Boxster vs 996 vs 911

[ToddM]

Scott

Yes, but it would still need water

[450knotOffice]

This is true.

[Wayne 962]

Having written a book on the 1965-89 911, and currently writing two books, one on the Boxster and the other on the 996, I'd say I'm slightly qualified to weigh in on this discussion.

Hands down, the Boxster is a great car. I love the feel of the car on the track. I love the whole concept of the car. We're building a "Boxster Carrera" which will have a 911 engine, Brembo big brakes, PSS9 suspension, Tarret sway bars, the whole nine yards. I expect this car to be a killer on the track.

I also own a 996 with the Aero kit (basically made to look like a GT3). I bought this car for the book. If I wasn't doing a book, I probably would have waited for the GT3. The 996 - I have only driven it about 200-300 miles since I bought it more than a year ago. Why? It just doesn't terribly excite me. Not sure why. Perhaps I will get into it more when I start tearing it apart.

My favorite car to drive on the street is my 1972 911 RS clone. Built in an era of true sports cars, it really encompasses the "good ole days" when you get that oil smell in the engine compartment, the car is difficult to start, the heat either makes you freeze or burns you - and you loved it. No cats, no mufflers, basically a race-ready car for the street.



-Wayne

[ToddM]

Wayne,

Why would you need to swap out the boxter engine in favour of the 911 engine? I feel there's a parallel point in there somewhere relating to this topic

Sounds like your 72 has a lot of character; something a 996 is completely void of.

Anyways a little back more to the topic, kgs365 has done what probably quite a few have done and has come full circle back to the classic 911. This is why I also am a firm believer that "plan to buy the best latest example you can afford" is advice for nobody other than the lowest common denominator.

This also assumes that every year Porsche improves their models... so back to my original question in this post, why would you need to swap out the boxter engine in favour of the 911 engine? Certainly the Boxter engine must be better following this logic.

I know, those of us who "downgrade" are just confused, the longhoods are worhtless now that they are 5 generations old, and R Gruppe guys are totally off their rocker.

...wait, I think one of those statements actually is true.

[450knotOffice]

Todd, I believe the "911" engine wayne is speaking of is the 996 engine, which has significantly more HP and torque than the smaller, but similar Boxster engines - 300 to 345 depending on the year and factory mods. This is the kind of power the Boxster has always needed.

Wayne, does your 996 have a PSS9 or similar coilover kit installed? I'll hazard a guess and say no. If it did, the handling and feel of the car would be on a completely different planet than anything offered stock or as an option by Porsche. Much, much firmer. Much better turn-in, etc.

Character? Well, no...not nearly what your clone has. No contest. As has been said however, "old" cars always have much more perceived character compared to new or newer cars. Many on this board who own Longhoods claim that my '84 impact bumper car has very little character compared to the earlier cars. Personaly, I disagree, but it illustrates the point that it seems the older the car, the more character it has.

[T77911S]

Originally Posted by ToddM

Wayne,

Why would you need to swap out the boxter engine in favour of the 911 engine? I feel there's a parallel point in there somewhere relating to this topic

.

i was told the boxter engine is a throw away engine. if it goes bad, you buy a new one. i think it has something to with the case and/or the bearing journals.
like wayne said, it is a good concept, but i think they went cheap with the engine.
as a mid engine car with a good motor and brakes, like wayne would build, would be an awesome car. i know my 914-6 was more fun to drive.
i dont keep up with any of the new cars, i like the old ones better, in fact, i dont know if could pick out a 996 from a 997.

[roadrelic]

Call it what you will, nostalgia.... But there is that "it" factor, a raw visceral feeling that the older 911's have. Most modern cars simply don't have it anymore......
The direct connection between the driver and car IS important; no drive by wire, no power steering, no power brakes, traction control HA!
Really there's no argument that the modern stuff is faster, and more driver "friendly" than cars past. Heck there's enough engineering and electrical wizardry to make the Reagan era space program look like a joke! Though I guess this is something to be expected on a car now costing some $75K+. Sadly that "it" factor has been lost amongst the wave of technology, but that's progress right?!

[ToddM]

Originally Posted by T77911S

i was told the boxter engine is a throw away engine. if it goes bad, you buy a new one. i think it has something to with the case and/or the bearing journals.
like wayne said, it is a good concept, but i think they went cheap with the engine.
as a mid engine car with a good motor and brakes, like wayne would build, would be an awesome car. i know my 914-6 was more fun to drive.
i dont keep up with any of the new cars, i like the old ones better, in fact, i dont know if could pick out a 996 from a 997.

