bobhig

I'm struggling to make a decision!

Looking at 2 Boxsters and both have advantages.

Both are Boxster S - 1st is a 2004 with 43000 miles. nice car. standard spec.

price is £9800.

second one is a 2002 car, only 35k miles, very high spec indeed with park sensors, sat nav, 19 inch wheels, PSM, xenons etc. price is £8500.

Whilst I think the 1st (2004) car is probably better value, I'm attracted by the spec of the older car.

Can anyone offer me any advice please?

Bob

ECS Tuning

Make sure you get a PPI first though and then make your decision based on that, but I would go with the newest one you can afford. What are the colors of the two ? Do you have any pictures ? There is a wealth of information and I'm sure many will chime in soon. Good Luck and keep us updated.

MUSSBERGER

Is that a factory sat/nav?

Dave H.

options aside, the only real advantage to the 2004 is the glass rear window.

with PSM and xenons, i'd take the '02...

terbiumactivated

Bobhig, Although a PPI can be a very telling report, they are not a guarantee that all is well. If you're buying from a dealer, the repair warranty / terms are more important just my two cents. +1 on the glass window top.

Macster

Generally speaking newer is better.

Based on what you posted then my vote is for the 2004.

I am not current on market pricing so I can't speak to the pricing. You'll have to determine if the pricing is based on market reality or an overactive seller's imagination.

One big attraction the 2004 has (besides just being newer than the other car) is I like the glass rear window. My 02 Boxster's plastic window is getting pretty hard to see out of. (The car is on its second window, too. The first one cracked and was replaced.)

PSM I don't care about. My 02 Boxster doesn't have it and in almost 265K miles of driving I have not missed it or wished it was there.

While my Turbo does have PSM I drive the car (and the Boxster, all cars in fact) in such a way it is never needed. My philosophy is to avoid developing a dependence on automotive electronic nannies because there is nothing to be gained by pressing one's luck that these will always bail one out of trouble. I prefer to drive in such a way to avoid trouble in the first place.

Now one argument for the older car is Bi-Xenons headlights.

I have these on my Turbo and these are very nice, if you drive out in the boonies at night. My Boxster has the plain headlights and these were quite adequate but it was a real eye opener (figuratively and literally) when I took my Turbo out over the same roads with its bi-xenons. Wow.

But I would be hard pressed in your case to choose the older car simply on for the sake of getting bi-xenon headlights.

I do not like 19" wheels. Bigger wheels (and tires) are a modern car curse forced on many by aesthetics (of questionable taste) at the cost of ride and to some extent handling.

Based on my experience and preferences the 18" wheels on my Turbo are harsh enough. And oh the tire cost...$500/each for rear tires.

As for SAT/NAV, these often prove to be out of date by the time the car is released for sale. 8 or 9 years later... Can you say antique?

Before you opt for the car with the SAT/NAV be sure you can buy updated maps for it. And give it a try to make sure you like how it works.

I've got an aftermarket SAT/NAV (a medium priced Garmin unit) in my Turbo and it works pretty good. When I get in other cars with SAT/NAV often the units are useless with their goofy interfaces.

Be sure whichever car you settle upon you check the car out thoroughly. They are both just used cars so a thorough used car check out is paramount. Assume nothing works until you verify it does work.

My advise is to listen to the engine start and idle from a dead cold start and let it idle and continue to listen until the engine has idled nearly up to full temp. Allow 10 or 15 minutes for this. Be sure the A/C is off. (You check this later.)

Be sure the CEL and other warning lights come on at key on and go off at engine start.

Have the seller take you on a 15 mile test ride. You ride as a passenger and focus on the car's condition, ride, handling, everything.

Back at the starting point you take the car out as a driver and cover the same route.

The route wants to cover a variety of roads so you get to experience the car in a variety of situations. City traffic with stop/go driving, low, medium and high speed (highway speed) cruising. Hard acceleration from near idle to redline then an upshift and continued hard acceleration for as long as the driver deems it safe.

The engine should never exhibit any untoward behavior.

Back after your test drive if you still like the car now do a used car inspection. This is where you check the A/C, heater, everything.

