944s2 cabriolet or porsche boxster 97-01?
02-22-2003, 04:40 AM
#2
Rennlist Member
I'm biased, obviously, but the 944S2 cabrio is an instant classic (not to mention that it would cost $20K less while you're at it...)
As you stated, the S2 cab is a rare car: only about 6K units were built worldwide, whereas there are tens of thousands of Boxsters on the street.
As you stated, the S2 cab is a rare car: only about 6K units were built worldwide, whereas there are tens of thousands of Boxsters on the street.
02-22-2003, 01:07 PM
#3
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
actually more rare then that. The final of all cabriolets made according to two diffrent books is only 1,700 that is includeing the extremely rare 944 turbo cabriolet made (500 made) for porsche britan.
02-22-2003, 02:15 PM
#5
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Kenilworth, UK
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a 944 Cab S2 a few years back, my current Porsche is a MY03 Boxster S, the Boxster is a great car to drive fast, VERY FAST, but without a shadow of doubt the 944 was more fun to drive at lesser speeds, oversteer on demand 
Also the 944 is a classic and still looks sleek where as in my humble opinion when the Boxster gets replaced it will instantly look old, just like when the 3 series BM was replaced, not a major shape change but looking at a M3 old shape now, it's almost embarrassingly old looking.
Just my opinion of course
Also the 944 is a classic and still looks sleek where as in my humble opinion when the Boxster gets replaced it will instantly look old, just like when the 3 series BM was replaced, not a major shape change but looking at a M3 old shape now, it's almost embarrassingly old looking.
Just my opinion of course
02-23-2003, 05:04 AM
#6
Rennlist Member
Please forgive me, 986 people, but I thought I'd answer Fishey's question.
Fishey, although the S2 cab and the turbo cab share practically the same body, they're quite different performancewise, and I like each for specific reasons.
The S2 has a big 3.0 liter engine that is really smooth. It makes around 208 HP and is a great cruising car on the highway that also has nice low end grunt around town.
The turbo S engine in the 951S cabrio is smaller (2.5 liter) and has a more "all or nothing" performance. It pulls less than the S2 when you're not on boost, but when you are, it's quite exhilarating. The stock 951S makes around 247 HP, which is about the same as a 986 S.
The 986 is a great car, particularly the S, but unfortunately they're still in another league than the 944 cars pricewise.
Fishey, although the S2 cab and the turbo cab share practically the same body, they're quite different performancewise, and I like each for specific reasons.
The S2 has a big 3.0 liter engine that is really smooth. It makes around 208 HP and is a great cruising car on the highway that also has nice low end grunt around town.
The turbo S engine in the 951S cabrio is smaller (2.5 liter) and has a more "all or nothing" performance. It pulls less than the S2 when you're not on boost, but when you are, it's quite exhilarating. The stock 951S makes around 247 HP, which is about the same as a 986 S.
The 986 is a great car, particularly the S, but unfortunately they're still in another league than the 944 cars pricewise.
02-23-2003, 01:50 PM
#7
Pro
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Long Island,New York(Now in Orlando, FL)
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 986/S looking old???..i dont think so...the 986/S is definitly has a classic look...take a look at the future model,there are only slight changes..drsh i think your opinion is definitly in the minority...
Trending Topics
02-23-2003, 03:17 PM
#8
Instructor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typically rarity means harder to fix over time. As parts and knowledge becomes more scarce, I would think the 944 Turbos may face an increased problem for maintenance. This has been the case for many others.
As for looks, the unfortunate part is the 944, as nice as it looks, has become dated by virtue of the copycat syndrome. Older Mazda RX7s, the Precida and even the Chrysler/Mitubishi Lasers all look lot like the 944 - which causes the dated look syndrome.
Fortunatley, the Boxster look is based on the 550 Spider - and if you see pictures of them together, the resemblance is amazing. Nearly 50 years and the design still draws a gasp of excitement. Now that is timeless!
Not even the 911 can do that...yet.
Also, price is all relative. When the 944 was out, equivalant cars were cheaper too. Now, even many minivans cost near $40,000 and mid sized beemers are well into the $50s. As an affordable Porsche, the 944 had its day, now the 986, next ??
As for looks, the unfortunate part is the 944, as nice as it looks, has become dated by virtue of the copycat syndrome. Older Mazda RX7s, the Precida and even the Chrysler/Mitubishi Lasers all look lot like the 944 - which causes the dated look syndrome.
Fortunatley, the Boxster look is based on the 550 Spider - and if you see pictures of them together, the resemblance is amazing. Nearly 50 years and the design still draws a gasp of excitement. Now that is timeless!
Not even the 911 can do that...yet.
Also, price is all relative. When the 944 was out, equivalant cars were cheaper too. Now, even many minivans cost near $40,000 and mid sized beemers are well into the $50s. As an affordable Porsche, the 944 had its day, now the 986, next ??
02-23-2003, 09:42 PM
#9
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by craigg:
<strong>Typically rarity means harder to fix over time. As parts and knowledge becomes more scarce, I would think the 944 Turbos may face an increased problem for maintenance. This has been the case for many others.
As for looks, the unfortunate part is the 944, as nice as it looks, has become dated by virtue of the copycat syndrome. Older Mazda RX7s, the Precida and even the Chrysler/Mitubishi Lasers all look lot like the 944 - which causes the dated look syndrome.
Fortunatley, the Boxster look is based on the 550 Spider - and if you see pictures of them together, the resemblance is amazing. Nearly 50 years and the design still draws a gasp of excitement. Now that is timeless!
Not even the 911 can do that...yet.
