718 S perfect road trip car
Discussion
Just back from 2,500 miles across Germany/Italy/Austria/France etc. in my 718 2.5S. I have now bonded with the car, and I can't think of anything better to do this trip in. I didn't want for more power on the alpine passes, the car was comfy, quiet, economical when cruising and sounded great in the mountain passes (Sports Chrono and PSE fitted). The 2.5T engine was also great for pulling you out of the switchbacks, no need to wait for the revs like in the 4.0 six.
A faster car (on paper) would not have been more fun, especially a coupe, and watching some of the 911s rattle their owner's teeth out on the passes made me even more happy with my choice.
My next trip will probably be back in a McLaren (spider next time of course), but to me the Boxster is Porsche's real sports car star.
A faster car (on paper) would not have been more fun, especially a coupe, and watching some of the 911s rattle their owner's teeth out on the passes made me even more happy with my choice.
My next trip will probably be back in a McLaren (spider next time of course), but to me the Boxster is Porsche's real sports car star.
I agree, the Boxster is brilliant for touring across Europe and is sublime on mountain passes. And while mine is a 4.0 I do agree that the 4 pots would be more than enough to thoroughly enjoy the experience. More speed and power doesn't necessarily translate into more fun and enjoyment.
Boxsters are hard to beat for the money! You can fit so much luggage into them too so a two week holiday is no problem. I love mine, sure two extra cylinders wouldnt hurt but I dont feel short changed when on a nice road. I've just coming back from a tour of France and ticked over 50K Km's, would recommend to anyone.
SkinnyPete said:
Love a boxer. Always wished I had one over my Cayman, in summer at least.
I bought a Cayman (as I swore as a teenager that I would have a Porsche one day) then 6 months later sold my long-term Caterham. I missed the open air, so bought an old MX5 with power hard top as a daily.I think a 718 Boxster could replace both of them (though a Cayman Targa would be my dream car!!) with a cheap old shed as a daily.
Well I’ve had 4 Boxsters, the latest a 2017 718 2.0 PDK bought at 6 months old.
As others have said, a European road trip is exactly what these cars are built for.
All of mine have toured Europe extensively including France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands among others.
They are brilliant practical cars and no impact on luggage space when the roof is down.
We always stay in Airbnb’s and ensure we have a washing machine in our accommodation at some stage of our tour.
And plenty of room for wine, champagne, pastis etc etc (44 bottles last time with space for more!)
Our next road trip is travelling through France into Northern Spain (Basque region) in around 7 weeks time - can’t wait!
As others have said, a European road trip is exactly what these cars are built for.
All of mine have toured Europe extensively including France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands among others.
They are brilliant practical cars and no impact on luggage space when the roof is down.
We always stay in Airbnb’s and ensure we have a washing machine in our accommodation at some stage of our tour.
And plenty of room for wine, champagne, pastis etc etc (44 bottles last time with space for more!)
Our next road trip is travelling through France into Northern Spain (Basque region) in around 7 weeks time - can’t wait!
targarama said:
Just back from 2,500 miles across Germany/Italy/Austria/France etc. in my 718 2.5S. I have now bonded with the car, and I can't think of anything better to do this trip in. I didn't want for more power on the alpine passes, the car was comfy, quiet, economical when cruising and sounded great in the mountain passes (Sports Chrono and PSE fitted). The 2.5T engine was also great for pulling you out of the switchbacks, no need to wait for the revs like in the 4.0 six.
A faster car (on paper) would not have been more fun, especially a coupe, and watching some of the 911s rattle their owner's teeth out on the passes made me even more happy with my choice.
My next trip will probably be back in a McLaren (spider next time of course), but to me the Boxster is Porsche's real sports car star.
Completely agree, and this mirrors my own experience. On paper the flat-six looks like the “proper” Porsche engine, but out on the road — especially somewhere like the Alps — the four-cylinder turbo just makes more sense.A faster car (on paper) would not have been more fun, especially a coupe, and watching some of the 911s rattle their owner's teeth out on the passes made me even more happy with my choice.
