Caymen 2.7 2015 go? - Page 3 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

A friend is inquiring about a 2015 Boxter. hes asked my advice not an expert in any of this all i know is they are nice. that's about it. I did suggest he look at last shape spyders or type R if depreciation is a consideration (is that reasonable advice?) but I also told him to buy a 4C so what do I know. Is a 2015 PDK 2.7 Caymen a good buy? his budget is 38-43 ish

thanks ill pass that along.

My opinion is the complete opposite. PDK has shorter overall gearing and one extra gear, plus the effortless and quick shifting allows you to shift down and get it into the power band where you wouldn't bother with the manual. "just stamping on the loud pedal waiting" may be accurate while you're driving it in automatic mode but who does that to have fun? 987 Spyder, R and 4C are all good suggestions.

anonymous said: [redacted] I'd agree about the sweet engine and perceived gutlessness but I'm with EricE and take a different view about PDK. The high gearing is the major reason for the perceived lack of grunt - and PDK does some way to redress that being 10-15% lower geared in the intermdediates. True if you let the PDK box do it's own thing in Normal mode then you will have to wait for it to decide to get in a suitable gear, but if you use Sport mode - or (far better) drive it in manual mode you have the advantages of the lower gearing and faster, smoother gearshifts. In short if you drive in PDK manual you have a more responsive and, in practise, faster car. Whether you prefer the greater interaction you get with a manual gearbox is a subjective issue that only you can decide. All that said I chose a 3.4 (PDK) because the 2.7 is engine-wise a bit of an all or nothing car -perfectly OK for cruising and great when wringing it's neck - the 3.4 does 7 tenths much better. Edited by bcr5784 on Tuesday 5th January 19:22

EricE said: My opinion is the complete opposite. PDK has shorter overall gearing and one extra gear, plus the effortless and quick shifting allows you to shift down and get it into the power band where you wouldn't bother with the manual. "just stamping on the loud pedal waiting" may be accurate while you're driving it in automatic mode but who does that to have fun? Agree, 2.7 is best with PDK- needs lots of gear changes which PDK does brilliantly. 3.4 and a manual makes more sense, more torque to deal with the high gearing and less changes needed as a result.

With cmoose. I guess a 2.7 would be akin to a old skool hot hatch in manual guise. Only with way better handling, mid corner balance and braking. I guess it just shows how different we all are. I drove a 3.4 987 Spyder pdk and thought it was total dog xxxx. You just sit there like a spare one waiting for the red line before you press a button. So uninvolving. Tried the manual and whoo hoo! So much to think about approaching a bend hot, having to bang in a quick heel and toe downshift before you throw it in. On faster cars like 400 bhp plus 911, the pdk is something else. Like you need the added assistance of the gearbox so you can concentrate on other stuff as its travelling much faster.

anonymous said: [redacted] Yeah I hear you and understand the logic. Having lived with a 2.7 pdk over 24,000 miles it really suited the engine; one thing that I really liked was being able to use 1st gear whilst in motion, not something I've ever felt comfortable with on a manual (any car). During twisty hoons it was great for firing the car out of hairpins and helped keep the engine on the boil. I did test a manual 2.7 before deciding on pdk- great gearbox but I felt didn't compliment the engine, take 10/15mph of the ratios and it would have been ace.

thanks guys. Interesting discusion pdk v manual

I think you can enjoy the PDK just as much as a manual, slonk around in full auto if you so wish, or set your pants on fire in full manual mode, going up and down the box with the paddles and wringing every last once out of the engine. What ever your friend decides they are fantastic fun, compared with what else is out there.

I rented a 2.7 PDK Cayman in San Francisco a couple of months ago, had it for a week and did a decent number if miles in it. Bottom line was that is was a fantastic car, louder than I expected but took me longer to get comfortable with than the 987 Cayman I've spent time with before, felt a bit more "at arms length". I can't see how anyone would be disappointed or dislike the car, it's amazing... But I'd always go for the S, the chassis needs a little extra shove to make it entertaining on the road (i.e. more slow in fast out on country roads) and the added refinement adds to that for me also. Stretch for the S if you can!

Although the high gearing has been alluded to, in case you haven't seen the figures, the manual car does about 80 in second and 115 (Mph!) in third - so you won't be doing much gearchanging if you are hooning it and want to keep your license. The (same) manual gearing is criticised on the GT4 as still being too high with a 3.8 engine. The other point not made is that the 7th gear of PDK allows for much more relaxed motorway cruising - though you will have to drop into 6th pretty often with the 2.7. But in the end it comes down to personal preference, factoring in the type of driving you do, and you should try both pdk and manual and both 3.4 and 2.7. Some (quite reasonably) have rejected the 3.4 on the grounds that it is too easy to get into license losing territory - it may not be hypercar quick - but 0-100mph in 11 seconds isn't slow.

bcr5784 said: Although the high gearing has been alluded to, in case you haven't seen the figures, the manual car does about 80 in second More like 84mph from memory just to be pedantic. The 115mph in 3rd is about right. Both quite depressing Some outfit somewhere is going to cash in on the silly 981 ratios and produce a reliable shorter final drive. And in about 5 years time, I reckon the pick of the Porsche sportscar line up is going to be a used 981 manual 3.4 Cayster with a 15% shorter final drive and 375bhp tune that the chap in Germany is doing for about 3K euros. THAT would be a fantastic motorcar

I don't have the figures, but when I went to PEC and drove a manual BGTS, I also took my 7.1 GT3 with me to use in the afternoon on their tracks. I did some very specific tests while there and max speed in 2nd (at 7800rpm) was to within ~1mph or so of what I could do in 2nd in my GT3 (84mph at 8400rpm). As I've said before, if I think the gearing on my GT3 was too long for road use, it's unlikely I'm going to think even longer gearing on a Cayster is going to be a good idea! I appreciate that actual speeds may be slightly different from indicated (and also vary slightly between models), but in reality we drive based on what the speedo tells us. And when I was wringing out the manual BGTS at PEC and seeing well over 80mph indicated in second, it was very disappointing. Ultimately we always say it's how the car makes you feel, and plenty of people are fine (or at least not too frustrated) with the manual gearing. Unfortunately, I'm not one of them and it helped me make the decision to go PDK route. If the BGTS had been going to be my only fun car, my choice may have been different as a manual will always give in a way that a PDK can't. But luckily for me I can get my manual kicks elsewhere and having a PDK car is a nice bit of variety.

I find my myself agreeing with CMOOSE on this...... I can remember in the past when car companies made sure that a car could do at least 62mph in second gear to keep the 0-60 times down. I can't help think that most people on a bit of a charge will be changing gear normally around the 7k mark and from memory the torque curve is best between 4500k and 6500k. In reality this would mean an actual speed of say 67/68mph in 2nd, although I agree that 3rd gear looks/feels a bit long at over 100mph which ever way you look at it. For me the main issue is the low down torque (or lack of it). If I 'forget' that I'm not in my turbo charged hot hatch and change up too soon, it seems to take an age in third gear to build up the revs to the point when things begin to get the least bit interesting. When the car is in the sweet spot, it's quick enough, but it does need the driver to put in a bit more effort to get the best out of it, but you also have to be realistic and accept that it's a 40k car and not an 85k Carrera S!!

See what you mean ref changing at 7k rpm, but the fact remains that the rev limit is 7.8k rpm and is there to be used, which it can't effectively be on UK roads. Otherwise they should have just kept the limit at a bit over 7K and been done with it. And at the end of the day we're just making excuses for the fact that Porsche gave it the silly gearing for emissions and performance restriction purposes and no other reason. ETA: ref low down torque, that's actually one of things that catches me out with the PDK - I'm so used to 6 sp cars that when I'm in seventh and flick down 3 gears for an overtake, I assume I'm in 3rd and am then massively disappointed by the peeformance until I realize I'm still one gear to high

