I've just bought some poverty Pork…

[Eddie Strohacker]

Patrick Bateman said:

On the maintenance front, I'd say the most annoying thing about parts is finding non-Porsche options in the same way you easily can with a BMW for a significant saving. Brakes and the odd suspension component notwithstanding.

I've discovered VAG heaven on that front. Plenty of shared generic parts like sensors & senders if you can be bothered to look them & it can be a bit of a bother.

My 987 is currently sporting a Skoda temperature sender.

Hello Skoda:
Hi, I'd like a temperature sender for an Octavia please
Sure, can I take your reg number please?
Well, it's like this...

[Mario149]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I was thinking along the lines of base version Boxster (2.5/2.7, 201bhp --> 225bhp) version base version 911 (3.4, 296bhp) personally where you're talking a 30% power jump, but I do see what you mean. Lack of 6sp in the base Boxsters I drove also played a big negative in my head, even if in reality it's not going to make a great deal of difference. Add in my other 911 "advantages" and I can see where the premium comes from. I also think the 4 seats thing is not given enough credit as well. I use my 911 waaaaaay more than my old Boxster over the time I had/have them since my daughter was born. If you have kids and are trying to sell the idea of an impractical sports car to a skeptical other half, even the whiff of practicality (even if you never intend to use it) will make a big psychological difference I reckon.

[LordHaveMurci]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

It is daft isn't it, I guess the 911 has always been a 'premium' sports car whatever that means & the Boxster has so often been seen (incorrectly) as the poor mans Porsche.

I just wish I'd be happy selling my 996 & buying a Boxster & banking the difference, trouble is I always wanted a 911, not just a Porsche, I suspect I'm not alone.

[edh]

Mario149 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I was thinking along the lines of base version Boxster (2.5/2.7, 201bhp --> 225bhp) version base version 911 (3.4, 296bhp) personally where you're talking a 30% power jump, but I do see what you mean. Lack of 6sp in the base Boxsters I drove also played a big negative in my head, even if in reality it's not going to make a great deal of difference. Add in my other 911 "advantages" and I can see where the premium comes from. I also think the 4 seats thing is not given enough credit as well. I use my 911 waaaaaay more than my old Boxster over the time I had/have them since my daughter was born. If you have kids and are trying to sell the idea of an impractical sports car to a skeptical other half, even the whiff of practicality (even if you never intend to use it) will make a big psychological difference I reckon.

There's quite a jump in performance between the 2.5 and the 3.2 Boxsters, both in top end power & mid range torque. I found my 986S fast enough & doubt I'm able to go much quicker in my 996. Both are in the sweet spot for power/weight where you can actually use the performance on the road, plenty of revs and WOT . 986 has glorious induction noise, which is rather lost on the 996. 996 has much lighter & airy cabin with much better visibility. To me the 996 feels a more sophisticated, grown up car, not sure why. Both are great cars

Price premiums will never be logical - I wouldn't pay more for a 993 or a 964 over a 996 for example. 986 and 996 should give you reasonably cheap motoring (bar the small % of disasters) as there should be no depreciation. 986S in particular is a bargain.

[Diesel Meister]

carrottop said:

Having owned both I can say that they are very different cars. They feel and handle completely differently.

I've never owned a 911 but have driven 996s and 986s extensively including back to back (I also currently have a 986) and I respectfully disagree.

They feel different sure, but not un-alike in many respects, which to be expected for the reasons already set out. Personal preference aside in most on-road driving situations, they are startingly similar as a driving experience, with most obvious difference beg the relative proximity of the engine as much as the extra size / interior space etc..

My point was not that 911s are not different / worth more / whatever. I just find 100%+ premium a little hard to fathom!

I would very much like a 996 as I prefer a hard top, back seats and a tad more pep, but I can't really justify the cost to change, even allowing for the extra everything plus intangibles

[ATM]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

So not metaphorically the same?

[maxwellwd]

LordHaveMurci said:

It is daft isn't it, I guess the 911 has always been a 'premium' sports car whatever that means & the Boxster has so often been seen (incorrectly) as the poor mans Porsche.

I just wish I'd be happy selling my 996 & buying a Boxster & banking the difference, trouble is I always wanted a 911, not just a Porsche, I suspect I'm not alone.

This is where I am at, I started off with a Boxster but to be honest I wanted a 911 as it is something I have always dreamt of owning one day. To be frank with the way prices are going on 911s in the future I don't think I would be in a position to get one, so it was now or never for me.

The Boxster is a great car though, another issue that I see a lot and was chatting to my independent about is that on the whole maintenance costs between a 986 & a 996 are broadly the same, currently you just wont get the money back if you invest in a full overhaul in a 986 but you have a sporting chance to in the 996

All lovely cars, I just find it bizarre that the 986 is still so cheap when so many marques & models have risen so much in recent times like fast fords, 90s Jap stuff but you can still bag a good Boxster for well under £5k

[soxboy]

Diesel Meister said:

I would very much like a 996 as I prefer a hard top, back seats and a tad more pep, but I can't really justify the cost to change, even allowing for the extra everything plus intangibles

I am in a similar position. I bought a 987 on a whim and it has been great, however practically speaking I could really do with 4 seats in order to justify keeping it. The problem is that a jump to a 997 is probably at least 3x (if not 4) what mine is worth and I can't justify it. Even entry level 996s are almost double.

This thread makes interesting and I must say frustrating reading. As I said, my 987 was bought on a whim at a low price (was a part ex the dealer didn't want as he specialised in commercials) due to its high miles and lack of history. The car has been checked over and its fine, however when I have looked to sell it on (due to needing 4 seats for the school run) the lack of interest/ low ball offers has been very frustrating. There seems to be so much caution over these cars with a surprising lack of people willing to take a punt, even when priced accordingly. I don't think I've seen such hesitation on any other car.

