Turkertwo

Great post, and every9one is so civil. Well, except for that last Boxter comment, and yes, they are for women only.
In 2004 I test drove a '96 993 and a '00 996, and mainly because my 6'3" frame could not get comfortable in the 993, I came home with the water pumper. I loved them both, but never regretted my purchase.
As noted by an earlier poster, I think both models require a few modifications before they really deliver obscene levels of motoring joy. The 996's must haves include exhaust and intake mods, and mine is much happier with replacement "motorsport" clutch and single mass flywheel. So equiped, they sound and drive more like the "more viceral" Porsches of yore.
That said, I dream of a G50 track toy with lots of fiberglass and a race motor.

Sue Esponte

Was that really Porsche's marketing approach or just kind of a common sense market rationalization based on the fact that, at the time, Porsche had two models and the Boxster was the cheapest model? Doesn't logic seems to dictate that the cheaper of the two is the "entry level" car. Isn't that true of any automaker though; their cheapest model is the "entry level" vehicle?

A base Boxster costs $50K before options. If the Boxster is today's "poor man's Porsche" then I think most people would be satisfied with being poor. Everything's relative...but I guess that's beside the point.

As for any similarities between the 986 and 996 upsetting the 911 crowd I don't think the issue is unique to Porsche or the 911 and I'm not sure why it was/is a surprise to anyone.

Ask most 328i owners if they'd mind if their car came stock with an M bumper and I think the universal answer will be "bring it on!" Ask an M3 owner and they're apt to respond quite differently. I think the same would be true of AMG owners, Corvette owners or any model of vehicle with a significant enthusiast following. If Chevy sold a $30K car that, in all respects, looked exactly like a C6 except from the rear, I think it would confuse and upset a lot of the Corvette faithful.

Remember, the front end of the Mk1 986 wasn't just similar to the Mk1 996. They were pretty much exactly the same if not indistinguishable.

Hell, I think the issue even applies in more obscure markets. While most people probably couldn't care less about Volvos, I can tell you that many enthusiasts of Volvo's R model cars were up in arms over Volvo's decision to discontinue its performance model and instead release an "R-design" line of cosmetic and performance accessories for its next generation models. The move was perceived by many to dilute the value of the R brand (as if the market even knows what an R is).

I'm really not sure why it surprises anyone that applying a carbon copy 911 front end to a Boxster upset many 911 enthusiasts. I'm not even suggesting that it should upset you (or anyone) but I still maintain that THIS was Porsche's marketing failure -- not with whether or not they called the Boxster an "entry level" vehicle (which it is/was).

-Eric

PFAR

If the 996 and boxster are indistinguishable (apart from the rear), and the 996 and 997 are pretty much indistinguishable except for the headlights ... uhh

The 996 and the boxtser are very distinguishable from every angle .. except from a low to ground / head on look.

About the 993 ... Beautiful looking car, with some nice sculpted lines. Performance wise, it would be difficult for it to compete with modern sports coupes. Still a unique ride. Not my choice of an everyday ride though.

Someone posted a beautiful pic of a 964 RSR a few posts ago. That has to be my fav. Porsche design as well!

race911

Discussion starts and stops with the M96 engine for me. Seen one too many which have "done blowed up". Any air cooled I can fix out of my spares.

PFAR

Yeah, Ill be pissed if my engine blows up on me. Until then ... Vroom Vroom!

Ed Burdell

The best handling Porsche I have ever driven is the Boxster Spyder. A perfectly tuned suspension, a simply amazing car.