Porsche: 718 Boxster/Cayman News
09-08-2004, 11:41 PM
#125
Obnoxious Philadelphian
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Jersey
Age: 47
Posts: 5,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by majormojo
On the bottom interior picture, what's that thing on the right side of the console? Looks like a 1980's car phone...
Paging Zack Morris
09-09-2004, 12:41 AM
#126
Frozen Wannabe Oracle
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Age: 42
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lung Fu Mo Shi
Are they going to do something to give it better performance. It's been dog slow for years.
09-09-2004, 12:54 AM
#127
Registered AssHat
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Age: 46
Posts: 3,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Professor Gascan
The Boxster has never been about straight line speed, it's about balance, much in the same way the NSX is. Porsche claims the new Boxster will do 0-60 in 5.9, with the S doing it in 5.2.
09-09-2004, 01:16 AM
#128
Frozen Wannabe Oracle
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Age: 42
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lung Fu Mo Shi
I agree, but aside from braking, the competition leaves it behind. It just has no power coming out of the turns...actually it's just too heavy for the power.
09-09-2004, 01:39 AM
#129
Registered AssHat
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Age: 46
Posts: 3,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Professor Gascan
Which competition would that be? The Z4 3.0 won't keep up with an S, and may be a little faster than the base car, and the S2000 splits the difference (with a hard launch more than real world performance). I don't think the new SLK will be any faster, except for the SLK 55 AMG, but it will probably be quite a bit more money. The only competition that I can think of that will dust it is the Corvette. Maybe I'm missing something.
I'm not saying it's not fun, but a "roadster" of that size should NOT weigh more than our TSX by 300 pounds! It's obscene.
09-09-2004, 02:34 AM
#130
Frozen Wannabe Oracle
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Age: 42
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lung Fu Mo Shi
S2000 or a 350Z on a track (forget launches and drag crap). The S2000 has very high entry speeds due to its weight. The 350Z has the straight line power. The Boxter is both too heavy and weak on power.
I'm not saying it's not fun, but a "roadster" of that size should NOT weigh more than our TSX by 300 pounds! It's obscene.
I'm not saying it's not fun, but a "roadster" of that size should NOT weigh more than our TSX by 300 pounds! It's obscene.
I don't know where you get the idea Boxster is a bad track car. On the Nurburgring the Boxster S ran a 8:32 vs the S2000's 8:39 (all with the same driver in dry conditions). The 350Z Roadster is no track star either, with 3428lbs on board, it quickly overheats its front tires, not to mention that it's straight line performance is on par with the base Boxster.
09-09-2004, 06:13 AM
#131
dɐɹɔ ǝɥʇ ʇɐɥʍ
I'm in the market for a car like this in two years, if they increase the price much from the current boxster I wouldn't even consider it with the Elise around 
Edit- I hate to admit it but I liked the interior from the old boxster better, lets hope they used higher quality materials this time around at least.
Edit- I hate to admit it but I liked the interior from the old boxster better, lets hope they used higher quality materials this time around at least.
09-09-2004, 07:43 AM
#132
Bye TSX, hello domestic?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOVA
Age: 42
Posts: 8,552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lung Fu Mo Shi
I agree, but aside from braking, the competition leaves it behind. It just has no power coming out of the turns...actually it's just too heavy for the power.
09-09-2004, 08:30 AM
#133
Frozen Wannabe Oracle
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Age: 42
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by xizor
For reference see Best Motoring compare the Boxster to other coupes, the thing nearly gets lapped.
A lap time done around the Nurburgring (or any track for that matter), by a professional driver, in similar conditions, while still not perfect, is a better indication of each cars individual performance.
09-09-2004, 09:38 AM
#134
Registered AssHat
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Age: 46
Posts: 3,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Professor Gascan
WAAAAAAA??????? I don't know where you're getting your info from, but the Boxster is no where near 300 lbs heavier than the TSX. The funny thing is the Boxster S is 320lbs lighter than the TSX (3230 vs. 2910).
I don't know where you get the idea Boxster is a bad track car. On the Nurburgring the Boxster S ran a 8:32 vs the S2000's 8:39 (all with the same driver in dry conditions). The 350Z Roadster is no track star either, with 3428lbs on board, it quickly overheats its front tires, not to mention that it's straight line performance is on par with the base Boxster.
I don't know where you get the idea Boxster is a bad track car. On the Nurburgring the Boxster S ran a 8:32 vs the S2000's 8:39 (all with the same driver in dry conditions). The 350Z Roadster is no track star either, with 3428lbs on board, it quickly overheats its front tires, not to mention that it's straight line performance is on par with the base Boxster.
Either way, 2900 is way to heavy for the car.