Pesty said: A friend is inquiring about a 2015 Boxter. hes asked my advice not an expert in any of this all i know is they are nice. that's about it. I did suggest he look at last shape spyders or type R if depreciation is a consideration (is that reasonable advice?) but I also told him to buy a 4C so what do I know. Is a 2015 PDK 2.7 Caymen a good buy? his budget is 38-43 ish What does he want from it? What has he come out of? If his dream car is an Aventador, he'll perhaps want the highest power he can get, PDK or manual. If it's a daily driver, like my 2014 2.7 PDK, he'll find the auto box great for traffic, the PDK fun in manual mode with the gear lever, and sufficient power for quick overtakes and lots of lovely high revving NOISE from the engine, the latter of which you won't get so much of in the S as you'll not need to rev it so much. I tried 2.7 and 3.4 and chose the former as it was fine for my requirements, having come out of a 2012 TTS. He just needs to DRIVE as many different ones as he can, and then choose.

For the record the calculated speeds in 2nd and 3rd on (standard) 18" wheels (not allowing for tyre growth or minor differences between tyre brands) are 79.7 and 112 at 7800rpm (red line) at 7400 (peak power) they are 75.6 and 106mph. They are practically identical on 19 or 20" wheels.

DJMC said: What does he want from it? What has he come out of? If his dream car is an Aventador, he'll perhaps want the highest power he can get, PDK or manual. If it's a daily driver, like my 2014 2.7 PDK, he'll find the auto box great for traffic, the PDK fun in manual mode with the gear lever, and sufficient power for quick overtakes and lots of lovely high revving NOISE from the engine, the latter of which you won't get so much of in the S as you'll not need to rev it so much. I tried 2.7 and 3.4 and chose the former as it was fine for my requirements, having come out of a 2012 TTS. He just needs to DRIVE as many different ones as he can, and then choose. A3 convertible. Can't say for sure. He has had access last year to a an R8 and a California. I think he just wants a little sports car for a bit of weekend fun. I know his son is a Porsche fan. He has had a few family losses recently and can't take it with him was the only reason he gave me.

I'm just amazed that people still spell Cayman wrong

anonymous said: [redacted] It is for me unfortunately - I don't mind hitting 70 and some on NSL country roads, but at 80 and some you're getting close to ban territory and plod will be much more interested. Equally, a short blat up to 90 or so joining a MW or DC to wring out 3rd is probably not going to attract too much attention (I've been stopped for this but luckily had some understanding traffic police) given average speeds, but take it up to 110mph and things will be rather different

anonymous said: [redacted] Correct. I made the mistake once with a brand new Audi TT dsg when they first came out in 2003....believed all the hype 'not an automatic....best of both worlds' rubbish...never again. Well, not in a sports car.... Merc limo or SUV 4 x 4 perhaps....but I can't ever see myself wanting to buy one of those!! Edited by FrankCayman on Saturday 9th January 08:58

anonymous said: [redacted] That's what I love about my 2.7L 5-speed 987 so much. The powerband is only around 4500-6500 RPMs, and the car only gets to about 85mph at 6500rpm in third gear, so heel/toe'ing it around twisties is a blast. Of course, the chassis of the 987 isn't as refined as the 981, so the 987 probably feels faster.

anonymous said: [redacted] I wrote "70 and some" i.e. I try to keep it to less than 80 Prob should have been clearer. Also bear in mind that I live in London so it takes me 35 mins or so to get anywhere resembling a country road where you can give it anything resembling the full beans, and even then because it's where everyone and their uncle from London with a sportscar goes, there is quite a lot of plod around. That said we're hopefully moving to the sticks in the next few months so things should improve

I think he may be better off with a Cayman.

duder13 said: That's what I love about my 2.7L 5-speed 987 so much. The powerband is only around 4500-6500 RPMs, and the car only gets to about 85mph at 6500rpm in third gear, so heel/toe'ing it around twisties is a blast. Of course, the chassis of the 987 isn't as refined as the 981, so the 987 probably feels faster. I reckon my 5 speed 2.7 987 Boxster was my most enjoyable car....6 gears are really unnecessary. 7? Jesus......

