Saturday 30th April 2016

Porsche 718 Cayman - official

Recovered from the shock of a four-cylinder Boxster? Here's the new Cayman!

---

Don't worry, all the big surprise cards have already been dealt by Porsche for this new range of 718 models. The new Cayman isn't now less powerful than the Boxster, or offered only with PDK, or suddenly a great deal heavier. This 718 Cayman, by the spec and the looks, is very much how we would have predicted it to be. Whether that's a good thing or not is another matter...

Now the slowest Cayman is capable of 170mph...

So it's the same choice between 300hp, 2.0-litre standard model and 350hp, 2.5-litre 'S'. Again, torque has climbed significantly, the base 718 Cayman producing 280lb ft between 1,950 and 4,500rpm, the S upping that to 310lb ft between 1,900rpm and 4,500rpm. Big, big numbers for Porsche's junior sports car, even with prior knowledge of the Boxster. With the correct options ticked and right foot mashed to the carpet, Porsche claims 0-62mph in 4.7 seconds for the 718 Cayman, dropping to just 4.2 seconds for the S. Top speeds are 170 and 177mph.

The same changes wrought underneath the Boxster are found here too. Damper settings are revised and the steering is 10 per cent quicker, plus both springs and anti-roll bars are firmer in the name of increased agility. Suspension options include PASM (10mm lower than standard), PASM Sport (20mm lower) and Porsche Torque Vectoring with a limited-slip diff. The brakes are larger to deal with the additional performance, the 718 Cayman taking on the system from the old Cayman S and the 718 S using 911 four-piston calipers. Discs are 330mm at the front and 299mm at the rear on both models, although the S uses 6mm wider front discs.

Updates familiar from the Boxster inside too

The styling changes will be familiar - you're getting the theme here, hopefully - to anyone who has spent time poring over a four-cylinder Boxster as well. Same 'floating' rear lights with the script across the middle, same reprofiled intakes to force more air in and same updated front end with a "more purposeful" appearance. An improvement? As always, it's up for debate...

The four-cylinder Cayman is available to order now, priced - as promised - below the equivalent Boxster. That means a 718 Cayman costs £39,878 and a 718 S is £48,834. With the M2 still available to order, BMW's alternative arguably presents a stronger threat than ever at £45K. There will surely be a TT RS in time also. Stretching the price envelope a little (or add a few options to the Cayman) and you're soon into Exige territory, plus there's the Nissan 370Z NISMO, the affordability of which has been proven only this week.

How different will the 718 Cayman be to the Boxster? What will it sound like with a roof permanently on? And just how expensive can you make a four-cylinder Porsche coupe? Answers to (hopefully) follow soon!

 

[MrBarry123]

So as they've done with the Boxster, Porsche have managed to make the new Cayman look like a Chinese copy of the 981.

Bizarre.

[joshleb]

The existing Cayman is one of my favourite to look at cars, everything is just "there"!
Small size, good engine, aggressive yet refined looks, and doesn't sound half bad either.

This one, whilst similar just isn't doing it for me, and what's with all the blue lights?

Hopefully be able to pick up one of the current Caymans in a few years, unless everyone appreciates them like I do...

[dawson2k5]

Is it weird that the only thing I thought was how comfortable the interior looks?

[Impasse]

Gosh. What a complete surprise. How unexpected of them to do that. Love the fresh thinking that's gone into this.

[Mothersruin]

Does it really say '718 Cayman' on the back?

[sege]

Just had a random thought about Porsche and their new four cylinder turbo engines.
Is a 2.0 litre four cylinder engine inherently more economical than a six cylinder 2.0 litre one? I don't see how, unless there's marginally less friction losses or something (assuming that is actually a thing)?
Or is it just cheaper and easier to make and package? Maybe for these cars that packaging aspect is actually the key issue, but if so that seems a real shame that it led to the losing of two cylinders and so much character. Couldn't they have got rid of or reduced the size of the the boot or something? These cars presumably still have the bulk of their boot storage in the front?
For comparison the old RB20DET (straight six not a boxer obviously) out of the 2 litre Skylines is one of the most charismatic, exotic and sexy sounding engines ever (with the right boy racer exhaust attached).