The 350Z can slow down a bit to save the tires and still keep pace with the Boxter.
Any more, it's like the Jeep Grand Cherokee of roadsters for people with money for a 2nd car tat costs $40K. Everyone has them, and no one uses them as they should.
09-09-2004, 10:10 AM
#135
Frozen Wannabe Oracle
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Age: 42
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lung Fu Mo Shi
Sorry, gross versus curb. Oopsie. I hate it when I forget to read.
Either way, 2900 is way to heavy for the car.
The 350Z can slow down a bit to save the tires and still keep pace with the Boxter.
Any more, it's like the Jeep Grand Cherokee of roadsters for people with money for a 2nd car tat costs $40K. Everyone has them, and no one uses them as they should.
Either way, 2900 is way to heavy for the car.
The 350Z can slow down a bit to save the tires and still keep pace with the Boxter.
Any more, it's like the Jeep Grand Cherokee of roadsters for people with money for a 2nd car tat costs $40K. Everyone has them, and no one uses them as they should.
As for the claim that people with too much money don't use them like they should, you could make that claim about any new sports car. Most are bought by people who have the money to make it a second car, and use it cruising. Just because people paid less to own a 350Z roadster or S2000 doesn't make that fact go away.
09-09-2004, 10:10 AM
#136
Bye TSX, hello domestic?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOVA
Age: 42
Posts: 8,552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Professor Gascan
If it's the video with the 350Z, S2000, and M3, that should have been a Boxster S in there in the first place. Second, other than the excellent entertainment value, Best Motoring videos are hardly an exact science.
And the poll was based on price to power ratio I believe, and the boxster was the worst (hence first poll position). So it was the worst car in that race and the most expensive for what you get. I gotta go watch it again to make sure though.
09-09-2004, 10:54 AM
#137
Frozen Wannabe Oracle
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Age: 42
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by xizor
Definately not an exact science, but they have skilled drivers on a race course. The boxster not only started first in the poll, but finished incredibly far behind every other car. You can make even some tiny conclusions that the boxster was no where close to the competition. Even the driver said the car isn't powerful enough, you don't need a german test track to figure these things out.
09-09-2004, 11:44 AM
#138
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jul 2003
Age: 43
Posts: 5,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Professor Gascan
Like I said, it should have been the Boxster S in there in the first place. But it should have been apples to apples as well. The M3 should have been a cabrio, same with the 350Z. The S is a better track car than any of those.
09-09-2004, 12:09 PM
#139
Frozen Wannabe Oracle
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Age: 42
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ClutchPerformer
So you're saying that the Boxster S is a better track car than an M3 cabrio? I disagree.
The times I'm referencing are coming from here. About half way down the page.
09-09-2004, 02:33 PM
#142
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Second-generation Porsche Boxster, first official look - - GREG KABLE - - Source: Autoweek
North American sales start Jan. 15, followed by the Boxster coupe’s debut later in 2005. Starting prices are $44,595 for the Boxster, $53,895 for the S.
---
Despite its familiar appearance, Porsche says up to 80 percent of the ’05 Boxster’s components are heavily revised or replaced, although company officials admit many of the car’s crucial hard points have been carried over from the first-generation model launched in 1996.
North American sales start Jan. 15, followed by the Boxster coupe’s debut later in 2005. Starting prices are $44,595 for the Boxster, $53,895 for the S.
---
Despite its familiar appearance, Porsche says up to 80 percent of the ’05 Boxster’s components are heavily revised or replaced, although company officials admit many of the car’s crucial hard points have been carried over from the first-generation model launched in 1996.
09-09-2004, 02:47 PM
#143
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Fremont, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gavriil
Second-generation Porsche Boxster, first official look - - GREG KABLE - - Source: Autoweek
North American sales start Jan. 15, followed by the Boxster coupe’s debut later in 2005. Starting prices are $44,595 for the Boxster, $53,895 for the S.
---
Despite its familiar appearance, Porsche says up to 80 percent of the ’05 Boxster’s components are heavily revised or replaced, although company officials admit many of the car’s crucial hard points have been carried over from the first-generation model launched in 1996.
North American sales start Jan. 15, followed by the Boxster coupe’s debut later in 2005. Starting prices are $44,595 for the Boxster, $53,895 for the S.
---
Despite its familiar appearance, Porsche says up to 80 percent of the ’05 Boxster’s components are heavily revised or replaced, although company officials admit many of the car’s crucial hard points have been carried over from the first-generation model launched in 1996.
09-11-2004, 04:21 PM
#145
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by runnerX
so we can expect basic Boxster S convertible to be somewhere around $60k.. sigh.. for the price I would rather get SLK55 AMG since it is also priced around $60k.
And have double the torque and a hard convertible top. Plus the airscarf
