Monday 28th April

Porsche Boxster S (986) | PH Fleet

On paper, there has never been a better time to own an early Boxster - what's the reality?

---

Almost three decades after the launch of the 986-era Porsche Boxster, they’re under secondhand scrutiny like never before. There’s the looming arrival of an electric Boxster for one thing, the thought of it inevitably shining a spotlight on the most affordable examples that feature a naturally aspirated flat-six - as well as the delayed appreciation of its 911 contemporary, the 996. 

Where a rear-engined Porsche with fried egg headlights, a manual gearbox and rear-wheel drive will be a good deal more than £15k for a sub-100,000-mile one, there are equivalent Boxsters - 3.2s, of course - for less than £10,000. And that’s actually up from where they used to be. Forget 924s and 968s - these are the classic Porsche sports cars that are really interesting right now. Affordable, plentiful, great to drive, and with the ‘90s (allegedly) sort of cool again, a 986 must be on quite a few radars. 

So consider this investigative journalism, PH style. We have this 2001 Boxster S, some bits to sort, and a few (hopefully) sunny summer months to discover whether a 986 really is as good in reality as the breezy daydream seems. Because we’ve all been tempted by a cheap Porsche at some point or another, right?

A bit of context, for starters. This Lapis Blue example hasn’t been bought at a knockdown price in an auction or grabbed from the classifieds for a song; it’s actually the property of my future father-in-law. He’s been the sole owner of this one since specifying it new in 2001, covering a little under 60,000 miles in that time. By all accounts, it’s been a fairly trusty old steed in almost a quarter of a century, but that’s a long time for any car to live; now a little love is required to get the Boxster back to its best.

Russell deserves it, too (my in-law, not the car). What with a cancer battle, bereavements, a written-off M5, and facing the prospect of me marrying his daughter, it’s not been the easiest few years. And keeping a Porsche in fine fettle, quite understandably, hasn’t been priority number one. So as well as hopefully discovering a bit about the best ways to maintain, upgrade, and enjoy a 986, we can help a chap out who’s long overdue some good fortune.

Having raced one a few years back, the temptation to go full road racer is enormous. But I’ve also got to remember that I’m lending a hand here, not building a dream Boxster, so most changes will be to factory spec. Though not all, if my crossed fingers pay off. The main priorities for right now are bringing some flat paintwork back to life, replacing a manky roof, modernising the audio and sorting a couple of electrical gremlins. The spoiler’s stuck up, for one thing, and we can only get Radio 2, for another. Fundamentally though, it seems like a decent car, having covered 150 miles or so already - roof down and flat-six howling is a real treat - albeit with the room for improvement obvious. 

And no time like the present. It’ll be in the garage over the next few days to sort a couple of more mundane issues like struts and wheel bearings (or whatever’s causing the wobble), then we can get into the fun stuff that’ll really work some magic on this much-loved Porsche. Any advice, input, or pointers are very much appreciated; there’s a bit of budget to work with, and I’m keen to make this as good as it can possibly be. Even if it means driving around with that numberplate on…

---

FACT SHEET

Car: 2001 Porsche Boxster S (986)
Run by: Matt Bird
On fleet since: April 2025
Mileage: 58,900
Last month at a glance: The Boxster is the cheapest way into a classic Porsche sports car - is it the best?

• 2024 Dacia Duster Journey | PH Fleet
• 2025 Audi RS3 Sportback | PH Fleet

[CarlosSainz100]

I had one of these as a second car a few years ago. My first Porsche. It had brilliant handling, went well but what let it down was the lack of an adjustable steering wheel; apparently sorted in later models. I'm 6ft 4 and have very long legs and although the seats were very comfortable the bottom of the steering wheel was always brushing my thighs.

I also found it to be very long geared. You had to be going very illegal speeds before you got near the upper rev range which spoiled the fun a bit.

I would love another one but maybe a later model.

[Loplop]

My mate bought one of these at the start of the year, cheap.

It's a bloody riotous hoot!

[aestivator]

Owned 25 years from new - here's to long-term relationships with cars

[LordGrover]

Brilliant little cars.
More characterful and fun than the 981 I had afterwards. It's never going to set the world alight so no point trying; just enjoy it for what it is.

[Batfoy]

Big fan of these, had an early 2.5 and loved it. Woefully underpowered but actually ok for me at the time, enough welly for a bit of fun but not so much that you would get into trouble in short order. Put 20k miles on it in the first year!

[Turbobanana]

I've spent far too much time since last September looking at these, as the car I should buy to replace the aging, crusty British sports car I sold because I didn't use it enough (Triumph GT6, before you ask).

What I learnt was that the majority of Boxsters are in dull colours and are either high mileage, hard-driven examples or cherished, lightly-used ones. This appears to be one of the latter, leading me to the main reason I didn't look at the 3.2s, which is that they appear far more prone to the bore-scoring issues than the smaller engined models, particularly on cars driven over frequent short distances.

Great back-story, Matt, and I hope you can do the car justice for its deserving owner. Just watch out for heavy oil consumption / sooty tailpipes.

