Cayman 2.9 - Page 3 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

Having been looking for a while now, I took the plunge & test drove a Cayman 2.9 a low mileage 61 plate just before Christmas , I really liked the car but had a few reservations & hence have not bought it yet. It had 19 Turbo 2 wheels which looked great however on the standard suspension I found the ride through town quite hard causing the rear of the car to rattle & shake a bit. It was superb on the 50 -60 MPH flowing country roads , on the Motorway around 75 - 80 a lot of road/wind noise around mid ships on the car. I intend to keep the car for 10 years & really would like to some advise, is worth saving around £12,000 more & to buy a new 981 2.7 riding on standard 18 wheels. Will the 2.9 be a more reliable lump than the 2.7 dfi long term ie in 7- 8 years time , I quite liked the 987 traditional handbrake & simplicity of the gauges. Having sat in the showroom 981 I found the more cabin more comfortable & I guess it will be more refined on the motorway & the build quality seemed better. It will be an only car which will driven approx 8 - 10k a year.

I find the 18's on my 987.2 are MUCH better than the 19's in every department but looks. Try and drive one, it may solve your complaints.

All received , I do like guards red looks a fine car .

My previous Gen 1 3.4 had PASM and 19" wheels and it was slightly too firm for me. I fitted 18" wheels and it was just about right. I've now got a Gen 2 2.9 with standard suspension on 18" wheels, and it is fine - about the same as the Gen 1 with PASM on 18"s. The Gen 2 Caymen were fitted with a slightly softer damper than the Gen 1 cars. When I looked up the options on my car, it was originally fitted with 19"s, so I guess the previous owner must have felt it was too firm.

I agree with cmoose, the smaller the wheels the better functionally. The 2.9 is not DFI though but it's IMSless. For me it's the sweetspot in terms of engines and VFM. I am gobsmacked how solid 2.9 Boxster and Cayman values have been over the past 3 years.

I think you should try a 981 too. Objectively it is a better car. It rides and handles better and wheel size isn't such an issue. Ride is really OK on 20" wheels and remarkably good on 19s, let alone 18s. As you have noted it's more up market inside. BUT steering feel has been lost and you might find the car less engaging - particularly at modest speeds where the 981 simply goes round corners with no apparent effort. Engine noise is not an issue at motorway cruising speeds in a PDK 981 (7th is much higher than 6th in a manual car) but tyre roar remains the dominant noise - to the point where it renders an expensive sound system rather pointless.

Thank you for your comments & advise.

I bought one of the last pdk 2.9 2012 before they finished. its on 18 boxter s wheels that it came with drives like a dream love the cabin, i wasnt a great fan of the new high centre consul, electric handbrake thing on the new cars so i bought the 2.9. You mentioned only 12k difference i assume a pretty basic car for that.most of the new stuff with decent spec is coming out mid 50k plus

I drive a high spec (19", PCM Nav, cd/dvd changer, Bluetooth, full phone prep, full cocoa leather interior, Bose, PDLS, cruise, heated sport adaptive 18-way seats, parking sensors, multifunction steering, special paint, exterior bits painted, extra leather bits/ aluminium bits inside, etc., etc.) low mileage 2.9, exterior/interior in excellent condition, always garaged etc., not a mark on it. Even the base 981 on 17" puts it to shame in every possible way. The new car may only be 3 years younger than my 2.9 in years released time but seeing it and driving it makes my car feel like it is 20 years old. The 2.9 although released in 2009 is based on a car that is now 10 years old the 2005 987. If I was buying a car today ESPECIALLY one that I would like to keep for 10 years I wouldn't even think of looking at 987's and this is from someone who loves their car and appreciates the significant price difference. I suggest you seriously start looking at 981s or you will regret it maybe not today but certainly sometime down the line. If you have to scratch a Cayman itch for a year or two sure a 987 would fit the bill but otherwise no way, sorry.

pugfun said: I drive a high spec (19", PCM Nav, cd/dvd changer, Bluetooth, full phone prep, full cocoa leather interior, Bose, PDLS, cruise, heated sport adaptive 18-way seats, parking sensors, multifunction steering, special paint, exterior bits painted, extra leather bits/ aluminium bits inside, etc., etc.) low mileage 2.9, exterior/interior in excellent condition, always garaged etc., not a mark on it. Even the base 981 on 17" puts it to shame in every possible way. The new car may only be 3 years younger than my 2.9 in years released time but seeing it and driving it makes my car feel like it is 20 years old. The 2.9 although released in 2009 is based on a car that is now 10 years old the 2005 987. If I was buying a car today ESPECIALLY one that I would like to keep for 10 years I wouldn't even think of looking at 987's and this is from someone who loves their car and appreciates the significant price difference. I suggest you seriously start looking at 981s or you will regret it maybe not today but certainly sometime down the line. If you have to scratch a Cayman itch for a year or two sure a 987 would fit the bill but otherwise no way, sorry. So you think the steering feel in the 981 is better than in the 987?

