Marine Blue

The point of the original Spyder and the Spyder's of years past was specifically to improve the overall driving characteristics and create a very focused driving experience at the expense of some creature comforts. Daily driver, definitely not but I know many here on Rennlist and offline that use the Spyder as DD's and love it. It just depends on what you're willing to put up with. Clearly you have no interest in an ingeniously engineered top that saves a significant amount of weight and lowers the cars center of gravity. It's not for everyone and was never intended as such, that's what makes it great. Porsche built a car for people who could care less about convenience and want the ultimate connection with the car.

I have said it numerous times, if we all had the same tastes the world would be a pretty boring place.

Marine Blue

And to get somewhat back on topic....I can't offer any real world comparisons between the R8 and Spyder since I haven't drive the R8 but here's a comparison between the 987 Spyder and an older R8 just for fun:

Z356

Well, I had a MY2011 Audi R8 V8 Spyder (not the V10) and
the older 987 MY2012 Boxster Spyder. I loved them both...
and sold them both!






***


Hard to compare...but let me give you all the following thoughts:

1) The Audi V8 Spyder, with very few options, was
originally $137K vs the '12 Porsche Spyder, loaded
with options, had a sticker of only $84,770! So their
price points are widely apart! And the R8 V10 is much
higher!!!!!



https://rennlist.com/forums/987-981-...tom-order.html

2) Audi is all wheel drive & the Porsche is rear wheel
drive. At the limit, the Audi will push (understeer)...

3) Curb weight difference is almost 1000 lbs (in my
V8 version) in favor of the Boxster Spyder. That
lightness is hard to beat when comparing the
driving dynamics of each mid-engined car!

4) Boxster Spyder is 300% more practical than
any R8, coupe or Spyder! This, in my opinion,
is the 'Achilles Heel' of the Audi R8. Lack of
usable trunk space (and no possibility of putting
anything behind the seats of the R8 Spyder)
makes this vehicle almost useless for travel!



Even with set of English-made ('Bespoke') custom
R8-specific hard leather cases with alcantara interior
lining that originally cost over US$5K, packing for
any sort of travel was a challenge on the R8!



5) The Audi R8 Spyder, or a coupe for that matter, is
in a different league as far as 'star power' with the
general public. I never drove the R8 anywhere without
someone taking photos from the sidewalk or their cars.
Most non-car enthusiast folks thought the R8 was in the
same price range & 'class' category as the world's auto
exotics - Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc. Personally, I thought
that the 987 Boxster Spyder looked pretty good...but
most casual observers would categorize the R8 as a
rung, or two, above!

****

My dos centavos for what it's worth. I replaced the
Boxster Spy der with a '15 991 gt3. And the R8 Spyder
with a '16 Audi RS7 (custom built to be delivered in 2
months).

Saludos,
Eduardo
Carmel

Phil G.

Only going to say this once. If you'll notice, the majority of posts on the 981 forum are about the Spyder. There is just no question it is an awesome sports car and the 3.8 is a phenomenal engine. I would have bought one for the performance, but personally, I just don't love the looks of the car as much as the "plain" Boxster S. I find the manual top very busy, and it looks to me like a bimini top you see on some power or sailboats. I also find the front and rears on the cars to be aggressive for sure, but just not my taste, including the cowls. Is the car worth the extra $20k over an S? sure, if that's your taste and you want a great car with essentially a current 991S engine. I actually like the simpler lines on the S, and for me, the car has plenty of power - especially the way I'll be using it. Top up or down, I just like the look of the S more. Again, it's all subjective and a matter of taste. Now, if I just could have gotten the 3.8L six in my S ......

BTW, Z356, both your Boxster and the R8 are just magnificent looking cars. Now that I see the Aqua Blue over red interior - well, it's gorgeous.

skiahh

Thanks, Captain Obvious. That was exactly the intent of my post. Porsche Spyder = 918; Boxster Spyder = 981. The R8, at least V10 version, is considered a supercar which would mean it should be compared to the 918, not 981. And my point is the R8 doesn't really compare to either the 981 Spyder or 918 Spyder.

Which is why I did not try to get an allocation.

As for your assertion that it should be even more complicated, I'm not sure where you get that. With the engineering in these cars, an automated roof would not have been that hard to design. Hell, look at the Targa's roof!

