No respect for the Boxster
 

I've noticed lots of disrespect for the Boxster on many other car forums. Phrases like overpriced for what you get, poor man's Porsche, and overhyped and underpowered seem to abound. There was even an episode on the Sopranos a couple of years ago where Tony Soprano made a disparaging remark about the Boxster.

Although I've never owned a Boxster, I've had the pleasure of driving a friend's Boxster S, and I was really impressed by what the car has to offer at a relatively modest price by Porsche standards. Has anyone else noticed this, and does anyone have a clue why the negative attitude, notwithstanding all of the Boxster positive reviews by nearly all car magazines.

Usally made by non Boxster owners...

They are great cars, I own both and like each one for diff reasons...

Mid engine complex :) IMO

I think there are several reasons

1) no Porsche supported racing program around the car

2) Came out with the dot com boom. Seems lots of "non enthusiasts" (to be nice;) ) were buying them as status symbols. Posers. Good for them. Good for Porsche (the company).. annoying to true fans of the marque.

3) Often thought of as "chick" cars, being relatively cheap, convetibles.

Sadly, the stereotypes have stuck. I've never owned one but have driven several over the years and always thought they were fun/good performing cars. Its just that when I get close to wanting to buy one, someone I know has a (major) mechanical let down. Frustrating to say the least.

It's the stigmata that every entry level Porsche has suffered from.

Well, except for a few makes like Ferrari and Lambo, P-cars ARE overpriced for what you get. Porsches are not bought because they represent good value. Hondas are for that.

Most of the disrespect I have run across is from 996 owners. That is probably because the 986 is about 90% the same as the 996, and initially it was significantly less powered and significantly cheaper. A lot of folks also mistook the cheaper 986 for a 996, so my impression is that a lot of 996 guys feel like the 986 buyers were buying 986s to run around and be 996 poseurs.

Also, remember that for a long time, Porsche was a 1-car company. Recently, however, the Boxster/Cayman and 911 are more visually differentiated. Then, the Cayenne REALLY gave the 911 guys something to worry about. Also, the Cayman not being a convertible has helped give the mid-engine platform a little more credibility. Don't feel too bad, even in the 996 forums, the convertibles, Tiptronics, and 4WDs get hammered on.

Meh! Who cares? At the end of the day my Boxster has the Porsche engine whine,Porsche crest and Porsche feel. I couldn't be more happy myself.

They're coming around. Usually after a good drive. (Don't listen to anyone who hasn't spent a fair amount of time behind the wheel of a Boxster...they have no idea what they're talking about.)

I did a poll recently on Pelican: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showt...hreadid=300878

Early in the poll, there were more people who "loved / wanted" Boxsters than anything else. It seems to have stalled about where I expected the results to be. But it's good to see so many more "911 folk" coming around on the Boxsters.

sorry...long post......
 

After being a Porsche lurker for a heck of a long time, family/financial conditions finally recently allowed me to do more then dream. Ofcourse, like the majority of folks, I grew up reading, looking at, getting drives in 911, so without question, my first thoughts were drawn to the 911.

Then I looked at my budget and looked at what I could nab for the $$ I am willing to spend on a 8 month a year car (I am in Montreal). In my range, I could source a few older 964's, 986's and at the tall end, a ratty 986S.

I drove a very clean 986S and was very impressed. Interior space, ride, handling, the sounds. Then I had a local PCA member take me on a ride in his 964 so that I could understand the 964 experience. It was very cool as well. But the interior space, the fact that the car was 14 years younger (avg), storage space and the more rev happy engine of the Boxster just won me over.

The Boxster does not have the same idiosyncrasies of the 911, many of which have gone on to become what most people qualify as the qualities of “a real Porsche”. There is something awfully cool about a bunch of engineers that are too stubborn to move the motor forward to achieve easier results, they just chipped away and developed a car that was to become the pinnacle of sport car driving, the 911 is just that iconic.

On the other hand…the Boxster represents a continuation in the lineage of Spyders, RS60 etc.

So folks think that all Porsche ever built and raced were 911’s. Not true.

BTW, today at 3pm, I am meeting with a seller. I just may be picking up my first Porsche, the realization of my childhood dream. 986S in mint condition, with the hard top. AS/M blue. I am soooo psyched.

Cool MikeBat! Good luck with it.

And remember, the first Porsche was mid-engined! :thumbsup:

thanks Doug, it is a day of rekoning.

I can hardly think straight.

I will definately post some pics. The car's owner is a friend (and hockey team mate). He is moving to a 997 4S. I know the car has been babied.

I do not believe that RMS will be a problem on this car, 2002 S. But... I will have a garage check it anyways.

RMS is a "problem" with just about any of the newer water pumper Porsches. But most often, if it happens, it's just a little oil seapage with little consequence to the car's running ability. In other words, it's one "problem" that has been blown way out of proportion.

To the point of this thread, there have been a lot of "problems" that have been blown out of proportion on all the boards, probably why Boxsters are not as highly thought of as, say, 911s. Not to say that our cars are perfect, but there's certainly no significant reason to avoid the model altogether.

Not sure what this really means.

For the US:

From 1949-1964 there was the 356 and its iterations
1965-1969 - just the 911 (and its iterations)
1970-1975 - 911's and 914s (maligned for being VW's)
1976 - 911's (912E and left over 914's and maybe an early 924 (maligned for being "audi/vw's"))
1977-1995 - 911, 924/44/68 (hmm, gained acceptance here though) and 928
1996 - 911's
1997- Present - 911's, boxster/cayman, cayenne, CGT

So with the exception of 1996, you would have to go back nearly 37 years to make the original statement true. Perhaps what you meant by "one car" is to say that Porsche was defined and identified most exclusively with the 911.

I do think some of the "hatred" comes from early 996 owners who paid twice as much for the same "front end" and were likely "mocked" for their purchase of such an expensive boxster.

That said, with time comes acceptance. With the newest "aircooled" porsches 10 years old, there is yet another "owner type" discovering and enjoying the boxsters. Fantastic autocross cars... bad rap for RMS/Engine failures and suddenly they are "cheap to buy" and still modern to enjoy everyday!

A former neighbor of mine has a 996 and she always bad-mouthed the Boxster as a cheap car, etc. Even told of how the dealer sales people agreed with her (ass-kissers). I didn't have the heart to tell her how her car was so similar to the Boxster. Oh well.

Most of what you read is either envy or ignorance. Boxster owners (that I know) love their cars, that pretty much sums it up for me.

Just a couple of points:
1. Ask anyone who knows how to drive well on a track how they like the Boxter. It is a well balanced car and is pure Porsche.
2. Someone mentioned that Porsches are overpriced. I disagree. For the street, you don't NEED a Porsche but if you race, or track your Porsche hard, then you get what you pay for. Go to the next club race and show me how many 10+ year old Corvettes are out there and then tell me Porsches are overpriced.