Apart from a handful ( ) of people on PHs, no one cares.

I truly don't have a problem with the steering on my 981. Perhaps it's because I drive the occasional BMW and hop back into mine and realise how much better mine is ;-)

Interesting comments. I have a 987.1 S and have driven several 981s, one at the PEC and one on the road for a couple of days. Each time I jumped out of the 981 into my car I though the driving experience was practically identical, it certainly didn't feel like jumping into an 'old' car. The brakes on my car are less servo'd and the interior is obviously older but as far as driving goes they felt very similar to me. Others may disagree but I certainly don't feel there has been a massive jump in 10 years.

anonymous said: [redacted] So true that. I really enjoyed the 987 and indeed it felt like a step up in many ways compared to the 986. But something got lost at the same time as the car got refined and "NVHed" to death to please the "consumer" and tickle their exposure to placebo. A certain rawness and purity kind of got lost. And guess what, exactly the same happened with the 981, it's the "superior product" compared to the 987, quite clearly. Does it make it the better driving car ? I don't think so, even if you can forget the on-off switch overservoed brake pedal (but who cares apart from a weirdo like me who do appreciate modulation, we live in a fairly binary world...). But I just got back into what the 986 2.5 MO30 felt like recently. It just happens to have a Toyota badge, how bizarre.

Have to say my favourite porsche was my 986s facelift, certainly from a driving point of view. I even perhaps preferred the cleaner look to the fussier newer cars. Got to say the steering was more sanitised even on the transition to 987.

I have a 987 Boxster 2.9 and recently spent a few days with a 981 Boxster 2.7 PDK which I did about 400 miles in. My Boxster has standard suspension with 19"s and I think it rides really well for the type of car that it is, certainly seems no different from my 986 with 18"s. The 981 is a vastly improved car in terms of the interior design. I'm still not convinced by the rear of the car, the bumper looks a bit too straight and high if that makes sense. I think the Gen 2 987's look the nuts from the rear due to the LED rear lights. Driving the 981, it felt slower with the 2.7 and PDK, you really have to rev it to get the best out of it which is similar to my 987 but the gearing seem to go on forever. I love the PDK gearbox, especially with a sports exhaust but i'm not convinced it's the right choice on the smaller engines. I drove it to London and back from Bristol and was just amazed by the difference in comfort levels. There is virtually no noise inside the cabin from outside although even though it did not have a sports exhaust, the engine sounded a lot louder on throttle than my 987 due to the way the engine noise is piped into the cabin. For me it didn't matter but for some people it may get a bit tiresome after a while. Speaking to the techies, the 981 uses a lot more VW group parts than the 987. A lot of the behind the scene stuff interior parts aren't up to the usual Porsche standards which means that they are getting a lot more cars with rattles etc. If I was in your position, I would look at getting a Cayman R. If its a car you are going to be keeping for 10 years then this is what I would go for. The extra outlay will be worth it in the long run!

giltranator said: The 981 is a vastly improved car in terms of the interior design. I'm still not convinced by the rear of the car, the bumper looks a bit too straight and high if that makes sense. I think the Gen 2 987's look the nuts from the rear due to the LED rear lights. Driving the 981, it felt slower with the 2.7 and PDK, you really have to rev it to get the best out of it which is similar to my 987 but the gearing seem to go on forever. I love the PDK gearbox, especially with a sports exhaust but i'm not convinced it's the right choice on the smaller engines! On the assumption the PDK gearing is the same across the whole boxster range, you'd definitely not want a manual 2.7 if you felt the PDK was too long! Manual will do 84mph in second at 7.4k rpm, PDK will only do 75. The BGTS I'm trying to make happen in the coming weeks will def be a PDK. The long manual gearing is a bit of a deal breaker for me even though I'm traditionally a manual person. Luckily for me, in this instance the PDK was the planned choice anyway given the other cars I run. If I was buying a BGTS as my only car and was after a manual, I'd be mightily hacked off

