This

Author
Discussion

bcr5784

7,102 posts

144 months

Friday 27th February 2015
quotequote all
mollytherocker said:
I can answer this for you.

Every option ever invented or sold has been a net cost that has not been recovered. Its a pure sales tactic that you need certain options to sell a car. Options are far more profitable than cars.

Lets say you throw 15k of options on a new 911. I can assure you that at the very most you will recover 5k of that at say 3 years.

You lost 10k.
If you believe Parkers guide figures (the paid for ones) it doesn't appear to be quite that simple. They quote secondhand figures for Caysters with and without a wide range of options. Some options - like PCM appear to be hold most of their initial cost for quite a while. Other more esoteric ones don't. Obviously well down the track that won't apply, but if you only keep the car for a couple of years then the choice of options is quite significant in depreciation terms (if Parkers are right).

mikal83

Original Poster:

5,340 posts

251 months

Saturday 28th February 2015
quotequote all
FrankCayman said:
Have you bought said Boxster??
Not yet....just re read my post and I forgot to put the word SAT....into it!!!

I had a converted rubber bumper MGB 2 yrs ago and the top of the windscreen was just about dead level with my eyes, grrrrrrrrrrr, in the Chim, I sat well down and was very comfortable. The TF was similaish to the MGB but a little lower and felt a tad tighter.
the Boxster I sat in was a 1998 2.5. The top of the windscreen felt a little higher but further away. seat was right back and I wanted to push it back further but it was at its limit and I wanted to lower it but it was also at its limit. next stop, going for a drive in them, with OH

FrankCayman

2,121 posts

212 months

Saturday 28th February 2015
quotequote all
mikal83 said:
Not yet....just re read my post and I forgot to put the word SAT....into it!!!

I had a converted rubber bumper MGB 2 yrs ago and the top of the windscreen was just about dead level with my eyes, grrrrrrrrrrr, in the Chim, I sat well down and was very comfortable. The TF was similaish to the MGB but a little lower and felt a tad tighter.
the Boxster I sat in was a 1998 2.5. The top of the windscreen felt a little higher but further away. seat was right back and I wanted to push it back further but it was at its limit and I wanted to lower it but it was also at its limit. next stop, going for a drive in them, with OH
How tall are you, mate? I am 6ft 2" and found I 'just about' fitted in my 987's. I think the 986's are a fraction more cramped inside. Just have to make sure you set the seat to it's lowest'ish' setting (not right on the floor, otherwise it's uncomfortable!).

The first few weeks of owning my first 987, I felt a little cramped, yet after a while I seemed to find a more upright position that actually was more comfortable than my previous cars laid back position.

The 981's have loads more room....but I realise that is no help to you whatsoever!

I hope you fit in it and like...the Boxster 986's are great cars!!

mikal83

Original Poster:

5,340 posts

251 months

Saturday 28th February 2015
quotequote all
I'm 6'1 and have a 31 1/2 inside leg,, so have a slightly longer body, which makes me sit slightly higher.
Will be out and about next week dragging OH around looking at cars....her fave dream day out!!! NOT.

FrankCayman

2,121 posts

212 months

Saturday 28th February 2015
quotequote all
mikal83 said:
I'm 6'1 and have a 31 1/2 inside leg,, so have a slightly longer body, which makes me sit slightly higher.
Will be out and about next week dragging OH around looking at cars....her fave dream day out!!! NOT.
I see.. you should be ok then...it was my lanky 34" legs that were the problem!

Happy hunting.....

mikal83

Original Poster:

5,340 posts

251 months

Saturday 28th February 2015
quotequote all
The car I have been looking at comes fully specced up and is a 2.7...IYHO should I hold out for an S, (which may or may not come with same high spec) or is the 2.7 OK?

FrankCayman

2,121 posts

212 months

Saturday 28th February 2015
quotequote all
I personally would buy on condition/right colour and wheels that suit your taste etc. rather than worry about if it's a 2.7 or a 3.2...

mikal83

Original Poster:

5,340 posts

251 months

Saturday 28th February 2015
quotequote all
My thought too, have you had a peek at the one that I like?

mikal83

Original Poster:

5,340 posts

251 months

Saturday 28th February 2015
quotequote all
Thanks for that...appreciatte your thoughts.

I loved the sheer grunt of the chim I had, even tho that sounds a bit topgearish. Its a combination of many things. I will not be blasting down autobahns, just quick blats around Cornwall and maybe a weekend or two around frogland. But it will be a fair weather car when the sun shines....that and my bike, (1300 fjr).
Its not fixed that I will buy a boxster, I still intend to look at MG TF's for the small car funfactor...or another sports car if anyone recommends one within my budget of 6k....and NO I dont like mx5s/beemers........