RE: Is there hope for the 718 Boxster? PH Blog
Discussion
I haven't owned a Porsche since 1981, and no new ones since 1976, so perhaps my comment is easily dismissed, but I am of the belief that these have become tokens of affluence, like BMW's, rather than the driver's car of days gone by. Maybe that is a good thing as I rarely hear of the dreaded "I'll learn to drive before I buy my second" syndrome so common to the early cars. Maybe it's just sour grapes as now I have the time and knowledge to restore an old "S", but not the pocketbook.
Am I the only one who thinks the writer of this article is trying to be massively negative about this, considering he hasn't driven it?
Porsche have held out for as long as they conceivably could. If there was a way to hold on to the flat six AND remain competitive they would have done it.
They don't sell used cars, they sell new cars, and I can easily point to any number of threads on Pistonheads with people complaining about the low power output from the existing cars as it is. When you can buy an A-class with nigh-on 400hp, they needed to move the game on.
Porsche have held out for as long as they conceivably could. If there was a way to hold on to the flat six AND remain competitive they would have done it.
They don't sell used cars, they sell new cars, and I can easily point to any number of threads on Pistonheads with people complaining about the low power output from the existing cars as it is. When you can buy an A-class with nigh-on 400hp, they needed to move the game on.
Edited by jayemm89 on Thursday 28th January 20:03
J4CKO said:
Jesus its a Boxster, a car that has come in for no end of stick, it was a good car before and ok, its lost a couple of cylinders but Porsche wont care about a few internet beards who still moan about their old models getting fancy water cooling.
Exactly. This wonderful flat 6 that grenaded itself with some regularity can be picked up pretty cheaply these days, you'd have thought the anti-brigade would be rejoicing with the 'crap' new model coming out and further pummeling the used market? I've never seen such pessimism towards a company from current owners, some of whom who must be pretty gifted engineers being able to completely fathom a car from a press release 
Lovely car I'm sure but the official video suggest all that manic 'sport button' hitting excitement happened whilst travelling at 82kph so around 50mph.
My f
king arse did it 
If you're going to advertise a car going really fast on the best looking road in the world, without doubt looks as if it's going fast and overtaking another Boxster whilst definately going really fast.
Don't be silly and expect us to believe it was at 50mph
My f
king arse did it If you're going to advertise a car going really fast on the best looking road in the world, without doubt looks as if it's going fast and overtaking another Boxster whilst definately going really fast.
Don't be silly and expect us to believe it was at 50mph
Edited by HoHoHo on Thursday 28th January 20:55
yonex said:
J4CKO said:
Jesus its a Boxster, a car that has come in for no end of stick, it was a good car before and ok, its lost a couple of cylinders but Porsche wont care about a few internet beards who still moan about their old models getting fancy water cooling.
Exactly. This wonderful flat 6 that grenaded itself with some regularity can be picked up pretty cheaply these days, you'd have thought the anti-brigade would be rejoicing with the 'crap' new model coming out and further pummeling the used market? I've never seen such pessimism towards a company from current owners, some of whom who must be pretty gifted engineers being able to completely fathom a car from a press release J4CKO said:
The S has 350 bhp and wads of lovely torque, it looks good, is modern and well appointed, I bet its a lovely, satisfying car to drive and own despite missing a couple of cylinders.
The Mercedes A45/CLA45 AMG seem to be selling by the boat loads despite being a 4-pot turbo, rather than the thumping V8 of old school AMGs.Most people agree the BMW M3/M4/M5/M6 engine is "lacking that special" something of the previous generation V8/V10 - hasn't stopped them shifting bucketloads of those either.
MikeGalos said:
So what they're really saying is:
59 years ago when we were a sports car company we created a successful 1,250lb mid-engined sports racer with a 1.5 liter twin cam engine and a 5-speed. It was state of the art for the late 1950s. Today we're announcing an update to our low-end line that weighs as much as two and a half of those sports racers, has an engine that's 30% larger and has our name on a big banner on the rear. Because we think you won't know the difference between an ultra-light sports racer and a bloated boulevard cruiser we're naming the new line in honour of that car from six decades ago. Give us your money.