Mario149 said: On the assumption the PDK gearing is the same across the whole boxster range, you'd definitely not want a manual 2.7 if you felt the PDK was too long! Manual will do 84mph in second at 7.4k rpm, PDK will only do 75. The BGTS I'm trying to make happen in the coming weeks will def be a PDK. The long manual gearing is a bit of a deal breaker for me even though I'm traditionally a manual person. Luckily for me, in this instance the PDK was the planned choice anyway given the other cars I run. If I was buying a BGTS as my only car and was after a manual, I'd be mightily hacked off Have to agree. There is clearly some misinformation going the rounds (from Porsche not from you) about PDF gearing. It's now clear on the GTS that both PDK and manual use a 3.89 diff ratio. Porsche originally quoted that both PDK engined cars had 3.25 ratio diffs compared with 3.89 for the manual. That would make the PDK cars HIGHER geared in the first 6 gears than the manual. That is certainly not the case with my (Mar 2014) Cayman S. I am tempted to believe that both manual and PDK use the same diff ratio (3.89) - except that using GPS to correct the speedo readings on my car the calculations would lead me to believe the diff ratio was 3.7! It could well be that the rev counter on my car underreads, but I can't confirm that. However I AM sure that current PDKs are geared lower in the first 6 ratios than manuals. All that said I drove a 2.7 pdk and considered the ratios rather long - and bought a 3.4 PDK instead. I'm sure I'd consider a 2.7 manual geared definitely too high, and even a 3.4 manual longer than desirable.

Your opinion, fine. I love the PDK on my GTS..

anonymous said: [redacted] See what you mean, but let's not forget that the long manual gearing would also sanitise the 2.7 to a degree by taking the edge off the straight line performance (1 - 75/84 = 11%, so broadly speaking like running around feeling like you're driving 240hp rather than 265hp, probably exacerbated even further because you'll spend less time in the 4.5 to 6.5k rpm max torque band) no matter what the official figures say. And there's only so much more fun you can have with a manual IMO when you can't rev out 3rd without going over a ton. My V12 550 with an almost identical redline has shorter gearing which is a daft state of affairs Yes there's the point that actually stirring the box at 7/10ths gives you something more to do, but given that the engine needs to be revved to start with and you're down on effective torque, you're going to want to be hanging onto gears longer even when you're not giving the full potatoes. For me, it would all be a step too far. TBH though, it's a bit of a moot point for me as I wouldn't take a 2.7 in any guise - if I want to rag 270bhp and have it feel fast, I'll take my 993. I'm sure the 2.7s they are fine cars and great for people buying their first ever high end sportscar or used to less power, but in an age where, like it or not, big power is quite prevalent, a Boxster that is 20 years newer than my 993 and only making the same power strikes me as a bit daft. Yes Porsche have never chased power figures, and maybe that's always concentrated people's minds on just how good a steer they are, but I've always had the nagging feeling that with every model they were about 10% down on ponies to what they, at least IMO, should've been given the market and their price point. The recent 997 and 981 GTS models are the first time when I have thought "yep, that power is commensurate with the new price give or take a bit". A 2.7 with moderate level of options to give it a few toys, make it a bit prettier, more petrol-head focused and commensurate with its luxury branding, for low £50ks seems *awfully* expensive e.g. http://www.porsche-code.com/PFBM7WQ9 Edited by Mario149 on Friday 2nd January 13:04

Not to go off topic, but is the gearing of the manual similar to the 987? I find once you become acquainted with the ratios then it’s not really a big deal, it is however the first car I’ve owned where I frequently downshift into 1st when already underway.

anonymous said: [redacted] In truth I have not, but unless there is some black magic going on on Porsche are lying about power/torque figures and gearing, it's not a particularly quick car. A quick google suggests that it is basically no quicker than the outgoing model. You and a few others may be happy with a very basic spec which is great as it gives you access to a cheap good drivers car that you're happy with, but to my mind and I suspect many others, a poverty spec Boxster is not a "proper" Porsche as it's not a luxury item, as while it's pretty from the outside with minimal options added, it's missing too many things a modern high end car should have performance-wise and on the inside. If it was £38k on the road and included PCM, no horrible dash plastic etc and a few basic toys that other brands seem to provide, I'd be all for it. As it is, for that money, I'd go elsewhere new if I was just after driving experience, or go second hand. Conversely I'm happy to hopefully fork out £65k or so on a moderately specced BGTS which to my eye looks like a junior supercar with toys, luxury and performance to match. Good job we're all different Edited by Mario149 on Friday 2nd January 19:14

giltranator said: If I was in your position, I would look at getting a Cayman R. If its a car you are going to be keeping for 10 years then this is what I would go for. The extra outlay will be worth it in the long run! Is the Cayman R the apogee of the breed so far...? Seems it might be.

anonymous said: [redacted] Only going on what I was told by my local dealer techie. I think he was referring to the parts behind the dash etc rather than the things you can see and feel whilst sat in the car

