RE: Porsche 718 Boxster: Review

RE: Porsche 718 Boxster: Review

Author
Discussion

Ozzie Osmond

21,189 posts

247 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
^^ The plain fact is I've never heard you say a kind word about ANY car, except the one you just happen to own. Didn't the engine blow up or something? I guess that's all part of the enthusiast experience we should be yearning for.

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
So what do you think you''ll replace current Cayman with ?

Are there are any Turbo cars you've enjoyed ? By which I mean is it specifically the delivery of the F4T you didn't like when you tried it or Turbo engines in general ?

jayemm89

4,044 posts

131 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
I did read somewhere (possibly EVO) that the downsizing trend may slow down as the emissions tests are changed, most of us have experienced the allegedly super frugal turbo cars which somehow get nowhere near the MPG they claim, and are often little better than the big, evil NA engines they replace. It would be lovely for Porsche to move the Boxster back to an NA car, but I just can't see that happening as now it's turbo most of their customers would just miss the mid-range shove (I can forgive that).

I drove an MX-5 for the first time last week, the 2L current gen car, although it was never going to set your hair on fire, for country driving the engine was "just right" - quite pleasant. I'm sure in summer I'd suddenly develop a hankering for a BBR 200bhp kit, but it was another nice reminder of what little sports cars used to be like.

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
^^^^^

Loved my MX5, I always thought the engine was the weakest link and not particularly characterful. The rest of the car was so good though that it didn't dull the experience.

CABC

5,589 posts

102 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
Ozzie Osmond said:
One of the big Porsche-myths is that Boxster/Cayman buyers "couldn't afford a 911". My own experience has been that quite a few Boxster/Cayman buyers (oops, I nearly said enthusiasts...) choose the mid-engine car because they love the mid-engine chassis.
Not a myth though, it's the view held by most actual buyers. It's also repeated by ladies who know enough about cars to tell the difference, even if it doesn't bother them at all. So of course many men will factor that macho teasing effect in their aspirations.

Enthusiasts may choose mid-engined, but they don't add up to a lot.

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Oh dear well you wouldn't like some of my choices then !

Still you know my mate Kul so as I said you're no doubt a nice chap.




anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
Standard Porsche thread (when a certain poster pops up) to be honest. People get a little tired of being patronised over and over again. Hence why things always end up in the toilet.

Wills2

22,878 posts

176 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
yonex said:
Standard Porsche thread (when a certain poster pops up) to be honest. People get a little tired of being patronised over and over again. Hence why things always end up in the toilet.
Yep and it's quite tiresome.





Pan Pan Pan

9,928 posts

112 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
Must admit I have never been quite sure, how owners of very high performance cars of all types, actually use them on public roads and on a continuous/day to day basis, where the slightest pressure on the accelerator, can put the car massively and deeply into licence losing territory.
I have been lucky enough to drive a number of such cars. The worst probably being a Testa Rossa, where after a long drive I came back with my right ankle aching in trying to keep it off the loud pedal.
Such cars, and the 718 struck me as being in this group, could reach stupendous speed in seconds, especially given the immediate accessibility to the power that the 718 seems to provide. I would be genuinely interested to know how the owners of such cars deal with this aspect of their performance where for `normal' driving on public roads possibly as little as just 10-15% of a cars overall performance potential is being used.
For example do drivers of such cars drive within the limit for 95% of the time, with an occasional blip up to stupendous speeds where road conditions permit, or where they get the inevitable A**hole who thinks it is a good idea to follow such cars a few feet off its rear end?
Recently saw a McLaren being tailgated by a tw*t in BMW one series, and thought what `does' the dumb f*ck in the BMW think he is doing? could it be the Mclaren was threatening his manhood, or did he `really' think he stood some sort of chance against it? It is for sure a funny old world.

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 12th November 2016
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Crikey.

This has all got rather serious.

I'm not sure anybody took anything personally.





Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 12th November 23:35

Wills2

22,878 posts

176 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
Such a pity, he probably knows what he's talking about as well but hasn't learnt to express himself or at least hide his distain for cars he doesn't think are worthy, which does beg question why he bothers posting about modern Porsche?

It's like he's barking at the night...




mwstewart

7,620 posts

189 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
A.G. said:
Well I've been tooling around in forced induction Pork for a couple of days and cant see the problem.

Haha sweet. Nor familiar with Porsche's but is that a K-Jet air mass meter open to the elements, or is the filter in the engine lid?

stuckmojo

2,983 posts

189 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
please feel free to ignore my post if you think that only those in the market for a new car in this class need respond.

I am not even mildly excited about this car. Is it because of the engine?

In part, yes. Perhaps the engine is the item which tips the scales against it. It's the fact that the car industry (and press) is focusing on chasing numbers and failing to focus on the intangibles that make driving great which bugs me.

