SleepRM3

For those who've driven both, can you feel the difference between the 3.2-L and 3.4-L Boxster S engines?

rkeyser

My wife has a 3.2 and I have a 3.4. Yes, you can tell the difference. The 3.4 feels much stronger in the midrange (2.5 - 4.5). On top there isn't a lot of difference but noticeable.

SleepRM3

Well it sounds like the 2007 987S is the Boxster S to get?!

Renn 951

Test drive them both and decide whether YOU think the difference is enough to justify the extra cost. Some people are happy with the 3.2 But if you're coming from an M3, you'll probably think the extra HP is worth it to move up to the 3.4.

SleepRM3

FWIW, I have test-driven a 2005 987S when the cars were first available a few years ago. The Boxster S is the best handling, best steering, most telepathic sports car I'd ever test-driven. The rear-midengined layout, suspension, and the 3.2-L F6's rev-happy nature all contribute to the Porsche Boxster S's driving mystique. The Boxster S's chassis is one of the stiffest roadster chassis I've ever experienced too--very little cowl shake over bumpy roads.

My only nitpick was the 3.2-L F6's somewhat lightweight torque delivery below 4000 rpm compared with my bimmer's 3.2-L S52 I6's torque delivery.

The 2007 987S's 15-lb.ft/15-hp increase should address this. As you say--the proof's in the test drive.

Does the 987S need a limited slip differential?

Can a clutch-type LSD be added later--even with PSM?

Porsche surprises me by neglecting to install LSDs in their sports cars--relying on their electronic driving aids--which may intrude on the purity of the driving experience.

Dr. Car

Mid and rear engined cars suffer little from lack of an LSD. The Boxster would be little faster around a track with an LSD. It's not at all like the M3 would be without an LSD. I've competed in a 986S and 997S and can't say I ever worried about tirespin; issues like understeer, tire pressure, and the like were higher priorities.

SleepRM3

Ok, good to know. Makes sense since much of the weight is over the drive wheels, so you'd have to be accelerating hard out of a very tight turn to get any wheelspin with rearengined or rear-midengined Porsches? I just don't want any 987S one-wheel peel outs during stoplight races against those pesky S52/S54 M3s, nor do I want an electronic nanny spoiling all the fun during an open lapping session in the 987S.

Dr. Car

No worries about bad wheelspin in jackrabbit starts on the street or excessive wheelspin on the track. In addition to the rearward weight bias that aids rear wheel traction, the Porsches also lean less than the E36 M3 and thus don't tend to unweight the inside rear tires as badly (although a 911 can lift an inside front tire off the ground, like a lot of cars including the E36).

I was an E36 M3 owner before I got my 911, so I have experience with your car. You'd look back fondly on the E36 but won't spend a lot of time missing it.

Here I am at speed in the old E36 M3:

SleepRM3

Good pic of your old S50-powered M3. Having been from the E36 M3 yourself--I'm curious why you didn't go with the 987S platform? Handling is superb--dare I say better than the 911's handling character (understeers too much at the limit).

Dr. Car

I drove the 996, 996 Turbo, Boxster, Cayman and a 997S last. I found the Boxster and Cayman too composed and the 996 much more lively... exciting, involving, easier to rotate and somewhat more needful of car control skills. The 996 TT suspension felt soft, floaty and vague for such a fast car, I didn't want to have to modify the suspension to be happy with a car, and I figured I needed 415 like a hole in my head. I had headroom issues in the 996, and when I drove the 997 I immediately loved the headroom; I liked the interior and exterior styling a little better; and I felt the PASM suspension was the best street/track compromise I'd ever driven.

Here's another E36 M3 glam photo:

SleepRM3

Another good shot. 997S is a big jump from the humble '95 M3 LOL. I have not test driven the current 997 platform yet. I'm sure I'd like the extra power. I'm wondering if the 987S's handling composure could be unsettled a little with more hp? Porsche purposefully holds these cars back to keep them away from the 911's performance. Interesting you note the rotation-friendliness of the 996. I agree with that sentiment--having tested a student's '99 996 at full speed with no PSM on track--lively is right--as in lively handiwork with the opposite lock LOL.

Dr. Car

I am positive that marketing is Porsche's reason for not giving the 987 chassis more horsepower. They want the 911 to be top of the line and command more money. The 987 chassis would do fine with more hp; witness Ruf and Farnbacher-Loles 3.8 conversions which are great with the extra hp.

Chevy used to do this with the Camaro, always giving it a little less power than the same V8 engine had in the Corvette; although in that case the Corvette chassis was much better, so why did they think they needed to bother? Probably b/c a lot of buyers won't look past 0-60.

Another reason I liked the 911 was the back seat. I can envision putting kids back there someday; I have fond memories of sitting in the not-a-back-seat area behind the front seats of my Dad's Sunbeam Alpine when I was a wee lad.

SleepRM3

Dr. Car, great pics of the old M3--how about pics of the 911 then?

I browsed the car ads for 997 Carreras. Surprisingly I could pick up a used 2005 for the < than the price of a new 987S. Definitely something I will consider.

I'm looking at the 2007 987S b/c I've always wanted a proper 2-seat roadster. The BMW M Roadster's long hood design is a turn-off, and it doesn't have the handling finesse of a proper rear midengined design like the Boxster S.

I live in Indy where roadster top-down weather is very rare, so the practical side of me says get the 997 C2--but--there is something about touring the twisty roads with the top down, and listening to the flat six's exhaust notes bounce off of the trees. It's an awesome experience. Only a motorcyle can one-up the Boxster S's experience (top down).

Dr. Car

My intention is not to recommend the 997 over the 987; I just recommend driving them both. I agree the allure of a convertible is compelling. I happened to like the 997 better, but it sure is a lot of money.

Here are a few photos of my 997 in action:

SleepRM3

Wow. The old E36 M3 pales in comparison. Looks like you're enjoying your baby--good for you! I do not intend to track the 2007 987S regularly, except occasionally just to get the feel for her at full speed. Thanks for sharing your experience!