Brave pants on - The 4K Boxster - Page 3 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

In a moment of boredom fuelled madness I decided to buy a 1999 2.5 Boxster for 4K from a Facebook ad last weekend. Owner had had it 16 years. 78k miles, reasonable condition for age, good history up till 6 years ago since then it’s only done 400 miles and had very little use. Rolled the dice, 5 miles after purchase the EML light on and its spluttering. Thankfully northway Porsche took a quick look and swapped a cracked coil pack which made it much better but still bad enough 10 miles later for another EML illumination, so I set off with trepidation on the 250 mile drive home. Super unleaded seemed to do the trick, so I’m presuming it was the cracked coil pack plus bad fuel. It got me home and is now purring away. Service pack, coil packs, fuel filter, two new rear tyres cost me £350 and will be fitted this weekend. Biggest fault so far is a errant car horn that sounds at random - but apart from that it it’s good fun. Updates to follow.

Fantastic work - I love stories like this! Way more than I dare do with my limited DIY car skills. Keep us updated!

Well done, welcome to Boxster ownership!

Yeah, it is brave, but hopefully the old adage that fortune favours such behaviour will work in your favour. Lot of car for the money. Good luck with it.

Heaveho said: Yeah, it is brave, but hopefully the old adage that fortune favours such behaviour will work in your favour. Lot of car for the money. Good luck with it. Certainly seems to be, feeling it’s right on cusp of becoming more of a classic than an old Porsche. Remember in the 90’s when 3.2 Carreras were cheapo Porsche’s.

Great way to learn to fix a 986 platform and alot carries overs to the 987. Work away at a cheap one!

Is anyone else now scouring eBay/marketplace ?

egor110 said: Is anyone else now scouring eBay/marketplace ? All the time, and for all kinds of madness!

Plenty of DIY help on boxa.net

Pics??

Another thumbs up for Boxa.net. Was always on there when I ordered a 987 back in 2005. Nice work OP btw.

Often the rubber bump stops on the steering wheel frame fail, so any slight knock or bump and the horn sounds. Plenty of DIY guides to replace it, or even try some rubber washers/bungs to replace the failed ones.

unclepezza said: Often the rubber bump stops on the steering wheel frame fail, so any slight knock or bump and the horn sounds. Plenty of DIY guides to replace it, or even try some rubber washers/bungs to replace the failed ones. Thank you, for the moment I just wedged a small bit of cardboard in.

Completed the charity County run today without hitch. It's growing on me.... Being totally honest always been a bit dismissive of boxster having had a few 911's,, tvr's and the like but its good. Steers, handles and goes well enough to be fun, engine smooth and soundtrack reminds you it's a porsche. Can't believe an MGB is twice as much, similar money would only buy a very leggy 1.8 mk3 mx5 - I think these are criminally undervalued.

I've just bought a 3.2 after years and years of looking and waiting. Great little cars. The 2.5 has shorter gears so there isn't much between them. I had a run out chasing a 2.5 tip on a boxa.net meet a couple of weeks ago and I was surprised how well it shifted. Pop over to here and say hello. https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

Been in for garage check over / service today. Got a thumbs up from garage, who said all good given age, no rust to pipes, no oil leaks, suspension all good. Fuel filter hadn’t been changed since 2007, explains why it was running like a dog initially.

Mental to think you can *still* get a N/A six cylinder mid engined two seat Porsche for that sort of money.

Brave man, great purchase! Having owned a 996 for 12yrs I would love an early Boxster to run alongside, such great value at the moment.

bennno said: Been in for garage check over / service today. Got a thumbs up from garage, who said all good given age, no rust to pipes, no oil leaks, suspension all good. Fuel filter hadn’t been changed since 2007, explains why it was running like a dog initially. Good news on the pipes and suspension, they're the jobs that cost. I bought blind a 987 2.7 tip four yeas ago. 130k, no service history, £4.5k. Probably spent most of the purchase price in the meantime, some of expected and some not!

ReverendCounter said: Mental to think you can *still* get a N/A six cylinder mid engined two seat Porsche for that sort of money. This! Sounds like you’ve found a good example - let’s see it!

ReverendCounter said: Mental to think you can *still* get a N/A six cylinder mid engined two seat Porsche for that sort of money. Yes, every time I look at a 986 cutaway you can see the design work that went into it and now they're MX5 money...there was a waiting list when they were new just like there is for a GT4 etc now..

£350 for two new 17” rears is very punchy. The problem with these, for me, is too fold. Parts are expensive and if you can’t DIY and are reliant on the skills of others, they are money pits.

highway said: £350 for two new 17” rears is very punchy. The problem with these, for me, is too fold. Parts are expensive and if you can’t DIY and are reliant on the skills of others, they are money pits. But they're not though. I put tyres on the back of my 996 for less than £100/corner - decent Kumhos that are (supposedly) designed for the 911. Parts available everywhere - ABS sensors, etc are cheaper than a 1 Series Servicing cheaper than a Kia Ceed. Insurance cheaper than a Kia Ceed. (Yes all on a 996 but will be broadly similar for it's little brother)

highway said: £350 for two new 17” rears is very punchy. The problem with these, for me, is too fold. Parts are expensive and if you can’t DIY and are reliant on the skills of others, they are money pits. I just spent £420. However that bought an OE service pack plus bits from Design911 - 6x coil packs, plugs, air filter, fuel filter, oil filter, cabin filter, plug tubes. Plus 2 x rear Kumho PS71, plus 10L of Mobil 1 - plus paid the local garage to service / fit it all.

Make sure you ensure the roof drainage channels are kept clear, that was expensive to rectify as it involved flooded ECU which knackered the hood mechanism. Other than that costs have been about £500/ year. Some parts are expensive, but many are average priced especially service parts. Insurance is reasonable (£175/ yr on a standard policy inc business use) and depreciation is negative in the current market. Cost more than average? Probably. Money pit? Definitely not.

highway said: £350 for two new 17” rears is very punchy. The problem with these, for me, is too fold. Parts are expensive and if you can’t DIY and are reliant on the skills of others, they are money pits. IMO they are definitely an ideal car to learn DIY. Not a daily so if things take weeks who cares. Not a £60k newish Porsche you're too worried about.

soxboy said: Make sure you ensure the roof drainage channels are kept clear, that was expensive to rectify as it involved flooded ECU which knackered the hood mechanism. Other than that costs have been about £500/ year. Some parts are expensive, but many are average priced especially service parts. Insurance is reasonable (£175/ yr on a standard policy inc business use) and depreciation is negative in the current market. Cost more than average? Probably. Money pit? Definitely not. is there a good guide or can you advise where and how to keep clear?

Andyoz said: Yes, every time I look at a 986 cutaway you can see the design work that went into it and now they're MX5 money...there was a waiting list when they were new just like there is for a GT4 etc now.. That's a 987

edc said: Andyoz said: Yes, every time I look at a 986 cutaway you can see the design work that went into it and now they're MX5 money...there was a waiting list when they were new just like there is for a GT4 etc now.. That's a 987 Ah, early morning post without my glasses! Here's one. Essentially the same but you get the general picture. Lovely design execution.

Andyoz said: edc said: Andyoz said: Yes, every time I look at a 986 cutaway you can see the design work that went into it and now they're MX5 money...there was a waiting list when they were new just like there is for a GT4 etc now.. That's a 987 Ah, early morning post without my glasses! Here's one. Essentially the same but you get the general picture. Lovely design execution. Do they have a special department for cutting their cars into pieces like this?

apparently, yes!

highway said: £350 for two new 17” rears is very punchy. The problem with these, for me, is too fold. Parts are expensive and if you can’t DIY and are reliant on the skills of others, they are money pits. I'm no Porsche apologist ( anything but, I'm generally a Jap car freak ) but paying £350 for 2 17" tyres is just lazy. I bought 4 N rated 19" Goodyears for £630 fitted this year.

Have we got any pics of it yet?

Pic from county charity run we did in Sunday.

There are some budget Boxsters about, I just purchased a 2003 2.7 facelift for £3800, yes it has 135K, the coil packs are cracking, as are the top mounts. But it's a great drive for the money, has had a clutch change, doesn't leak and I'm finding parts are not that expensive when you look outside Porsche (e.g. Spyder Performance etc).

Forgive my ignorance, but what's the story with engine reliability on these early boxsters then? Same issues as the 996 and early 997s? For now they are looking quite classic retro - I didn't like them in period because they look like a bar of soap, but really digging the amber lights now!

bennno said: Pic from county charity run we did in Sunday. Looks really good

thelostboy said: Forgive my ignorance, but what's the story with engine reliability on these early boxsters then? Same issues as the 996 and early 997s? For now they are looking quite classic retro - I didn't like them in period because they look like a bar of soap, but really digging the amber lights now! The early 2.5 boxsters and the earliest 3.4 996 are the least risky engine wise. I'm not certain about the 2.5 but I know the early 3.4 had a different coating on the pistons which minimises bore scoring. I'd assume the 2.5 is the same. After the first 2 years - or there abouts - they dropped this illusive piston coating and started using something else which was not as good. The other concern is IMS which is less problematic with the earlier cars as they had a bigger dual row IMS bearing.

thelostboy said: Forgive my ignorance, but what's the story with engine reliability on these early boxsters then? Same issues as the 996 and early 997s? For now they are looking quite classic retro - I didn't like them in period because they look like a bar of soap, but really digging the amber lights now! I was exactly the same re thoughts on car. I'm told the 2.5 has a better dual IMS bearing than later cars up to 2010 and uses pistons prior to the problematic coating that's associated with bore score. OE grade parts quite cheap from design 911.

bennno said: Pic from county charity run we did in Sunday. That looks like a top buy for 4k.

bennno said: I was exactly the same re thoughts on car. I'm told the 2.5 has a better dual IMS bearing than later cars up to 2010 and uses pistons prior to the problematic coating that's associated with bore score. OE grade parts quite cheap from design 911. Mid 2005 on 987s reputedly have the larger dual row bearing, there's good info on Boxanet about this. It's the 3.4 987 that has potential piston / bore issues. The smaller engined cars don't suffer from this.