I get painfully sad when people compare torque graphs.

None of the latest Porsche cars actually for sale excite me as much as the model line from 10 years ago. And I'm not a luddite; my next new car will be a Tesla model 3, or something else RWD and electric.

Reading the posts above, there is some recognition that those cars aren't made for people who post on here. They are mass-market produced goods set at maximising profits for Porsche GMBH. They always were. But their USPs are getting pretty thin on the ground.

The iPhone comparison is quite fitting. It's no longer a matter of performance/quality/exclusivity, it's a brand game of a different nature.

Paradoxically, I'm more excited about the electric Porsche than about a half-baked 4-pot Boxster with two cylinders amputated and a turbo added to appease regulators and chase numbers. But that's just me.

thanks for reading

je777

341 posts

105 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
Yes, it's a good car - of course it is, it's a Porsche.
But that doesn't excuse them ruining it needlessly:
electric steering, four cylinders, awful gearing.
You can make excuses for all, but I don't know how anyone (anyone interested in driving, that is) could own one of these without those three things incessantly niggling at you.
They've - knowingly - made it worse.
I know the secondhand vs new argument doesn't hold, but if you're spending your own money who is buying this rather than a 6 cylinder Boxster (which you could also turbocharge for the same money)?

anonymous-user

55 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
je777 said:
Yes, it's a good car - of course it is, it's a Porsche.
But that doesn't excuse them ruining it needlessly:
electric steering, four cylinders, awful gearing.
You can make excuses for all, but I don't know how anyone (anyone interested in driving, that is) could own one of these without those three things incessantly niggling at you.
They've - knowingly - made it worse.
I know the secondhand vs new argument doesn't hold, but if you're spending your own money who is buying this rather than a 6 cylinder Boxster (which you could also turbocharge for the same money)?
I'm going to tread warily given my first incursion into this thread but ..........

I think sentences like "I don't know how anyone (anyone interested in driving, that is) could own one of these without those three things incessantly niggling at you." sound rather elitist. I suspect there are plenty of people who will buy these cars and enjoy them and who if asked about their interest in cars and driving would say they are interested, perhaps even passionate about both. It's a short step from "anyone interested in driving" to the lazy stereotyping that has dogged the Cayster line since its inception c.f. Hairdressers, birds car, can't afford a 911 and other such stupidities. I know that's not what you said by the way but PH does in my view tend to a foster the odd undercurrent of "I'm more of a purist than you" which can, at times, come across as a bit of a badge of honour when in fact like most things in life it's an entirely subjective matter.

I think the underlying tone of the article is that the car is overall neither better nor worse than its predecessors but it is however different. It meets some, but not all, of the older cars' standards, it also brings new qualities or improves upon others. As a result I would disagree that it has been "knowingly made worse", it has though been knowingly made different and the virtues or otherwise of that difference are very well articulated in the original article.

typos !

Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 13th November 11:11

kambites

67,593 posts

222 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
je777 said:
They've - knowingly - made it worse.
No, they've knowingly made it less driver-focussed. Not the same thing at all in a mainstream car.

Pan Pan Pan

9,928 posts

112 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
je777 said:
Yes, it's a good car - of course it is, it's a Porsche.
But that doesn't excuse them ruining it needlessly:
electric steering, four cylinders, awful gearing.
You can make excuses for all, but I don't know how anyone (anyone interested in driving, that is) could own one of these without those three things incessantly niggling at you.
They've - knowingly - made it worse.
I know the secondhand vs new argument doesn't hold, but if you're spending your own money who is buying this rather than a 6 cylinder Boxster (which you could also turbocharge for the same money)?
You cannot buy a new 6 cylinder Boxster or Cayman anymore, (unless going for the GT4 version which retains the 6 cylinder engine) So only a second hand 6 cylinder Boxster/ Cayman would be a possibility. I was certain I would not like the 4 cylinder 718, but having driven one have changed my mind.
As posted above, the only odd thing about having one, and other similar cars from other manufacturers, is reconciling their vast performance, with day to day driving on public roads. If I was lucky enough to have one, it is possible my licence would be gone before long. This is what apparently what does happen to quite a few buyers of such cars, and they turn up at the dealerships some time later wanting to sell the car back with their licences away with the fairies. (the dealerships are only too happy to do so, but at no where near the price the punter had just paid for it) It is also evidenced by the number of punters, who hire a high performance car for a wedding/birthday/ other significant event etc, and then crash it.
looks like a mid range Caterham could be a good performance car choice for many, in that its `overall' performance is more in line with day to day driving on public roads than a super/hyper car might be?

jayemm89

4,044 posts

131 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
Pan Pan Pan said:
This is what apparently what does happen to quite a few buyers of such cars, and they turn up at the dealerships some time later wanting to sell the car back with their licences away with the fairies. (the dealerships are only too happy to do so, but at no where near the price the punter had just paid for it) It is also evidenced by the number of punters, who hire a high performance car for a wedding/birthday/ other significant event etc, and then crash it.
looks like a mid range Caterham could be a good performance car choice for many, in that its `overall' performance is more in line with day to day driving on public roads than a super/hyper car might be?
Although this is really a discussion for another topic, cars becoming faster is obviously an issue for many. One reason why I personally would not be interested in a new 911 - hell, my old 996 C4 was plenty capable of getting me into trouble with the law if you weren't sensible.