My next trip will probably be back in a McLaren (spider next time of course), but to me the Boxster is Porsche's real sports car star.
The torque delivery is the whole story. You’re not waiting for 5,000rpm to arrive before the car does anything interesting; it’s already pulling hard from 2,000, which is exactly what you want coming out of a hairpin rather than sitting there working up through the revs like the 4.0 six needs you to. On a long trip that adds up to a much less tiring drive — you’re not constantly hunting for the right gear to keep it in the sweet spot.
And your point about “faster on paper ≠ more fun” is the crux of it. Point-to-point on a real road, with real traffic, real surfaces and real corners, the four’s flexibility and the way it just gets on with overtakes without drama beats a car that’s “quicker” in a straight line but needs everything lined up perfectly to feel good. The six sounds better standing still in a car park. The four is the better tool for actually driving.
Mar5hall said:
Completely agree, and this mirrors my own experience. On paper the flat-six looks like the proper Porsche engine, but out on the road especially somewhere like the Alps the four-cylinder turbo just makes more sense.
The torque delivery is the whole story. You re not waiting for 5,000rpm to arrive before the car does anything interesting; it s already pulling hard from 2,000, which is exactly what you want coming out of a hairpin rather than sitting there working up through the revs like the 4.0 six needs you to. On a long trip that adds up to a much less tiring drive you re not constantly hunting for the right gear to keep it in the sweet spot.
And your point about faster on paper ? more fun is the crux of it. Point-to-point on a real road, with real traffic, real surfaces and real corners, the four s flexibility and the way it just gets on with overtakes without drama beats a car that s quicker in a straight line but needs everything lined up perfectly to feel good. The six sounds better standing still in a car park. The four is the better tool for actually driving.
Horses for courses. It really is zero hardship (quite the opposite) to downshift and remain above 3500rpm. The torque delivery is the whole story. You re not waiting for 5,000rpm to arrive before the car does anything interesting; it s already pulling hard from 2,000, which is exactly what you want coming out of a hairpin rather than sitting there working up through the revs like the 4.0 six needs you to. On a long trip that adds up to a much less tiring drive you re not constantly hunting for the right gear to keep it in the sweet spot.
And your point about faster on paper ? more fun is the crux of it. Point-to-point on a real road, with real traffic, real surfaces and real corners, the four s flexibility and the way it just gets on with overtakes without drama beats a car that s quicker in a straight line but needs everything lined up perfectly to feel good. The six sounds better standing still in a car park. The four is the better tool for actually driving.
I would suggest on a road trip, the event of the upper range on a 6-cylinder is what makes up for it being less relaxing on a commute through town, which is where the turbo-4 clearly has the advantage.
All brilliant things, that’s a certainty.
A Boxster in the Alps? I took last Thursday and Friday off work…
On the way past Gstaad towards St Moritz, via Süsten, Grimsel, Furka and Oberalp passes.
And then back again along the same route the next day :
As a aside, I took my (lighter but comparable power-weight figures) A110S to Milan three weeks ago via the Simplon and Gd St Bernard passes.
Yes, a 4-pot turbo does have more grunt; a similar max torque figure is at 2000rpm lower. But as RJ said above, it’s just a simple matter keeping the F6 NA engine above 3500rpm, enjoying the noise and of course visiting more petrol stations
On the way past Gstaad towards St Moritz, via Süsten, Grimsel, Furka and Oberalp passes.
And then back again along the same route the next day :
As a aside, I took my (lighter but comparable power-weight figures) A110S to Milan three weeks ago via the Simplon and Gd St Bernard passes.
Yes, a 4-pot turbo does have more grunt; a similar max torque figure is at 2000rpm lower. But as RJ said above, it’s just a simple matter keeping the F6 NA engine above 3500rpm, enjoying the noise and of course visiting more petrol stations
Mar5hall said:
Completely agree, and this mirrors my own experience. On paper the flat-six looks like the proper Porsche engine, but out on the road especially somewhere like the Alps the four-cylinder turbo just makes more sense.
