RE: Porsche 718 Boxster - full details

[xRIEx]

chrispmartha said:

macky17 said:

Is it? I'm just getting started. Porsche may rely on the ignorance of the masses to justify a price INCREASE with a lesser power unit but us PHers are not supposed to be so easily ripped off...

I'd buy an S - in about 5 years when they're £15k or less. That would be about right.

Erm, it's got more power hasn't it?

I can only assume that by 'lesser' he means in some status hierarchy, that H4 turbo is lower down the order than H6 NA.

[DonkeyApple]

chrispmartha said:

DonkeyApple said:

I think you have to ask the question of what is it really doing that a hot hatch or hot diesel isn't doing other than looking more like a sports car?

Really? you can't see what a bespoke built (as in built to be a sports car from the off!) open top sports car with a mid engined RWD layout might offer over a Golf GTD?

Yes. That is why I can see that it does less that is different today than it did yesterday. And hence the questioning as to whether this is a good thing.

[Nerfbat]

The price increase sounds a bit punchy to me - spec it up a bit and it's an expensive car now.

[chrispmartha]

DonkeyApple said:

Yes. That is why I can see that it does less that is different today than it did yesterday. And hence the questioning as to whether this is a good thing.

I just don't get this, someone who is wanting a 2 seater open top sports car isn't going to want a Golf GTD just because it has similar torque at low revs.

Fair enough from a 'car enthusiats' point of view you may think the car has lost something (other car enthusiats may disagree) but are youwho Porsche thinks are the target market for a boxster?

[Guvernator]

Nerfbat said:

The price increase sounds a bit punchy to me - spec it up a bit and it's an expensive car now.

This is true for the entire Porsche range now I'm afraid. Porsche used to be a company who despite the premium badge and quality engineering where actually pretty good value for money, now we have Boxsters starting at £50k and a vanilla 911 knocking on the door of 6 figures with some essential options!

[Mr_Yogi]

How does the torque curve compare with that of old school turbos; such as the 944 Turbo, 930 Turbo, 965 Turbo, etc.?

A quick google revealed this:

Which I assume is stock (looks like the graph from the back of the manual).

250nm between 2200ish - 6500rpm is quite broad but is definately more screws to the top end.

[DonkeyApple]

PhantomPH said:

DonkeyApple said:

It's probably the case that the under 30s this car is aimed at have very different expectations than slightly older people ...

I think you are miles off if you think this car is aimed at under 30's. How many have £50k+ to spend on a Porsche? Under 30's will likely be starting to try and get on the housing ladder, start families etc. This is aimed at the late 30s+ - perhaps even early 40's (who wish they were still under 30!). People who now have a few spare quid and the earning power to afford it. People who don't want suspension that tries to break your back and people who want creature comforts for their commute.

(not referring to the above comment) but there is an incredible amount of crap being talked on this thread. Drive it and if you like it and can afford one, then buy it. What does it matter if it's powered by wishes and dreams???

Edited by PhantomPH on Wednesday 27th January 11:16

Maybe. I live in London and it's definitely a car that is driven by male under 30s and over 50s ladies for the most part. Key to those two demographics is that they don't have children to ferry about and live in areas where parking cars is quite difficult. Even out in the South East it's still young lads and middle aged ladies you see with them for the most part. Although you start to see a few more old blokes in them also.

[xRIEx]

DonkeyApple said:

chrispmartha said:

DonkeyApple said:

I think you have to ask the question of what is it really doing that a hot hatch or hot diesel isn't doing other than looking more like a sports car?

Really? you can't see what a bespoke built (as in built to be a sports car from the off!) open top sports car with a mid engined RWD layout might offer over a Golf GTD?

Yes. That is why I can see that it does less that is different today than it did yesterday. And hence the questioning as to whether this is a good thing.

I would guess that question has existed since the Golf GTi (and probably well before). Just randomly picking a sportscar of the approximate time, the Spitfire: "The 1500 Spitfire now produced 71hp (DIN) at 5500 rpm, and produced 82 lb·ft (111 N·m) of torque at 3000 rpm.[1] Top speed was now at the magical 100 mph (160 km/h) mark, and 0 to 60 mph (97 km/h) was reached in 13.2 seconds."

The Golf GTi: "This special model was powered by 1588 cc and 1780 cc four-cylinder engines fed by a Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection, which helped them develop a respectable 110 & 112PS (80 kW) @ 6,100 rpms and 140 Nm (103 lbs-ft) of torque @ 5,000 rpm. Aided with a curb weight of just 810 Kg (1,785 lbs), it allowed the GTI to accelerate 0-60 mph in 9 seconds. The top speed was of 180 km/h (some 110 mph)."

Now I don't know much about either of these cars other than what I've read but obviously for many a year, hot versions of 'family' cars have outperformed various other sports cars on the market. I guess it comes down to how those cars make you feel. I reckon I would feel much better driving a 275bhp Boxster than a 360bhp A45AMG.

Isn't that what it is for us petrolheads: how we feel about these cars, whether it's the looks, the noise or how we feel throwing a car (and being thrown by it) along a great road?

[DonkeyApple]

chrispmartha said:

DonkeyApple said:

Yes. That is why I can see that it does less that is different today than it did yesterday. And hence the questioning as to whether this is a good thing.

I just don't get this, someone who is wanting a 2 seater open top sports car isn't going to want a Golf GTD just because it has similar torque at low revs.

Fair enough from a 'car enthusiats' point of view you may think the car has lost something (other car enthusiats may disagree) but are youwho Porsche thinks are the target market for a boxster?

That's kind of the point. .

[danp]

Why do you think they have two different engine sizes? (unlike the new 911 base/S which are both 3.0)

Surely would have saved money to have had just the one capacity?

[DonkeyApple]

xRIEx said:

DonkeyApple said:

chrispmartha said:

DonkeyApple said:

I think you have to ask the question of what is it really doing that a hot hatch or hot diesel isn't doing other than looking more like a sports car?

Really? you can't see what a bespoke built (as in built to be a sports car from the off!) open top sports car with a mid engined RWD layout might offer over a Golf GTD?

Yes. That is why I can see that it does less that is different today than it did yesterday. And hence the questioning as to whether this is a good thing.

I would guess that question has existed since the Golf GTi (and probably well before). Just randomly picking a sportscar of the approximate time, the Spitfire: "The 1500 Spitfire now produced 71hp (DIN) at 5500 rpm, and produced 82 lb·ft (111 N·m) of torque at 3000 rpm.[1] Top speed was now at the magical 100 mph (160 km/h) mark, and 0 to 60 mph (97 km/h) was reached in 13.2 seconds."

The Golf GTi: "This special model was powered by 1588 cc and 1780 cc four-cylinder engines fed by a Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection, which helped them develop a respectable 110 & 112PS (80 kW) @ 6,100 rpms and 140 Nm (103 lbs-ft) of torque @ 5,000 rpm. Aided with a curb weight of just 810 Kg (1,785 lbs), it allowed the GTI to accelerate 0-60 mph in 9 seconds. The top speed was of 180 km/h (some 110 mph)."

Now I don't know much about either of these cars other than what I've read but obviously for many a year, hot versions of 'family' cars have outperformed various other sports cars on the market. I guess it comes down to how those cars make you feel. I reckon I would feel much better driving a 275bhp Boxster than a 360bhp A45AMG.

Isn't that what it is for us petrolheads: how we feel about these cars, whether it's the looks, the noise or how we feel throwing a car (and being thrown by it) along a great road?

I agree entirely. But don't you suspect that these cars are really being built to sit in urban traffic and only a fleeting nod to where we historically think of a sports car being used? Porsche know that this car is going to spend most of its life in traffic around town centres and straight link roads that join one town centre to another. Isn't the concept of sporty, open road driving a complete sham and marketing pastiche today for these mass produced vehicles?

[ecs0set]

article said:

...new Porsche script revealed when the rear spoiler emerges from the bodywork.

AndyCGTS said:

...the Porsche logo intergration looks nicely done

Really?

Different strokes...

Edited by ecs0set on Wednesday 27th January 12:04

[Alex]

ecs0set said:

Really?

