fivepointnine

around here a S has about a 3k price premium

Plyman438

Yeah, I love in thread after thread in comparing the two 986 models the base is always inferior to the S. In fact, the base is about 100 pounds lighter, and the engine is a freer revver. In first and second gear, the base is probably just as quick, and with 17-18 inch wider wheels, probably more tossable. In third gear and above, the differences between both models probaby show more. Kind of nice to have an extra gear, but base is a very capable sports car and in some ways more capable as in lighter, higher revver, and more tossable on optional tire/wheel packages. Car and Driver did a 0-60 time of 5.9 seconds in 1997 2.5L Flat 6 Boxster. I would say 2000 2.7L Flat 6 is good for maybe 5.6-5.8. The S Model maybe 5.5. You can't feel the difference between those figures. Very close. Power to weight ratios are probably very similar with S getting slight nod as it does carry more weight.

Byprodriver

44 Ft./lbs. of torque definitely beats 100 lbs. of weight no matter what gear you are in. You "probably" have never driven a S.

Plyman438

Actually, it's 33 lbs. of torque as 2001 base has 192 to S's 225. Yes, we agree, the S at $10,000+ more is slightly quicker. It also has 33 more hp. And it weighs 2,855 lbs. to base's 2,778 lbs. The base hits maximum torque and hp at 6500 RPM while the S hits it at 6250 RPM. I used to own a modded Mustang 5.0 V8 and other than third and fourth gear of course doesn't pull any quicker than my Boxster as far as seat of the pants go. I've driven a BMW 3 Series I Turbo also and seat of the pants up to 60 mph feels no different. All fast cars in straight line with Boxtser being better all around. Also been a passenger in a Porsche Turbo S and that does feel different as in feeling like you are being catapulted off of aircraft carrier in F-18 Hornet.

2001 Orient Red Metallic Boxster

Boxster in my Future?

I may be reading the comments wrong here, but it seems that folks are saying the S isn't really that much faster than the base. The 0-60 times of course support that general conclusion - but I have heard others claim the S has more low-end torque and feels demonstrably faster off the line and has more seat of the pants whoosh. Not arguing the point here; just looking for more clarification as is the OP.

I have a 2009 base model and lately have felt that I would like to have more of that low-end oomph. So, I've considered trading in my base for an S. But after reading this thread I wonder if I'd be wasting my money! Unfortunately winter has set in around here so I can't test drive any (besides there aren't any new S models in town right now).

I've also thought I might wait a while and get a 911 Carerra (possibly a CPO) in order to satisfy more of that need for a stronger pull. That's a LOT more money - so I'm not sure that's going to happen... at least not for some time. Am I expecting too much from the Boxster S? Or, would I feel the difference in torque? Thanks for the responses.

Doug

CW-VIESOCK

Porsche has always built a taller ladder. That way, you are always looking up...if you are looking.

Plyman438

We have been discussing the 986 type. There is more difference in power with your 987. I believe the base 987 in your MY has 245hp, and S has 310hp which makes for 65 more hp instead of the 33hp difference in 986. I imagine torque will be significantly more also. So I would imagine there would be more seat of pants difference. Of course the 987 is a bit bigger vehicle also and has put on more weight. Modern cars are getting porkier like Americans in general.

You may want to look at the Boxster Spyder. I have looked at You Tube video where a 2011 Spyder smokes a Mustang GT, Mustang 5.0, Cadillac CTS-V, and Dodge Challenger Hemi. No contest in 1/8th of mile drag race. Not even close. Challenger asks for rematch and gets smoked again. However, the Spyder got smoked by a Corvette. I believe the Spyder does 0-60 in around 4.6 or so. In quarter mile, the times should have been pretty close in high 13's with the Corvette in low 13's. The Spyder is mighty quick even with only 320hp and much less torque than big block Corvette and Dodge Challenger. It's lighter weight doesn't hurt.

2001 Orient Red Metallic Boxster

fivepointnine

I love the fact to get massive acceleration in my S I do not have to downshift, just punch it and it takes off like a bat outta hell. Factory figures for a 2000 S is 5.8/13.8, drive it like you hate it and you can probably knock about 1/4 to 1/2 second off both......I think one of the mags got a 0-60 in either 5.3 or 5.4 for the S

Boxster in my Future?

Silly me! I tend to forget about the number assignments of the different model years. Thank you for that clarification; Maybe by next year there will be a few used, but loved Spyders around... I just am not sure I can get used to that ragtop appearance. But I suspect it would be a lot more eager to jump than my base.

Of course there's always the Corvette.

Doug

CW-VIESOCK

Power? Yes!!! But don't forget, you will have to look at that interior when you drive it

Boxster in my Future?

Indeed. The best interior design I've experienced in cars I've owned were all German: Audi, BMW, and Porsche. The Corvette is tempting with all that massive torque (and I think it's pretty sexy looking, too)... but the interior (while better than the average GM design) does not ooze quality or OCD design attention for sure!

Doug

Charlie C

I think you are wrong with these facts. Before I bought an S, I read Car & Driver and the 2003 S did 0-60 in 5.3 whereas the non S was above 6 seconds. That being said, the non S is a great car and the newer ones with larger engines are matching the old S performance.

Turb-OH Brad

Compared to a 986 interior?? I'll take the Chevy!

Plyman438

Yeah, I was going to say......the interior of my 2001 986 is clean and well preserved, but nothing to write home about. I like the three instrument pods right in front of me and ignition to the left of steering wheel is cool, but rest of interior is fairly nondescript and dated for most part. You can also see where Porsche tried to save money in meeting its price target with materials used. Lots of cheap plastic. My Boxster cost $49,000 new, and the interior feel and design doesn't come close to giving you $50,000 vehicle feel IMO. The option inside of my Boxster are heated seats, leather seating, power seats, wind screen with rattling locking lever, and auto climate control. The 987 looks a bit better, but doesn't blow one away on a vehicle that can cost upwards of $70,000 if fully optioned. I didn't buy my Boxster for its interior, but a little nicer one would have been great. Great looking sports car until you open door.

2001 Orient Red Metallic Boxster

mikefocke

If you are thinking of buying a Boxster of any type for the straight line acceleration you are looking at the wrong car IMHO. Owned a '99 base 2.5 and a '01S 3.2. Was the S faster with bigger brakes and a slightly improved suspension...yes. But I liked driving the base more as it was more about what I could get out of the car as opposed to the car being better than I was. I could put my right food down harder/longer. Some like the gear spacing on the 5-speed as opposed to the 6-speed too.

Drove every roadster around before I bought the first Boxster. Nothing at all appealed to me until the first mile in the Boxster. It felt right at the start for me. Very reliable, enjoyable and cheap to maintain was my experience.

Your choice may be different.