MR2 to a Boxter - is it worth it? - Page 2 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

I have a subtly modified MR2 roadster. Subtly as in suspension/bracing upgrades to improve its already pretty good handling. I was toying with the idea of turboing it to about 200bhp or for the same money I could trade and get a slightly older boxter 2.5 or maybe even 3.2S. I've never driven one to be fair but on paper the 2.5 would be a fair bit slower and the 3.2 would be about the same. When I think through it I just can't see any good reason why getting a boxter would be the better option so thought I'd start this thread to invite comments. A few things first though; The badge means nothing to me, neither does impressing others. Comments just on the car only Don't need to hear hairdresser comments people that thick don't belong on PH anyway, you'll be ignored! Things currently putting me off Running costs for an older boxter are much higher than an MR2 apparently? Heavy car/big engine = crap MPG. The MR2 with a blower still gets 30mpg start stop/town driving. Good stuff Better resale value? Cheaper insurance maybe? Better handling? Alternatives welcome too...

Boxster 3.2 best bet, the MR2? You need to drive German metal to feel the difference in terms of build and materials they cost more for a good reason. Your jap machine will keep up all day long but Porkas performance is only part of the appeal. That siad if I could get my hands on another good 240k I would swap my 996.2 c2 cab

stargazer30 said: I have a subtly modified MR2 roadster. Subtly as in suspension/bracing upgrades to improve its already pretty good handling. I was toying with the idea of turboing it to about 200bhp or for the same money I could trade and get a slightly older boxter 2.5 or maybe even 3.2S. I've never driven one to be fair but on paper the 2.5 would be a fair bit slower and the 3.2 would be about the same. When I think through it I just can't see any good reason why getting a boxter would be the better option so thought I'd start this thread to invite comments. A few things first though; The badge means nothing to me, neither does impressing others. Comments just on the car only Don't need to hear hairdresser comments people that thick don't belong on PH anyway, you'll be ignored! Things currently putting me off Running costs for an older boxter are much higher than an MR2 apparently? Heavy car/big engine = crap MPG. The MR2 with a blower still gets 30mpg start stop/town driving. Good stuff Better resale value? Cheaper insurance maybe? Better handling? Alternatives welcome too... Reading your comments and requirements, I would suggest a Honda S2000 is the way forward. Only get a Boxster if you want a Porsche. MTR

mollytherocker said: Reading your comments and requirements, I would suggest a Honda S2000 is the way forward. Only get a Boxster if you want a Porsche. MTR or a Z3 M Roadster!

How about a 996 some great buys about a totally different animal than a MR2

juansolo said: Asuming we're talking about a Mk3 MR2 here I'm taking that assumption as well, & if it is the mk3 spyder it's a particulary hard act to follow. I got a 350Z afterwards, & although a frat car it felt like a bus compared to the mister2. Got rid & then got an Exige, more nimble but felt so flimsy compared to the mr2. Funnily enough I followed that with an m3 csl & it was much better-more powerful, not too big & a very nimble feel to it. Currently running a Z4M coupe & it's right up my street

I bought my wife a little 2.5 Boxster for her birthday last November (she loves the badge, and used to be a hairdresser....she's also not a PH member ), and to be honest I really enjoy driving it. Handling is good, and fun if you want it to be.....the engine needs to be wound up (I love the noise it makes at around 5k when it wakes up), but once on song it goes well. Its weight and power is about the same as an old 2wd cossie, so may not be blindingly fast, but its still a good drive. Build quality wise, very good, although it does seem to suffer with stone chips. MPG is also very good, the wife often see's mid 30's....I dont, more like mid 20's for me One tip, if you get an early one with the plastic rear screen, dont put the roof down when cold....I did this Sunday morning, the car is now booked in Friday for a new screen....d'oh!

Howdy Stargazer...I was the one that bought your old turbo kit. It is still an astonishing bolt on. I bought an 03 996 turbo and still have the Mr2. When comparing the turbo'd roadster even with some pretty precious metal it's still a really good all round package. it's the sheer unburtstable nature of the car that gets you.

How much you talking about for the turbo upgrade or equally how much you willing to spend on a different car including proceeds from the MR2?

RichB said: How much you talking about for the turbo upgrade or equally how much you willing to spend on a different car including proceeds from the MR2? 200bhp upgrade for the MR2 (mk3) is around £3.5K all in. So if I used that to trade the car I'd be looking at a replacement in the £7 to £7.5K range.

pmr01 said: Howdy Stargazer...I was the one that bought your old turbo kit. It is still an astonishing bolt on. I bought an 03 996 turbo and still have the Mr2. When comparing the turbo'd roadster even with some pretty precious metal it's still a really good all round package. it's the sheer unburtstable nature of the car that gets you. Hey matey, Glad its still putting a smile on your face! I really regretted it after I took the kit off and sold the MR2, so ended up getting another one and I'm at it again! This time I'm sticking with 200bhp though if I go turbo. I started this thread after my brother in law told me I'm nuts and I should just buy something faster out the box. But he is a bit of a badge person, unlike me.

MR2's are great pieces of kit - no question - but on the limit I would say that they were much less predictable / easy to control than the Boxster (assuming the suspension isn't worn out). The Boxster is a much better balanced car with free "open roof engineering" - but I think the 3.2 "S" is what I would suggest you aimed for and if you find a really good 2.7 with the right spec - that can still be great fun. Coming from a tweaked MR2 (or could be tweaked) - the 2.5 probably won't have enough shove for you - but it does make a great noise when thrashed! Like others on here - I think the Boxster provides a very different experience. One that feels good every time you twist the key and hear that flat six come to life, but if you just want straight performance, maybe the first Honda Civic Type R would suit you better (with 200bhp or more) straight out of the box?

'Ello ello, there's a username I haven't seen in a while! How's it going fella? Good to see you still stuck with the '2 and a turbo! FWIW a well-driven 2.5 will be as quick as a 200bhp mk3 tubby, and that's from personal experience. It may not look like it on paper, and it won't feel anywhere near as quick due to not having that turbo-shove the '2 with (presuming) a GT28R strapped to it, but the chassis allows for higher speeds to be carried and you'll get more confidence from that. Liz (remember her?) went from a 2.5 to a TTET '2 and the only reason for that I believe was that the running costs were significantly higher. A Boxster in any form is a much more rewarding drive than any MR2 mk3 I've ever been in (1ZZ/2ZZ/turbo/V6), and it's more cosseted too. It does feel bigger, but it's in no way too big to be thrown around with gay abandon on your favourite B-roads.

I remember when I was looking to get an MR2 and the turbo upgrade when I saw this comparison http://celsmr2.tripod.com/MR2%20VS%20BOXSTER.htm not sure how accurate it is but the 40-70mph in 3rd gear suggest the MR2 is quicker than the 2.7! Not sure if I believe that but even so, it can't be far off and with a turbo should walk it then.

johnnyboy101 said: I remember when I was looking to get an MR2 and the turbo upgrade when I saw this comparison http://celsmr2.tripod.com/MR2%20VS%20BOXSTER.htm not sure how accurate it is but the 40-70mph in 3rd gear suggest the MR2 is quicker than the 2.7! Not sure if I believe that but even so, it can't be far off and with a turbo should walk it then. Better use 2nd when playing with MR2's then!

It's a step up. Think of the Boxster as a higher starting platform and the Mr2 almost maxed out. Even with 6 cylinders in mine, i know it's not as good as a 3.2 Boxster will be. Buy a 3.2, run it and enjoy it and then you can look at playing with it. A fettled Porsche is going to be a lot more accomplished than a fettled Mr2.

Asuming we're talking about a Mk3 MR2 here, which is a particuarly sweet handling car, the boxster will be very familiar territory. It will feel like a big lump after the Mr2, but it's just as well balanced and makes up for it with a characterful engine. It's a good choice, in comparison it'll be a bit like a GT car with a lot of sports car feel. Practically speaking, it's much better (it has a usable front boot for a start). Running costs will be higher, sure. That's inevitable. But if you're sensible they're not bad and as you'd be looking at an old enough car, you can go with much cheaper specialists for maintenance/servicing. Insurance is what it is. MPG, I average 26mpg with a 2.7 Cayman. It'll do over 30 on a motorway run and will drop to low 20's when driving spiritedly. Edited by juansolo on Tuesday 21st February 16:21

One of the earlier respondees suggested a 996. I have one and the other half has a MR2 Roadster; drive them back to back and the Porsche is in a different league but very different. A lot depends on where and when you are going to drive it but I'd suggest driving one and seeing how you feel. As mentioned, the S2000 is a great alternative also.