The 996 is the same problem. Its 1 PN from Porsche. The transmission for both vehicles is also 1 PN from Porsche; all gearing is pressed on to the sleeve.

Porsche AG is primarily focused on marketing these days. The Caymen could spank the 996/997 platform, but they wont let that happen.

[RWebb]

1 pn ??

[450knotOffice]

There is a very interesting and informative article in last month's Excellence magazine about the water cooled engine in the 986/996/987/997 series of cars. It details the engine, its development, and its problems. The article then goes on in good detail about three different engine builders/rebuilders who've come up with re-engineered fixes for these engines that eliminate the design weaknesses the engine had. They address every known problem. Interestingly enough, they mention that the heads are incredibly robust and efficient and allow the engine to easily make rated power, which allowed Porsche the latitude to create a nice broad powerband with a mild cam.

There was an interesting thread on Rennlist in which one of the rebuilders signed on and joined the thread to answer any and all questions

These guys are rebuilding the engines now (even though that may not have been Porsche's original intent) and are giving back to their customers much better engines than Porsche gave them originally - and with more power and displacement too, if they want it.

[ToddM]

Originally Posted by RWebb

1 pn ??

1 part number. It is a "no service support" engine. They want you to buy a new one, not fix it.

[ToddM]

Originally Posted by 450knotOffice

There is a very interesting and informative article in last month's Excellence magazine about the water cooled engine in the 986/996/987/997 series of cars. It details the engine, its development, and its problems. The article then goes on in good detail about three different engine builders/rebuilders who've come up with re-engineered fixes for these engines that eliminate the design weaknesses the engine had. They address every known problem. Interestingly enough, they mention that the heads are incredibly robust and efficient and allow the engine to easily make rated power, which allowed Porsche the latitude to create a nice broad powerband with a mild cam.

There was an interesting thread on Rennlist in which one of the rebuilders signed on and joined the thread to answer any and all questions

These guys are rebuilding the engines now (even though that may not have been Porsche's original intent) and are giving back to their customers much better engines than Porsche gave them originally - and with more power and displacement too, if they want it.

They address every known problem? Hmm.. accoring to many on Pelican there were no problems, even when shown with evidence of these problems. But hey, buy the newest one you can afford because newer is always better!

I am glad though that this is now being addressed by some publication and that there are corrective actions.

Still, the cost of entry for a 996 for example, whatever the cost of rebuild the engine to address these problems, then the money you have to throw at the vehicle to make it repond and give the feedback that a 911 does... it begs the questions why not just buy a 911 if thats what fits the bill?

[Wayne 962]

Originally Posted by ToddM

Wayne,

Why would you need to swap out the boxter engine in favour of the 911 engine? I feel there's a parallel point in there somewhere relating to this topic

1 - Bought this Boxster with a blown engine
2 - The stock 2.5 or 2.7 engine does not have enough power.

Let me add to my comments in saying that the Boxster S is really the one to get with the 3.2. I believe the cars with the smaller engines are a bit underpowered for my taste.

-Wayne

[Wayne 962]

Originally Posted by ToddM

This also assumes that every year Porsche improves their models... so back to my original question in this post, why would you need to swap out the boxter engine in favour of the 911 engine? Certainly the Boxter engine must be better following this logic.

The Boxster engine and the 996 engine are virtually the same - the only differences are in power and displacement.

-Wayne

[Wayne 962]

I've got two Boxsters and a 996 that I bought for doing the books. I still like the Boxsters over the 996. I think the Boxster is more similar to the older cars than the 996. With the top down, mid-engined layout - it's the younger edition of the 914.

With respect to the motors, these will be rebuilt in the future after Porsche stops providing crate motors (like the 3.4 I bought for $6K). When the supply dries up, the aftermarket will take over. Right now, parts aren't available because there's no demand for them. I have had this discussion with my supplier many times on this topic.

-Wayne

[kgs365]

wayne ...when will your boxster book be out?...only a few days left in 2008...i could see doing a simular project ...boxsters with blown or unblown motors can be had at the $10,000 level with a larger engine installed that could be a potient car

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by Wayne at Pelican Parts

Let me add to my comments in saying that the Boxster S is really the one to get with the 3.2. I believe the cars with the smaller engines are a bit underpowered for my taste.