Also, price is all relative. When the 944 was out, equivalant cars were cheaper too. Now, even many minivans cost near $40,000 and mid sized beemers are well into the $50s. As an affordable Porsche, the 944 had its day, now the 986, next ??</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">I don't think you could be more wrong because for one the 944 took a original aproch at things. The boxster has copyed it big brother alittle to much. The front headlights are identical to the 996. As for the original 550 I think the only thing that carried over was the engine layout. I really can't find to much similarity's in the car's.(Well mid engine) Also the proformance of the pre-variocam boxsters compared to the s2 is not much of an increase. As a matter of fact in my car vs my friends 98 boxster I was able to top him in the 1/4mile by a small .06 . This shocked me to tell you the truth of course you can say that my rection time was .05 better then his so its really close to say the least. I have been waiting for this spring to come so we could both hit the track (road course) at the same time and have some fun but right now I am haveing Ring&pinion problems. I have drove his car (but well he wouldn't let me take it to the limit) and from what I have noticed is the cars actually feel similar with the boxster being the easier car to drive. Now as most of you know easier isnt always faster. I really look forward to hitting the track this spring and realy takeing it to the limit. I can say that it will be very close. I really love the lift off oversteer into the turns in the 944 does the boxster have this same super fun feature? (DROOLING - Lift off oversteer) Also for whoever said the s2 looks like a RX7 or miata. This is true but same thing for the boxster ever heard of a toyota MR2? I personaly think they look alot like the boxster. I heard the boxster only had a drag coeficent of .31 that would be the same as the .31 boasted by the 944 s2 cabriolet. .33 for s2 and turbo but the cabriolet has 60mm less windshield. Weird isnt it? Also top speed is identical on the 149mph for manual versions. I think it comes down to personal opinion.
<strong>Typically rarity means harder to fix over time. As parts and knowledge becomes more scarce, I would think the 944 Turbos may face an increased problem for maintenance. This has been the case for many others.
As for looks, the unfortunate part is the 944, as nice as it looks, has become dated by virtue of the copycat syndrome. Older Mazda RX7s, the Precida and even the Chrysler/Mitubishi Lasers all look lot like the 944 - which causes the dated look syndrome.
Fortunatley, the Boxster look is based on the 550 Spider - and if you see pictures of them together, the resemblance is amazing. Nearly 50 years and the design still draws a gasp of excitement. Now that is timeless!
Not even the 911 can do that...yet.
Also, price is all relative. When the 944 was out, equivalant cars were cheaper too. Now, even many minivans cost near $40,000 and mid sized beemers are well into the $50s. As an affordable Porsche, the 944 had its day, now the 986, next ??</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">I don't think you could be more wrong because for one the 944 took a original aproch at things. The boxster has copyed it big brother alittle to much. The front headlights are identical to the 996. As for the original 550 I think the only thing that carried over was the engine layout. I really can't find to much similarity's in the car's.(Well mid engine) Also the proformance of the pre-variocam boxsters compared to the s2 is not much of an increase. As a matter of fact in my car vs my friends 98 boxster I was able to top him in the 1/4mile by a small .06 . This shocked me to tell you the truth of course you can say that my rection time was .05 better then his so its really close to say the least. I have been waiting for this spring to come so we could both hit the track (road course) at the same time and have some fun but right now I am haveing Ring&pinion problems. I have drove his car (but well he wouldn't let me take it to the limit) and from what I have noticed is the cars actually feel similar with the boxster being the easier car to drive. Now as most of you know easier isnt always faster. I really look forward to hitting the track this spring and realy takeing it to the limit. I can say that it will be very close. I really love the lift off oversteer into the turns in the 944 does the boxster have this same super fun feature? (DROOLING - Lift off oversteer) Also for whoever said the s2 looks like a RX7 or miata. This is true but same thing for the boxster ever heard of a toyota MR2? I personaly think they look alot like the boxster. I heard the boxster only had a drag coeficent of .31 that would be the same as the .31 boasted by the 944 s2 cabriolet. .33 for s2 and turbo but the cabriolet has 60mm less windshield. Weird isnt it? Also top speed is identical on the 149mph for manual versions. I think it comes down to personal opinion.
02-23-2003, 11:53 PM
#10
Pro
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Long Island,New York(Now in Orlando, FL)
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
stock Boxster S, 0-60 5.2, 1/4 13.8 top speed 163 amazing mid engine...with that type of chasis and handling i dont care about the oversteer(there is enough overster for the grin factor)..as far as the lights being the same as 996,boxster debut first with them..lets not forget about the engine note ;-)...944 is a great car,but cmon...boxster is hard to beat..lol
02-24-2003, 09:15 AM
#14
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Texas Gulf Coast
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you driven both cars back to back yet. That should answer your question quickly. The Boxster is a more modern car with more updated amenities. I am not biased against the 944 cars. I had and loved an '89 Turbo S that I drove as my daily driver for quite a while and then progressed that car into a race car. The Boxster is just a more fun all around car IMHO.
02-24-2003, 12:25 PM
#15
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
I have drove both cars back to back and we have just played on some country roads. I would like to let you know the older boxsters do not have variocam (the 201hp and 188tourque) ones. I would say that I Like the 944 seats better and the dashlayout becasue its simplistic and extremely easy to read. The sifting of both gearbox's are smooth and extremely easy to find the gear. The boxsters updated convertable is way better with the fold flat and better visability when up. The boxster cant cary 4 people witch for me I find my self doing alot. The better handling car? Thats really so close from what I have noticed. The boxster is more modern and has way less squat under acceleration. In the curves both cars were considered the best handling cars of there respected generation "the 944 cabriolet actually took the coupes for this honor because even with more weight it was all positioned perfectly also its weight was downlow. The cabriolet also stoped 2 feet shorter from 60) The frames of both cars and there stifness, I feel that both are about even. I don't know over the harsh asphalt what car is better but I don't care because around here is all smooth roads (hince the reason I dont know)