I think he should have tried another dealer. The law is on his side in any event, not only do they need to prove he tracked it but also that the excluded activity (tracking) caused his problems. I would not have given up so easily.


I forgot (until it was just mentioned) about the dry sump conversion kit available for the boxster. What is it, how much does it cost, and are there any drawbacks? If the 986 had TRUE dry sump and no warranty BS i think it's a superior design to the older cars. No other exotic/high end/super car maker in the world uses a rear engine design, all mid engine and there's a reason. Even the $440k CGT is mid engine.

Also re: Boxsters being cost prohibitive.... I think all Porsches are cost prohibitive. Parts for old cars are outrageous. I had a 944 (NA) that was a slow old "porsche looking car" it had alot of audi and perhaps vw parts in it. It was expensive as hell to operate and maintain. My dad has owned a 986 S for 3 years and I owned that 944 for about 1 1/2. Guess who spent more on repairs? Old porsches require all sorts of ridiculous preventive maintenance like timing belts and water pumps.

So forget the warranty stuff, an old 80's 911 doesn't have warranty. Suppose you buy a used boxster S that's maybe a little cosmetically beat up or has some mechanical problems since you're going to change alot of stuff on it anyway (I'll be really liberal with the prices except for the cost of the car itself).

You get a 2000 Boxster S for around $26,000 (with 30k miles on it).
You spend $8k on suspension upgrades, wheels, slicks
You spend $6k gutting the interior, putting in racing harnesses and seats etc.
Optional step you spend a net of about $12k putting in a 3.6L conversion (the old 3.2 engine definitaly has value).
You install the dry sump kit ? How much does that cost? Call it $4k


$44,000 and you have one hell of a light a weight mid engine track car. 250 horsepower and probably under 2700 lbs.

$56,000 and you have 320 horsepower in a ~2700 lb car pretty much race ready.

There are of course supercharging options as well but I would be worried about longevity issues.

If anything I probably over estimated the costs of all the adon parts but still. Compare that to a z06 or the costs of really tuning up an old 911 for equal performance and I don't think the costs are out of line. Racing parts are expensive for anything especially Porsches.


That being said I don't now is the first time Porsche has made serious mistakes about quality and the vehicles its releasing. It's bad enough they made an SUV in the first place (the Turbo version is *kinda* cool) but now they have a V6 version that uses a VW engine. Not to mention the whole car shares alot of similarities with the VW Toureg.

In the past you had 914's, 924's and 944's using inferior VW and Audi parts. I don't think the 914 was a bad design but using VW engines and other parts in a Porsche car to cut costs is just as bad as what they're doing now if not worse. The 944's suffered from problems with the timing belts and water pumps if they weren't changed on a regular basis. I don't about specifics on the 924's and 914's because I never owned one but I can't imagine VW and Audi engines being comparable to Porsche engines especially from that period of time. Maybe Porsche will find its way again, atleast they're not using VW engines in their sports cars right now.

 

All good points, but I still don't think you should have to spend that kind of money on a brand new Porsche just to get it ready for the track. The idea is, you buy it because it's made for that kind of use.

Anyway, I'm obviously in the minority because most people would rather cruise down the street and pose next to their cars than actually drive them hard and risk a rock chip.

Oh well, I still think it's important to voice our concerns about the direction Porsche has taken, even if it falls mostly on deaf ears.

 

I'm with you about 80% but I just don't see this as necesserily a bigger screwup than Porsche has made in the past.

Aside from your GT3's, Carrera RS's, RS America, and other special models I don't think any of the mainstream Porsche models were exactly 100% track ready out of the box... Correct me if I'm wrong though.

I think the warranty exclusions are bull**** (although I like the longer term) and feel the same about the lack of a dry sump.

On the other hand I think the general longevity and lack of "scheduled maitnenance" bs you get with current Porsches is great.

Look at ferrari, they have $7,000 30k "scheduled maintenance" where the engine has to come out. That's ridiculous. Would you prefer Porsche give you a no exclusions 2 year warranty but then turn around and tell you you have to take the engine out at 30K miles and pay $7,000 to overhaul it? I wouldn't!

 

Now you say we must race our cars on a track to be considered an enthusiast? I still maintain a stock Boxster would give any stock SC or Carrera a run for it's money. They need 3.2l to make what the "new" generation engines make with 2.5l. DOHC 4V/Cyl. These are things only found in "truly" race bread engines only a few years ago. never mind some hacks "race preped" street car.

 

Charlie C Wrote:
I understand you opinion. I loved the look of the 993 and think it's the most beautiful car ever made (so far).
But either we pick what we like from what Porsche produces or we don't buy a Porsche. Then what would happen to Porsche? Would you suggest we buy a BMW or "Vette" instead?
Charlie

Good point Charlie, I don't know what the solution is - I guess it's such a cultural shift that maybe what Porsche once had can't be reclaimed. I guess it's irrelevant, we'll just see what happens to the marque - my guess is, within 5 years, Porsche will have little brand mystique, and sales will drop to the point where the company will be bought-out anyway. I don't know why that's such a bad thing, they could have the financial security of a large automaker (i.e. Daimler?), and be able to concentrate on their product, instead of only on profits. I for one don't care who owns the company, the current generation of 'suits' at Porsche don't impress me at all. Wiedeking included...

