Which Boxster to get?

[Explosive Newt]

987 3.2 is the correct choice.

The 2.7s actually sound better (particularly the whine on the overrun) but are simply too slow. The 987 2.7 my father had was always slightly frustrating when you had to navigate around other traffic (i.e. overtake) whereas the 3.2 I owned was significantly torquier and more pleasant to drive. Also has the 6 speed box rather than 5 so worth it also for that (some 2.7s have the six speed box but it was a cost option most didn't bother with).

987 also significantly nicer in appearance both inside and out and in reality is a 986 mk III so fewer niggles as you progress through the revisions. I wouldn't bother with a 986 for how little extra the 987s are in reality. 3.4 987 increased risk of bore scoring so again, not worth it for the extra 15hp and the extra cost.

ETA: I have a 911 now but have nothing bad to say about Boxsters. I toyed with the idea of getting another one to use in summer for top down driving given the current pricing. I expect they'll start to go back the other way (like the 996) soon as the ropier ones get weeded out.

One thing I always look for is whether the exhaust looks to be sagging too low (or a clunking over speed bumps from behind your head) - an indicator of shot transmission and/or engine mounts and a car that's either been thrashed or spent its whole life in traffic around town (in which case budget for a clutch if its over 60k miles.)

As Jobbo will tell you, maintainence can stack up over time but as with all older cars it a bit of a lottery what will need doing. At least depreciation will be effectively zero at this point (sadly not when I owned one).

Thanks! And the envy think hits hard as also mentioned. I’m aware cheaper is often a false economy in these older cars (the Jag was a lesson there) so it does sound like my best bet is to save for another 6 months or just wait until post the PhD!

[Explosive Newt]

There is a careful equation between potential driving fun and rage from my tiny yet incredibly angry significant other. You guys cannot know how furious I will be if I blow money that could go towards a deposit on a house...

I would suggest what car you get next might not be your biggest issue to resolve here

[drcarlos]

I think that was tongue-in-cheek because that was the most expensive of the options you offered

There is a careful equation between potential driving fun and rage from my tiny yet incredibly angry significant other. You guys cannot know how furious I will be if I blow money that could go towards a deposit on a house...

Buy a house. You can dick around with Boxsters later!

I did this in 2000, still waiting to dick around with a Griffith 19 years later.

Carl.

[Jobbo]

Oh, don't get the crab claw wheels, they're awful.

You'll probably have a very defined set of criteria then buy the one which doesn't fit them but has clearly been well looked after.

[Rich B]

There is a careful equation between potential driving fun and rage from my tiny yet incredibly angry significant other. You guys cannot know how furious I will be if I blow money that could go towards a deposit on a house...

Buy a house. You can dick around with Boxsters later!

I did this in 2000, still waiting to dick around with a Griffith 19 years later.

Carl.

still better than having a griff in 2000 and still waiting to buy a house 19 years later though!

[Carlos]

A 986S on 17's.

The later cars I had as courtesy cars all had massive wheels and rubber band tyres. They rode poorly and felt less fun.

[GG.]

They ride much better on michelins versus the contis or bridgestones they mostly came fitted with from the factory. Compared to a BMW on run flats it rides like a Rolls even on 19s so I wouldn't bother downsizing the wheels. Being mid engined they're quite snappy if you try and get the back end moving about - personally in a car designed to be polished and fast on a twisty B road I'd rather have the grip I think.

Interestingly I always liked the crab claws or lobsters or whatever they're called (particularly the convex front alloys). I still do now but do admit they're of a time and don't perhaps age as well as the Carrera Classics. It shouldn't put you off buying on condition, however.

[NotoriousREV]

They ride much better on michelins versus the contis or bridgestones they mostly came fitted with from the factory. Compared to a BMW on run flats it rides like a Rolls even on 19s so I wouldn't bother downsizing the wheels. Being mid engined they're quite snappy if you try and get the back end moving about - personally in a car designed to be polished and fast on a twisty B road I'd rather have the grip I think.

Interestingly I always liked the crab claws or lobsters or whatever they're called (particularly the convex front alloys). I still do now but do admit they're of a time and don't perhaps age as well as the Carrera Classics. It shouldn't put you off buying on condition, however.

I love the lobster claw wheels. My mate has them on his Sport body-kitted 997 C2S, they look great and I always though they made the 987 look more grown up.

[tim]

I had an early 986 2.5 and a 986 3.2S. The 2.5 was the better drive, overlooking the power deficit. But I doubt you'd want either of those now.

I wonder how cheap the early 2.5s are now...

[GG.]

