This - Page 3 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

Trader says there "could" be a little wriggle room in the price. http://www.classic-chrome.co.uk/cars/porsche-boxst... As a complete newbie porker.....would really appreciatte any advice.

You could get a facelift for a similar price. No offence intended.

Orangecurry said: You could get a facelift for a similar price. No offence intended. You mean the 2003 model?

Orangecurry said: You could get a facelift for a similar price. No offence intended. Does he need it then?

I thought cars were sexless

Didn't they get a glass rear screen from 2001 onwards? There's quite a few on autotrader - with a few more miles, but IMO these cars need driving. Obviously no matter which one you buy, a borescope-included inspection would be a worthwhile spend.

mikal83 said: I thought cars were sexless MTR? (No, this isn't MTR.)

Orangecurry said: Didn't they get a glass rear screen from 2001 onwards? There's quite a few on autotrader - with a few more miles, but IMO these cars need driving. Obviously no matter which one you buy, a borescope-included inspection would be a worthwhile spend. "The model received a minor facelift in 2003. The plastic rear window was replaced by a smaller glass window" Wiki.

Orangecurry said: MTR? (No, this isn't MTR.) Thats not me, the cheek! My boots are burgundy.

its green...

So's this http://www.classic-chrome.co.uk/cars/porsche-boxst...

anonymous said: [redacted] Agree, but finding a pre-facelift 986 2.7 with leather is a tough job, not many of the earyl base models were particularly well specced, even finding one with A/C can be a challenge.

anonymous said: [redacted] Cmoose, that car actually has the pretty rare (and very expensive at the time) Sport Design seats and dash. It's actually a very cool, slightly squishy carbon/chequer plate effect, with the seat backs and centre console in a textured metallic paint. I really like it...and I'm used to staring at mine! OP, car does seem a tad dear, the colour and ambers dates it a bit IMHO.

anonymous said: [redacted] Does that help you out?

Oh dear.

anonymous said: [redacted] Cmoose Why are you so obsessed with extended leather? Its not that great really. I would assume it makes the car heavier. And thats a BAD thing. Wouldnt you agree?

anonymous said: [redacted] Fair enough, but I can assure you that I have no interest in leather. At all.

pre face lift better looking for me

Leather is neither here nor there for me either I have to say, but each to their own and if you like that kind of thing then who are we to argue. But it's certainly quite low down the priority list when considering a 12-15 year old car i'd have thought for anybody. I do think that's a pretty good price for a well looked after 986, I know my dad paid more like £8k quite recently for a very well looked after 986 facelift 2.7 with 45k miles although in a slightly more desirable colour (green Porsches generally don't sell very well) - but again if green is your colour then you're in luck. On the face of it without having seen the car in the flesh £6k is a pretty good price for a good fun car. 986s didn't generally suffer with scored bores, save the money from a boroscopy and put it toward fitting an uprated IMS bearing would be my advice, although to be fair that also is a fairly rare issue but peace of mind helps people who suffer with Porsche Paranoia - which is a far more common issue than either IMS failure or scored bores.

Leather is more of a concern on older cars for me as it can look terribly tired, but most concerning, it can make the interior smell horrible .... like...well...a dead animal! (had a 997 with full leather for 3 months...much preferred my 987 without). If I were buying a second hand Cayman, a 2.7 without any worries of bore scoring would be a deal breaker...not a 3.4 with the constant worry of bore scoring and a layer of leather glued to the dash. Back on topic....car looks great...but get it inspected. Edited by FrankCayman on Friday 27th February 07:12

anonymous said: [redacted] My point is Moose, when buying an older car there are more important things to consider than a leather wrapped dashboard and the prefect colour, having the best condition example I could find would be more important, and should be to anybody buying a 15 year old car. I'm not poo pooing leather interior, but in a car for driving it is so low down the list for me it becomes irrelevant, if I was buying a Rolls Royce then I'd expect leather. Like I said earlier if you're into that then fill your boots, for a lot of people though it just doesn't add any thing for them and I can understand why, no right or wrong answer.

anonymous said: [redacted] Totally agree. Would not have a porsche without it. I would discount any car without it on a second hand search. I think it should be standard on a premium product to be honest. Without it I think the interiors look very cheap. I regret not getting the leather sun visor option on the Spyder because the standard items are pretty nasty plasticky items.