Mario149 said: In truth I have not, but unless there is some black magic going on on Porsche are lying about power/torque figures and gearing, it's not a particularly quick car. A quick google suggests that it is basically no quicker than the outgoing model. You and a few others may be happy with a very basic spec which is great as it gives you access to a cheap good drivers car that you're happy with, but to my mind and I suspect many others, a poverty spec Boxster is not a "proper" Porsche as it's not a luxury item, as while it's pretty from the outside with minimal options added, it's missing too many things a modern high end car should have performance-wise and on the inside. If it was £38k on the road and included PCM, no horrible dash plastic etc and a few basic toys that other brands seem to provide, I'd be all for it. As it is, for that money, I'd go elsewhere new if I was just after driving experience, or go second hand. Conversely I'm happy to hopefully fork out £65k or so on a moderately specced BGTS which to my eye looks like a junior supercar with toys, luxury and performance to match. Good job we're all different Edited by Mario149 on Friday 2nd January 19:14 Sure is. In the past Porsches were sensible, reliable, everyday performance cars. I would hope that definition would still hold. In the Ferrari world there WAS a body of opinion that a REAL Ferrari had 12 cylinders. In the Porsche world there IS a body of opinion that a REAL Porsche is a 911. I sincerely hope that we haven't got to the position where a REAL Porsche has to have 18-way electric seats! All that said I'm not convinced that the Cayster is really that good VALUE. Yes (I think) its the best sports car at the price BUT value? I never thought I would hold up BMW as an example of good value, but consider: A BMW M135i has far more performance than a standard Cayman, as much in the real world as the S, more kit than either and 5 seats for £10k less than a Cayman, £20k less than an S. An M3 costs the same as a GTS and has much more grunt, kit and seats. Which is better value?

anonymous said: [redacted] I can't really live with it either !! It's not pleasant, it's gruff, it sounds carp and it's bizarrely mapped. But then again, I open the bonnet and at least it's compact and ridiculously low and not much else could fit in there in any direction and I kind of understand and accept the compromise...which in turn allows me resolve the impossible equation of 1 car = track and daily.

anonymous said: [redacted] PCM isn't bad, it's not great value for money, but not bad. Extended leather isn't that pricey true, but I don't think I don't a Porsche should be available with a plastic dashboard, it's f-ing naff on a car that's part of a brand flogged mercilessly as high end, especially when everyone nowadays is at pains to point out that the Boxster/Cayman is no longer in the shadow of the 911. You may consider it ticking off arbitrary consumerist items, but I would suggest that the majority of others, even on PH, consider that a luxury car, sportscar or not, should have at least some of these items as standard. I think the number of people that genuinely rejoice in the fact that they can order a Boxster/Cayman with a plastic dash, no sat nav and 18" wheels to save 10kg is rather small. If someone is that concerned with how a car drives, I suspect they're buying the wrong car. It's not a cheap car for what it does even in basic form, so it shouldn't ever look or feel like corners have been cut, even in basic form IMO. The funny thing is, taking leather interior as an example, I would have thought that the extra factory faff involved in setting up infrastructure to allow giving the option of a plastic dashboard to scoop the extra fraction of people for whom it's unavailability would be a deal breaker come purchase time would more than make up for if they just made it standard, added say 75% of its price to the base cost and picked up the few extra punters who loved the idea of a entry level car but thought the interior looked too cheap for a Porsche. But I guess there's a higher issue involved, probably a marketing one of being able to say you can buy a Porsche for less than £39k which in reality almost no-one ever would. Edited by Mario149 on Saturday 3rd January 11:41

anonymous said: [redacted] Look, I could have bought any of these 3 and chose the Cayman because I believed I'd prefer driving it - but that doesn't mean I'm blind to the VFM argument. If you want the cheapest driving fun get a Caterham. I doubt you would because, like me, your lifestyle choice means the Cayman is a better COMPROMISE. But for unadulterated driving pleasure it's a Caterham for me - which is why I will hire one for track days from time to time. Indeed, if I could get my other half to drive (or at least be a passenger) in a Caterham, an M135i AND a Supersport R for £50k (in total) would be a much better (more fun AND more versatile) choice for me.

anonymous said: [redacted] But it hasn't got anything like the performance of a Base 981. Even the petrol is a long long way off, so that argument simply doesn't hold water. Now a hot Megan or Leon (or M135i) do have comparable performance and so the VFM argument does hold - it may not be YOUR preferred choice (or mine), but that is because you are ignoring (as I am) the VFM argument. I could argue (but won't) that a Caterham Supersport R is FAR FAR better value than a Cayman S (more fun less money) - but that is ignoring the practicality and kit argument.

anonymous said: [redacted] Are you seriously suggesting that a Caterham and the hottest of Meganes aren't (extremely) enjoyable to drive? (you can have both for 50k) I can only assume you haven't driven either.

As a drivers car the base spec is fine. If for some reason you want more performance and luxury 'because it's a Porsche', then so be it, get the faster one. I grow tired of this ever growing trend of cars needing to go even faster (more easily) than the outgoing models. More grip, more electronics (and I very much count PDK), more speed. All of which moves the performance envelope so far beyond what is sane on a road that driving them on a road becomes dull unless you're driving like a psychopath. Tried a 981 Boxster S PDK, I wouldn't swap my old 987 Cayman for it. Massively faster in every respect though it was. Nice roof though. As people say though, different strokes for different folks. Nice that Porsche, at leasts with the 981 range, still cater for these differing tastes. It's not likely to continue though, which is a shame. EDIT after reading more of the exchange - The Caterham argument is valid. But again it all comes down to where the performance envelope is. A Superlight for example I consider the best all round Caterham ever made. Basically the balance of that thing is utterly perfect and as long as you don't over tyre it with R400 wheels and CR500s, it's handling is VERY lively even at low speeds. Great fun everywhere. However when you start pushing a Caterfield with 200+hp around on the road with the above wheel / tyre combo on, you move where that playfulness is way up the speed range and you're back to driving it like a psychopath. Now a fast Caterham can be enjoyed at low speeds too, but I'd argue that you'd have more fun with a Superlight driving it at 60% on the roads than you would be with an R500 driving at 20% on the roads. This is what I'm talking about. It's usable performance / handling that's applicable to road use. Which is why I also believe that the 160R will probably be the best road Caterham that they currently make. A car I suspect you can get close to using 100% of it's performance on a road without breaking the speed limit. Again, the base model and again it appeals more to me as a road car than a faster alternative. Edited by juansolo on Saturday 3rd January 15:24

So it's the brakes that are rubbish on the 981 now, is it? If I hadn't covered 40K miles in my 981 and know what a superb car it is, I would read Pistonhead Porsche forum and think they were a bag of s te. Glad I make my own mind up rather than listen to 'test pilots' who thrash them around for a couple of days, but don't actually live with them. How silly of Porsche to make modern cars...they should really have stopped at the 986. I must hound a second hand car dealer for an extended test drive in a 986 to see just how much better they are....smelling of an old shiny leathered dash should enhance the experience no end.....

anonymous said: [redacted] Your facts always help me, Cmoose!!!

juansolo said: As a drivers car the base spec is fine. If for some reason you want more performance and luxury 'because it's a Porsche', then so be it, get the faster one. I grow tired of this ever growing trend of cars needing to go even faster (more easily) than the outgoing models. More grip, more electronics (and I very much count PDK), more speed. All of which moves the performance envelope so far beyond what is sane on a road that driving them on a road becomes dull unless you're driving like a psychopath. Tried a 981 Boxster S PDK, I wouldn't swap my old 987 Cayman for it. Massively faster in every respect though it was. Nice roof though. As people say though, different strokes for different folks. Nice that Porsche, at leasts with the 981 range, still cater for these differing tastes. It's not likely to continue though, which is a shame. EDIT after reading more of the exchange - The Caterham argument is valid. But again it all comes down to where the performance envelope is. A Superlight for example I consider the best all round Caterham ever made. Basically the balance of that thing is utterly perfect and as long as you don't over tyre it with R400 wheels and CR500s, it's handling is VERY lively even at low speeds. Great fun everywhere. However when you start pushing a Caterfield with 200+hp around on the road with the above wheel / tyre combo on, you move where that playfulness is way up the speed range and you're back to driving it like a psychopath. Now a fast Caterham can be enjoyed at low speeds too, but I'd argue that you'd have more fun with a Superlight driving it at 60% on the roads than you would be with an R500 driving at 20% on the roads. This is what I'm talking about. It's usable performance / handling that's applicable to road use. Which is why I also believe that the 160R will probably be the best road Caterham that they currently make. A car I suspect you can get close to using 100% of it's performance on a road without breaking the speed limit. Again, the base model and again it appeals more to me as a road car than a faster alternative. Edited by juansolo on Saturday 3rd January 15:24 Odd as it may seem as a 981 PDK Caterham S owner - I agree with a lot of what you say, but perhaps for slightly different reasons. I agree a Supersport is a sweet spot for the road (a bit short on top speed on the track though) . But it has at sensible speeds similar performance to a Cayman - both in a straight line and around corners. The difference? A Caterham talks to you all the time, even well below the limit. So you feel part of the process rather than an admiring bystander. A manual gearbox may give you something to do in the meantime, but given the long ratios, not that much. A bit of an exaggeration for effect, sure, but you get the drift. It's not that the Cayman is too capable, just that it doesn't tell you what it's doing until you are going somewhere near the limit. If it had more feel through the steering I think it would be fine, and more enjoyable more of the time. I don't think it's too fast on acceleration in a straight line - even the PDK has long ratios - its much more natural to rev the nuts off a Caterham and use all the performance because of it's low gearing. I suppose it's what you're used to. To put that in context bikes are, I think, needlessly fast and it DOES spoils the experience for me. 25 years ago there used to be bikes (250 two strokes!) which were ONLY as quick as an S to 100mph. These have gone. Now any sports 600 (let alone 1000) will get to a 100 in little more than half the time.