The torque delivery is the whole story. You re not waiting for 5,000rpm to arrive before the car does anything interesting; it s already pulling hard from 2,000, which is exactly what you want coming out of a hairpin rather than sitting there working up through the revs like the 4.0 six needs you to. On a long trip that adds up to a much less tiring drive you re not constantly hunting for the right gear to keep it in the sweet spot.
And your point about faster on paper ? more fun is the crux of it. Point-to-point on a real road, with real traffic, real surfaces and real corners, the four s flexibility and the way it just gets on with overtakes without drama beats a car that s quicker in a straight line but needs everything lined up perfectly to feel good. The six sounds better standing still in a car park. The four is the better tool for actually driving.
You are missing the point of the thread completely, people buy what they want to drive for whatever reason they want, it isn't a competition, it isn't about who is right and wrong. It is about enjoying what you own and drive visiting some of the best driving roads on the planet.The torque delivery is the whole story. You re not waiting for 5,000rpm to arrive before the car does anything interesting; it s already pulling hard from 2,000, which is exactly what you want coming out of a hairpin rather than sitting there working up through the revs like the 4.0 six needs you to. On a long trip that adds up to a much less tiring drive you re not constantly hunting for the right gear to keep it in the sweet spot.
And your point about faster on paper ? more fun is the crux of it. Point-to-point on a real road, with real traffic, real surfaces and real corners, the four s flexibility and the way it just gets on with overtakes without drama beats a car that s quicker in a straight line but needs everything lined up perfectly to feel good. The six sounds better standing still in a car park. The four is the better tool for actually driving.
Given that the vast majority of readers are not interested in what you (another self proclaimed clueless expert) think about their car why not post some pictures of where you have driven your car instead, I am sure we would all like to see them?
To all the 718 4-pot fanboys who are suggesting that the 718 turbos’ key strength (vs the naturally aspirated 981 flat 6 ) in real world driving is its easily accessible torque delivery , I would suggest that you work that little bit harder to ensure that you are in the correct gear at all times.
And the 718 4 cylinder cars definitely suffer from a discernible degree of of turbo-lag vs their N/A predecessors.
I would prefer to do the tiny bit of extra work required by the flat 6 to be rid of the 4-pots’ turbo lag (not to mention the benefits of a screaming, high revving flat 6 )
Other might have different views and priorities, but being in the correct gear for each and every situation transcends make and model.
And the 718 4 cylinder cars definitely suffer from a discernible degree of of turbo-lag vs their N/A predecessors.
I would prefer to do the tiny bit of extra work required by the flat 6 to be rid of the 4-pots’ turbo lag (not to mention the benefits of a screaming, high revving flat 6 )
Other might have different views and priorities, but being in the correct gear for each and every situation transcends make and model.
carspath1 said:
To all the 718 4-pot fanboys who are suggesting that the 718 turbos key strength (vs the naturally aspirated 981 flat 6 ) in real world driving is its easily accessible torque delivery , I would suggest that you work that little bit harder to ensure that you are in the correct gear at all times.
And the 718 4 cylinder cars definitely suffer from a discernible degree of of turbo-lag vs their N/A predecessors.
I would prefer to do the tiny bit of extra work required by the flat 6 to be rid of the 4-pots turbo lag (not to mention the benefits of a screaming, high revving flat 6 )
Other might have different views and priorities, but being in the correct gear for each and every situation transcends make and model.
Lag lol. Just get a pdk or put it in sport mode. And the 718 4 cylinder cars definitely suffer from a discernible degree of of turbo-lag vs their N/A predecessors.
I would prefer to do the tiny bit of extra work required by the flat 6 to be rid of the 4-pots turbo lag (not to mention the benefits of a screaming, high revving flat 6 )
Other might have different views and priorities, but being in the correct gear for each and every situation transcends make and model.
Check out a Saab 900 if you want lag. Porsche have effectively removed lag.
Gassing Station | Boxster/Cayman | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff