Boxster 97-99 vs. Boxster 00-02
04-01-2002, 11:35 AM
#1
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boxster 97-99 vs. Boxster 00-02
I would like to get some performance information on the two "versions" of the regular Boxster that have been sold. It is my understanding that the engine displacement was increased from 2.5L to 2.7L starting with the 2000 model year. A few other posts have alluded to some improvements in interior trim as well.
For the current model, the Porsche website quotes:
[quote]The 2.7-litre Boxster engine develops a total of 162 kW (220 bhp) of power. Maximum torque of 260 Nm is available from as low as 4,750 rpm. The results are outstanding driveability, torque and cylinder charging, as well as extremely smooth running characteristics. 0 to 100 km/h takes just 6.6 seconds, while top speed with a manual gearbox is 250 km/h. <hr></blockquote>
Can someone provide comparable numbers for the 97-99 cars with the 2.5L engine?
For the current model, the Porsche website quotes:
[quote]The 2.7-litre Boxster engine develops a total of 162 kW (220 bhp) of power. Maximum torque of 260 Nm is available from as low as 4,750 rpm. The results are outstanding driveability, torque and cylinder charging, as well as extremely smooth running characteristics. 0 to 100 km/h takes just 6.6 seconds, while top speed with a manual gearbox is 250 km/h. <hr></blockquote>
Can someone provide comparable numbers for the 97-99 cars with the 2.5L engine?
04-01-2002, 08:03 PM
#2
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
151 cu. in.
201 hp @ 6000rpms (150 kW)
181 ft-lb @ 4500 rpms (245Nm)
3.4"x2.8"
redline- 6700
0-60 7.4 seconds
top speed 149 mph
I think they only weigh about 20 pounds less then then the 2000's hope this helps
201 hp @ 6000rpms (150 kW)
181 ft-lb @ 4500 rpms (245Nm)
3.4"x2.8"
redline- 6700
0-60 7.4 seconds
top speed 149 mph
I think they only weigh about 20 pounds less then then the 2000's hope this helps
04-02-2002, 09:15 AM
#3
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia. >>> Now in Gibraltar
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I have a standard 1999 2.5 L (150kw)
It runs 15.1 for the 1/4 mile
<a href="http://www.qplanet.org/images/auto/timeslip15l.jpg" target="_blank">LARGE jpg here</a>
Given the 2.5 runs a 15.1, the performance calculator suggests a 2.7 would run a 14.7
hope that helps
<a href="http://www.qplanet.org/boxster.html" target="_blank">2.5 general info here</a>
It runs 15.1 for the 1/4 mile
<a href="http://www.qplanet.org/images/auto/timeslip15l.jpg" target="_blank">LARGE jpg here</a>
Given the 2.5 runs a 15.1, the performance calculator suggests a 2.7 would run a 14.7
hope that helps
<a href="http://www.qplanet.org/boxster.html" target="_blank">2.5 general info here</a>
04-28-2002, 01:40 PM
#4
2nd Gear
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey all,heres a little more info on the 97-99/ 00-02 boxster performance discussion....
The Factory claimed the '97 2.5 Boxster could run 0-62 in 6.9 w/5 spd, and 7.4 w/ tiptronic.
Road and Track magazine tested a 97 Boxster doing 0-60 it in 6.0 seconds, running a 1/4 mile in 14.6, Motor Trend, a few years back clocked a 98 Boxster doing 0-60 in 6.0 seconds as well, and 1/4 mile in 14.5 seconds. I find the factory is EXTREMELY conservative with their performance claims. Every magazine has beaten the factory times by a large margin. Most people that test a car will get different results,due to launching technique and of all things weather and heat
The Factory claimed the '97 2.5 Boxster could run 0-62 in 6.9 w/5 spd, and 7.4 w/ tiptronic.
Road and Track magazine tested a 97 Boxster doing 0-60 it in 6.0 seconds, running a 1/4 mile in 14.6, Motor Trend, a few years back clocked a 98 Boxster doing 0-60 in 6.0 seconds as well, and 1/4 mile in 14.5 seconds. I find the factory is EXTREMELY conservative with their performance claims. Every magazine has beaten the factory times by a large margin. Most people that test a car will get different results,due to launching technique and of all things weather and heat
04-28-2002, 10:54 PM
#5
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote]Originally posted by Garrett:
<strong>Hey all,heres a little more info on the 97-99/ 00-02 boxster performance discussion....