bcr5784 said: Odd as it may seem as a 981 PDK Caterham S owner Now THAT is a car I'd like to try! In purest driving terms, on the road, I still think there's little to touch an S1 Elise. It has everything, the feedback of a Caterham, but a roof and doors and decent ride Caterhams will always be (dry) weekend only cars. Caymans are more dailies that can be fun when you get up them. But they'll never have the feedback of either the Lotus or Caterham. They're just too big, heavy and full of things to make your journey more pleasant. Like roofs that work and things like that. Edited by juansolo on Saturday 3rd January 20:41

juansolo said: Now THAT is a car I'd like to try! In purest driving terms, on the road, I still think there's little to touch an S1 Elise. It has everything, the feedback of a Caterham, but a roof and doors and decent ride Caterhams will always be (dry) weekend only cars. Caymans are more dailies that can be fun when you get up them. But they'll never have the feedback of either the Lotus or Caterham. They're just too big, heavy and full of things to make your journey more pleasant. Like roofs that work and things like that. Edited by juansolo on Saturday 3rd January 20:41 Wuss! Used a Caterham sans windscreen, or heater as a daily all-weather driver for a year. Luxury compared with a bike (but you do look a bit of a berk with a helmet on). Had an S1 Elise also - great car too, but did actually prefer the Caterham, though a close call.

On my third Boxster/Cayman now. Just got a new 981 Cayman and tend to cover about 20k miles per year. Only comment is that Frank Cayman is spot on.

miroku said: On my third Boxster/Cayman now. Just got a new 981 Cayman and tend to cover about 20k miles per year. Only comment is that Frank Cayman is spot on.

anonymous said: [redacted] Would be interesting to see the numbers though. anonymous said: [redacted] If you're solely about the mass produced new car driving experience without too much comfort/reliability/build quality compromise, I would say so yes. But then following that logic they should offer it with cloth seats, plastic everywhere and a manual roof for £30k which I imagine would suit you perfectly because of your priorities. But they don't offer it like that because while the cars are mass produced, they're still a luxury brand and they need to charge a certain amount to maintain that image. As such I, and I suspect a lot of Porsche punters, just think that for certain options in their range, especially at the lower end of their scale, they have it slightly wrong in that they go too low.

anonymous said: [redacted] I'm not convinced of that. They are hugely successful (profitable) because of the SUVs, not the sports cars. Indeed I think their pricing is somewhat bizarre. The first issue is the cost of extras. They are almost the last manufacturer who charge inflated extra charges for things that most would expect as standard in far cheaper cars. BMW have finally had to give up on that pricing model. At the moment I would imagine a "typical" Porsche delivered costs perhaps 20% more than list just to kit it out with things that might be expected in rivals (Many will cost a lot more) . Compare the price of BMW 35iM Sport with a similarly equipped Boxster (let alone an S) and you will see what I mean (and yes, I know a Z4 isn't as good as a Boxster, less prestige and all that, but it is a LOT cheaper similarly equipped) The second is its relationship with the 911. Porsche have in the past been careful to position the Cayster below the 911 in power, finish and price. But the difference in power and finish has all but disappeared - and the GT4 will result in the 911 and Boxman ranges overlapping in performance at least. But I can't actually believe the Cayman costs significantly less than the 911 to produce. Not only which the press are voicing out loud that actually a 981 is as good if not better than a 911. Now for some the only real Porsche is a 911 - but that attitude can't last forever. So what's going to happen? I think 981 prices will be moved much closer to 911 prices (as has already happened in the States) and standard kit will be upgraded (or as has happened in the US the charge for extras will be much less - how about 14way seats + PDLS + Rain sensor + Seat Heating + dual zone AC all for 1170 DOLLARS!!!) But somehow I feel that is going to make a 981 more expensive rather than a 911 less.

bcr5784 said: But somehow I feel that is going to make a 981 more expensive rather than a 911 less. I lightly spec my non 'S' Caymans and Boxsters as I am not too bothered about many of the options, I then end up with a car that looks/drives the same as a heavy specc'd version at £20K more! I hope they don't go down this route!

anonymous said: [redacted] They are not selling 55000 sports cars in the UK - the US market is far bigger (5 times the size of the UK) where they are changing tack on pricing as I say. They sell as many 981s alone as total Porsche UK sales. Why is it that US Porsche sales are increasing rapidly (around 20% per year) whereas they are flat in the UK? Could it just be that the pricing model they use there is more acceptable to the market there? Or is it that they don't really care that much about the UK market and will rip us off as long as we will put up with it? Perhaps they have a better handle on pricing in the US than the UK, dear boy.

anonymous said: [redacted] I think it is pretty well known that the 9x6 cars payed for Cayennes etc, but given that Cayennes outsell 911s and Caysters by 3+:1 or so now, the bankrolling is likely to be going the other way

anonymous said: [redacted] PCM...pointless tat? Whats wrong with it? Surely for any car of today to feel 'high quality, sophisticated and expensive' would need some kind of navigation/music device control/handfree mobile phone control....??

anonymous said: [redacted] Positioned well from a business PoV? Yes, clearly, although we'll never know whether it's close to optimum. In the grand scheme of analyzing people's habits, Porsche don't sell many sportscars so it's never going to be like analysing people's supermarket shopping traits via a nectar card and to my knowledge they're not interviewing thousands of randoms about what they would and wouldn't pay for as options. Positioned well from a punter happiness PoV, less so. Arguably the latter is irrelevant, at least in the short term so long as people buy the cars, but in technological age where people are spoilt, charging extra on a high end car for some leather, some technology an average phone can replicate and climate control that even a bog standard cars for half the price have as standard is cynical and leaves a bad taste about what is otherwise a great product.

anonymous said: [redacted] Sat Nav and being able to listen to music in a car are consumerist features? A truly odd statement. Fair enough if you had a Lotus Elise....but a Cayman...which MUST have a leather dashboard??!!!

anonymous said: [redacted] The ability to listen to and control your music via an iPod with an integrated touchscreen solution that also enables navigation through the screen and a very useful selectable Binnacle is, I feel, a sophisticated and important addition to a modern Coupe which is my daily drive. To say the functionality of the PCM is, as you so eloquently put it 'piss poor', simply not true. If I am being a consumerist because I don't want to be faffing about with CD's and having suction pads stuck to my windscreen for aftermarket Sat Navs.....that's your problem! My idea of a true 'Sports Car' was my Lotus Elise which didn't even have a radio...pure drivers car...

anonymous said: [redacted] What do you think makes a 'Sports Car' sophisticated and expensive (apart from a leather dashboard)? And what is your definition of a 'Sports Car'?

anonymous said: [redacted] Well actually NO. Get your facts straight. Mercedes sell about 7 (SEVEN) times as many SLKs as Porsche do 981s in the UK. The fact that any road test you read will tell you that a 981 is a far superior car suggests that Mercedes are doing something right and Porsche something wrong. And a look at the pricing and standard specs will give you a clue what it is. And heaven help Porsche if Mercedes do get their act together on ride and handling.

anonymous said: [redacted] Thank you! That pretty much describes my Cayman 981!! My brake pedal feel is just fine too! Internet connectivity and high res screen...in a sports car??? I don't think I'd like that - but if that's what the average consumer demands!! ;-)

anonymous said: [redacted] Funnily enough, I didn't spec the PCM for the Sat Nav. I was fed up with the poor connectivity my 987 Cayman and Boxster offered for iPod Control (I love my music, so like to listen to it in my car...sorry, I know this shouldn't be allowed in a sports car). I hate fitting aftermarket stuff to my cars and like a clear cabin with everything hidden away....phones, iPods etc...no cables, suction pads etc... I think they make any car look unsophisticated and cheap. I have since been surprised how well the whole PCM works. The Nav has proved to be really good, the bluetooth phone brilliant and the iPod connectivity excellent. It all works really well with the multifunction steering wheel too. And it's just a small screen...nothing offensive sitting there all 'bling'.... Yes, I am well aware there are probably better versions offered in other cars.....but I can't do much about that, can I? The PCM does eveyrhting I ask of it in a neat and clutter free OEM way.....I don't think it's 'piss poor' The reason I've bought 3 Porsches is because they offer me all things....a sports car for the weekend...yet a comfortable place to sit in and travel for business during the week. It really isn't a problem ;-)

anonymous said: [redacted] Obfuscation - we are talking MARKETING. The Z4, Boxster, SLK, F-Type, Corvette (in the US) are in MARKETING terms competing - even if YOU don't see them that way. I could make equally fatuous distinctions - Is a Boxster a "woman's car" - many (NOT ME) see it that way? Is a 911 a GT and not a sports car? Surely the 911 cabs and targas are luxury cabs! The bottom line is that Mercedes with the SLK and GM with the Corvette (for example) far outsell the 981 which in price and the market's perception is in the same arena. They are doing something which (greatly) increases their market penetration. Now of course it could be that Porsche and (presumably) you are happy that they make higher unit profits at the expense of volume. Oddly some buyers (including me) are less happy.