Heaveho said: bennno said: I was exactly the same re thoughts on car. I'm told the 2.5 has a better dual IMS bearing than later cars up to 2010 and uses pistons prior to the problematic coating that's associated with bore score. OE grade parts quite cheap from design 911. Mid 2005 on 987s reputedly have the larger dual row bearing, there's good info on Boxanet about this. It's the 3.4 987 that has potential piston / bore issues. The smaller engined cars don't suffer from this. This is what I read... ‘All Boxsters up to 1999 are dual rows, 2000-2001 are a total crap shoot and have to be pulled apart to determine which bearing is in them. 2002-2004 are all single rows. 2005 starts another crap shoot year where it can either be a single row, or the oversized non serviceable version. Again, the only way to know is to pull the car apart and look. 2006-2008 are all the non serviceable units’. Bore scoring seemingly 2006-2008 cars, not 2.5 / 2.7.

bennno said: Heaveho said: bennno said: I was exactly the same re thoughts on car. I'm told the 2.5 has a better dual IMS bearing than later cars up to 2010 and uses pistons prior to the problematic coating that's associated with bore score. OE grade parts quite cheap from design 911. Mid 2005 on 987s reputedly have the larger dual row bearing, there's good info on Boxanet about this. It's the 3.4 987 that has potential piston / bore issues. The smaller engined cars don't suffer from this. This is what I read... ‘All Boxsters up to 1999 are dual rows, 2000-2001 are a total crap shoot and have to be pulled apart to determine which bearing is in them. 2002-2004 are all single rows. 2005 starts another crap shoot year where it can either be a single row, or the oversized non serviceable version. Again, the only way to know is to pull the car apart and look. 2006-2008 are all the non serviceable units’. Bore scoring seemingly 2006-2008 cars, not 2.5 / 2.7. Sounds pretty accurate. The 3.2 987 which wasn't affected by bore scoring was replaced in 2006 by the 3.4....which was affected by bore scoring, apparently due to a change in piston coating and cylinder composition. There's supposedly a crossover point in the chassis number run during 2005 where they stopped using the single row IMS. My '05 3.2 falls into the latter, larger bearing category if you believe the story. Which of course, I want to.......

Heaveho said: Mid 2005 on 987s reputedly have the larger dual row bearing, there's good info on Boxanet about this. It's the 3.4 987 that has potential piston / bore issues. The smaller engined cars don't suffer from this. MY2006-on 987s have a 'large' single-row bearing. The only dual-row bearing fitted to any of these engines was dropped in 99/00, replaced by the 'small' single-row bearing. Anyway, 986 lumps are pretty reliable. IMS failure is a slight risk, but cylinder scoring is unusual enough in 986-spec M96 engines to not be worth worrying about. Wouldn't personally choose a 2.5 on the basis of reliability. The delta isn't big enough / clear enough versus the other engines. Would lean 3.2 as you lose out on very, very little versus the smaller engines, but do get some useful additional torque and the price premium for a 3.2 is pretty modest.

I bought mine two years ago for £2k, a bit rougher looking than yours though... (Same colour though) Worked through a load of issues slowly and it's just getting better and better. Drain holes are easy enough to find, my problem was the hood mechanism ate itself and the arms punched through the lining. New bits from breakers and now all good, I have put the hood in "manual" configuration though so I know it won't happen again. Geometry seems to be important on these, mine was out and it was destroying tyres / handling awful. Now rather nice. Next job for me is anti roll bar bushes as they are clonking away.

For drain holes, you can fit (I haven't done it yet) 987 covers to the holes to stop debris going in. They're about £7 from OPC

bennno said: is there a good guide or can you advise where and how to keep clear? Try this: https://youtu.be/Hz-C9pkMnDk

bennno said: is there a good guide or can you advise where and how to keep clear? Open hood about six inches, look in gaps either side and you will see the drain holes. Clear out rubbish, close hood, happy.

TubbyNorman said: bennno said: is there a good guide or can you advise where and how to keep clear? Open hood about six inches, look in gaps either side and you will see the drain holes. Clear out rubbish, close hood, happy. You can use an airline but most diyers use a trombone or camelback pipe cleaner. Run the hose pipe in and make sure the water runs through and doesn't back up.

It's easy, main problem is if you have an oak tree over the drive like I do. A normal size acorn is exactly the right size to get wedged in the hole at the top...