[kingston12]

maxwellwd said:

I just find it bizarre that the 986 is still so cheap when so many marques & models have risen so much in recent times like fast fords, 90s Jap stuff but you can still bag a good Boxster for well under £5k

That must be a combination of the sheer number left on the road and the fact that a lot of people will be worried about the potential costs of running an old Porsche compared to something that was cheaper and more mainstream to begin with.

I have got a 987S which is still depreciating fast. It is now worth less than virtually every other car I have owned in the past - all of them were run of the mill cars and one of them is thirty years old now!

[Patrick Bateman]

soxboy said:

I am in a similar position. I bought a 987 on a whim and it has been great, however practically speaking I could really do with 4 seats in order to justify keeping it. The problem is that a jump to a 997 is probably at least 3x (if not 4) what mine is worth and I can't justify it. Even entry level 996s are almost double.

This thread makes interesting and I must say frustrating reading. As I said, my 987 was bought on a whim at a low price (was a part ex the dealer didn't want as he specialised in commercials) due to its high miles and lack of history. The car has been checked over and its fine, however when I have looked to sell it on (due to needing 4 seats for the school run) the lack of interest/ low ball offers has been very frustrating. There seems to be so much caution over these cars with a surprising lack of people willing to take a punt, even when priced accordingly. I don't think I've seen such hesitation on any other car.

I'm not sure how much it's caution coming into it. I've had mine advertised for over 2 weeks, specifically mentioning it's had a Hartech rebuild in the title.

I've had one message on eBay asking why it needed a rebuild and a text from someone local to me who is actually interested because of the rebuild.

It's exactly what attracted me to the car in the first place but I don't know what proportion of potential buyers think the same way.

Edited by Patrick Bateman on Friday 3rd November 16:45

[was8v]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The boxster is widely regarded as the better sports car.

Rationally, people should covet the Boxster more than the 911 for the use they are put to.

People are not rational. See the value of fast fords. They are rubbish. But they are culturally significant. So are 911s. Boosters are not.

[Patrick Bateman]

I hate the general public.

I'd have hoped more potential sports car owners weren't so ignorant. Just in it for the pose factor.

Edited by Patrick Bateman on Friday 3rd November 16:52

[edc]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I suspect people generally think they are getting more car with a 996, and t some extent it's true. The extra seats and space, the bigger engine, the nicer badge, plus the its a real Porsche cache has some value etc.

As for your other point about the enthusiast market I think that if the 986 was twice the price then you would lose a whole segment of buyers who think that the Boxster is cheap and will be a nice prestige vehicle on the drive or something to impress with.

As it is the Boxster is the affordable car in the range and attracts some buyers in the same way that those who want the biggest bang for buck look at Kias and Hyundais. On a personal level I've benefitted from the low prices for the past few years.

[Diesel Meister]

Also worth remembering that this is hardly peak season for the purloining of 'verts. Most shall be winter barging at best!

Either way, like anything its either sell it for what people are willing to pay or hold onto it. I'd personally not be inclined to accept a low-ball offer but it's likely I'll have no choice but to take a hit on mine despite it being in good condition with fresh fluids and MOT.

[ATM]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I was being sarcastic, sorry.

I find the now popular use of the word literally to be a bit annoying - literally.

[carrottop]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Some fair comments there. What do you mean by front end patter?

[MDL111]

Crap - I spend too much time on here. I just bought a car and now I want a 986 ....

[Mario149]

edh said:

Mario149 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I was thinking along the lines of base version Boxster (2.5/2.7, 201bhp --> 225bhp) version base version 911 (3.4, 296bhp) personally where you're talking a 30% power jump, but I do see what you mean. Lack of 6sp in the base Boxsters I drove also played a big negative in my head, even if in reality it's not going to make a great deal of difference. Add in my other 911 "advantages" and I can see where the premium comes from. I also think the 4 seats thing is not given enough credit as well. I use my 911 waaaaaay more than my old Boxster over the time I had/have them since my daughter was born. If you have kids and are trying to sell the idea of an impractical sports car to a skeptical other half, even the whiff of practicality (even if you never intend to use it) will make a big psychological difference I reckon.

There's quite a jump in performance between the 2.5 and the 3.2 Boxsters, both in top end power & mid range torque.....986S in particular is a bargain.

Can't disagree with that. I did test drive a 3.2S from Porsche Guildford back in 2008 and it def had a better amount of poke, but not enough for me. I had also test driven a Maser 4200 at around that point for similar money which was a torque and rev fest, so between that and the styling my money went on the Italian despite the ste gearbox When I sold the Maser 6 months later (2003 car, 37K miles, only £17K private sale in 2008....bonkers!) for a 996, even that 315bhp felt very slow all of a sudden, so the Boxster would have been out of the question. I think maybe the issue is that older Boxsters feel like they can handle so much more power and weirdly aren't retro enough for me. My 993 NVR has a similar power/weight ratio (she was particularly lively from the factory it seems and then Wayne at Chipwizards worked a bit of magic on top) as a 986S, but between the more antiquated drive and the power delivery not coming properly on song until 4k rpm, it feels a lot faster and more dramatic.

As I said, I think the 986s "suffer" from being too competent in many ways - first world problems?! But, reading people's posts on this thread, I do wonder if that's a particular issue that affects me more than most people

[Mario149]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

And if memory serves, they've always sold more 911s than Boxsters, so if you amortize dev costs based on prod volumes, it's almost certainly the case I would have thought....economic genius by Porsche.

[snotrag]

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a13148149/...