In what way was it the better drive? Genuine question. Are you just referring to lack of grip on smaller wheels? There surely can't be many other tangible differences between the two other than the lack of power which I'm not sure makes anything a better drive.

2.5s dropped to under £4k for a tatty one with a tip box. Not sure where they are now.

ETA: this is at the top end but interesting: https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified ... ars&page=2

I defy you to find any car with ceramic brakes for cheaper than that!!

[Jobbo]

There's no way I'd buy a 2005 Boxster for £15k. You can get a low mileage 2009 2.9 from a dealer for that: https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified ... 2064654898

Or less for a few more miles, but with ventilated seats (this one is tempting me actually): https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified ... 8119391144

The 2.9 is the one which has no engine issues, remember, and has similar power to the 986S.

[GG.]

No I wasn't suggesting you would - I was just seeing what they topped out at and noticed that one with ceramics.

The one you posted looks good for a gen II but its still 25hp down on a 987 3.2 which I think is a sufficent gap to make you think twice. Particularly as the DFI engines don't sound as good and I'm not sure if you can get OEM sports exhausts for them (though of course you could go aftermarket).

The 987 2.7 is 240hp and wasn't quick enough for me so I'm not sure an extra 15hp would be quite enough but obviously YMMV.

[PaulJ]

I've owned a 986 2.7, a 986 3.2 S and a 987 3.4 S in the past. The first developed an oil leak, the second lunched the engine at 11,000 miles and the 987 S was faultless. (All in new car warranty - I was told that the replacement short engine would have been about 12,500 + VAT + fitting otherwise ). The other thing about earlier cars is the plastic rear windows which need assistance to fold correctly sometimes - very uncool.

Choose good history over colour and options too of course.

Good luck.

[Jobbo]

No I wasn't suggesting you would - I was just seeing what they topped out at and noticed that one with ceramics.

The one you posted looks good for a gen II but its still 25hp down on a 987 3.2 which I think is a sufficent gap to make you think twice. Particularly as the DFI engines don't sound as good and I'm not sure if you can get OEM sports exhausts for them (though of course you could go aftermarket).

The 987 2.7 is 240hp and wasn't quick enough for me so I'm not sure an extra 15hp would be quite enough but obviously YMMV.

No 987-era Boxster feels particularly quick (caveat: I haven't tried a Spyder) so choosing between two versions based on +/- 10% of maximum power is utterly pointless. Particularly if you have one which is known for sudden IMS failure or bore scoring, meaning you avoid the red line in practice.

I agree with Paul, condition/history is everything.

[GG.]

Its ironic given I went for the 997.2 over the 997.1 for reasons of bore scoring but I wouldn't worry about any 987 other than a 3.4 as they're low(er) risk. The IMS risk is overstated largely I think.

I'd still take the extra power & torque (and better sound) of the 3.2 over a 987.2 and save the extra money to swap out the IMS if I felt nervous. The 987.2 styling is also a little fussy for me.

But of course - condition should be paramount. I'd walk away from anything that didn't look like it had been absolutely cherished. Hood operation is also a good shout to check. That did fail on my 3.2 and required a new linkage I think (done under warranty).

[GG.]

I've owned a 986 2.7, a 986 3.2 S and a 987 3.4 S in the past. The first developed an oil leak, the second lunched the engine at 11,000 miles and the 987 S was faultless. (All in new car warranty - I was told that the replacement short engine would have been about 12,500 + VAT + fitting otherwise ). The other thing about earlier cars is the plastic rear windows which need assistance to fold correctly sometimes - very uncool.

What was the cause of the engine failure out of interest?

[Explosive Newt]

I've owned a 986 2.7, a 986 3.2 S and a 987 3.4 S in the past. The first developed an oil leak, the second lunched the engine at 11,000 miles and the 987 S was faultless. (All in new car warranty - I was told that the replacement short engine would have been about 12,500 + VAT + fitting otherwise ). The other thing about earlier cars is the plastic rear windows which need assistance to fold correctly sometimes - very uncool.

Choose good history over colour and options too of course.

Good luck.

This is a slightly terrifying read! Which of the three (gremlins aside) was most fun, out of interest?

[IanF]

Are old Caymans more or less expensive than Boxsters? I can’t remember if it was this generation that swapped over the pricing.

[GG.]

987 Caymans were more expensive despite not having the expensive complexity of the folding roof. Think you're right in that its now the other way round?

[Explosive Newt]

Are old Caymans more or less expensive than Boxsters? I can’t remember if it was this generation that swapped over the pricing.

Similar kinds of pricing at the older end (2006 ish) - one or two private sales or Knockers and Snatch esque dealers selling for sub £10k.