Why does Boxster get a lukewarm reception?
 

At half to a third the cost of a 911, it seems like the Boxster is a lot of car for the money. Why did it have a lukewarm reception?

Empirically, it sounds like something car guys would love. Under 3000 lbs.
It has 3.2 engine like the 911. Base model has 200hp, and the S has 250hp. Was it overshadowed by the 300hp 996?
It is mid-engined which many say is the ideal weight distribution.

Is it the IMS/RMS that also burdens the 996 reputation?
Is it the water cooled aspect?
Do people not like the convertible aspect?

I DD a boxster and I have an SC, they are apples and oranges. I happen to love the (not so) little car, it is a tank and just flat out fun to drive. Mine is the 97 2.5, you know the one that you are NEVER supposed to buy, but in 170K is has been very very reliable, and more then proved itself as a suitable driver.
The main problem I see with the stigma that goes along with the car is 1 it was marketed to women 2 it isn't a 911, and because of those reasons many people won't drive one. You have to remember that a Porsche for many many people is a penial extension, and they don't want to deflate thier ego by driving a lesser vehicle. I just smile and keep going on, content in my manhood, getting 28mpg and shifting at 7K, all day every day.
Thay are great cars, solid and fun

Seems to have something in common with the Miata, in that regard.

It's an aspirational brand, people may scoff since it's a lesser model,
but that doesn't seem to apply to entry level BMW and Benz models.

Good post, spot on (corrected for spelling only).

I think the Boxster is more sexy and less macho than the current 911.

That does not appeal to the knuckle draggers which see themselves as top dogs.

Dude, I get an A for creative spelling. :D

Reminds me of a comment I read re: the Cayman, the Boxster's roofed sister, in one of the car mags. It was something to the effect of 'when a guy in a Cayman pulls up next to me, I immediately think 'couldn't afford a 911'

I have to admit being a bit dismissive of the Boxster's myself, until a friend who owns one let me auto cross his at Hershey last month. Never even sat in one prior to driving it to tech inspection. I found it to be one of the most balanced, well behaved cars I've ever driven. I hadn't autocrossed in 20 years (and when I did, it was in a Golf GTI; quite a different animal) and the Boxster's was so easy to drive at the limit that I wound up second in class and took home a trophy. I have a great deal more respect for the car since then.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1432474496.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1432474514.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1432474543.jpg

I remember when the concept came out and thought it was beautiful.
Something got lost in final production and the headlights haven't aged well.
They aren't so much timeless, as they peg the car in a mid 90's point in time.
You also mention empirical- and the boxster is seen by some as a car that is produced to always be second fiddle to the 911. It's not as powerful, it's not quite up to snuff, even though is has a better layout. On paper, it's almost always one purposely one step behind 911.
Also, like many mid engined two seaters, they arent as practical as other cars- even a 944 has so much more room for storing stuff.

I wouldn't mind having one as an autocross project.

Agree with that comment. Loved the concept car as well.

It's interesting that the Boxster isn't more loved by Porschephiles. Isn't it the modern version of a 914-6 that's so respected by the air-cooled crowd?

This is dead on the money. I used to have the same car, just a 99. I did think it was a bit underpowered, but that was quickly remedied with the bump up to 2.7L with the next engine. I loved the car, and as soon as it's practical for us to have another 2-seater in the family (i.e. when we don't have to tote around kids in the back) I'm sure we'll get another one.

I really think the only people who dump on the boxster are those that are more concerned about image that substance, or those that have never driven one and just assume they're junk. A beautiful mid-engine convertible with a wonderful sound and superb handling - what's not to love?

Oh, and to add to that: if I had to choose between boxster and 996 it'd be a boxster all day long. Better looking, more nimble and more fun.

As said above, "couldn't afford a 911" is what the snobs would say. Richard Hammond said something similar, albeit jokingly, in one episode of Top Gear.

I actually like the 987, even the 981. The 986, not so much. I'm just not sure I am ready for a convertible either. I grew up in a country where opening the car windows would make you dirty and sweaty in a heartbeat. So owning a car without a top wasn't ever a dream of mine.

We covet the cars of our youth.

I had one. It was great to drive. Much better balance in corners than a 911. But the dreaded IMS spooked me so I sold it. I have a friend who had 2 engines blow in 2 different Boxsters. Now that they can be had for < $10k I would buy another, but I have too many toys right now.

only folks not pleased with a boxster/cayman are folks who have not driven them, or are not interested in driving cars hard.

always wanted to LS one. renegade hybrids makes a kit.

Back in the day....
It took me one look at a Boxster doing a hard launch at an AX. Some called it wheel hop but it was the whole engine/trans exhaust.....all the hangy down stuff....bouncing up & down with funny noises to convince me that I didn't need one. A Porsche fail IMO......meh... just more raw meat for my 914.

Holy Schmoly!

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/THWKx2enwz0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I think some of it is because it's a convertible. Not seen as track-worthy by the DE crowd (although it is) and a car that the mainstream automotive press labeled "cute" in the early days.

I don't personally care for convertibles. Had a few over the years (British and Italian), just not my thing. I passed on some sweet 911s over the years, because I just preferred coupes...

Personally, I think that the Boxsters/Caymans are the "best bang for the buck" available in a "modern" Porsche out there. I love my old 911, but if I were to get something "almost new", I'd be looking for a Cayman. (Full-time convertible doesn't work well in Oregon, at least not for me.)

I think it is because most "enthusiasts" base their car buying decision on some criteria other than how it drives. Image to others, reputation, how it looks, how exclusive it is... anything other than what they can do with it. The reality is most people can't drive a car beyond about 70% of it's capability. The nuances of a car are lost on them.

Porsche never marketed the car specifically to women, so that argument is pointless. It was an entry level car, since it was the least expensive in the line-up, but you could argue that an entry level Porsche was always a used Porsche. For a few people, it was a completely different car to the 911 and all the better for it. Sadly, far too few people figured that out.

JR

I'm not a Boxster fan because:

For me, the shape hasn't aged well. Not enough character.
The production car lost much from the prototype.
Early Boxster interior materials seemed cheap and haven't aged well.
I'm just not a convertible guy.

I wish they'd come out with the Cayman at the same time. Then we'd be looking at some amazing $8000-$10,000 used cars right now.