If you still like the car after this and believe you can buy the car for a price that both you and the seller can agree upon, have the car PPI'd. Among other things the DME over rev counters will be read and the engine run time. With this you can sanity check the odometer to possibly detect any tampering with this has been done.

mikefocke

Glove box and glass rear window on the '04 and you can add the headlights for $2k in the US.

Headlights and stuff on the '02 but obsolete GPS/Sat system you'll hate and you can add the glass hood with frame for around $2k in the US.

These cars are getting so old age isn't as important as condition.

Both have the same IMS potential.

Your choice.

DFW01TT

The rear glass window and Xenon are the big differences. Glove box is nice in the '04 too, forget the satnav, your phone works better.

If you spend the preponderance of your time on the Motorways, then the 2004 will be great.
However, if you're on A&B roads most of the time, you'll soon spend to upgrade to the xenons.

MikeBat

Rear glass window is the practical advantage of the 2004.

Otherwise, they are relatively the same car. Buy the one that makes you smile the most.

Misplacedyankee

Had an 2002 S for 5 years without any issues whatsoever and mine was fully optioned as well. I would have no hesitation in going with the 02 over the 04. The glass window would have been nice for sure, could care less about a glove box

GL. As others have said its all about doing some sort of PPI on each and what records you have to document maintenance and work completed.

Directioneng

Bob hasn't told us the colours yet.

perfectlap

19" wheels? How heavy are they a piece? Much more than 30#'s and that will effect ride quality and wear out the suspension sooner. You might want to consider an 18" lightweight wheel for winter on full snow tires. All season tires are a waste of sports car - compromised in every season. and 19" snow tires are expensive.

I would go with the newer option to avoid the hassle of replacing the plastic window for glass later.
I have no idea what park assist is. But I only park my car on the sreet as a last resort. I don't need sensors to help me park offstreet. Porsche Nav with its outdated CD load file was useless back in 2002, more so in 2013. I'd sooner install a mini tablet in the dash. Some of the 996 folks have done this. I'd get a wifi tablet that I could pair with my Android phone's LTE signal. No litronics headlights is a minus but that's easily the worst bang for the buck mod I'd done on my Boxster S, more cosmetic than functional. And there are aftermarket options to get you HID.
A bit more complicated to install than the factory Litronics that are simple plug and play replacement of the entire assembly.

And add $2K for the IMS upgrade from LNE. Or roll the dice that you aren't in the "5%" of possible catastrophic engine failure. 2001- 2005 are the most problematic Boxster years for this issue.

aj986s

Xx on the rear glass. The earlier plastic window has to fold for the top to drop, and can develop weak points in the crease that'll eventually crack. We had our cracked plastic rear window replaced by a great upholstery shop for around $500. Glass also gives you rear defroster.

There's an aftermarket top available with rear glass, but the roof struts on pre-03's are different (3 struts versus 4) and the aftermarket top w/glass is a smallish rear window, to avoid the crease. IMHO, not a worthwhile investment.

perfectlap

^ I also repalced the plastic window for $400. Not worth it. The waterproof sealing from the factory is removed when the old window is cut out. And unless the installer replaces it, he'll most likely just be stitching straight thru the plastic which allows water to get in where the stitch hole is. My replacement window was already forming droplets inside the car on the wet ride home from the installer. I had to put a towel there...Also the stitch work was not factory quality, depends on how good your installer is suppose. The replacement plastic was also a thicker grade than the factory which makes creases a lot more noticeable when the plastic is folded. I think I'll be eating the $400 and going with the aftermarket glass top. But that gives the car a more up to date look than plastic which looks kind of 1990's.

aj986s

The shop I used actually cut out all the old stitching holes, and then inserted a slightly larger plastic window. The sewing job was phenomenal, and -0- leaking. Looks very clean and original; only by comparing to an adjacent car can you tell the window opening is slightly larger.

I recently looked at a friends top where the rear window was inserted into the original opening and it clearly not as nice an installation job.

Also, I forgot to mention that with the aftermarket glass window top, I've also read that because of its position and rigidity, it can interfere with the top's "service position" in order to access the top of the engine compartment.