7th is a cruising m-way gear though unless you have a GT3 so doesn't really count

Mario149 said: 7th is a cruising m-way gear though unless you have a GT3 so doesn't really count aaaaaahhhhh....overdrive!

38mpg at 80mph baby!

I'm torn re the 2.7. I love the engine. But I think the gearing just kills it dead. It does not have the torque to fill the gears, so it is actually not a fast car unless you are right at the top of the 2nd. The 981 2.7 is absurdly over-tyred, too, which makes it a very sterile drive. It does not have the power or the weight to require so much rubber. All that said, with sensible gearing and 17 inch wheels, it would be an incredible car for our roads. It would be my pick of the engines if the gears allowed it to sing more often. Strip out some weight and you would have something so much better than the GT4 for driving on actual roads with actual speed limits and other actual people! The 3.4 in the Cayman is probably my least favourite Porsche engine in terms of responsiveness, torque vs power and noise; but it's a seriously capable engine for that car (and all Caymans sound great). I disagree about the 2.7 being good for overtaking. I think it is seriously lacking in that regard, as it is quite weak at a lot of overtaking speeds: it isn't high enough in the revs in 2nd for low-speed overtaking; and you risk bashing the limiter for faster overtakes (where 3rd is useless because it only comes alive at far above most overtaking speeds). (I bashed the limiter in 2nd in my 997.2 S the other day, although the limiter is lower. Embarrassingly, I thought I had shifted into 3rd and hadn't... You couldn't make that mistake in the 2.7, as 3rd would felt like 5th with the 3.8)

ORD said: I'm torn re the 2.7. I love the engine. But I think the gearing just kills it dead. It does not have the torque to fill the gears, so it is actually not a fast car unless you are right at the top of the 2nd. The 981 2.7 is absurdly over-tyred, too, which makes it a very sterile drive. It does not have the power or the weight to require so much rubber. All that said, with sensible gearing and 17 inch wheels, it would be an incredible car for our roads. It would be my pick of the engines if the gears allowed it to sing more often. Strip out some weight and you would have something so much better than the GT4 for driving on actual roads with actual speed limits and other actual people! The 3.4 in the Cayman is probably my least favourite Porsche engine in terms of responsiveness, torque vs power and noise; but it's a seriously capable engine for that car (and all Caymans sound great). I disagree about the 2.7 being good for overtaking. I think it is seriously lacking in that regard, as it is quite weak at a lot of overtaking speeds: it isn't high enough in the revs in 2nd for low-speed overtaking; and you risk bashing the limiter for faster overtakes (where 3rd is useless because it only comes alive at far above most overtaking speeds). (I bashed the limiter in 2nd in my 997.2 S the other day, although the limiter is lower. Embarrassingly, I thought I had shifted into 3rd and hadn't... You couldn't make that mistake in the 2.7, as 3rd would felt like 5th with the 3.8) 2.7 PDK 981 suits me sir. Fast enough overtaking when you've only ever had an E46 330ci; TTS; DB7. Similarly, for me, handling and revs are sublime, comparatively speaking. I think it's just down to expectations? Edited by DJMC on Saturday 9th January 23:19

DJMC said: 2.7 PDK 981 suits me sir. Fast enough overtaking when you've only ever had an E46 330ci; TTS; DB7. Similarly, for me, handling and revs are sublime, comparatively speaking. I think it's just down to expectations? Edited by DJMC on Saturday 9th January 23:19 Suspect it's a bit more than expectations. PDK gearing is lower for a start- so that helps - and while I don't mind an upshift with PDK while overtaking - because the change is so quick, I'd be more reluctant with a manual with a relatively slow cross-gate change into third.

Have a 2.7 manual so might be biased but I did try manual and auto 2.7 and manual 3.4. The 2.7 needs to be worked harder and is a bit more effort in traffic. The 2.7 actually works quite well for me as a daily driver, in normal traffic I keep it below 3.5k and avoid too much speeding but if I want to go then it has a lovely howl as it revs past 5.5K and really starts to shift.

