986 to 996 - Page 1 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

I’d like the thoughts of anyone who’s made the change from Boxster to 911 but specifically 986 to 996. I love my Boxster which is an immaculate, low mileage example, however, despite never driven a 996, I have a hankering for an original 3.4 example. Anyone on here made the move? I think the move away from an open top car would hurt most as I don’t want a convertible 996.

Don't think anyone can help you, it's a personal preference thing. I've seen people comment that they found the 996 well worth the change, others that they've regretted it and discovered they preferred the way the 986 drives. A quick drive in a 996 would probably help you decide which camp you're likely to fall into. One thing is for sure, though. It's definitely harder to find a really clean, low mile 996 C2 than a really clean, low mile 986.

I have both. What do you need to know?

ATM said: I have both. What do you need to know? Maybe if you had to keep one, what would it be? I like the thought of an early 996 but think I’m maybe just getting caught up in the 911 hype. I had a great day out yesterday in my 986 and I’m now not sure how or if it would have been enhanced by a 996.

I've owned 2 x 996's (a 3.4 C4 and a 3.6 C2) and 2 x boxsters (a 986 3.2S and a 987 3.4S), though all quite a long time ago. The boxsters evoke the fondest driving memories.

Hedgeman said: I've owned 2 x 996's (a 3.4 C4 and a 3.6 C2) and 2 x boxsters (a 986 3.2S and a 987 3.4S), though all quite a long time ago. The boxsters evoke the fondest driving memories. May I ask why?

105.4 said: May I ask why? Roof down motoring and sweet handling.

ATM said: I have both. What do you need to know? Maybe if you had to keep one, what would it be? I like the thought of an early 996 but think I’m maybe just getting caught up in the 911 hype. I had a great day out yesterday in my 986 and I’m now not sure how or if it would have been enhanced by a 996.

Hedgeman said: Roof down motoring and sweet handling.

Owned a 986, have spent enough time in 996s to know it would really miss the noise and engagement of having the engine right behind my head. Also would really miss the rear boot on the Boxster. I know there's rear seat space in a 996 but for keeping bags etc safe when going from hotel to hotel on a road trip the Boxster can easily swallow enough kit for two of us for a fortnight.

pattyg said: ATM said: I have both. What do you need to know? Maybe if you had to keep one, what would it be? I like the thought of an early 996 but think I’m maybe just getting caught up in the 911 hype. I had a great day out yesterday in my 986 and I’m now not sure how or if it would have been enhanced by a 996. Difficult question to answer The 986 feels a bit lacking in outright grunt. 996 definitely has more grunt and you notice it. The 911 will always be a 911 in whatever flavour or generation you go for. It sounds cheesy but it does make you feel good knowing you have a 911. A boxster will never tick this box. Do you see what I did there? The handling is different. And you do notice it. 996 [especially an earlier one] does not want to turn in unless you lift the throttle. A boxster will turn much better on the throttle. However a 911 will grip much better once you apply the throttle mid or as you exit a bend. It feels Impossible to spin. So a 996 is harder to drive well and this makes you feel better when you get it right. Finally I'm over 6 foot and I don't really fit in a 986. A 996 will always win if you are taller. So I just don't know. And that's probably why I have both.

An option that nobody has mentioned... If you like the handling of the 986 but fancy more power, then a 3.4 or 3.6 transplant might work. Frequently done in ???? and documented in 101 projects. Edited by gsewell on Sunday 27th August 21:43

ATM said: The 911 will always be a 911 in whatever flavour or generation you go for. It sounds cheesy but it does make you feel good knowing you have a 911. A 996 [especially an earlier one] does not want to turn in unless you lift the throttle. Coming from a background of fwd hot hatches, when you say that, I actually wince a little.

gsewell said: An option that nobody has mentioned... If you like the handling of the 986 but fancy more power, then a 3.4 or 3.6 transplant might work. Frequently done in ???? and documented in 101 projects. Edited by gsewell on Sunday 27th August 21:43 Not mentioned here but popular is the 3.7 conversion. This isn't an engine transplant. Instead it is a rebuild of your existing with enlarged pistons. But expect to pay 15k for this. The transplant from 2.5 to 3.4 was popular in the USA when I had my first 986 in 2004. Because it was a relatively simple swap with the cable throttle cars. I believe but not 100% that other transplants get complicated because there were various generations of engine and ECU and you need to match the engine you are using to the donor car carefully. Don't forget that cooling in the mid engine cars is not as good as the rear cars. The rear cars have better air flow over the engine. The mid cars have a wall of steel between them and the wind from the front so the air only really tickles round the sump maybe. Heat is your enemy with these engines. If you were to get serious you could maybe use a 3.6 engine with enlarged pistons to 3.9. The 987 engine can go up to 4.1.

Thanks all, I really just need to drive a 996. The large engine conversion does sound appealing however.

pattyg said: II think the move away from an open top car would hurt most as I don’t want a convertible 996. 100% agree Some of the very modern 911 look OK in convertible but the 996 looks just wrong to me Plus all 4 seater cars with convertible roofs give awful wind buffeting at higher speeds with roof down For top down motoring it has to be a proper 2 seater