Hehe I chuckled 59 years ago when we were a sports car company we created a successful 1,250lb mid-engined sports racer with a 1.5 liter twin cam engine and a 5-speed. It was state of the art for the late 1950s. Today we're announcing an update to our low-end line that weighs as much as two and a half of those sports racers, has an engine that's 30% larger and has our name on a big banner on the rear. Because we think you won't know the difference between an ultra-light sports racer and a bloated boulevard cruiser we're naming the new line in honour of that car from six decades ago. Give us your money.
MikeGalos said:
For that matter, when was the last time Porsche even produced actual race cars?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_RS_Spyder
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_919_Hybrid
MikeGalos said:
(Hint: there hasn't been a factory racing team since 1998)
http://www.porsche.com/uk/aboutporsche/pressreleas...
Interesting article, I can see why people are concerned, loss of flat six etc. I have a 3.2S 987 , which I absolutely love, but I have to say I like the looks of the 718 it is a strong modern style, the engine sounds ok - not as evocative as the flat six of course - if that is really how loud it is and it has not got one of those stupid sound synthesiser on it.....I think we need to give it a chance in a real road test , or perhaps even drive it ourselves. Yes the promo vid with its silly button pushing was marketing claptrap, but lets wait and see.
You never know with the move to 4 cylinders, the depreciation of 986 ,987 and 981 may slow (I wont say start rising, that's a long way off)
You never know with the move to 4 cylinders, the depreciation of 986 ,987 and 981 may slow (I wont say start rising, that's a long way off)
D200 said:
I expect the a lot of the ph high post count massive to say it’s now completely and utterly ruined as it doesn’t have 6 cylinders. This is beyond ridiculous.
News Flash - Cylinder count doesn’t make good.
It’s just a pile of pretentious know-it-all snobs who probably have no intention of ever buying the car anyway but just like to slag it off. I don’t think many people who are considering buying brand new Boxster [or Cayman] will not be put off by the fact it’s now flat 4 turbo, some will, but it will be a tiny miniscule minority.
Small things like handling, performance, braking, steering, looks, interior etc also count – in my opinion they matter MORE than cylinder count not less.
It’s the same as saying all V12s better than all V8’s – personally I don’t think that is the case, but I guess if that’s all you care about fair enough, each to their own.
I haven’t driven or heard the new boxster [nor has anyone outside Porsche] but I suspect and hope it will be a great drive and will be very surprised if the engine is terrible, but I won’t be an idiot and judge it before it’s ever been driven
I think the previous Boxster’s are slightly overrated, performance wise. I drove a couple and I would be glad of some shove that will make it feel fast [well have not driven a GT4 excluded, maybe it feels fast – as it has a 911 engine]. They just don’t feel that fast, and if you are spending 50k + on a performance car you want it to feel fast, well I would anyway [plus handle well as they do].
This new Boxster S has 911 996 Turbo performance for just over 50k and will probably average a real-world 30 mpg and so on
Wait for the reviews or better still a test drive it before slating it
If it turns out to be rubbish then fair enough, but wait until then.
Then if you are such a cylinder snob go and won’t even look at this car due to fact it’s a flat 4 then go buy a 100k 911
Maybe I'm one of the morons you're referencing, and potentially would be looking at something like this for my next car. But honestly I wouldn't consider it solely down to the amount of cylinders in the engine. The sound of an engine is of high importance to me when considering a car, and I much rather have a year or two older boxster with that glorious sounding flat 6, than one of these newer lawnmower varieties. News Flash - Cylinder count doesn’t make good.
It’s just a pile of pretentious know-it-all snobs who probably have no intention of ever buying the car anyway but just like to slag it off. I don’t think many people who are considering buying brand new Boxster [or Cayman] will not be put off by the fact it’s now flat 4 turbo, some will, but it will be a tiny miniscule minority.
Small things like handling, performance, braking, steering, looks, interior etc also count – in my opinion they matter MORE than cylinder count not less.
It’s the same as saying all V12s better than all V8’s – personally I don’t think that is the case, but I guess if that’s all you care about fair enough, each to their own.
I haven’t driven or heard the new boxster [nor has anyone outside Porsche] but I suspect and hope it will be a great drive and will be very surprised if the engine is terrible, but I won’t be an idiot and judge it before it’s ever been driven
I think the previous Boxster’s are slightly overrated, performance wise. I drove a couple and I would be glad of some shove that will make it feel fast [well have not driven a GT4 excluded, maybe it feels fast – as it has a 911 engine]. They just don’t feel that fast, and if you are spending 50k + on a performance car you want it to feel fast, well I would anyway [plus handle well as they do].