It's not. I usually do change up during an overtake (as there is no reason to stick at 6000 revs once up to speed). But NEEDING to change up demonstrates that the gears are not well-suited to our roads. In an ideal world, wouldn't you want your gears to give you increments of fast acceleration that fit well with executing overtakes at normal road speeds? A car that is ballistic from 40-80 in 3rd, for example, would be very well suited to our roads. To be fair, I would like lots of short intermediate gears, so I would prefer a car that DID require mid-overtake shifts. I imagine most people would see having to change up mid-overtake as a bit annoying, though, given that most people find overtaking a bit taxing. I don't so would prefer to have short gears even it means changing up at inconvenient times. I think the 2.7 is, despite the gearing, nice for a weekend blast. But most of my fun journeys are long and involve a lot of overtaking, which makes me want a 3rd gear that can be used on our roads without risking your licence.

anonymous said: [redacted] A smooth gearchange (as opposed to a neck snapping one) will cost you a second or so of lost acceleration, so it's often not worth doing. Of course if you are not bothered about smoothness then you can make sensible gains - but you'll still probably lose half second unless you have no consideration for your drivetrain. And yes I do (quite often) change gear when overtaking in a manual car but as I said I am MORE RELUCTANT to with a manual car than PDK. It is simply common sense logic.

anonymous said: [redacted] Why is why such long gears are a nightmare, especially if there is not enough torque to fill the intermediate gears and so make them usable for fast driving. On proper roads, I found myself driving mostly in 2nd in the 2.7, barely changing gear at all except to grab a cruising gear for very long straight bits; whereas I can happily change between 2, 3 and even 4 on the same roads in the 997 S (slightly shorter gears and more torque). I love a screamer, but even I felt a bit of a tit driving along in the same gear for minutes on end. I think someone used to modern sports cars (especially with turbos) would find the 2.7 slow. I love the engine, but the gears are very badly suited to its zingy power delivery.

All quick back road driving is 2nd, 3rd and occasional 4th for me. 3rd will hit triple figures. Sometimes drop to 1st for very sharp bends.

anonymous said: [redacted] To put it in context the difference between a 20 mph increment in the upper reaches of second and the same increment in third in an S (I don't have figures for a standard car) is about 1 second. So, if you take a second over a gearchange there is actually little point in starting in second and then changing into third for most overtaking manoeuvres. I trust you have data logs to demonstrate how quick and smooth you are - I have access to plenty which show they are rarely as quick as people might think on track let alone on the road. If you find it fun fine - but don't delude yourself that the gains are always that great.

anonymous said: [redacted] Clearly you don't have the logs.... I suggest you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shift_time it quotes across gate gear shift times as 1-2 seconds and 0.5 to 1 fore and aft times. I didn't need to read it - but clearly you do. Edited by bcr5784 on Sunday 10th January 16:25 Edited by bcr5784 on Sunday 10th January 16:37

anonymous said: [redacted] Sorry Moose, I have this unfortunate habit of introducing facts and logic into what ought to be an emotional debate. Blame my scientific training.

bcr5784 said: Blame my scientific training. Is that the same training that has created the 'global warming' phenomenon?

anonymous said: [redacted] That is because logic is a foreign country to you. If you don't see that the time a gearchange takes is highly relevant on FAST cars as to whether it makes sense (logically) to use one gear or two when overtaking then I really can't help you. If you want to - because you like it - fine. Just don't try to defend it on a rational basis - and don't suggest it's me that is the muppet when you are the quarter whit.

anonymous said: [redacted] Can't be bothered to respond to such drivel - I won't respond either to the your (inevitable) response to this non-statement. As usual, you will just HAVE to have the last word,

well guys, as much as I like a good argument it was all for naught. hes buying a 14 plate R8

manual. I did suggest a R8 manual although slightly older as something that may hold value as all mid engined cars in future will be paddle so may he did listen a bit to me

The fool just let me drive it.What was he thinking.what a machine I could get used to one of those.

im sure it would. not been driving mine through health. no track days for years bike sold years ago so it was a bit of a shock when I booted it for safety reasons. would do me very nicely think id s t myself in a v10