Considering New Boxster as only car - 4Cyl Refresh Options?

Considering New Boxster as only car - 4Cyl Refresh Options?

Author
Discussion

Krobar

Original Poster:

283 posts

106 months

Saturday 16th May 2015
quotequote all
Hi All,

I'm considering a Boxster as my first ever new car. I'm new to Porsche although have owned cars with similar performance.

Does anyone know if the upcoming 4 Cylinder engines are to replace or go along side the 6 cylinder units? I asked my local dealer and was told a 4 cylinder refresh is coming but they had no concrete details. Obviously if the 4 cylinder is cheaper with similar performance that would sway my decision to buying after the refresh (Although I really like the sound and character of my current 6).

I also have a few option specific questions. Is the smaller steering wheel available with the manual? (Dealer told me only with PDK but the configurator suggests it is OK). Also what is the deal with DAB radio? I was told that it is included with Bose and Burmester audio but again the configurator thinks otherwise.

Are people able to get any kind of discount on the 2.7 Boxster of late?

mollytherocker

14,365 posts

208 months

Saturday 16th May 2015
quotequote all
Its hard to imagine the 4 cylinder motor being anything more than a crushing disappointment.

But it depends what you want. I am sure that the average new Boxster buyer will be fine with it.

DavidJG

3,507 posts

131 months

Saturday 16th May 2015
quotequote all
I'd go for the '6' any time. In a few years from now I suspect the last of the 6 cylinder Boxsters will have held a lot more of their value than the turbo 4s. For enthusiasts, a revvy 6 will be the desirable engine of the two.

bcr5784

7,102 posts

144 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
DavidJG said:
I'd go for the '6' any time. In a few years from now I suspect the last of the 6 cylinder Boxsters will have held a lot more of their value than the turbo 4s. For enthusiasts, a revvy 6 will be the desirable engine of the two.
I personally like the NA 6 and agree your probably right about resale. But I think much of the appeal of the engine to many is the exhaust noise. You won't find much about exhaust noise on Caterham forums - and they are surely much more hard core enthusiasts than the average Porsche owner.

Having had two Subarus I do miss the mid-range grunt of a turbo, which is a significant alternative compensation. That grunt on the Turbo 4 Porsche's will make the frequent criticism of the long gears probably go away. The 4's should also be a fair bit lighter too.

So while I can see why there will be many who mourn the passing of the 6, I do see an upside too.

Krobar

Original Poster:

283 posts

106 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
bcr5784 said:
I personally like the NA 6 and agree your probably right about resale. But I think much of the appeal of the engine to many is the exhaust noise. You won't find much about exhaust noise on Caterham forums - and they are surely much more hard core enthusiasts than the average Porsche owner.

Having had two Subarus I do miss the mid-range grunt of a turbo, which is a significant alternative compensation. That grunt on the Turbo 4 Porsche's will make the frequent criticism of the long gears probably go away. The 4's should also be a fair bit lighter too.

So while I can see why there will be many who mourn the passing of the 6, I do see an upside too.
Your thinking seems similar to mine. I guess the six if anything is more important in the Boxster than the Cayman.

It is not just the change of engine though that is interesting for the upcoming refresh, improvements to the electronics (Audio/Nav) are actually quite important to me as this would be a daily drive. Does anyone have any details on the upcoming refresh? Being a Porsche I suppose we wont see any drop in price for the loss of 2 cylinders.

EricE

1,945 posts

128 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
I expect the new 981.2 4-cylinder turbos to be better engines live with for the average buyer. Significantly higher torque in the lower RPM range, lower fuel consumption, higher power (would guess 380 PS for the 981.2 S).
It'll probably sound ok compared to other turbo 4-pots but very disappointing to people who are used to the old flat six.

My guess is that the Cayman and Cayman S will get a turbo 4-cylinder while the GTS and GT4 models will retain the 6-cylinder engine at a higher price point.

Beanoir

1,327 posts

194 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
I can't think of a modern 4cyl engine that has character, so I imagine the new Porsche Boxster to be a great car with a dull Audi S3 engine in it basically.

mollytherocker

14,365 posts

208 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
Beanoir said:
I can't think of a modern 4cyl engine that has character, so I imagine the new Porsche Boxster to be a great car with a dull Audi S3 engine in it basically.
There have been some fabulous 4 cylinder engines, like the Cosworth BDA on carbs and Alfa 2.0 unit. But, you are right, all modern 4 cylinders are dishwater.

In fact, modern 3 cylinder engines have more character! I actually quite like them.

Krobar

Original Poster:

283 posts

106 months

Sunday 17th May 2015
quotequote all
This is why I'm unsure to buy a 6 now for better noise and character or buy a refresh model for slightly cheaper running and better day to day use. Not a track racer but redline my current C350 daily and love the noise with the roof open but handling seems poor in the Merc.

Anyone running a 2.7 daily? Or does everyone have a GT4 😀


bcr5784

7,102 posts

144 months

Monday 18th May 2015
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
More torque = more effortless performance? The 2.7 manual (in particular) does need to be razzed to perform and, lovely engine though it is, you may not always be in the mood in a DD.

truck71

2,328 posts

171 months

Monday 18th May 2015
quotequote all
Krobar said:
This is why I'm unsure to buy a 6 now for better noise and character or buy a refresh model for slightly cheaper running and better day to day use. Not a track racer but redline my current C350 daily and love the noise with the roof open but handling seems poor in the Merc.

Anyone running a 2.7 daily? Or does everyone have a GT4 ??
Ran a Cayman 981 2.7 as a daily in lieu of a co car for 10 months/ 24,000 miles. It was dynamically very competent, practical, efficient (40mpg on longer trips) well made and great fun when I was in the mood; I'd often take rural routes up and down the country to enjoy the car whilst on business..

Negatives would be the stop start function (easily fixed by programming the system to default to off), ergonomics of the centre console (very fiddly and get lost behind the gear selector) and like many new cars lacked soul.

The engine needed a ringing to extract any performance but I didn't find that a chore- the gearing as has often been discussed would be better if it were 10mph lower per ratio (even in PDK form) but it wasn't the end of the world for me. When I bought it in Dec 2013 discounts were available, no idea on the current state of the market.


Edited by truck71 on Monday 18th May 09:41

EricE

1,945 posts

128 months

Monday 18th May 2015
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I guess it depends on what you are looking for in a car, but having driven the 2.7 for a day I felt it was woefully underpowered. It may be fast enough as a daily driver for a normal driver who hasn't driven any other Porsche before but that's about it.

I'd look and feel like an idiot revving it out around town, even then just barely keeping up with the average 3L Diesel rep mobile or current 2L 4 cyl hot hatch that just pulls away briskly without much thinking or much drama.

Obligatory Chris Harris link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCN7KlMzDAk

I think the turbo 4-cylinder will be a great upgrade over the N/A 2.7 for 99% of the population. The other 1% is here on PH. smile

Krobar

Original Poster:

283 posts

106 months

Monday 18th May 2015
quotequote all
Liked the vid (The Cayman S review by the same person was good too). Seems the money I have means I can only have performance or handling if I want a new car. SLK55s can be had for 43K new which look like a very nice engine for the money. I suppose I need to actually test drive a Boxster and see how it handles.

Krobar

Original Poster:

283 posts

106 months

Monday 18th May 2015
quotequote all
truck71 said:
Ran a Cayman 981 2.7 as a daily in lieu of a co car for 10 months/ 24,000 miles. It was dynamically very competent, practical, efficient (40mpg on longer trips) well made and great fun when I was in the mood; I'd often take rural routes up and down the country to enjoy the car whilst on business..

Negatives would be the stop start function (easily fixed by programming the system to default to off), ergonomics of the centre console (very fiddly and get lost behind the gear selector) and like many new cars lacked soul.

The engine needed a ringing to extract any performance but I didn't find that a chore- the gearing as has often been discussed would be better if it were 10mph lower per ratio (even in PDK form) but it wasn't the end of the world for me. When I bought it in Dec 2013 discounts were available, no idea on the current state of the market.


Edited by truck71 on Monday 18th May 09:41
Thanks for the useful feedback Truck. Will the dealer change the stop/start default?

EricE

1,945 posts

128 months

Monday 18th May 2015
quotequote all
More semi-official news on the topic. Interestingly he mentioned a "Cayman and Boxster successor", so maybe they are really going to rebrand it and sell it as the 718.
I imagine the marketing department would rather sell a "new model with 718 Spyder flat 4 racing genes" than a "facelifted Boxster with two cylinders less than the old one".

http://www.autonews.com/article/20150518/OEM04/305...

truck71

2,328 posts

171 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Krobar said:
Thanks for the useful feedback Truck. Will the dealer change the stop/start default?
Yes, if you do proceed just ask them to do it at PDI (if you think it will annoy you of course- it may not). Just to expand on the performance, this is not a dragster; big diesels and super hot hatch's will be quicker in a straight line. However as an A/B road device that offers precision and involvement whilst keeping your licence safe it really works. If traffic light emergency starts and dick waving in lane 3 on the motorway are your thing then this isn't the car for you. Show it an empty back road and it's brilliant. I came from a TVR Tuscan which was in another ball park performance wise, I could drive the Cayman quicker in 95% of situations..

bcr5784

7,102 posts

144 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
The other alternative is an S. The 3.4 engine makes it a much more effortless car on the motorway and whenever you just want to breeze along quickly. Sure you don't need the top end performance, but the mid range is nice to have and was the clincher for me. I was thinking of a new 2.7 myself but a drive in an S convinced me that a 6 month old S for about the same money (spec for spec) was a better choice.