[shost]

sege said:

Just had a random thought about Porsche and their new four cylinder turbo engines.
Is a 2.0 litre four cylinder engine inherently more economical than a six cylinder 2.0 litre one? I don't see how, unless there's marginally less friction losses or something (assuming that is actually a thing)?
Or is it just cheaper and easier to make and package? Maybe for these cars that packaging aspect is actually the key issue, but if so that seems a real shame that it led to the losing of two cylinders and so much character. Couldn't they have got rid of or reduced the size of the the boot or something? These cars presumably still have the bulk of their boot storage in the front?
For comparison the old RB20DET (straight six not a boxer obviously) out of the 2 litre Skylines is one of the most charismatic, exotic and sexy sounding engines ever (with the right boy racer exhaust attached).

Indeed a small capacity boxer turbo six would sound a least a bit better and give a USP. I'm going to the Boxter launch this week because I was invited. Even seen a TV add for one. I cannot imagine Porsche doing that if they weren't worried about sales. Most reviews have been a bit flat too.

[MikeGalos]

Mothersruin said:

Does it really say '718 Cayman' on the back?

No, it says:

P O R S C H E
718 Cayman

So you can be sure that people looking at it know it was a Porsche you got out of.

[Timbola]

Think it looks awesome.

Has been hard deciding between buying an M2 or a 718 Cayman S, but the Cayman wins it.

Order is going in this June.

[EricE]

Audi announced the new TTRS at the same event. Better sounding engine, one extra cylinder, 400 PS, 3.7 sec to 60, larger brakes.

If Audi were to adapt the GKN AWD system from the Focus RS then I'd get that over this Cayman any day.

[Timbola]

EricE said:

Audi announced the new TTRS at the same event. Better sounding engine, one extra cylinder, 400 PS, 3.7 sec to 60, larger brakes.

If Audi were to adapt the GKN AWD system from the Focus RS then I'd get that over this Cayman any day.

Non-RWD. Front-engined. And looks are indeed subjective, but I've always thought TTs look unsettled and weird.

No thanks.

Edited by Timbola on Monday 25th April 06:50

[Axionknight]

I'd rather have one of the last flat six motors personally, but I can see why Porsche have done this - I look forward to seeing if it affects sales (I doubt it will tbh).

[Vitorio]

EricE said:

Audi announced the new TTRS at the same event. Better sounding engine, one extra cylinder, 400 PS, 3.7 sec to 60, larger brakes.

If Audi were to adapt the GKN AWD system from the Focus RS then I'd get that over this Cayman any day.

More expensive from what i can tell though

the TTRS apparently is €66K without netherlands specific taxes, while the Cayman start at €66K, which is including those taxes (and those tend to not be cheap, especially for performance cars). The TTS, for reference, is €68K over here.

Personally i'd have the cayman out of these two, in yellow please! (although i might go for a lightly used 6 cilinder cayman instead)

[DonkeyApple]

shost said:

sege said:

Just had a random thought about Porsche and their new four cylinder turbo engines.
Is a 2.0 litre four cylinder engine inherently more economical than a six cylinder 2.0 litre one? I don't see how, unless there's marginally less friction losses or something (assuming that is actually a thing)?
Or is it just cheaper and easier to make and package? Maybe for these cars that packaging aspect is actually the key issue, but if so that seems a real shame that it led to the losing of two cylinders and so much character. Couldn't they have got rid of or reduced the size of the the boot or something? These cars presumably still have the bulk of their boot storage in the front?
For comparison the old RB20DET (straight six not a boxer obviously) out of the 2 litre Skylines is one of the most charismatic, exotic and sexy sounding engines ever (with the right boy racer exhaust attached).

Indeed a small capacity boxer turbo six would sound a least a bit better and give a USP. I'm going to the Boxter launch this week because I was invited. Even seen a TV add for one. I cannot imagine Porsche doing that if they weren't worried about sales. Most reviews have been a bit flat too.

Because this is the first big change that it too blatantly about tax benefits to a small group of old men and impossible to dupe punters into accepting it as some form of important modern driving dynamic that is a must have.

They can't hide this one and so are going to have to market their way through. It does appear that more and more people are beginning to see what has been happening to key brands in the last decade.