This new Boxster S has 911 996 Turbo performance for just over 50k and will probably average a real-world 30 mpg and so on
Wait for the reviews or better still a test drive it before slating it
If it turns out to be rubbish then fair enough, but wait until then.
Then if you are such a cylinder snob go and won’t even look at this car due to fact it’s a flat 4 then go buy a 100k 911
It isn't beyond ridiculous. One of my main joys of driving is hearing a nice sounding engine. Granted there are quite a lot of really great 4 cylinders around that sound incredible. But in a Porsche I'd just imagine a 6 cylinder of some degree, and the sound that comes along with it. It doesn't have anything to do with 0-60, handling or top speed, and a lot to do with the noise that comes from the back of it.
Cylinder count is a major consideration imho, when I was looking to change from my Cosworths (500Bhp sierra, 400Bhp Escos), pretty much anything with four cylinders seemed to be a sidestep to me rather than a step "up", if that makes any sense at all?
Ended up with a 996 turbo & a supercharged E46 M3, both interesting takes on the 6 cylinder engine.... Need a V8 next I reckon!
Anyway... I'm sure the new boxster will be a cracking car, but despite never really having fancied one, I think the flat 6 soundtrack will be a loss to the enthusiast.
Ended up with a 996 turbo & a supercharged E46 M3, both interesting takes on the 6 cylinder engine.... Need a V8 next I reckon!
Anyway... I'm sure the new boxster will be a cracking car, but despite never really having fancied one, I think the flat 6 soundtrack will be a loss to the enthusiast.
Polarbert said:
Maybe I'm one of the morons you're referencing, and potentially would be looking at something like this for my next car. But honestly I wouldn't consider it solely down to the amount of cylinders in the engine. The sound of an engine is of high importance to me when considering a car, and I much rather have a year or two older boxster with that glorious sounding flat 6, than one of these newer lawnmower varieties.
It isn't beyond ridiculous. One of my main joys of driving is hearing a nice sounding engine. Granted there are quite a lot of really great 4 cylinders around that sound incredible. But in a Porsche I'd just imagine a 6 cylinder of some degree, and the sound that comes along with it. It doesn't have anything to do with 0-60, handling or top speed, and a lot to do with the noise that comes from the back of it.
Exactly this. I didn't buy an 4c PURELY for the reason that it had a 4 cylinder engine.. if it hadn't, I would have one now. I just haven't driven a single one that I gel with, including the golf and A class. I like the sound, I like the characteristics of flat 6's and v8's personally.. It isn't beyond ridiculous. One of my main joys of driving is hearing a nice sounding engine. Granted there are quite a lot of really great 4 cylinders around that sound incredible. But in a Porsche I'd just imagine a 6 cylinder of some degree, and the sound that comes along with it. It doesn't have anything to do with 0-60, handling or top speed, and a lot to do with the noise that comes from the back of it.
We loose some of the feeling of the car, to gain boost, flat delivery and economy, but like the article I think it's a shame to have only a gimmicky recompense for the fact that it's now a 4 cylinder - up the boost and give it a throwback name.Same with all these modern 4 pot turbos that are playing touch-cocks with 0-60 figures, a half a second isn't going to make it 'feel' complete to me.
I'm certain they'll sell, and I'm even certain they'll drive - but not for me
jayemm89 said:
J4CKO said:
The S has 350 bhp and wads of lovely torque, it looks good, is modern and well appointed, I bet its a lovely, satisfying car to drive and own despite missing a couple of cylinders.
The Mercedes A45/CLA45 AMG seem to be selling by the boat loads despite being a 4-pot turbo, rather than the thumping V8 of old school AMGs.Most people agree the BMW M3/M4/M5/M6 engine is "lacking that special" something of the previous generation V8/V10 - hasn't stopped them shifting bucketloads of those either.
It seems to be all about "Top Trumps", as in what a car can potentially provide rather than how it does it, but each to their own!
They may sell bucket loads of them (mostly as a trinket to serial handbag buyers perhaps) - but then having 6 cylinders (albeit with a turbo) hasn't stopped BMW shifting bucket loads of M135is and M235is!
I suppose only time will tell.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff