I was doing OK until that poopie-headhttp://www.pelicanparts.com/support/...oilet_claw.gif Steve W. told me my Corvairs were not sophisticated. You can diss the 911's, but that was low!

I went to look at a Boxster, thought about buying it but couldn't aford the sex change operation. I bought a 89 911 instead. My wife likes me better this way.

wow.... i just read this whole thread..... so much to comment on but i will keep it short.

levi...... you were lost before you even hit "enter" to start this thread, and i DONT mean that is a bad way, if you have to ask the question that is the basis for the thread then game over. the skier guy had the idea. there are soooo many cars that are faster than our 911's, but its not about the speed for most of us....

"IT IS however the need to look into the garage just before you got to bed every night for one last look at the old 911,......." have you done that once with your boxster?....... will you still be thrilled with a 20 year old car?..... i still do do exactly that and i have had my 911 fifeteen years, i STILL peek at it at night and smile.

my lil niece summed it up a lil easier...... "tio (uncle), a boxster is porsche with panties" :) i didnt even know what to say!

it's too bad boxsters are the sportsters of Porschedom.

won't stop me from owning it one day though.

This comes out of excellence mag May 2004, page 16

"its just more fun to drive a slow car fast, than a fast car slow" *

* Mike Robbins, who has driven a356 on the far side of 800,000 miles.


Roman in LA

I dunno, my 3 liter 911SC will run circles around a boxster S not to mention a lowly 2.5 liter boxster.
Maybe you need to drive a 911 that makes ther intake pressure go above zero. Either that or put nitrous on your boxster ;)

Lets face it, air cooled 911's really are glorified VWs. The suspesion is a kludge compaired to modern multi link versions.

When people finally realize the true value of these cars the price will hopefully plumet.
(Then I will be able to get that 72 longhood at a reasonable price!)

-------------
Just remember that any car can go fast. (if you drop it out of an airplane...)
Lets use a boxster as a test case!

drive a 914 sometime and see who slow Porsche's really can be.
then drive that same car thru a corner without using the middle pedal and see what an old car can really do.

i love it when people with boxsters 30yrs younger are amazed that my lil teener can hang with them in the twisties.

some day i hope to have room for a old 911 in my garage. but for now I'll just hang in the middle of the pack, waiting for you to pass on the next straight.:rolleyes:

If you enjoy driving an injection molded little girl's kitty car (it's probably Barbie Pink), with enough s/w programs on it to constitute a video game and the engine in a place where it won't be able to hurt you, please continue to drive your Boxster.

You probably like living in an assisted care retirement home as well.

I've driven a Boxster S and it reminds me a lot of my mother-in- law's Lexus ..............................BORING. For that matter it reminds me a lot of my mother-in-law.

Dirty Marty
Fallbrook, CA

I love how some people read a little to far in to things. First off, I'm not knocking the 911. I want one for a weekend play car. I asked if I'm missing something. Not for an evaluation of my driving skills or of my own car. I very happily drive my barbie pink timid little lowey boxster in to the triple digits daily and I don't even soil my panties.
I'm still asking the same question. It is my personal believe that the cars I have driven are dog ass slow because their doggs. Poorly maintained and just plain tired. Some of them looked fantastic "that 2.4" I think was a 70... it's 36 years old. Slight chance of low compression?
The others where beat all to hell with the exeception of one that was a total cream puff sc.... I talked to a guy about it and he said that that model loves to build up mad amounts of carbon on the valves if you don't drive it hard enough. Is this really the case? And what about the somewhat later larger displacement cars? Just looking at the numbers everything from a 2.7 up should be an outstanding performance car. My little boxster is only about 200hp at the crank... thats like less then 150 at the wheels plus it's heavy. The 97 is the litest boxster but it's still some 2800 lbs or so.
Are there particular models that are much heavier than others? Tranys that are to be avoided? Engines that suck? 2.7 with the reactors in the exhaust comes to mind. Don't those cook the engine?
That's precisely why I have asked to meet up with some of you that have cars the really preform well. I want to take notes. Part numbers. Pics of nessasary mods. Suspension set up. I want to figure out what I've been missing here.

Hey Levi,

I think everything essential has already been said.

In terms of sheer performance, 20-30 years of technological development counts for a lot, so if you're looking for sheer speed, you'll not likely find it in an older 911.

There is a significant difference in speed between one of the earlier 2 liter models and a late model 3.6 liter as well, but I think you'll find it universally admitted that the newer models just don't have 'the feel' that the earlier ones did.

I cut my Porsche teeth on a '74 914 2.0. Man that thing was fun to drive, but the cardinal rule was 'keep the speed up, cause it's hard to get it back'!

For a lot of us here, the 911 was the cat's arse when we were growing up (I know it was for me), and it will probably always remain so for us for just that reason.

If you don't look at the car and dream and remember the giant-killing Porsche of old, you're probably not going to get the '911 thing'.

It's really what matters the most to you. If you don't have 'the sickness', you'll probably be happier in your Boxster, and there's nothing wrong with that.

If you think you might have it, then read some more (particularly here), drive some more cars and see what you think. Best of luck whatever you decide,

ianc

Levi,

IF you're for real the best thing for you to do at this point is shut up. I say that with the best intentions. Spend about a month reading the posts and learning. Then start asking questions about anything that isn't clear. Your current approach is not winning you a lot of support.

As far as not getting it, no you're probably not. When I first bought my SC I really wondered what I had done. I only drove it for about 5 minutes and let a more experienced guy drive it for a while. I was expecting much more refinement. Now I love the raw quirkiness of it. In the world of Motorcycles you'd be on a BMW K-bike and I'd be on an Airhead. (Which I had until last year)

I think the band Rush puts it best:
"Well weathered leather, hot metal and oil. The scented country air. Sunlight on Chrome, the view of the lanscape, every nerve aware."

Joe
82 911SC Targa

This is all about the original question, to wit, the definition of Sports Car. Levi's definition apparently has a lot to do with 0-60 times. I suggest that his comparison should be a 911 of the same era as the Boxter to experience the 0-60 times. Or he should try a ride in a modified 911 (which he is asking for). If HP is his drug, he really needs to try a modded blown car.

As to nostalgia etc. It's obvious he don't get it.

dry sump oil system
 

do boxsters have dry sump oil systems? If not how do they handle high g turns and not loose lubrication?

Hey thanks guys,
For me it's not really about 0-60 times, it's more about coming out of the corners and having plenty of get up and go to make the most out of the next straight away. As far as handleing and brakes I like to brake when I see god and then back down a little. As far as nostalgia... your 100% right. I don't get it. I'm a young man... all though I have a major sweetspot for my old 124..... Mega, mega dog.... 86 hp of understeering deathtrap. And right again... I'm going to have to find a 930 or something to try out.
Thanks for the help. I really do appreciate your input.

Yeah it's a dry sump. Even though it's water cooler instead of air/oil cooled it still holds some 9 1/2 quarts..... not like some of you guy's thought that are pushing 13.

Levi - I read this entire thread, and can see your point of view. Many many cars are faster in a straight line than our old 911s. In "not getting it" or "missing something" I think what you haven't yet experienced is a 911 in a race track setting. It wasn't until I experienced mine on a race track, did I fully appreciate the capabilities of these cars; capabilities that have absolutely nothing to do with power, but more driver input as well as overall engineering.

The examples you drove are in no way "dogs," as they were never intended for what you did with them. You should take yourself up to Thunderhill the next time a DE comes around, and ask for a ride in a 911. Then go for the same-style drive around the track in your Boxster. I won't say the Boxster will beat the 911 or vice versa; in the grand scheme of engineering, the 911 should not beat the Boxster. But as a performance car, it should exhilarate nonetheless, albeit much differently than what you are used to with your Boxster.

In short, after a fast track ride in a 911, I think you'll come back a little bit winded.

SmileWavy

I think you might want to find a 964 for a test drive - the C2 not the AWD C4. See how you like it.

If you prize lighter wt., more elemental cars then an S made up to 1973 should be your next test drive.

To get an overview of which models have more problems or what problems, your best bet is get a book. The one by Peter Zimmerman is good. You might also try looking at the reference articles on Pelican.

This board is very valuabel but the suggestion fo ryou to just browse it is a lot of time spent in specialized threads to glean a few general things. You can save that for later.

OK, so to save you a lot of horsing around (and because I'm bored), here's a brief 911 summary insofar as I know it. Others chime in please to tell me where I've gone wrong (particularly in early days).

65 - 68 - The earliest 911's. SWB means Short Wheel Base. Handling problems until the wheelbase was lengthened in '69. 2.0 engine with carburettors. These years (up to '73) are called 'long hoods' because of the lack of impact bumers.

69 - 73.5 - LWB 911's; handling improved. Engine size rose to 2.2L, then 2.4L. At the end, three models: T, E and S. Cars are still lightweight and agile. Still rustbuckets though. Midway through 73 the factory changes from carbs to CIS injection. The 914 is brought out, and lives out most of its quick life during this period.

74 - 77 - The 'Mid Years'. Great light 911's without frills. Drawbacks are unfortunately many and need adressing before roadworthiness is assured. 2.7L engine is unreliable and will need fixes and major work to be solid. Likely this has been done by now. The first of the 'impact bumper' cars. 74-75 not galvanized, 76 galvanized save the roof, 77 fully galvanized. This is a good thing.

78 - 83 - SC's. Engine displacement raised to 3.0L. HP ranging from around 180 to a little over 200 in 1981 or 2. Case made of AL instead of MG. CIS injection. Fully galvanized. Rear fenders flared for larger wheels. The SC 3.0 is regarded as 'bulletproof'; one of the most reliable and long-lasting engines Porsche had produced to date. 83 marks the reintroduction of the cab. Cats introduced, and oxygen sensors with associated control circuitry in 1980.

84 - 86 - The Carrera. Displacement raised to 3.2L. Engine management is introduced with the change to Bosch-produced DME (Digital Motor Electronics); timing is now managed by the DME; a pulsed instead of continuous injection. Efficiency is much improved, although driveability suffers somewhat. Power is up to ~230 HP elsewhere and ~215 HP in the US. These cars have additional features like central locking, footwell blowers etc., and are starting to feel heavier. Transmission is still the venerable 915 that has been in use since the early seventies.

87 - 89.5 - Later G50 Carreras. The Carrera's tranmission is replaced with the G50, a heavier but more robust unit using the Borg-Warner synchronizers rather than Porsche's own Baulk ring type. The clutch is now hydraulic rather than the cable clutch of the 915. Car is still heavier, but power is good, and standard wheel size increases to 7&8X16 in '88.

89.5 - 93? - The 964. Displacement increased to 3.6L with a twin plug ignition. Car looks very similar (with considerable fairing added to the body), although Porsche claims it is a completely new car under the skin. Suspension is considerably redesigned with coil-over springs rather than torsion bars, and offers better handling at the rear due to the redesigned trailing arm geometry.

93? - ? - the 993's. Here's where I get hazy. Still a 3.6, although now with hydraulic lifters. A redesigned multi-link rear suspension mounted on a sub frame is a big improvement, although again weight has gone up and responsiveness has gone down. The famous (and revered) bugeye headlights (trademark of the 911 heretofore) are done away with. Car is popular and highly sought after as the last of the legitimate air-cooled 911's.

Beyond here I think there was some car that they called a 911 that had some kind of liquid-cooled engine, but I'm not sure. I've kind of lost interest in the whole thing around here, so someone else will have to take it up.

ianc

Okay guys, here is were we are with this thread...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1160213268.gif