[Dale487]

shost said:

sege said:

Just had a random thought about Porsche and their new four cylinder turbo engines.
Is a 2.0 litre four cylinder engine inherently more economical than a six cylinder 2.0 litre one? I don't see how, unless there's marginally less friction losses or something (assuming that is actually a thing)?
Or is it just cheaper and easier to make and package? Maybe for these cars that packaging aspect is actually the key issue, but if so that seems a real shame that it led to the losing of two cylinders and so much character. Couldn't they have got rid of or reduced the size of the the boot or something? These cars presumably still have the bulk of their boot storage in the front?
For comparison the old RB20DET (straight six not a boxer obviously) out of the 2 litre Skylines is one of the most charismatic, exotic and sexy sounding engines ever (with the right boy racer exhaust attached).

Indeed a small capacity boxer turbo six would sound a least a bit better and give a USP. I'm going to the Boxter launch this week because I was invited. Even seen a TV add for one. I cannot imagine Porsche doing that if they weren't worried about sales. Most reviews have been a bit flat too.

Smaller cylinders are less themodynamical effiecent - which is guess is the reason a lot of 1.0 engines have gone to 3 cylinders instead of 4. Also Porsche state that all the turbo plumbing and a 6 cylinder engine won't fit in the Boxster/Cayman engine bay.

The 718 Cayman looks as good as I hoped it would after they revealled the 718 Boxster & it starts below £40k too.

[Nerdherder]

If I ran Porsche it would have been:

Cayman > 4 pot 2.0 turbo for the taxation benefit
Cayman S > Naturally aspirated 6 (the 3.4 from the 981 GTS would make sense. The 3.8 from the 981 GT4 would be great but developments need to be reserved for a next GT version.)

And
-Why not the same strategy for the 911.
-A smaller, lighter model that sits below the Cayman with only the 4 pot in various states of tune.

[DamianQS]

As I am not Porsche diehard I am merely judging the car on its merits as a package. I will change my Audi S1 in a couple of years .The "basic" Cayman with a manual and not too many extras would definitely represent a step up in performance and a nice overall package. Having been on the Boxster configurator (Cayman not available yet)it is evident how Porsche make there money on extras , perhaps a lightly used well specced one will be the way to go.

It is either going down this route or down the used route, 996 Carrera 4 currently is my auto trader save (search).

[EricE]

Nerdherder said:

-A smaller, lighter model that sits below the Cayman with only the 4 pot in various states of tune.

This is on the table again. It looks like theres an internal power struggle going on inside Porsche about whether or not there is room below for a Boxster/Cayman. The last official statement was that the 718 Boxster and their line of preowned apporved models are their "entry models" but new rumours appeared about a baby boxster scheduled for 2018 with a 37000€ price point appeared in April.

http://www.autobild.de/bilder/neue-porsche-bis-202...

Personally I cant see it happening because it would be a 4-cylinder roadster and cannibalise sales from the 718 which already seems like a somewhat disappointing package compared to the old cars.

[DonkeyApple]

Nerdherder said:

If I ran Porsche it would have been:

Cayman > 4 pot 2.0 turbo for the taxation benefit
Cayman S > Naturally aspirated 6 (the 3.4 from the 981 GTS would make sense. The 3.8 from the 981 GT4 would be great but developments need to be reserved for a next GT version.)

And
-Why not the same strategy for the 911.
-A smaller, lighter model that sits below the Cayman with only the 4 pot in various states of tune.

How does this taxation actually work though?

Porsche SE has the VW up to lower its group average and it sells millions of low CO2 cars a year. The Cayman could emit what it likes and have no impact at all on Porsche's data.

But I guess this is more about the individual tightening of CO2 restrictions on key global cities and the need to keep pumping out product to people who can't afford to pay the increased charges for using certain types of cars where they live?

Ergo, enthusiasts end up paying the price to enable brand ambassadors to buy in.

[andy97]

Nerdherder said:

If I ran Porsche it would have been:

Cayman > 4 pot 2.0 turbo for the taxation benefit
Cayman S > Naturally aspirated 6 (the 3.4 from the 981 GTS would make sense. The 3.8 from the 981 GT4 would be great but developments need to be reserved for a next GT version.)

And
-Why not the same strategy for the 911.

But how do we know that Porsche aren't planning a 4 pot turbo for the 911?

It may be that the days of the n/a flat 6 are numbered. Not immediately maybe, but some time in the mid term future, as a 4 pot turbo maybe easier to get the required economy and emissions out of, plus the torquey nature of turbos may mean that's it's a "better" drive in the real world?