[coop252]

As a two-year owner of a Rainforest Green 3.2S of the same year and similar mileage, I will be very interested in this thread. The previous owner had let things slip a bit, too. I have replaced the coffin arms, shockers, various bits of perished rubber, and of course had the clutch, IMS, and RMS done. I absolutely love it. As much fun doing the work as driving it........almost!

[Johnny G Pipe]

Crazy value, if you avoid the neglected hounds. I got a 2.5 to avoid the issues with the I...I... (sorry, not going to mention it) and stronger gearbox. A quick shifter and an exhaust, Bob's your Uncle.

The Oettle exhaust mod is the one to do btw. Only other advice is don't let the drains block and flood the underseat electrics, this has ruined more cars than the IMS ever has.

(Dammit, I mentioned it after all.)

[LennyM1984]

Turbobanana said:

the main reason I didn't look at the 3.2s, which is that they appear far more prone to the bore-scoring issues than the smaller engined models, particularly on cars driven over frequent short distances.

It's the 987 3.4 that is more prone to bore-scoring. The earlier 987 and 986 3.2s were largely okay.

I had an early 2.5 and thought it was fantastic. Not particularly powerful but the handling was great and it could really carry speed on track. Sadly it got written off by some German tourists and so I replaced it with a Cayman (which is better in every respect really).

[Stevie-Box]

Great to see the little 986S being featured. I bought one 11 years ago, meant to keep it 2 years but still have it.

For the stereo, I have the continental headunit, looks standard but features Bluetooth DAB etc

Also have H&R M030 springs, looks great but won't lie, it is now quite harsh on the UK potholed roads

[Erast Fandorin]

coop252 said:

As a two-year owner of a Rainforest Green 3.2S of the same year and similar mileage, I will be very interested in this thread. The previous owner had let things slip a bit, too. I have replaced the coffin arms, shockers, various bits of perished rubber, and of course had the clutch, IMS, and RMS done. I absolutely love it. As much fun doing the work as driving it........almost!

That sounds about par for the course; in spite of optimistic articles on the joys of 986s like this one, there's no such thing as a 'cheap' Porsche - even if you're doing the spanners yourself.

The 968s don't fit anyone much over 6ft tall, and the headlights look like a half-filled colostomy bag.

[86wasagoodyear]

Definitely on my list for the medium term. I'll be after a 2.5 for the lower power & shorter final drive ie high revving fun without reaching silly road speeds.

[Stefan D]

Had one of these and a 911 of the same vintage (just a base model). I thought the boxter was the better car.

[Batfoy]

Stefan D said:

Had one of these and a 911 of the same vintage (just a base model). I thought the boxter was the better car.

Me too. My Boxster was in an OPC for some work, sales bloke gave me the keys to a standard 996 whilst I waited. Hugely underwhelming. Some years later, friend of a friend took me for a blat in a 911 Turbo, now that was much more fun.

[Water Fairy]

Interested in this. Not owned a Boxster yet but on my theoretical list.

Bro bought his second 986 S last year. Not driven it yet but I did drive his first. Agree with the long gearing and needing to rev them out to get the best from them. They don't feel that quick but on paper should be quick enough for the road. Guess we are spoilt with easily accessible turbocharged torque these days.

Coffin arms, front radiators and roofs seem to be common issues.

[The Pistonsdead]

Great story/write up matt. Wish you all the luck with this interesting venture.

[sideways man]

My boxster would be a 2.5. Less issues and shorter gearing= more fun I’d say.

[robemcdonald]

LennyM1984 said:

Turbobanana said:

the main reason I didn't look at the 3.2s, which is that they appear far more prone to the bore-scoring issues than the smaller engined models, particularly on cars driven over frequent short distances.

It's the 987 3.4 that is more prone to bore-scoring. The earlier 987 and 986 3.2s were largely okay.

I had an early 2.5 and thought it was fantastic. Not particularly powerful but the handling was great and it could really carry speed on track. Sadly it got written off by some German tourists and so I replaced it with a Cayman (which is better in every respect really).

What he said. Bore scoring not a problem IMS and RMS potentially, but likelihood of a failure is Vanishingly small.
Coolant cross overs might need looking at if not already done.

I ended up with a 987 as I fitted better and preferred the updated cabin.

That looks like a very nice one though.

[GreatScott2016]

Can’t get past the looks (particularly earlier models), so never been a fan of the Boxster, despite how good they may drive, noting I’ve never driven one .

[Shnozz]

Batfoy said:

Stefan D said:

Had one of these and a 911 of the same vintage (just a base model). I thought the boxter was the better car.

Me too. My Boxster was in an OPC for some work, sales bloke gave me the keys to a standard 996 whilst I waited. Hugely underwhelming. Some years later, friend of a friend took me for a blat in a 911 Turbo, now that was much more fun.

I test drove a 996 C2 which was priced within a whisker of the 986S at the same dealership and came to the same conclusion. I didn’t need the rear seats and the additional boot space on the boxster was a bonus.

That said, I was bored with the 986S within 6 months.