 

Daytona,

If they continue to cater to the mediocre masses why will they loose sales?

Why is what they're dong now worse than using VW and Audi engines in the past?

 

mackgoo,

I am not arguing with the benefits of newer technology - I think that, if applied correctly, it CAN make the new cars better than the old ones. However, while the technology has increased, some big compromises have been made. I mean seriously, just compare closing a door on a boxster compared to a 993 - the difference is obvious. The interior materials are crap in the new cars compared to the older ones, plain and simple. Yes, a good DESIGN, but poorly executed.

Like I said, a shame - in a few years, the older boxsters will be as 'ratted-out' as any econobox of the same age. Even the 944s had interior quality that is not nearly seen in today's cars.

In any case, I don't usually watch the Academy Awards because it's like watching a DNC ad. But I had to watch to see if they would snub Bill Murray this year, which they did - the only guy deserving of an Oscar last night, and they pick sean penn? Talk about a farce - they claim to be so in touch with their 'craft,' but the most important filmmaking awards are simply a chance to make a social/political statement - not even THEY take thier work seriously.

 

What work?

 

and WHAT talent? I'd rather shut my cable box off and watch static than watch that show.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Charlie C
and WHAT talent? I'd rather shut my cable box off and watch static than watch that show. [/QUOTE

All the actors are a dieing breed, they charge too much for too little, and are pompus, I can't wait for the digital age to replace them.

Just wait, soon all movies and backgrounds will be digital, kinda like the Hulk was.

Replace all over paid actors with digital ones.!!! My new chant!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vampyre

Quote:

Originally posted by Charlie C
and WHAT talent? I'd rather shut my cable box off and watch static than watch that show. [/QUOTE

All the actors are a dieing breed, they charge too much for too little, and are pompus, I can't wait for the digital age to replace them.

Just wait, soon all movies and backgrounds will be digital, kinda like the Hulk was.

Replace all over paid actors with digital ones.!!! My new chant!

Oh I couldn't agree more

It seems like all the actors in holywood now are somebody's son or brother or something. Not there on their talent at all. So many are just painful to even watch. Perl harbor was a great example

It will be so amusing when there are digital alternatives and actors price themselves right out of the market. Reminds me of US labor and unions.... You want how much? Sorry we're closing up shop and moving to a different country.

 

Daytona..You keep talking about slaming the door of a Boxster compared to a 993..The interior materials used in the 986/996 makes for an overall lighter car opposed to the 993.

 

autobahnNY,

Oh, I guess you're right - and hey, if they made the interior out of paper machet, it would be even lighter still!!

Keep on making excuses for it, it's your loss in quality. And whoever it was who was talking about Porsche NOT losing sales in the future, you're wrong... the reason many people buy their Boxsters IS the mystique of the brand. When that mystique is gone, they will go elsewhere...

Anyway, I think it'll be interesting to see when the technology makes completely digital actors a reality. (I mean to the point where you can't tell the difference... I'm talking about seeing a new Bond movie come out in 2010 with Sean Connery as bond - but the same age he was when he made Goldfinger!!) Only a matter of time I think.

 

Daytona, please take the "Moldy fig" attitude some place else. I don't believe that most of the people on this board really want to hear it (and I'm not just talking about the 986 section). Every Porsche that has ever been built has had a compromise or weakness in one area or another. If the lack of a dry-sump lubrication system in the 986/996 is too much for you to bear then don't buy one.

986's and 996's are in fact very capable track machines. A fact that is proven yearly by thousands of Porsche enthusiasts every year that track their cars at DE's and Porsche Club Racing events all across the country (myself included). Most of those enthusiasts have never had an oiling issue even after years of use in these events (again, myself included).

The Boxster is literally the car that saved Porsche. If the company had continued to build only 993's it would have driven right into bankrupcy and history. Instead Porsche now builds car that are capable competing at the highest levels of racing (GT2, GT3, Turbo, Carrera GT) as well as vehicles that are quite capable for most track use (986, 996).

Lets be honest. The days of driving your car to a track, competing in a wheel to wheel racing event (and being competitive) are long, long gone. The brakes, wheels/tires, suspension, and engine tuning that now exist even in Club Racing, (much less something like ALMS) simply eliminate this type of use (however, it sure is fun to do this at DE's).

Sure it is sad that these days are gone, but it doesn't change the fact that they are indeed gone.

The person who started this thread asked a legitimate question that has been hijacked. There are many legitimate reasons someone might want to switch from a '87 911 to a Boxster. There are also legitimate reasons to go from a Boxster to a '87 911! Instead of trying to grind each of these vehicles faults (yes they both have issues) a more positive discussion of the merits of each car could have been discussed....... unfortuantely it hasn't been.

 

Ray S,

I'm afraid you missed the point of my posts completely. My intention was not to **** anyone off, or start an argument. I'm pointing out that there's not any one "weakness" that the Boxster has - it's that Porsche has designed the car according to a different PHILOSOPHY than before. It is built cheaply by Porsche standards, when are you people going to admit that.