DS240 said: Totally agree. Would not have a porsche without it. I would discount any car without it on a second hand search. I think it should be standard on a premium product to be honest. Without it I think the interiors look very cheap. I regret not getting the leather sun visor option on the Spyder because the standard items are pretty nasty plasticky items. I think where we are getting confused is this 'premium' view of leather. Its folly. I personally dont like leather at all, and I would rather not have it on the seats either, I just dont like it much. In fact, I dont think leather has any place in a car. But I accept that is only my view and many others obviously like leather.

I've got minimal leather in the R and thats the way it should be IMO, even the buckets seats are 'leatherette' and alcantara.

WOW.....Oh I'm the OP btw. Scored bores, had something like that many years ago after a visit to Cairo in my Aircraft Carrier! Full leather/part leather. Whats the differance on "my" car. Also one nice chap pointed out the ad said cruise but both he and I cant see the lower right stalk that controls it. On another porker website, a porsche "guru", said...." On cars of these age they typically need a suspension refresh, wheel bearings, gear linkages, tie rods to actually drive like a porsche." Is he right? And another..." The £1500-£2000 Topbox quoted was the average amount spent on the car in the first year of maintainance as no matter how mint a car is according to the seller, there's always 3 or 4 things that need sorting to bring them to A1". Now....I'm not a brain surgeon or an astronaut BUT buying a car that is being resold by the same dealership that sold it to the current owner many yrs ago, servicing it and then doing a (god knows how many "point" checks, MOTing it, new tyres etc etc. I would have thought that 1500-2000 etc to "bring it up to scratch" is a bit of a head scratch. Also IF they sold it on, after the above, and it turned out to be a complete lemon, why would they A, offer 6 months warranty and B, dare risk the chance of me crying loud and clear for all the hear and take the risk of a backlash to their reputation. Or am I being soooooooooooooo naive.

mikal83 said: WOW.....Oh I'm the OP btw. Scored bores, had something like that many years ago after a visit to Cairo in my Aircraft Carrier! Full leather/part leather. Whats the differance on "my" car. Also one nice chap pointed out the ad said cruise but both he and I cant see the lower right stalk that controls it. On another porker website, a porsche "guru", said...." On cars of these age they typically need a suspension refresh, wheel bearings, gear linkages, tie rods to actually drive like a porsche." Is he right? And another..." The £1500-£2000 Topbox quoted was the average amount spent on the car in the first year of maintainance as no matter how mint a car is according to the seller, there's always 3 or 4 things that need sorting to bring them to A1". Now....I'm not a brain surgeon or an astronaut BUT buying a car that is being resold by the same dealership that sold it to the current owner many yrs ago, servicing it and then doing a (god knows how many "point" checks, MOTing it, new tyres etc etc. I would have thought that 1500-2000 etc to "bring it up to scratch" is a bit of a head scratch. Also IF they sold it on, after the above, and it turned out to be a complete lemon, why would they A, offer 6 months warranty and B, dare risk the chance of me crying loud and clear for all the hear and take the risk of a backlash to their reputation. Or am I being soooooooooooooo naive. I think it's also safe to assume that a car of this age will need bits doing to it (he says just having picked his Mondeo up from the garage and stung £200 for a wheel bearing) - some people still get the hump when cars need fixing, my dear other half for instance... Thats not to say you WILL spend £1500-2000 per year on it, my dad's car hasn't required any more than 2 new rear tyres in the last 18 months and it's the same car and same mileage. Suspension doesn't really wear so much with age (apart from rubber parts perishing) its more down to mileage and the potentially the way it's been driven. Most normal cars shouldn't require a complete suspension refresh at 50k, maybe the tie rods as they are a known week point in the 986/987 but thats not a mega bucks job.

My thoughts...apart from changing a starter on my C5 2 yrs ago and an Alt on my old rangey 5 yrs ago, all I've done over the last 10 yrs on cars are servicing/tyres! I have asked the dealership several ?? on what parts have been renewed and servicing history/mileage etc..........

anonymous said: [redacted] Hmmm, I really disagree on the Sport Design thing. I think that it actually makes the 986 interior look much more modern than either the extended leather or standard plastic and is much easier to live with. My car is 13 years old now and the soft-touch stuff is in utterly perfect condition with no hint of cracking is discolouration. It's also very tactile and just a bit more "sports car" than leather. My only gripe with it is that the textured paint does not wear well, and I'm having all kinds of fun sourcing a suitable paint to respray it with. FWIW it does not photgraph well so looks very similar to standard. Sport Design was a £2000 option when new so "cheap" it aint...

Beanoir said: I've got minimal leather in the R and thats the way it should be IMO, even the buckets seats are 'leatherette' and alcantara. Leather makes no sense: hot in Summer, cold in winter unless you add seat heaters- (more weight and cost.)leather is also slippery in the bends. I specced non-s seats in my S so that I'd have alcantara. I think the only reason to have leather is that, with childmess, it's easier to clean. Or to impress your non-driving friends.

Have now in an MGTF and a Boxster........mmmmmmmmmm

mollytherocker said: I think where we are getting confused is this 'premium' view of leather. Its folly. I personally dont like leather at all, and I would rather not have it on the seats either, I just dont like it much. In fact, I dont think leather has any place in a car. But I accept that is only my view and many others obviously like leather. I concur.

ilduce said: Leather makes no sense: hot in Summer, cold in winter unless you add seat heaters- (more weight and cost.)leather is also slippery in the bends. I specced non-s seats in my S so that I'd have alcantara. I think the only reason to have leather is that, with childmess, it's easier to clean. Or to impress your non-driving friends. Have to agree. But we must be in a minority - I never saw a 981 without leather faced seats when I was looking - and it was an option then, but doesn't seem to be now.

bcr5784 said: Have to agree. But we must be in a minority - I never saw a 981 without leather faced seats when I was looking - and it was an option then, but doesn't seem to be now. Here we are, sir....my 981 which I specc'd with standard alcantara. You can still spec like this according to the configurator...

FrankCayman said: Here we are, sir....my 981 which I specc'd with standard alcantara. You can still spec like this according to the configurator... But it's not available on the S configurator now - but was 12 months ago as a costed extra. I was looking at both 981s and Ss then.

bcr5784 said: But it's not available on the S configurator now - but was 12 months ago as a costed extra. I was looking at both 981s and Ss then. Yes, so I see.....that's frustrating for any potential 'S' clients. The alcantara looks so much nicer than the leather. Perhaps Porsche will start asking a premium for Alcantara.....oh....they already do!!!

mikal83 said: Have now in an MGTF and a Boxster........mmmmmmmmmm Have you bought said Boxster??

anonymous said: [redacted] I certainly appreciate the quality of the 993. I just dont equate leather to quality. I am more interested in the mechanical integrity and uncompromising design. Leather and wood reminds me of stuffy and smokey mens clubs and Rovers bought for status. Its just not what I want in a Porsche.

mollytherocker said: Leather and wood reminds me of stuffy and smokey mens clubs and Rovers bought for status. Ha....that's hit the nail on the head for me. When I get in older cars covered in leather, that's exactly what they smell like....a crusty old mens club. A chum bought a well kept 993s and it still smelt new, like my uncles Ford RS2000 when he bought it factory fresh back in the 70's.

mollytherocker said: I certainly appreciate the quality of the 993. I just dont equate leather to quality. I am more interested in the mechanical integrity and uncompromising design. Leather and wood reminds me of stuffy and smokey mens clubs and Rovers bought for status. Its just not what I want in a Porsche. I think the problem for those of us who really would rather NOT have leather is that if we spec a car without it will make the car more difficult to sell later - because clearly most buyers do want leather. I have the same problem with PCM. It really grieves me to pay (in reality) £3000 for a Sat nav, particularly one without speed cameras - but it's my perception that without it it will be more difficult to sell later. I think 20" wheels fall in the same category for me - I don't want them, but clearly a large proportion of buyers do.