I think the majority of owners of these cars are more than able to keep them at sensible or appropriate speeds. Whether those are always legal speeds, who knows. I tend to find the fastest vehicles on the roads are usually white vans and taxis. Whenever I'm driving a flash car I probably drive slower than normal on motorways etc... because I'm so blatantly visible, a copper might feel the need to check my speed where he would not have bothered were I in my Peugeot 207 van.

As for blokes crashing supercars on wedding hire, that is no doubt a combination of lack of experience and a desire to show off with no time to actually learn the car's limits in a safe environment. As a motorcyclist it frustrates me to see the path to 1000cc superbikes becoming ever more difficult (not an inherently bad thing) but the only thing stopping Junior getting into a Lamborghini for his first car is whether Daddy can afford the insurance.

A Caterham is a good shout because what you get is the SENSATION of speed at much lower velocities. A lot of cars now are so well setup and capable you could be forgiven for saying they had no feel, when they do it just only happens at serious speed.

je777

341 posts

105 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
RSK21 said:
je777 said:
Yes, it's a good car - of course it is, it's a Porsche.
But that doesn't excuse them ruining it needlessly:
electric steering, four cylinders, awful gearing.
You can make excuses for all, but I don't know how anyone (anyone interested in driving, that is) could own one of these without those three things incessantly niggling at you.
They've - knowingly - made it worse.
I know the secondhand vs new argument doesn't hold, but if you're spending your own money who is buying this rather than a 6 cylinder Boxster (which you could also turbocharge for the same money)?
I'm going to tread warily given my first incursion into this thread but ..........

I think sentences like "I don't know how anyone (anyone interested in driving, that is) could own one of these without those three things incessantly niggling at you." sound rather elitist. I suspect there are plenty of people who will buy these cars and enjoy them and who if asked about their interest in cars and driving would say they are interested, perhaps even passionate about both. It's a short step from "anyone interested in driving" to the lazy stereotyping that has dogged the Cayster line since its inception c.f. Hairdressers, birds car, can't afford a 911 and other such stupidities. I know that's not what you said by the way but PH does in my view tend to a foster the odd undercurrent of "I'm more of a purist than you" which can, at times, come across as a bit of a badge of honour when in fact like most things in life it's an entirely subjective matter.

I think the underlying tone of the article is that the car is overall neither better nor worse than its predecessors but it is however different. It meets some, but not all, of the older cars' standards, it also brings new qualities or improves upon others. As a result I would disagree that it has been "knowingly made worse", it has though been knowingly made different and the virtues or otherwise of that difference are very well articulated in the original article.

typos !

Edited by RSK21 on Sunday 13th November 11:11
I think why cmoose was annoyed - rightly, in my view - was because you took what he/she said and then misrepresented it according to your own beliefs on 'what people on ph generally say'. You've done the same here.
Electric steering, four cylinders, awful gearing would niggle me. As I said. Because there's no good reason for any of them to be like that. It was - manifestly - just my subjective opinion.
All the stuff you then add about elitism, 'more of purist' and hairdressers is nothing to do with me because I didn't say it; and I won't be discussing it further (because you seem not to discuss what people actually say, but what you imagine they say - as you've shown in your discussion with cmoose, no matter how many times it was, very clearly, stated to you).

je777

341 posts

105 months

Sunday 13th November 2016
quotequote all
kambites said:
je777 said:
They've - knowingly - made it worse.
No, they've knowingly made it less driver-focussed. Not the same thing at all in a mainstream car.
True enough. When I said 'worse' I meant only from my own point of view, which is that a sports car should be designed to be good to drive. By giving it electric power steering, a 4-cyl engine and 'economical' gearing they've made it less good to drive (my opinion, of course, but one shared, I think, by most who care about whether or not it's fun to drive).
The car may well be excellent, but how many of us don't think it would be better without those three 'flaws'?
I just can't see the logic in having those three things, purely to save some petrol. If your aim is frugality or environmental friendliness don't buy a Porsche.
None of this will affect sales too much, but I'm not talking about money.