anonymous said: [redacted] Funny we are thinking the same things. Perhaps you should try practising rationale debate it's a life skill that you might find useful. There is nothing factual or logical in your reply. On the one hand, in other posts, you extol the 981 as good value - and now you seem to be saying that Porsche know best about how to rip us off. Are they good value or are they ripping us off?

anonymous said: [redacted] Please READ what I said. I'll keep it simple for you just give me some simple answers to some simple questions. Yes or no will do fine. You have in previous posts said the 981 is good value, but you seem to NOW being saying that Porsche can charge the prices they do (cos they know the market much better than Mercedes, Chevrolet and me) and get away with it. Answer are they good value or are they taking us for a ride because they can? 911 vs boxster finish - just configure a 911 and a Cayman on the Porsche website - it's very difficult to tell one from the other. Absolutely no justification for a £20000 difference in price - perhaps why the difference is only $8000 in the US where they can't get away with it. SO Is the difference justified or not? Please no meandering diatribe - just 2 simple answers.

anonymous said: [redacted] I did say no meandering diatribe please, just simple answers to two simple questions - no point wasting time on you further.

bcr5784 said: Obfuscation - we are talking MARKETING. The Z4, Boxster, SLK, F-Type, Corvette (in the US) are in MARKETING terms competing - even if YOU don't see them that way. I could make equally fatuous distinctions - Is a Boxster a "woman's car" - many (NOT ME) see it that way? Is a 911 a GT and not a sports car? Surely the 911 cabs and targas are luxury cabs! The bottom line is that Mercedes with the SLK and GM with the Corvette (for example) far outsell the 981 which in price and the market's perception is in the same arena. They are doing something which (greatly) increases their market penetration. Now of course it could be that Porsche and (presumably) you are happy that they make higher unit profits at the expense of volume. Oddly some buyers (including me) are less happy. Except that the SLK starts at a lower list price, has diesel engine options to attract more people, have very favorable finance options to tempt people and have a higher footfall in their dealerships whilst people buy their other models. I don't know enough about the US market, but assume the greater value of the performance coupled with the status of the corvette in the States means that it's a go to car for many people who would never buy a Boxster or SLK or Z4. The Z4 and SLK ranges overlap only slightly with the Boxster, they're not really direct competitors... Nissan aren't exactly killing it in the UK with the 370z are they?

Porsche, at least for their sports cars, are absolute masters in terms of religiously applying a brilliant business model based on sound dynamic solutions (low COG, proper brakes, steering feedback, mostly NA - at least for the moment, relative low weight), protection of the brand, management of supply/demand, and maximising profit opportunities of course. I was looking at a the cost of a new base Cayman in white on 18s with just £1,300 worth of options and thought that you got a lot for your money actually, it was still under £40k with the symbolic discounts that I understand have become available... I can't think of a better package for that kind of money. And if it's too slow for someone for road use, then they probably need to look into advanced driving tuition.

nickfrog said: I can't think of a better package for that kind of money. And if it's too slow for someone for road use, then they probably need to look into advanced driving tuition. I often think the same!

nickfrog said: Porsche, at least for their sports cars, are absolute masters in terms of religiously applying a brilliant business model based on sound dynamic solutions (low COG, proper brakes, steering feedback, mostly NA - at least for the moment, relative low weight), protection of the brand, management of supply/demand, and maximising profit opportunities of course. I was looking at a the cost of a new base Cayman in white on 18s with just £1,300 worth of options and thought that you got a lot for your money actually, it was still under £40k with the symbolic discounts that I understand have become available... I can't think of a better package for that kind of money. And if it's too slow for someone for road use, then they probably need to look into advanced driving tuition. Let's agree that the 981 is dynamically, by some margin, the best in class, aesthetically, inside and out right at the top of the class and Porsche has more brand (snob) value than all its rivals. Lets even agree that the base price is very competitive. That (surely) being agreed why can they only shift 1000 units a year in the UK??? It's not a case of restricted supply - lead times are only modest. They MUST be doing something wrong. We may debate what it is - but doing SOMETHING wrong is surely beyond question. Clearly their pricing model works for you - and for a fair number of other people on the forum - but you are not typical Porsche buyers, the majority of whom pay for a lot of their extras. As you will see from other recent posts on this forum, for many of those who spec their cars up, the paucity of standard kit and the cost of upgrades GETS UP THEIR NOSE. It is bad marketing to upset your customers that way. I would suggest it is a major reason why the 981 doesn't sell better, particularly to those for whom driving dynamics are not the overriding consideration.

I had a 2.9 riding on 19" without PASM....drove and handled like a dream ..lots and lots of grip, what I like ...replaced with a 981 due to running up nearly 90K miles in it over 3 years. Here they are! (any excuse for some pics!!) Two guards together Edited by FrankCayman on Monday 12th January 17:03