Different strokes...

I agree. What next? Underbody neons? Porsche logo door puddle lights?

[havoc]

For once I think the article nailed it - this car, certainly the reaction to it, is going to depend on whether you like low-down torquey engines that don't take much driver thought (I nearly said diesels... ), or whether you want your Sports Car to have a high-revving, characterful engine that rewards you.

I think you can guess which side of the fence I sit on...


...and yes, I think in the current climate of congestion and increasing speed-enforecement across the Western world, giving Porsche's "entry level" car more power than the original top-of-the-range 911 turbo (the 718-S has more than the 964 Turbo) is a clear example that the bhp wars have gone too far.

In case you're asking, I'll take a 987 Cayman-R or Boxster Spyder and be very happy, thanks...

danp said:

Why do you think they have two different engine sizes? (unlike the new 911 base/S which are both 3.0)

Surely would have saved money to have had just the one capacity?

Because given they're turbocharged, if they'd stuck with e.g. the 2.5 engine*, then buyers of a non-S could have gone for a remap and easily got -S power. With the current engines, 300bhp is probably the current sweet-spot for a 2.0 turbo with sensible emissions figures and reliability/driveability, so the non-S buyers haven't got much room to remap.
* (try getting reliable, economical 350bhp out of a 2.0...)

[Carl_Manchester]

DonkeyApple said:

PhantomPH said:

DonkeyApple said:

It's probably the case that the under 30s this car is aimed at have very different expectations than slightly older people ...

I think you are miles off if you think this car is aimed at under 30's. How many have £50k+ to spend on a Porsche? Under 30's will likely be starting to try and get on the housing ladder, start families etc. This is aimed at the late 30s+ - perhaps even early 40's (who wish they were still under 30!). People who now have a few spare quid and the earning power to afford it. People who don't want suspension that tries to break your back and people who want creature comforts for their commute.

(not referring to the above comment) but there is an incredible amount of crap being talked on this thread. Drive it and if you like it and can afford one, then buy it. What does it matter if it's powered by wishes and dreams???

Edited by PhantomPH on Wednesday 27th January 11:16

Maybe. I live in London and it's definitely a car that is driven by male under 30s and over 50s ladies for the most part. Key to those two demographics is that they don't have children to ferry about and live in areas where parking cars is quite difficult. Even out in the South East it's still young lads and middle aged ladies you see with them for the most part. Although you start to see a few more old blokes in them also.

I think donkey Apple is right about the buyers of these cars.

[Mogul]

Zanzibar is back! Yippee!

Everything else? Probably a little early to tell but "meh!" feels appropriate as a knee-jerk reaction.

Not that is in any way the be all and end all, has there ever been a greater BHP/torque bump on any other model from one generation to another?

[fwaggie]

IMO this sounds as if it has a good chance of ruining the driving experience.

I loved the way my 987 3.2 S responded, the power starting to kick in above 4.5k RPM and building to the red line. The figures don't convey that at all, you need to drive it to experience it.

Something with a turbo torque curve? My C220 CDi has that, and it doesn't inspire me to drive spiritedly at all, just let it waft at the low revs where the turbo is kicking in. (yes I know it's a diesel, but the Ford EcoBoost with a turbo petrol was the same)

A sad day.

[alock]

GroundEffect said:

A torque plateau is a GOOD thing. A power plateau generally isn't.

I agree that a power plateau is a bad thing. I wouldn't say a torque plateau is a good thing either. A torque plateau means power is increasing linearly.

Rising torque means that not only is power rising, but the rate of change of power is increasing. In physics this is known as jerk (or sometimes jolt). Jerk is far more exciting than acceleration. It's why people love old fashioned turbos, because as they come on boost the torque increases rapidly and gives huge jerk.

[tom scott]

Well - this is Porsche.
Could well be the best sports car ever produced.
Wait and see.

[Debaser]

Article said:

along with confirmation of the new pricing structure that makes the coupe the entry level to the Porsche sports car range and the Boxster the pricier of the two.

I wonder how much a new Cayman S will be. Or a GTS.

Or a GT4 for that matter.