When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I've thought about going 997 cabriolet TT for a weekend roadster, but I've decided to put that thought on hold and try a flat 6 before I do anything else.
So, I've come across these two cars(white 2.7 and blue 2.5), both similarly priced.
Blue one however is open to negotiation and seller exclusively said he will "match" the price of the other because it basically sat for 2 years:
Oddly enough, 2.5 seems to respond much better to throttle inputs vs. 2.7 (stock), but this particular example had aftermarket exhaust (backbox only).
Does it have a lighter flywheel by any chance?
How do these compare reliability wise? What are some features I missed out other than engine power/torque? (I know 2.5 has better gear ratio)
Some info on two cars: White 2.7 5MT ('02):
-Around 122,000 km.
-One owner.
-Maintenance checks out up to last year Nov. (changed big bills like plugs, water pump, thermostat, etc)
-Mismatched aero color to original exterior
-Worn seat Alcantara (driver's only)
-17 inch wheels
-Hardtop
-Working soft top (with glass window)
Blue 2.5 5MT ('98)
-Around 80,000km
-Rare body color
-LED headlights
-Aftermarket exhaust (most likely supersprint)
-Clean exterior and interior
-aftermarket rear camera
-No maintenance records after to May 2016 (sat for 2 years with some car wash/idling)
-16 inch wheels
I like the look of the white one, except for that fugly whale tale. The blue one looks nice, and it does have a bunch fewer miles. Whichever you choose, be sure to get a ppi. It will save you money in the long run.
As for the engine, it wouldn't be a big deal either way. Mostly you get used to a car and if it's not satisfactory, you move on to something else. Nothing is forever.
The white car does have a hardtop which can be worth $700 to $1500 depending on location and season.
Note the different locations of the digital speedometers.
No idea the significance of the "Liberty Walk" logo.
The blue one has an aftermarket stereo which probably provides useful features.
Nothing shown in the pictures of the white one at to interior.
The whale tale may attract unwanted attention. Ditto the exhaust. See how you like it after a while driving it. Many aftermarkets drone and that gets tiring after a while.
The blue seems to have aftermarket LED headlights.
Get a guarantee of smog and registration. And a PPI.
I like the looks of the white one, including the wing. But, the blue one will have a dual row IMS bearing and the white one will be single row. Dual row is much more reliable.
I have never driven a 2.5l example. I put 317K miles on my 2002 2.7l 5-speed manual car and it was a superb car. It was the reason I bought a 2008 Cayman S and then a (used) 2003 996 Turbo.
My 2.7l had excellent throttle response with the factory flywheel. These flywheels are not that large/heavy from the factory as some would have you believe. The 2.7l flywheel was sufficient to with just a bit of throttle to bring the RPMs above idle that I could let the clutch out and the flywheel energy would get the car rolling smoothly and with minimal clutch slippage. So little slippage that the clutch in my 2.7l car was original even at 317K miles though it was clearly worn and needed to be replaced had I kept the car. Still 300K+ miles off a clutch... That ain't bad. And partially due to the factory in my opinion getting the flywheel just right. (The Turbo clutch at 120K miles had no measurable wear I might add.)
The difference in throttle response if not striking could be due to gas freshness, possibly even the wrong grade of octane was used, or the engine is just in need of a "tune". I know I let my Boxster's engine air filter go too long and after I changed it the engine perked up some. Another time just a switch from Shell V-Power to Chevron Supreme had the Boxster engine running markedly better after most of the tank of Chevron gasoline had been consumed. Also, another time after the O2 sensors were replaced (at around 305K miles with probably around 200K miles on them) the engine ran better. I noticed some improvement from my Turbo engine after its sensors were replaced at 132K miles.
New coils in the Turbo perked the engine up too. I had planned on replacing the coils (original) in the Boxster had I kept the car just to see if new coils made a difference.
My point is there are a number of things that while not serious still play a role in how well these engines run.
The 2.5l transmission is geared to compensate for the lower torque output of the 2.5l engine. The 2.7l engine while not a torque monster on the order of say my Hellcat does have more output than the 2.5l engine and is quite tractable even in 4th gear at lower RPMs.
IOWs, I would not buy the 2.5l over the 2.7l just because of the mistaken assumption the 2.5l transmission has the "better gear ratio". Both cars have transmission ratios that are intended to work with the engine in the car.
My 2002 came with 17" wheels/tires. It rode much better than my Cayman S with 18" wheels/tires and my 996 Turbo with 18" wheels/tires. For me 16" vs. 17" is a toss up.
The white car's appearance is a matter of personal taste. To my mild surprise while I'm not a fan of body add ons I'm not repulsed by the way the white car looks. The white car doesn't look too bad. But I still prefer the Boxster without any add ons and such.