The Factory claimed the '97 2.5 Boxster could run 0-62 in 6.9 w/5 spd, and 7.4 w/ tiptronic.
Road and Track magazine tested a 97 Boxster doing 0-60 it in 6.0 seconds, running a 1/4 mile in 14.6, Motor Trend, a few years back clocked a 98 Boxster doing 0-60 in 6.0 seconds as well, and 1/4 mile in 14.5 seconds. I find the factory is EXTREMELY conservative with their performance claims. Every magazine has beaten the factory times by a large margin. Most people that test a car will get different results,due to launching technique and of all things weather and heat</strong><hr></blockquote>
Two notes, there is a good chance the 2.5L is slightly faster (atleast to 60 mph if not 1/4 mile too) due ot gearing differences, all the magazine tests I've read have the 2.5 as fast or faster than the 2.7
Also their estimates are not as conservative as you might think, yes they are somewhat but not as much as you'd think. We use 0-60 but they go to a little more than 62 mph (0-100 kph) and that last 2 mph take longer than you would think. If you look at a graph of a cars acceleration the faster you go it really drops off dramatcially. Anyway they rate te boxster S at 5.9 0-62 and i'ts bene clocked at 5.3 to 60, I thought .6 sec was pretty outrageous for only 2 mph more but if you do the math it's really not.
<strong>Hey all,heres a little more info on the 97-99/ 00-02 boxster performance discussion....
The Factory claimed the '97 2.5 Boxster could run 0-62 in 6.9 w/5 spd, and 7.4 w/ tiptronic.
Road and Track magazine tested a 97 Boxster doing 0-60 it in 6.0 seconds, running a 1/4 mile in 14.6, Motor Trend, a few years back clocked a 98 Boxster doing 0-60 in 6.0 seconds as well, and 1/4 mile in 14.5 seconds. I find the factory is EXTREMELY conservative with their performance claims. Every magazine has beaten the factory times by a large margin. Most people that test a car will get different results,due to launching technique and of all things weather and heat</strong><hr></blockquote>
Two notes, there is a good chance the 2.5L is slightly faster (atleast to 60 mph if not 1/4 mile too) due ot gearing differences, all the magazine tests I've read have the 2.5 as fast or faster than the 2.7
Also their estimates are not as conservative as you might think, yes they are somewhat but not as much as you'd think. We use 0-60 but they go to a little more than 62 mph (0-100 kph) and that last 2 mph take longer than you would think. If you look at a graph of a cars acceleration the faster you go it really drops off dramatcially. Anyway they rate te boxster S at 5.9 0-62 and i'ts bene clocked at 5.3 to 60, I thought .6 sec was pretty outrageous for only 2 mph more but if you do the math it's really not.
05-01-2002, 11:02 AM
#6
Ironman 140.6
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The 2000 model improvements are;
2.7l engine (more power and higher redline)
upgraded interior
e-gas
revised gearing
The 2000 model should out accelerate the earlier models at any speed......just as the S will out accelerate the base models. I have never heard any one assert (as one poster did) that the 2.5's out-perform the 2.7's, the gearing changes were done to improve acceleration (not decrease it...why would Porsche do that?).
The 2.5's do seem to make a better (louder and more pleasant) induction "howl", but the 2.7 and the 3.2 still sound pretty "sweet".
Hope this helps.
2.7l engine (more power and higher redline)
upgraded interior
e-gas
revised gearing
The 2000 model should out accelerate the earlier models at any speed......just as the S will out accelerate the base models. I have never heard any one assert (as one poster did) that the 2.5's out-perform the 2.7's, the gearing changes were done to improve acceleration (not decrease it...why would Porsche do that?).
The 2.5's do seem to make a better (louder and more pleasant) induction "howl", but the 2.7 and the 3.2 still sound pretty "sweet".
Hope this helps.