I made the move from a 2001 pre-face lift MR2 to a post facelift Boxster 3.2, last year. The Boxster beats the MR2 hands down except on price.

I made similar move in 1999. Manual MR2 Mk3 T bar to 944 turbo s to Boxster S. Obviously 20 years ago I liked both car but the six in the 3.2 wins it all day long. Sweet motor. The 2.7 spins even more freely. I swapped ends in both car on track more than I liked. Both squirrelly under very hard braking rear go light before you know it facing the other way. Build quality and materials very similar. I'm looking again and an Alpine Z3 maybe an option too edited to say sos i had mk 1 and 2 MR2s - loved them. Edited by IMI A on Friday 9th July 11:30

I’ve recently moved from MR2 mk3 to 996 C4 Cab. 996 is a great upgrade from the MR2, performance is big step up, handling wise it does feel heavier and a bit less agile than the MR2 but feels more planted and just grips out of corners. I managed to drive back to back whilst I still had both. Going back to the MR2 it felt nimble in the corners but really felt a lack of power that I didn’t notice before. Quality of interior and ride is also a big step up, even though the 996 is not know for its quality. Overall feels much more special to drive than the MR2

Excellent thread bump. So it only took 9 years to make the move Top procrastinating

Wow holy thread resurrection Batman! If anyone’s interested I never bought the boxer. I did go though 3 x mk3 MR2s though. One standard, one an SP240 turbo, and my favourite a TTE turbo that was a 175bhp The tte mr2 still ranks as the most fun car I’ve ever owned.

Owned a lightly modded MR2 back in 2017-18. Now owner of a Boxster S. The MR2 are indeed super fun little cars. One of the most fun I've had. The Porsche is more of an event though, faster, better noise, brakes, handling, steering, comfort, basically everything. The main advantage of the MR2 though is lightness and rawness. I'd definitely say that the MR2 is 90% of the fun though, but the Porsche is just a greater experience. Edit: It seems I've just resurrected an old thread again, sorry about that

Went from a modified mk3 to a 3.4 987.. The MR2 was fun to drive for sure but the perfornance and composure of the 987 makes it a much better car to own and drive. Also the engineering, build quality, brakes and the flat 6 engine are light years ahead of the MR2. The mk3 is a cheap lightweight ragtop.. In comparison the Boxster is well build, solid, refined and extremely capable when making progress.

stargazer30 said: Wow holy thread resurrection Batman! If anyone’s interested I never bought the boxer. I did go though 3 x mk3 MR2s though. One standard, one an SP240 turbo, and my favourite a TTE turbo that was a 175bhp The tte mr2 still ranks as the most fun car I’ve ever owned. and i STILL have the sp240 :-)

I went from a Mk3 MR2 to a 987 Boxster this July. Substantially different cars. They may both be mid engined two seater convertibles, but the similarity ends there. The 2 was the most fun car I've ever driven when driving at commuter speeds . But the handling wasn't really to my taste when trying to drive quickly. Please, I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade. I know a lot of people like them, and they definitely have some pluses. But the 987 has a sure footedness that I really like. It's an unusually stable and well balanced handling car, especially considering where the engine is. It's a confidence inspiring drive. I'll always remember my time with the 2 with some fondness, as it was very nice general transport. But the handling of the 987, to me, is highly rewarding. I went through a succession of cars, each time trying to get the bang I really wanted for less buck. Clio 182, 130i, MR2. And each time, for me, it was an "almost" car. They were all good, but all the time, what I really wanted was a Boxster. I finally did it, and for the first time I'm not looking around at other cars. I haven't looked on Autotrader once since I bought the Porsche. That's a first for me.

There is also room for luggage in the Boxster. My wife doesn't travel light, but she can get 2 weeks of clothes in it, leaving a small space for my shorts. Try that in an MR2.