The glass rear window is a sign an aftermarket top has been fitted. I had a GAHH top fitted to my Boxster but I went with the plastic window version. The glass window version makes putting the top in the service position more trouble and the glass window is smaller and not as optimally located.
I'm not a fan of aftermarket stereos. So often these are DIY installed and the installation sucks. On this same subject I really do not like any mods to the exhaust, or even lights. In short I prefer my used cars be factory stock.
Overall I would prefer the 2.7l engine over the 2.5l engine but other factors have to be taken into account.
It really boils down to which car is in the better condition and which car you prefer after a thorough used car check out to make sure both cars have no issues. Absent any paperwork showing when various services were done budget for oil/filter service, transmission fluid change, brake/clutch fluid flush/bleed, new engine air filter, new fuel filter if serviceable (my 2002 had no serviceable fuel filter), new cabin filter, serpentine belt, probably new plugs (due at IIRC 60K miles), and I'd like to replace the coolant every 4 years or so to help prolong the life of the water pump, hoses and such. The water pump on my Boxster lasted 172K miles and the hoses were still in good condition at 317K miles and after 15 years.
All of the services don't have to be done at once. Although doing so gets everything out of the way and then you can just focus on enjoying the car for a good while without have to have another catch up service appointment looming over your head.
I have never driven a 2.5l example. I put 317K miles on my 2002 2.7l 5-speed manual car and it was a superb car. It was the reason I bought a 2008 Cayman S and then a (used) 2003 996 Turbo.
My 2.7l had excellent throttle response with the factory flywheel. These flywheels are not that large/heavy from the factory as some would have you believe. The 2.7l flywheel was sufficient to with just a bit of throttle to bring the RPMs above idle that I could let the clutch out and the flywheel energy would get the car rolling smoothly and with minimal clutch slippage. So little slippage that the clutch in my 2.7l car was original even at 317K miles though it was clearly worn and needed to be replaced had I kept the car. Still 300K+ miles off a clutch... That ain't bad. And partially due to the factory in my opinion getting the flywheel just right. (The Turbo clutch at 120K miles had no measurable wear I might add.)
The difference in throttle response if not striking could be due to gas freshness, possibly even the wrong grade of octane was used, or the engine is just in need of a "tune". I know I let my Boxster's engine air filter go too long and after I changed it the engine perked up some. Another time just a switch from Shell V-Power to Chevron Supreme had the Boxster engine running markedly better after most of the tank of Chevron gasoline had been consumed. Also, another time after the O2 sensors were replaced (at around 305K miles with probably around 200K miles on them) the engine ran better. I noticed some improvement from my Turbo engine after its sensors were replaced at 132K miles.
New coils in the Turbo perked the engine up too. I had planned on replacing the coils (original) in the Boxster had I kept the car just to see if new coils made a difference.
My point is there are a number of things that while not serious still play a role in how well these engines run.
The 2.5l transmission is geared to compensate for the lower torque output of the 2.5l engine. The 2.7l engine while not a torque monster on the order of say my Hellcat does have more output than the 2.5l engine and is quite tractable even in 4th gear at lower RPMs.
IOWs, I would not buy the 2.5l over the 2.7l just because of the mistaken assumption the 2.5l transmission has the "better gear ratio". Both cars have transmission ratios that are intended to work with the engine in the car.
My 2002 came with 17" wheels/tires. It rode much better than my Cayman S with 18" wheels/tires and my 996 Turbo with 18" wheels/tires. For me 16" vs. 17" is a toss up.
The white car's appearance is a matter of personal taste. To my mild surprise while I'm not a fan of body add ons I'm not repulsed by the way the white car looks. The white car doesn't look too bad. But I still prefer the Boxster without any add ons and such.
The glass rear window is a sign an aftermarket top has been fitted. I had a GAHH top fitted to my Boxster but I went with the plastic window version. The glass window version makes putting the top in the service position more trouble and the glass window is smaller and not as optimally located.
I'm not a fan of aftermarket stereos. So often these are DIY installed and the installation sucks. On this same subject I really do not like any mods to the exhaust, or even lights. In short I prefer my used cars be factory stock.
Overall I would prefer the 2.7l engine over the 2.5l engine but other factors have to be taken into account.
It really boils down to which car is in the better condition and which car you prefer after a thorough used car check out to make sure both cars have no issues. Absent any paperwork showing when various services were done budget for oil/filter service, transmission fluid change, brake/clutch fluid flush/bleed, new engine air filter, new fuel filter if serviceable (my 2002 had no serviceable fuel filter), new cabin filter, serpentine belt, probably new plugs (due at IIRC 60K miles), and I'd like to replace the coolant every 4 years or so to help prolong the life of the water pump, hoses and such. The water pump on my Boxster lasted 172K miles and the hoses were still in good condition at 317K miles and after 15 years.