-Wayne

I have a 2.7 and in the canyons it's more than I know how to drive. I should add that I have raced in motorsports on and off since 1957.


Or maybe I should take the point of view that I know how to drive a Boxster. Don't mess up. Either way, getting off a corner with 205 HP vs. 230 is not that much difference. It goes 130 w/o hesitation. Geez, what do you need?

[Steve W]

Great choice. The 3.2s are my favorite out of the air cooled cars- with a few mods it just has a great tactile and responsive feel about it. You can make it as raw, or even too raw depending on how carried away you get with it. Out of the box, most all Porsches I think are a bit too plush, but with some mods, probably most of them can give you some of that feel you want. Going forward, to the 964, then to the 993, each model gets heavier and looses some of that feel, but compensates with engine power. The watercooled 996, Boxsters to me was a big step further away with a very isolated feel to them. Very difficult to get excited or feel an emotional involvement with them, like driving a glorified Toyota. And why shouldn't it, the engine was designed by Mitsubishi as part of Porsche's new strategy to cut costs and become the most profitable car company in the world (and we all know how reliable Mitsubishis are ). I forget the exact figures, but while most car companies like BMW and Mercedes only make about $3000 on each car sold, Audi about $1500, Chrysler $900 and VW $400, Porsche makes about $28,000. I spent a few days with a '08 Cayman S and it really felt like driving a Toyota, thinking I'd would rather be driving a 3 series. The current GT3 though, that is another story - better than the feel of any 911 ever built, with the most power of any n/a Porsche production engine. Everything responds to the slightest input you give it, handling that stays planted in the turns as if it had the wings of a jet fighter, yet can be quiet and smooth, or loud and tight with the press of a button.

Likely the new 997.2 (998), with it's new A91 DFI motor will help bring back some of that lost feel, while eliminating the shortcomings of the previous M96/97 engines. Add a few suspension and maybe engine mods, and you'd have something approaching the GT3. Probably a good candidate for a 101 projects for your 997/998.

[petevb]

I'll weigh in.
I've had a few older 911s with engine swaps- the latest was a modified VRam in a 2200 lb early car. Recently I've also been fortunate enough to have a few occasions to drive well a well prepared ~2500 lb spec boxster and also a well prepped PSS9 equipped 996 at the autocross. I was able to get a good idea of the relative times, strengths and weaknesses of these cars- all of these were modified in the same 30-45k price ballpark.

The boxster was probably the slowest by a small margin under most autocross conditions, but it was also the least expensive. It's strength is turn-in and transitions- killer in the slalom. Weakness is power and getting power down- at roughly 11:1 power to weight it couldn't hang out of the corners.

The 996 put power down extremely well. Power to weight was closer to 10:1, but vs the boxster it was much faster out of the corners. The ABS and multi-link rear allow for amazing corner entry speeds as well- you can dive in with wild abandon, really attack the corners where in an early 911 you need to tiptoe. No real weakness to the car, though it wouldn't slalom as well as the boxster, and it could easily use more power.

The early 911 had a power to weight of closer to 7.5:1, so it's not a shock that it's also the fastest of the group by roughly 1-3 seconds (depending on the course) over one minute, which is obviously a fair bit. It's also the least consistent and hardest to drive by a good margin. Non abs braking, turn-in and slalom were all behind the later cars. The gap can be narrowed if you're willing to slide the rear, however, and the other cars can't come close out of the slower corners.

Thus I see this comparison as a game of paper, rock, scissors- each car excels in a different area. Rather than outperforming an early car in every respect, a similarly priced modified boxster is likely roughly as fast overall as an early 911, but much easier to drive. If the Boxster has an achilles heal it's probably that it can't put power down as well as the rear engined cars, which becomes more of an issue at higher powers. The early car's strength is an exceptional power to weight for the money- using it all is the tough part. And the 996 has neither extreme, though that makes it a bit less "interesting" to drive. You're begging for more power in the 996 and boxster, while in the 911 you're usually too busy to think about much of anything.

As the price and speed increases I still don't see a clear winner- the 911's handling can be improved with money, as can the later car's power deficit. It seems the 911 will always be the harder car to drive fast, however- it's up to the driver to decide if that means more fun or less...

[Macroni]

Originally Posted by onemark

I'll bet lot's of us go backwards....year wise that is.

From a Mint 1987 Cab...

To a 1973 in need of sorting......


To a 1969 in need of rebirth!


Is this ascent or descent?