Poll: Would you take a Boxster with a Carerra engine over a Carerra or even a Turbo?
08-20-2002, 02:49 PM
#46
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't need a bigger engine to embarass more powerful cars in a Boxster, just a great driver. There was a Boxster S at the Porsche/Ferrari track day I was at on Saturday, about the only things it couldn't gain on and/or pass through the turns were a GT3 (which was lapping just about everything including the F40 that was there) and a quartet of slick-shod F360 challenge cars. It doled out some severe embarassment to a great variety of Porsche and Ferrari drivers 
08-21-2002, 08:12 PM
#49
Intermediate
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Menlo Park, CA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look at the track time at The Nurburgring (below), a Boxster with 3.4L ain't faster than a regular 996. I don't know if 3.6L makes a big difference.
Having said that, I would be VERY seriously tempted if they have a Boxster TT with say at least 340hp.
<a href="http://home.swipnet.se/~w-32546/nbring/home.htm" target="_blank">Link to Nurburgrin Track Time</a>
Having said that, I would be VERY seriously tempted if they have a Boxster TT with say at least 340hp.
<a href="http://home.swipnet.se/~w-32546/nbring/home.htm" target="_blank">Link to Nurburgrin Track Time</a>
08-21-2002, 08:19 PM
#50
Intermediate
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Menlo Park, CA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I posted the wrong link... The right one should be
<a href="http://www.track-challenge.com/main.asp?useframe=tracktest1.asp?ordering=8" target="_blank">http://www.track-challenge.com/main.asp?useframe=tracktest1.asp?ordering=8</a>
The TechArt 986S and Gemballa 986TT is faster than the S but about the same if not slower than a regular 996.
<a href="http://www.track-challenge.com/main.asp?useframe=tracktest1.asp?ordering=8" target="_blank">http://www.track-challenge.com/main.asp?useframe=tracktest1.asp?ordering=8</a>
The TechArt 986S and Gemballa 986TT is faster than the S but about the same if not slower than a regular 996.
08-22-2002, 12:42 AM
#51
Instructor
Every single 996 I have run my 3.4 Boxster against I have smoked. Two coupes and a cab so far. 993's are beaten even more severly. (love the confusion on the oil pumpers face !)
Bring your MY00 C2 AS to the Midwest and we can add it to the list of 996's I've thrashed.
<img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[burnout]" />
Bring your MY00 C2 AS to the Midwest and we can add it to the list of 996's I've thrashed.
<img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[burnout]" />
08-22-2002, 01:08 AM
#52
Race Car
Boxster 3.4, come on out to California, and I'll show you what even a 29-year-old 911 can do to your fancy little convertible. 
(Actually, I'm a pretty big Boxster fan. I don't think it will get much of a reputation, though, until they reach a price point where they make attractive track cars. Then, if an aftermarket develops, watch out 911's...)
(Actually, I'm a pretty big Boxster fan. I don't think it will get much of a reputation, though, until they reach a price point where they make attractive track cars. Then, if an aftermarket develops, watch out 911's...)
08-22-2002, 01:42 AM
#53
Sorry I have to pixx somebody off again. I said it before and I'll say it again: If you THINK you are a good driver, get the boxster, doesn't matter if it's been modified. You will come out looking real good(people will think you are a good driver). If you KNOW you are a good driver, get the 911. If you come out after a drive looking real good, you are real good.
I will take a boxster for convertible fun, and a 911(coupe) for driving challenge and fun. I remember when the 944 first came out, all the adjectives we saw describing the boxster today were used to describe the 944 then, well..........
I will take a boxster for convertible fun, and a 911(coupe) for driving challenge and fun. I remember when the 944 first came out, all the adjectives we saw describing the boxster today were used to describe the 944 then, well..........
08-22-2002, 04:04 AM
#54
Intermediate
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Menlo Park, CA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First, I am a Boxster fan too and would really like one as a 2ndcar if I can afford it.
Now, let me quote Vic Elford...
"The 911 is prehaps the most maligned car ever built. ANytime car enthusiasts get together they tell horrendous stories of 911s spinning or leaving the road backward. Any black marks on the guard rail around freeway exits are automatically attributed to out-of-controls 911s.
Curiously, few, if any of these stories are recounted by 911 drivers themselves. Theu usually come from people who assume that because of their rear weight bia, 911s automatically spin the moment conditions are anything but ideal.
The truth of the matter is that although early 911s were a little more difficult to drive than "conventional" cars, largely because they had compararatively narrow wheels and tires, one you master the technique, you can do things with a 911 that, if not impossible, are certainly much more difficult with other cars. However, it is vital to cultivate the sense of balance and develop the smoothness discussed earlier if you want to get the best out of this car."
Now, let me quote Vic Elford...
"The 911 is prehaps the most maligned car ever built. ANytime car enthusiasts get together they tell horrendous stories of 911s spinning or leaving the road backward. Any black marks on the guard rail around freeway exits are automatically attributed to out-of-controls 911s.
Curiously, few, if any of these stories are recounted by 911 drivers themselves. Theu usually come from people who assume that because of their rear weight bia, 911s automatically spin the moment conditions are anything but ideal.
The truth of the matter is that although early 911s were a little more difficult to drive than "conventional" cars, largely because they had compararatively narrow wheels and tires, one you master the technique, you can do things with a 911 that, if not impossible, are certainly much more difficult with other cars. However, it is vital to cultivate the sense of balance and develop the smoothness discussed earlier if you want to get the best out of this car."
