deliriousga

That, and the last time Porsche talked about replacing the 911 with another model that wasn't rear engine....well, even though it's MY favorite Porsche, it went out of production after '95, the 911 survived and Porsche almost bit the dust.

Boxsterund914

I like it! But then the models I like best would lose the cost advantage. Oh well...

Another thing... Why should an engine that has 3.8 liters worth of holes cost more than an engine that has 2.7 liters worth of holes. Some things are just strange. Why does it cost less to fly from Ft Lauderdale to Chicago (connecting in Atlanta) than it does to fly from Ft Lauderdale to Atlanta? I wish I could charge that way for my services and get away with it.

jsaindc

I sold my Boxster for a 996. Part of the reason was I always wanted a 911, I needed back seats for the ocassional kids, and I wanted to upgrade. I had a 2.7 and felt if I was going to get a Boxster S why not get a 996. Let me first say that I loved the Boxster and I love my 996. The 996 is much different than I had expected. I do not think that you can understand the differences simply by taking a test drive down the highway. Get it out on the track or for an autocross and you will see. The 996 has so much more power than my 2.7 had which I picked up on rights away. I soon learned that the car did not handle so well. Huge amounts of understeer and if you did not watch you tire pressure the rear would break loose. It has taken me several months to get used to the 996...it is a lot harder to drive. You can not man handle it like the Boxster and need to watch your entry and exit, always break in a straight line. Once you get the feel for it though it is a blast to drive and I do think more fun than the Boxster. As fun as it may be it is very interesting to see that at autocrosses stock Boxsters generally are 2 seconds faster than stock 996s or 997s so power is not everything. The 911 is such an icon that I don't think it will be replaced for some time. The one thing that has changed though is the preception of the Boxster. I think that the Boxster is finally getting the respect that it deserves. The Boxster is a more true sporstcar but even so its not a 911 and therefore the need for Porsche to produce the 911.

Doug&Julie

Well...let's see....the 3.8 GT3 motor puts out...what...415hp? And the 2.7 motor puts out...what...245hp? So you pay more for more power. You pay more for more performance. That's fair to me. Maybe, to help justify, the higher motors come with performance packages, like the "big red" brakes. And the "ubber" motors come with anther level of package, like the Ceramic Composit brakes. So you still get more for paying more, but nobody suffers just because of their preference of body style. So theoretically one could get a 245hp 911 with back seats and just enough goodies, or a 415hp Cayman ceramic brakes and all the goodies, or a 355hp Boxster with big reds and most of the goodies.

So first you pick a chassis (mid coupe, mid convertible, rear coupe with AWD).

Then you decide how much hp you want to pay for.

Then, with that, you get a matching "performance package" to go with your hp.

Does that make sense? I think that would be pretty cool.

Boxsterund914

Hey, I remember some white knuckled blasts over Independence Pass in Colorado in the mid 70's in a 911S. I know the "adapting to the package" deal, and I agree they're big fun, but....You give me the same power package in the mid motor Pcar and I'll smoke the back motor Pcar (similar levels of suspension development etc.) every time. That's all I'm saying...I don't think the 911 would sell very well if the choices were:
1) 911 with the rear engine
2) 911 with the mid motor option
The perception would be totally different and the mid motor option box would be checked a lot!

The more I think about the "Doug and Julie" idea the more I like it. I uh, well, I don't think my vote is going to cary much weight though.

timnitti

I think you may have hit the nail on the head so to speak ... perhaps accidentally. Maybe people are looking for something beyond simply "competent", maybe they are looking for a unique experience. The Boxster - and presumably also the Cayman which I haven't driven yet - are sweet little cars. I think most people understand and appreciate the mid-engine design's strengths (and weaknesses), and I personally find the Boxster a great deal of fun; I like it a great deal. But I don't find it particularly exciting, different, or engaging. I also don't think adding more horsepower is going to change that. O.K., put the 3.8L 997 engine in the Boxster/Cayman ... now it's just a faster version of itself. Maybe it's better than a 997, maybe it isn't. I don't really know. I just didn't enjoy the experience as much.

The rear engine design is unique these days. Its dynamics are different than a front or mid engined car; giving anyone with years of experience with those types of platforms something new to play with. Steering feel is unmatched compared to anything else I've driven. It's not an easy car to drive to its full potential; that's a good thing! Once you start to learn how to handle it, you begin to see that the rear-engined platform does have some unique advantages and you start to exploit those; it's a rewarding car to drive when you can drive it well.

None of this is to try to say the 911 is a better car than the Boxster/Cayman. It isn't better or worse, it's just different. It all comes down to personal preference. I don't care if Porsche starts dropping the Carrera 3.8L into these cars. I don't care if they outperform the 911 if they do. Sure, I'll try them out and see if my mind is changed and if I like them better than the 911. Do I enjoy them more and are they more fun? That's what it will come down to. As it stands right now, I found the 997S to be more fun than the Boxster for the kinds of reasons I mentioned above, so that's what I bought.

Doug&Julie

I agree completely, which is why I think my "idea" would work. There would still be people who would buy the 911. A lot of people. The models would just be able to cater to each person's unique character, and each person's bank account as well.

Of course, like Boxsterund914, I don't think my idea will carry much weight in Stuttgart...

Boxsterund914

Got it.. I understand what you're saying. I feel the same degree of preference in the other direction. But that's good. I respect your preference, but want you to know my choice comes from familiarity with the 911 vs the Box/Cayman just as does yours.
I just question the people that see the lineup as the mid motor cars being the 1st step, working towards the rear motor cars as the next, and higher, step. They are completely different and I don't see one as the lead in to the other, like the Boxster being the "gateway drug" to the Cayman which eventually leads to the "hardcore drug" of the 911. It's amazing they can share so many parts and have such a totally different feel.

DreamCarrera

If the 911's design is inherently flawed then please tell my why it has achieved more racing victories than probably any other sports car in history. To this day it consistently wins its class against various world class sports cars which according to you posses a superior design element.

On the contrary, I think it is your theory that is wrong. Don’t knock the 911 because as you have said its successes, both racing and commercial, have paved the way for your beloved Boxster.

designman

Doug for president. Yep I buy that strategy. However, I put these cars in two categories with Cayman and Boxster subsumed into one, as are 911 coupe and cab.

The physical qualities of both designs rock--the middies with their neuttral grace and the 911s with their fighter-jet responsiveness. Also the 911 styling is timeless. Right now I think the 07 Boxsters without an option added are the bargain babies. There is so much to choose from. Long live both mid and rear Porsches.

turbo23dog

Very interesting discussion.

As an 80 SC owner, I'm looking for something newer (w/good working AC) and tangling with the choice of 911 vs. Box S. This thread is helping sort out that decision.

I've already had this discussion with JSAINDC and definitely tuned into his selling of a base box for an 996 cab; I'd have thought the same way. I think the question from my end would be given a chance, would he ever switch back to a box/S after having his 911.

Ray H

+1

mlambert890

This question is more complex than it seems. I completely agree with the idea that the Boxster and the 911 are just different and that you cant say one is "better" or "worse". I also agree that it is a real stretch to say that the 911's design is "obviously flawed". Maybe on paper from a purely academic perspective, but in practice, something about that "flawed design" works.

There is a commercial aspect to all of this that cannot be discounted, however. I think threads like this really boil down to mid-engine fans saying "we want a Cayman with 911 hp". But would you pay for that?

The question is, would large numbers of people *pay* 911 money for something that Porsche is not calling a 911? Because as long as there is a demand for the rear engine platform, they *cannot* call a midengine car the "911" (as has been suggested by Cayman fans many many times).

So Porsche is in a tough spot. The midengine design is super efficient, but they've built the prestige of their marque on the rear engine design that they have stubornly perpetuated. MANY enthusiasts love and want that rear engine platform with all of its "flaws". MANY vanity buyets also just want the "911". What do they do? Canceling the 911 name would be suicide. Calling a midengine car the "911" would cause a revolution. Creating a midengine car that has the power of a 911 would require pricing it accordingly. Is that going to sell? Vanity buyers wouldnt buy it, I can tell you that right now. Are there enough midengine fans who would pay 911 money for something that is not a 911 looking to Porsche? I kind of doubt it.

I think a lot of Cayman/Boxster fans really want a Cayman/Boxster with 911 power for Cayman prices. THAT isnt going to happen.

arenared

Isn't that what the Cayman experiment is for?

I wouldn't pay 911 money because too many 911 folks look vehemently down on Boxsters/Caymen, and it doesn't have the same prestige/heritage nor availability of motorsports parts. Also, the 911 is too "GT" for me.

But, if these latter items weren't the case, I'd pay MORE for the mid-engined version. For examle, I'd pay 911 prices for a stripped Cayman with a GT3 engine and nice adjustable suspension. Skip the sunroof, nav, power seats, climate control, full leather, etc., etc. So, yes, I would pay 911 prices for the right package but always at some discount because of the incessant deriding of Boxster/Caymen owners. At least the Cayman gets a little more respect becaust it's not a convertible.

mooty

i can't speak for others. but i be the first one to pony up 150k for a GT3 motor'd cayman.

i know i can get 3.8L from farnbacher or ruf, but i rather have it from the factory.

this is not to say cay s is better than 911 in anyway. they are simply different. thus i have both. this is like arguing that steak is better than watermelon. they are different, try both.