But I would certainly not agree that a crappy roof is what makes a car a Spyder. Hell, the definition of a Spyder (that I can find, anyway) makes a regular Boxster a "spyder". By most definitions, a spyder is a 2 seat convertible sports car. A roadster in the US. Car manufacturers use it as a model designation or trim level now (i.e. the Boxster Spyder). There's so much more to a spyder than a crappy roof.

I agree - everyone has their own idea of involvement. And my reference to a Jeep Wrangler is about as involved with your car as you can get! The equal to the Spyder, relatively speaking, in its strengths. Spyder (of whatever flavor) for speed, handling and style and the Wrangler for off road capabiity. Both at the top of their game.

s2ktaxi

i understood your intent but wanted to make it more obvious to the OP because of the naming used

German_Saint

Cool good points. I'm talking about the Porsche Boxster Spyder. I don't like the writing on the trunk and I like writing it out myself even less.

Underblu

I appreciate limited production run open top Porsches like the 997 Speedster, etc.,

However mine was a response is to an earlier post that seemed dismissive of folks wanting a more practical roof system and actually called for an even more complicated system. That somehow an arcane roof system or the effort involved is part of the raison d'etre of the Spyder. I think this is nonesense. That's my opinion.

but I wonder, How many Spyders do you suppose are being sold without AC and a radio. I'm sure very few if any. I'm also sure that if Porsche offered a Spyder with an automatic version of the roof there would be many takers. Does it mean that those folks are any less of an enthusiast. For me the Spyder is about a 3.8L Carrera engine in a mid engine open top setup that is under 3000 lbs. 100-150lbs for the roof I might agree with the point of a manual roof but 20lbs, id be surprised if Walter Rahl could feel the difference.

I would think that the 40lbs of unsprung weight saved via the PCCB would be more meaningful than the 20lbs of roof but I wouldn't post that true enthusiasts should only get the PCCB package.

Like I Said to me and many others this is the pretiest Boxster with the biggest engine and best suspension ever offered. That's the essence of the car not the manual roof. While the manual top didn't deter me I would have been happier with an automatic. Does that really make me any less of an enthusiast. I don't think so.

Marine Blue

I agree that Porsche's intent wasn't to create a complicated/arcane roof system for the Spyder and it wasn't the point of the car. The point as we know was to reduce weight and center of gravity while still providing a functional roof at the expense of convenience.

However it's hard to argue that the majority of customers and the motoring press felt the effort went too far and the roof is too difficult to use. So the new Spyder addresses these issues by simplifying the roof albeit at the cost of some increased weight. Fortunately the cars engine more than makes up for it.

Personally I would have loved to see Porsche go much further with the weight savings effort. Titanium exhausts, LWB's as standard, two piece roof, big engine and lightweight rear decklid. Fortunately for my wallet that didn't happen.

I know I sound like I'm obsessed with reduced weight but after years of mountain biking and messing around with lightweight components I am convinced that a small amount of weight reduction in every component adds up to a big difference in handling characteristics and overall feel. When you drive older cars that don't have all the safety equipment and added weight this becomes even more apparent.

sandy59

Porsche Spyder



Porsche 918 Spyder:

skiahh

Touche!

SteveInNj

I agree that if you pooh pooh the car over the roof then you do not get it. The roof is a piece of cake to operate and a non issue. All of the chatter otherwise is unwarranted and usually by people who do not have the car. If you find the roof too hard to use after the first say, ONE TRY, then you probably had trouble with lefty loosey righty tighty on the gas cap too. It is simple.

R8 vs 981 Spyder... why not throw a Ferrari or Caterham in the mix? The R8 and Spyder are completely different classes of cars.

ClintonM3

I spend in excess of 5 minutes to make my coffee in the morning. I measure the coffee beans. I grind the beans. I boil the water. Then I let it steep in a french press for at least 4 min. Press and pour.

Did you get that?

I also have a Keurig machine that can spit out a cup in 20 seconds, which I hardly use.

I for one, love the roof. I have the 987 Spyder, so it is the more "complicated" roof. I think it makes the car even more special, more unique. It fits the persona of the car. It is the definitive Cars & Coffee/ Sunday morning drive kinda car. Every drive should feel special, and opening the roof the long way adds to that special-ness.