Boxster exhaust note

[g-boy]

I've read that the exhaust note in the 2.7 is actually nicer than the 3.2, is this true?

anyone driven both?

>> Edited by g-boy on Tuesday 21st March 11:33

[yorkie997s]

I have owned both - they both sound nice but I preferred the S, it has more of a bass growl to it.

[Don]

It also changed in MY03 mildly - got a bit bassier again. And, of course, changed again with the introduction of the 987.

All of 'em, however, sound significantly better once the revs get above 4krpm. Which is why track days are an auditory treat.

Yes, you can buy sports exhausts to make it louder, but it doesn't suit the character of the car IMO...

[Don]

g-boy said:

I've read that the exhaust note in the 2.7 is actually nicer than the 3.2, is this true?

No. They're very similar. But I haven't driven a 2.7 - only heard them.

[yorkie997s]

They do sound quite different when you drive them - the S just sounds more muscular, and more 911-like.

[SteveDavidson]

I drove a Cayman (3.4 litre) last week and I don't think it's quite as sweet sounding as my 987 2.7.

Still sounded great though, just not as 'musical'.... the Cayman has a more aggressive, harder note with more pronounced gear whine

incidentally, the performance of the 3.4 was the least impressive aspect of the new car (maybe because the rest is so good!) but in my personal opinion, it could also be down to
the 2.7 being underated at 240bhp (feels more like 260 to me), so the power difference isn't so great....

Steve

[anniesdad]

I own a 2.7 Box and have driven a Cayman S if that helps.

To listen to I prefer the Boxster (it is bassier and less mechanical), to drive I prefer the Cayman S.

Whatever, they all sound glorious under acceleration.

[anniesdad]

SteveDavidson said:

I drove a Cayman (3.4 litre) last week and I don't think it's quite as sweet sounding as my 987 2.7. Still sounded great though, just not as 'musical'.... the Cayman has a more aggressive, harder note with more pronounced gear whine incidentally, the performance of the 3.4 was the least impressive aspect of the new car (maybe because the rest is so good!) but in my personal opinion, it could also be down to the 2.7 being underated at 240bhp (feels more like 260 to me), so the power difference isn't so great.... Steve

Did you jump from one to the other? did you notice how much lighter on it's feet the Cayman S was?

welcome to PH by the way!

>> Edited by anniesdad on Tuesday 21st March 12:28

[SteveDavidson]

thanks for the welcome!

"Did you jump from one to the other? did you notice how much lighter on it's feet the Cayman S was? "

they were both running 18"s and non-PASM suspension, so felt similar in that respect, what is noticable is the 100% extra rigiditity of the fixed head, to be honest I have always been surprised by the amount of scuttle shake in the Boxster, no road test mentions it, but it spoils the roof down experience for me. S2000's, Elise's, Caterham's don't suffer (OK so maybe it's unfair to compare the last two). Must be even worse on 19" wheels.

I also have an Integra Type R which has a similar 'throw it down any road regardless of the conditions' feeling as the Cayman. Shame Porsche are taking the pi*s with their profit margins (Cayman is cheaper to make than the Boxster but costs more). I'll be looking out for the base 3.2 model.

[g-boy]

very interesting thanks folks!

last couple of day has been nuts for me. just bought a TVR Griffith and then my missus resigned so i thought i had to sell. now she has been reinstated and my confidence is growing in the griff and now it feels as though i should part with my TT and go for a boxster....but then what is the point in having two ragtops??

hehe the mess i'm in

[Don]

g-boy said:

but then what is the point in having two ragtops??

How can you manage with only one?

Think of the horrible arguments about who has to take the tintop on sunny days! Life's too short otherwise...