ORD

18,086 posts

126 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
A great deal of nonsense in this thread.

(1) Since when is a few mpg difference remotely relevant on a new Porsche? You are dropping £5k+ a year in depreciation, £1k a year in other costs of motoring and are worried about £200 per year (at most) in fuel? MPG would feature literally nowhere in my consideration.

(2) Revving a 2.7 hard to keep up with traffic in town? What? First gear is pretty short, and 2nd pulls hard from 18mph or so. I don't think I have ever used anything like full throttle in town (driving a 3.4 admittedly).

(3) Turbo 4 pots have nothing whatsoever to do with what the majority of drivers want or will enjoy (as the majority, even of Porsche drivers, have no clue about engines). It is ALL about CO2 targets, and Porsche will sell us what it has to sell us to keep VAG within the limits. Nobody at Porsche will think anything other than that they are having to piss on our chips and tell us it's vinegar.

(4) I doubt the turbo 4 will be much lighter than the 2.7. Nothing worth thinking about in a car that weighs 1350kg.

I doubt the turbo 4 will have 380bhp - first, that is quite a high specific output, and, more importantly, the 4 will have to be a lot slower than the GT4 (and its replacement, which will probably keep an NA 6). I would expect about 330bhp but a fair bit of torque (so a horrible flat top end or low redline).




engineermk

96 posts

126 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
ORD said:
A great deal of nonsense in this thread.

(1) Since when is a few mpg difference remotely relevant on a new Porsche? You are dropping £5k+ a year in depreciation, £1k a year in other costs of motoring and are worried about £200 per year (at most) in fuel? MPG would feature literally nowhere in my consideration.

(2) Revving a 2.7 hard to keep up with traffic in town? What? First gear is pretty short, and 2nd pulls hard from 18mph or so. I don't think I have ever used anything like full throttle in town (driving a 3.4 admittedly).

(3) Turbo 4 pots have nothing whatsoever to do with what the majority of drivers want or will enjoy (as the majority, even of Porsche drivers, have no clue about engines). It is ALL about CO2 targets, and Porsche will sell us what it has to sell us to keep VAG within the limits. Nobody at Porsche will think anything other than that they are having to piss on our chips and tell us it's vinegar.

(4) I doubt the turbo 4 will be much lighter than the 2.7. Nothing worth thinking about in a car that weighs 1350kg.

I doubt the turbo 4 will have 380bhp - first, that is quite a high specific output, and, more importantly, the 4 will have to be a lot slower than the GT4 (and its replacement, which will probably keep an NA 6). I would expect about 330bhp but a fair bit of torque (so a horrible flat top end or low redline).
1 - I agree
2 - I agree again
3 - Everything is about CO2 targets; I work in car engine development for a Porsche rival, we're hitting CO2 not keep customers happy (they can afford run un-economical cars) but to keep politicians happy. Small capacity turbo engines are here to stay, get used to it.
4 - Again I agree, saving 50kg of an engine's mass is difficult and would have little effect on a car's overall performance.

Soon there will be plug-in hybrid versions of all the range as some Chinese cities will require any new car to be a PHEV. No PHEV = no sales in China, one of the biggest luxury car markets in the world.

ORD

18,086 posts

126 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
engineermk said:
1 - I agree
2 - I agree again
3 - Everything is about CO2 targets; I work in car engine development for a Porsche rival, we're hitting CO2 not keep customers happy (they can afford run un-economical cars) but to keep politicians happy. Small capacity turbo engines are here to stay, get used to it.
4 - Again I agree, saving 50kg of an engine's mass is difficult and would have little effect on a car's overall performance.

Soon there will be plug-in hybrid versions of all the range as some Chinese cities will require any new car to be a PHEV. No PHEV = no sales in China, one of the biggest luxury car markets in the world.
I would be much happier with a high-revving, low torque NA petrol engine plus an electric motor performing a "torque fill" function. A lot of fun to be had with that approach, and it could be very efficient indeed; but I doubt it is what we will get. It will be tiny turbo engine plus electric gubbins.