All of the services don't have to be done at once. Although doing so gets everything out of the way and then you can just focus on enjoying the car for a good while without have to have another catch up service appointment looming over your head.
Thank you for your comprehensive response (and others equally for sharing their thoughts).
The white one was owned by one owner, meticulously maintained at 5,000km interval using A40 oil (mobil 1). I've heard from the dealer that he decided to let it go for a new 718 GTS.
It has also done some big bills such as water pump and thermostat, water hoses, spark plugs, air filter etc.
The blue one was bought off USS Tokyo a year ago. Maintenance was done up until 2016 where 2-year inspection (something like SMOG test) was done.
The car has not been driven much (about 30km?) since and is still on its original oil. I like the exterior/interior color, but the car did sit for quite a long time.
I find myself leaning towards 2.5 (not particular about this blue one) since the engine seems to be more revvy but that could have been from the exhaust.
I wonder if changing the rear muffler on 2.7 makes noticeable difference.
From these two cars however, I would have to pick the white one for it strictly followed maintenance schedule.
Thank you for your comprehensive response (and others equally for sharing their thoughts).
The white one was owned by one owner, meticulously maintained at 5,000km interval using A40 oil (mobil 1). I've heard from the dealer that he decided to let it go for a new 718 GTS.
It has also done some big bills such as water pump and thermostat, water hoses, spark plugs, air filter etc.
The blue one was bought off USS Tokyo a year ago. Maintenance was done up until 2016 where 2-year inspection (something like SMOG test) was done.
The car has not been driven much (about 30km?) since and is still on its original oil. I like the exterior/interior color, but the car did sit for quite a long time.
I find myself leaning towards 2.5 (not particular about this blue one) since the engine seems to be more revvy but that could have been from the exhaust.
I wonder if changing the rear muffler on 2.7 makes noticeable difference.
From these two cars however, I would have to pick the white one for it strictly followed maintenance schedule.
Of the two cars based on what you have posted the white one would be my choice, too, but of course only after a thorough road test confirmed there were no issues.
A new car can sit a while without developing any issues. But an older car generally can't. Sitting unused for a car takes its toll and the cost goes up as time passes.
My used 2003 Turbo that I bought in 2009 with just under 10K miles was a pristine car. It had only covered on average 1666 miles/year from new. This kind of mileage is accumulated a little at a time with long periods of no use between use.
Long story short that car was a leaker. Transmission (6-speed manual). RMS. Front diff axle flange seals. The spoiler hydraulics. The water pump (the water pump in my Boxster lasted to 172K miles and didn't leak but got noisy as it wore out). All 3 radiators. Even the inside rear view mirror leaked.
Except for the RMS in my Boxster at around 25K miles and covered under warranty, the only other leak was from the spark tube o-rings which were just worn out when they were replaced at some point roughly around the 250K mile mark.
I would never buy that white car with the mods. Mods like that on a Porsche kill resale.
As for 2.5 vs 2.7, I came upon the same dilemma when I started shopping in 2012. Drove both. Liked the 2.5 better for emotional reasons. It absolutely wails to the core of its soul and makes a fantastic exhaust note on full throttle with the top down. Also correct that the early cars have shorter gearing which makes them feel a little more alive. I had no real issues with the 2.7, it was actually a little more tractable, but toned down and not nearly as sonorous as the early cars. A big part of the Porsche experience for me is that wailing flat 6 and the early Boxsters do not disappoint. Mine was a '99 still running with the original IMSb when I sold it at 107k after five years ownership. Terrific cars. Would own another. Dare I say slightly more fun than the 996 I replaced it with.
Dare I say slightly more fun than the 996 I replaced it with.
I went the other direction. Low mileage 996 aerokit to high mileage Boxster. While my 2.5 is nowhere near as fast as the 996, I agree the overall experience is more pleasurable than the 996
I would go for the white car. Granted, it's a little out there... but everything gels. The owner did it right. Single-row? Factor in the expense of doing a final solution type... er... solution. Or just continue the maintenance trend established by the original owner.
The hard-top I believe to be factory OEM. Those little panels/cubbies on the side of the top are, IIRC, to accomodate the top rack that can be installed. Again, IIRC, those tops were available for only a couple/few years. The hard-top would have to be removed to access the top engine panel. A soft-top/convertible with the plastic window allows for easy access to the top of the engine. I've read enough in this forum, over the past ~18 months, that when it comes time for my plastic/vinyl window, or top, needs to be replaced... I'm going plastic/vinyl, but with a tinted material. The glass window presents challenges, and the car comes with enough already. Anyhow...
I didn't see what are the asking prices for the choices. Care to share?
05-18-2019, 09:36 AM
2.5 vs 2.7.. your thoughts?