bcr5784 said: I think the problem for those of us who really would rather NOT have leather is that if we spec a car without it will make the car more difficult to sell later - because clearly most buyers do want leather. I have the same problem with PCM. It really grieves me to pay (in reality) £3000 for a Sat nav, particularly one without speed cameras - but it's my perception that without it it will be more difficult to sell later. I think 20" wheels fall in the same category for me - I don't want them, but clearly a large proportion of buyers do. I can answer this for you. Every option ever invented or sold has been a net cost that has not been recovered. Its a pure sales tactic that you need certain options to sell a car. Options are far more profitable than cars. Lets say you throw 15k of options on a new 911. I can assure you that at the very most you will recover 5k of that at say 3 years. You lost 10k.

mollytherocker said: I can answer this for you. Every option ever invented or sold has been a net cost that has not been recovered. Its a pure sales tactic that you need certain options to sell a car. Options are far more profitable than cars. Lets say you throw 15k of options on a new 911. I can assure you that at the very most you will recover 5k of that at say 3 years. You lost 10k. If you believe Parkers guide figures (the paid for ones) it doesn't appear to be quite that simple. They quote secondhand figures for Caysters with and without a wide range of options. Some options - like PCM appear to be hold most of their initial cost for quite a while. Other more esoteric ones don't. Obviously well down the track that won't apply, but if you only keep the car for a couple of years then the choice of options is quite significant in depreciation terms (if Parkers are right).

FrankCayman said: Have you bought said Boxster?? Not yet....just re read my post and I forgot to put the word SAT....into it!!! I had a converted rubber bumper MGB 2 yrs ago and the top of the windscreen was just about dead level with my eyes, grrrrrrrrrrr, in the Chim, I sat well down and was very comfortable. The TF was similaish to the MGB but a little lower and felt a tad tighter. the Boxster I sat in was a 1998 2.5. The top of the windscreen felt a little higher but further away. seat was right back and I wanted to push it back further but it was at its limit and I wanted to lower it but it was also at its limit. next stop, going for a drive in them, with OH

mikal83 said: Not yet....just re read my post and I forgot to put the word SAT....into it!!! I had a converted rubber bumper MGB 2 yrs ago and the top of the windscreen was just about dead level with my eyes, grrrrrrrrrrr, in the Chim, I sat well down and was very comfortable. The TF was similaish to the MGB but a little lower and felt a tad tighter. the Boxster I sat in was a 1998 2.5. The top of the windscreen felt a little higher but further away. seat was right back and I wanted to push it back further but it was at its limit and I wanted to lower it but it was also at its limit. next stop, going for a drive in them, with OH How tall are you, mate? I am 6ft 2" and found I 'just about' fitted in my 987's. I think the 986's are a fraction more cramped inside. Just have to make sure you set the seat to it's lowest'ish' setting (not right on the floor, otherwise it's uncomfortable!). The first few weeks of owning my first 987, I felt a little cramped, yet after a while I seemed to find a more upright position that actually was more comfortable than my previous cars laid back position. The 981's have loads more room....but I realise that is no help to you whatsoever! I hope you fit in it and like...the Boxster 986's are great cars!!

I'm 6'1 and have a 31 1/2 inside leg,, so have a slightly longer body, which makes me sit slightly higher. Will be out and about next week dragging OH around looking at cars....her fave dream day out!!! NOT.

mikal83 said: I'm 6'1 and have a 31 1/2 inside leg,, so have a slightly longer body, which makes me sit slightly higher. Will be out and about next week dragging OH around looking at cars....her fave dream day out!!! NOT. I see.. you should be ok then...it was my lanky 34" legs that were the problem! Happy hunting.....

The car I have been looking at comes fully specced up and is a 2.7...IYHO should I hold out for an S, (which may or may not come with same high spec) or is the 2.7 OK?

I personally would buy on condition/right colour and wheels that suit your taste etc. rather than worry about if it's a 2.7 or a 3.2...

My thought too, have you had a peek at the one that I like?

Thanks for that...appreciatte your thoughts. I loved the sheer grunt of the chim I had, even tho that sounds a bit topgearish. Its a combination of many things. I will not be blasting down autobahns, just quick blats around Cornwall and maybe a weekend or two around frogland. But it will be a fair weather car when the sun shines....that and my bike, (1300 fjr). Its not fixed that I will buy a boxster, I still intend to look at MG TF's for the small car funfactor...or another sports car if anyone recommends one within my budget of 6k....and NO I dont like mx5s/beemers........