Boxster 2.7 vs 3.2

[mwmackenzie]

Looking at maybe a circa 2000 boxster is there a huge difference between the 2.7 and 3.2 when it comes to performance and even economy? Are there model differences in specs etc? Would be manual and used now and then on track along with weekend jaunts away...

What are your thoughts?
Anybody tried both?

Thanks in advance

[blackburn]

Try also Box.net

All I know is that our 986s drinks like an alchy...

[Squozen]

I have driven both the original 2.5L Boxster and my current 'fun' car, a 2003 3.2L Boxster S.

Both are incredibly enjoyable cars. Yes, the 2.5 (or 2.7) is a bit down on power, but that's not something you really care about unless you find a long hill to climb. I drove the Boxster around Tasmania's amazing roads for 4 days and not once wished it had more grunt in the twisties.

If you're looking at a 2000 3.2L car, I'd be more inclined to get a 2003 2.7L to get that glass rear window. The chances of getting a plastic window you can still see out of may not be great.

Cheers,
Paul

[Adam B]

blackburn said:

Try also Box.net

All I know is that our 986s drinks like an alchy...

That should be boxa.net

Had an S, great car, more poke obviously but also had more kit, bigger brakes, bigger alloys as standard, half leather etc, still measly but you will tend to get higher spec S cars around as speccing the 2.7 to basic S cost a fair bit

If they differential is small get an S, I also had no issues with the plastic window, it's bigger than the glass one too

[blackburn]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Disagree. Facelift 986 far nicer IMO. Surprising how useful a glove box is. Nicer bumpers, clear indicators etc. Also much prefer 18" wheels. Each to their own. And yes it's Boxa.net My typo, sorry.