08-22-2002, 12:14 PM
#55
Instructor
Jack - Your car is is a great idea. Drop a 260hp 3.6 in a 2500 lb car. You'd give me a good run.
My car is 276 RWHP in a Mid engine chassis with 10 inch rear wheels running 265's.
If we come west this winter don't worry I'll look you up. You bring the 104 gas !!
My car is 276 RWHP in a Mid engine chassis with 10 inch rear wheels running 265's.
If we come west this winter don't worry I'll look you up. You bring the 104 gas !!
08-22-2002, 04:30 PM
#56
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paul,
I think that actually PROVES our point. The Bi-Turbo 911 from Gemballa has 500hp, the Bi-Turbo Boxster has 320, yet both went around the track in the same amount of time.
This of course can mean many things:
1) Different drivers with different skill levels
2) The 911 made up for shortcomings in the turns by increased speed in the straights
3) The track configuration favored straightline performance as much as cornering performance
4) Differences in suspension setups not listed here
5) etc. etc. etc.
So while this chart is "interesting" it is hardly conclusive of anything...
I'm happy to film some 911's at the track in a couple of weeks, but to do so I'll have to turn my camera around and point it backwards...
I think that actually PROVES our point. The Bi-Turbo 911 from Gemballa has 500hp, the Bi-Turbo Boxster has 320, yet both went around the track in the same amount of time.
This of course can mean many things:
1) Different drivers with different skill levels
2) The 911 made up for shortcomings in the turns by increased speed in the straights
3) The track configuration favored straightline performance as much as cornering performance
4) Differences in suspension setups not listed here
5) etc. etc. etc.
So while this chart is "interesting" it is hardly conclusive of anything...
I'm happy to film some 911's at the track in a couple of weeks, but to do so I'll have to turn my camera around and point it backwards...
08-22-2002, 07:27 PM
#57
Racer
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Agoura Hills
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing you guys should know is that the Gemballa TT Boxster is using a 2.5L engine. Gemballa now uses a 3.6L twin turbo for the Boxster S. HP ranges from 450HP to 650HP.
You guys are right. The Boxster IS easier to drive. Just like 964's are easier to drive than REAL 911s like a 69 911S. Now I also have a 930 Turbo and I can tell you she is bitch that will biteyou if you dont pay attention to her in a corner.non turbo 911s are easy to drive when you compare them to the early 911 turbos. But My Boxster and my 930 are both a blast to drive. For canyons, itsthe Boxster, for freeway use lonely roads its the 930.
You guys are right. The Boxster IS easier to drive. Just like 964's are easier to drive than REAL 911s like a 69 911S. Now I also have a 930 Turbo and I can tell you she is bitch that will biteyou if you dont pay attention to her in a corner.non turbo 911s are easy to drive when you compare them to the early 911 turbos. But My Boxster and my 930 are both a blast to drive. For canyons, itsthe Boxster, for freeway use lonely roads its the 930.
08-22-2002, 09:08 PM
#58
Intermediate
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Menlo Park, CA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ken:
Look at the numbers again. The comparison wasn't to a 911 Turbo, but a 911 S (C4S) with 3.6L and 320hp.
Porsche 911 Carrera S 320 370 280 5 5,2 1.15,9
TechArt-Porsche Boxster 3.4S 310 365 278 5,7 6,5 1.15,6
Gemballa-Porsche Boxster Turbo 310 400 265 5,5 6,2 1.18,8
Porsche Boxster S 252 305 260 6,1 8,5 1.19
According to these numbers, the Boxster 3.4 is neck-to-neck with a 996 C4S (3.6) around the track. Straight line time is significantly faster on the C4S. Unfortunately they don't have performance numbers for a regular 996 C2 which is lighter and a bit faster than C4S.
My guess is that a Boxster 3.6 and 996 3.6 would be about neck-to-neck. The choice from then on is straightly driver perference. i.e. whether you perfer a mid or rear drive, cab vs. hardtop, etc.
Hey Boxster 3.4 guy, what is your net weight after the engine upgrade. I wonder what the power-to-weight ratio is comparing 986 3.4, 3.6 and the 996 C2 and C4S...
Yes, I saw the RUF Boxster 3600. I would have ordered one if not for the fact that my company is still in layoff mode...
In any case, good to know we are all so passionate about this subject.
Look at the numbers again. The comparison wasn't to a 911 Turbo, but a 911 S (C4S) with 3.6L and 320hp.
Porsche 911 Carrera S 320 370 280 5 5,2 1.15,9
TechArt-Porsche Boxster 3.4S 310 365 278 5,7 6,5 1.15,6
Gemballa-Porsche Boxster Turbo 310 400 265 5,5 6,2 1.18,8
Porsche Boxster S 252 305 260 6,1 8,5 1.19
According to these numbers, the Boxster 3.4 is neck-to-neck with a 996 C4S (3.6) around the track. Straight line time is significantly faster on the C4S. Unfortunately they don't have performance numbers for a regular 996 C2 which is lighter and a bit faster than C4S.
My guess is that a Boxster 3.6 and 996 3.6 would be about neck-to-neck. The choice from then on is straightly driver perference. i.e. whether you perfer a mid or rear drive, cab vs. hardtop, etc.
Hey Boxster 3.4 guy, what is your net weight after the engine upgrade. I wonder what the power-to-weight ratio is comparing 986 3.4, 3.6 and the 996 C2 and C4S...
Yes, I saw the RUF Boxster 3600. I would have ordered one if not for the fact that my company is still in layoff mode...
In any case, good to know we are all so passionate about this subject.
