3.2 vs 2.7 987 Boxster for track use

[ReallyDriven]

Help. I am looking for a car to take on the track, circa £10k. It will only be for track us, plus getting there and back.
I was thinking Elise but am now looking at Boxster and Cayman. There are a few boxsters out there for the money but wanted to get people’s opinion on the difference between a 2005 3.2 manual vs a 2007 2.7 tiptronic both cars are S. The new one looks amazing in Grey, the older one is in black.
Or I could go for a 2005 115k miles 3.4s Cayman manual?
Help

[KPB1973]

ReallyDriven said:

Help. I am looking for a car to take on the track, circa £10k. It will only be for track us, plus getting there and back.
I was thinking Elise but am now looking at Boxster and Cayman. There are a few boxsters out there for the money but wanted to get people’s opinion on the difference between a 2005 3.2 manual vs a 2007 2.7 tiptronic both cars are S. The new one looks amazing in Grey, the older one is in black.
Or I could go for a 2005 115k miles 3.4s Cayman manual?
Help

Hi. There's no such thing as a 2.7 'S' - if any you're looking at have the 'S' badge then someone has added it on.

I personally wouldn't go for a tip car for a track tool, although I do really like the 2.7 engine on the road. It loves to be revved, and tends to need it because of the gearing (in the manuals).

Of the 3.2 and the 3.4, the latter has a reputation for bore scoring, although this might not be an issue for a track car if you're not doing many miles. They are relatively cheap because of that reputation though.

The 3.2 comes with its own problems, mainly IMS, but I seem to recall the 2005 is supposed to be a 'good one' in terms of the bearing used. It'd be worth looking in to, I think there's an old thread on here explaining the likely risk on a model-by-model basis.

I guess the issue between the two bigger engines is whether you want to risk one which can go 'pop' (3.2) or one which can erode over time (3.4).

Personally I think i'd go for a 986 3.2 for the lower initial investment vs risk of failure, plus they are lovely to drive, and closer to an elise in terms of mechanical feedback.

Good luck.

[IMI A]

3.2 manual defo

[MrVert]

Potential for a lot of costly problems with either of these around £10k, plus consumables will be fairly pricey for track use. Any servicing, parts and general maintenance could turn the experience a bit sour if you’re unlucky..

When we looked 4 years ago, after going into it for many weeks, we went S1 Elise instead. Got a 38k mile one owner car for £11k. We’ve since modded it a fair bit and it’s a cracking little track car.

You can still pick them up from time to time for around your budget or just above. Although I can’t see any for £10k at the moment.

Consumables are cheap as chips, hardly any wear in brakes or tyres. It’s ridiculously economical and hasn’t missed a beat.

Or, I’d be looking at a sorted MX5 for under £10k. People take the piss, but if they do, they’ve probably not driven one. Proper fun on a track, and they are so exploitable in a progressive, natural way.

This has sold, but it’ll give you an idea

https://bbrgti.com/blogs/cars-for-sale/bbr-super-2...

Good luck with your search

[MrC986]

Whilst I can’t comment personally on the Boxster question, an acquaintance used her 987 Boxster on track to good effect although the consumables are more expensive I.e. brakes/tyres etc. than the likes of a VX220/Elise which would handle better & give a better driving experience IMO as well as being easier to swap engines in if you were unfortunate to break it. Alternatively a decent MR2 drop top would be an alternative for a lot less £s.

[ReallyDriven]

MrC986 said:

Whilst I can’t comment personally on the Boxster question, an acquaintance used her 987 Boxster on track to good effect although the consumables are more expensive I.e. brakes/tyres etc. than the likes of a VX220/Elise which would handle better & give a better driving experience IMO as well as being easier to swap engines in if you were unfortunate to break it. Alternatively a decent MR2 drop top would be an alternative for a lot less £s.

Thank you, I am airing more towards the Elise as it’s lighter and would have a much better resell value.

[ReallyDriven]

You have swung my view and I am back in the Elise camp. I will up my price and try to find a garage for it. Thanks for the detailed answer too, very helpful.

MrVert said:

Potential for a lot of costly problems with either of these around £10k, plus consumables will be fairly pricey for track use. Any servicing, parts and general maintenance could turn the experience a bit sour if you’re unlucky..

When we looked 4 years ago, after going into it for many weeks, we went S1 Elise instead. Got a 38k mile one owner car for £11k. We’ve since modded it a fair bit and it’s a cracking little track car.

You can still pick them up from time to time for around your budget or just above. Although I can’t see any for £10k at the moment.

Consumables are cheap as chips, hardly any wear in brakes or tyres. It’s ridiculously economical and hasn’t missed a beat.

Or, I’d be looking at a sorted MX5 for under £10k. People take the piss, but if they do, they’ve probably not driven one. Proper fun on a track, and they are so exploitable in a progressive, natural way.

This has sold, but it’ll give you an idea

https://bbrgti.com/blogs/cars-for-sale/bbr-super-2...

Good luck with your search

[ReallyDriven]

If I can’t find a good Elise at a reasonable price then it’s back to the Porsche and your Iñigo here will help me cut the potential cars down quickly. Thank you.

KPB1973 said:

Hi. There's no such thing as a 2.7 'S' - if any you're looking at have the 'S' badge then someone has added it on.

I personally wouldn't go for a tip car for a track tool, although I do really like the 2.7 engine on the road. It loves to be revved, and tends to need it because of the gearing (in the manuals).

Of the 3.2 and the 3.4, the latter has a reputation for bore scoring, although this might not be an issue for a track car if you're not doing many miles. They are relatively cheap because of that reputation though.

The 3.2 comes with its own problems, mainly IMS, but I seem to recall the 2005 is supposed to be a 'good one' in terms of the bearing used. It'd be worth looking in to, I think there's an old thread on here explaining the likely risk on a model-by-model basis.

I guess the issue between the two bigger engines is whether you want to risk one which can go 'pop' (3.2) or one which can erode over time (3.4).

Personally I think i'd go for a 986 3.2 for the lower initial investment vs risk of failure, plus they are lovely to drive, and closer to an elise in terms of mechanical feedback.

Good luck.

[MrVert]

Don't discount the VX220T either, easily modified to make a really quick track car.

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202006099...

Or a 16v

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202007131...