Cayman or Boxster? - Page 5 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

looking into buying my first porsche, have been considering either a Cayman or Boxster- would like to hear opinions as i am new to the scene

Do you want a hard top or a convertible?

i'm thirsty, shall i have tea or coffee?

Dont see the point in the Cayman to be honest. Buy the Boxster and have the best of both worlds! Also if you buying brand new, the boxster is cheaper!!.. If the Cayman had the option for a sunroof then maybe my thoughts would be different. phil

Cayman might be better for everyday use, but the Boxster is a great, fun roadster. Even if the Cayman had a sunroof it wouldn't compare with a proper roadster - Porsche sunroofs are pretty rubbish - just adds weight in the wrong place, noise and an ugly hole, IMO.

I think Boxster is the better option because it gives you the choice of having the roof down when you want. You can also get hard-tops for them. You can't make a Cayman into a convertible but you can make a Boxster into a coupe.

It can be argued that the rigidity of the Cayman makes for a better handling car, but if you don't intend to track it, then you will probably never get to experience this on the road. As has already been said, if you like the wind in your hair get a Boxster. If, like me, you prefer the look of the Cayman and the balance provided by the extra rigidity, then no contest. Edited by Trev450 on Saturday 24th July 17:32

I had the same dilema about 4 months ago. Compared to the Boxster the Cayman is more focused and does feel faster. The whole car feels a bit sharper BUT I decided on the Boxster. The reason were as folows: 1) I felt the cayman would get frustrating as the suspension was less complient compared to the Boxster 2) The boxster is a nice car to drive with the roof down 3) My girlfriend prefered the Boxter and this was important to me as she has to put up with my driving and we fancy touring round France next year 4) Cheaper 5) Two boots. Often over the last 2 months we have gone to the garden ctr, boughts loads of stuff forgetting we had the Boxster but still managed to get everything in

1st_petrolhead said: I had the same dilema about 4 months ago. Compared to the Boxster the Cayman is more focused and does feel faster. The whole car feels a bit sharper BUT I decided on the Boxster. The reason were as folows: 1) I felt the cayman would get frustrating as the suspension was less complient compared to the Boxster 2) The boxster is a nice car to drive with the roof down 3) My girlfriend prefered the Boxter and this was important to me as she has to put up with my driving and we fancy touring round France next year 4) Cheaper 5) Two boots. Often over the last 2 months we have gone to the garden ctr, boughts loads of stuff forgetting we had the Boxster but still managed to get everything in I may be wrong but the last time I looked my Cayman had 2 boots as well

Yep really down to hard top or soft top and then looks, as for the boots about the same really although the Cayman gains slightly not having the roof mech the engine hump kinda negates any gain and the enclosed boot of the boxster is more secure. The Cayman sounds better inside, but its hotter inside compared to the boxster. Don't really think anyone can answer this except yourself, but if you are heading toward Boxster you should try the new Z4, if your not "Its has to be a Porsche" then you might find you prefer the new Z4 pretty close to the best of both worlds.

philnotts said: Dont see the point in the Cayman to be honest. Buy the Boxster and have the best of both worlds! Also if you buying brand new, the boxster is cheaper!!.. If the Cayman had the option for a sunroof then maybe my thoughts would be different. phil

TryHarder said: but its (the Cayman) hotter inside compared to the boxster. What on earth are you on about? Anyway - As long as it is soft bags - I can get 4 sets of golf clubs in the back of the Cayman.

Asterix said: TryHarder said: but its (the Cayman) hotter inside compared to the boxster. What on earth are you on about? Anyway - As long as it is soft bags - I can get 4 sets of golf clubs in the back of the Cayman. Maybe the aircon was broken on the one he looked at!

i have owned both and both great cars.the cayman is a far better handling car and more focused than the boxster and you do notice this on the roads.the only time i miss the boxster is on the sunny days we have been having lately but when it gets really hot you tend to have the roof up and aircon on anyway.the boxster is the only real convertible porsche make the 911 with a roof chop is pointless and removes the dynamics of the car where as the boxster was designed to be a convertible and the cayman designed around it hence the superb handling.if your car lives outside the cayman is a better prospect although saying that my boxster lived outside for 6 years and no problems the roof is very robust and weatherproof, they both have the same amount of luggage space although the cayman has the space above the engine.i suggest you drive both and get the one that suits your needs you will not be dissapointed with either. Edited by mayes911 on Sunday 25th July 11:56

Lonely said: Asterix said: TryHarder said: but its (the Cayman) hotter inside compared to the boxster. What on earth are you on about? Anyway - As long as it is soft bags - I can get 4 sets of golf clubs in the back of the Cayman. Maybe the aircon was broken on the one he looked at! Simple really, I don't use the air con unless it's a really hot day and my Cayman gets hotter behind you more so than I remember in my old Boxster, that's all I was saying.. Actually the whole car runs hotter I keep it in a garage and man does it radiate some heat.

TryHarder said: ....... man does it radiate some heat. Err .... Cars do that!

Pointless thread. Agree with the first post, you either want a convertible or don't. Worth noting though, the Cayman is, in my opinion, one of the most usable proper Porsches, (sorry Cayenne/Panathingy), the rear hatch of the Cayman makes sticking 2 sets of clubs in easy, plus a whole host of other things. How annoyed do I get seeing chaps stuffing a set of golf clubs in the back seat of a 911. Edited by March2008 on Sunday 25th July 19:17

thanks to the guys that contributed, now next question, i am looking for a used one (either cayman or boxster) should i only buy from porsche approved or should i buy elsewhere? if i buy from elsewhere would porsche honour a new warranty ? cheers

Pete if you are going for the Cayman, I would buy one from a respected indy and work with them to modify it (turbo + other bits).

cheers carl, would be tempted for a turbo upgrade having just come from a long history of tuned skylines. but think i would keep it standard for a while, (but knowing me there will be a point where i would need more power).... but can i have a list of respected indys

By the time "we've" made up your mind it'll be winter and you'll be asking advice on if you should trade it in for something more sensible! It's all well and good asking advice but I fear your questions so far have been far too subjective. Are you simply looking for people who will agree with what you have already decided in your own mind? It'll never happen - you'll only get "Buy from a dealer" and "Never buy from a dealer" responses. Search these forums and you'll see what I mean. "You pays your money......you takes your choice!"

JZM and RSJ are two respected indies. Have a look at the parr motorsport upgrades just incase you get the itch

cayman all the way the boxsters a birds car

Convertible vs. non-convertible. Simple as. Never really understood why anyone would opt for a cab in the UK anyway. Much prefer Cayman.

pete_1970 said: ...but can i have a list of respected indys I don't know what your budget is - but Harbour cars are listing two Boxster's at the moment, and are an excellent independent. Plenty of positive comments on here about them - my turbo came from them and their after sales has been superb. As mentioned, JZM and RSJ always get positive comments too.

I'd make the choice on one factor really - do you want a convertible? If yes, get a Boxster. If no, get a Cayman. I've had both and 'upgraded' to the Cayman because I wanted a change and I liked the shape. The power between the two is pretty close and I'd say you'll only really notice significant handling differences if your a driving god or a trackmeister. With regards Warranty, Porsche will give you their warranty if you pay £180 for their inspection, remedy anything they find wrong. It costs around £900 for the annual warranty, but I think you can only use them for repairs and servicing and you can't modify the car - even the battery has to be Porsche. Both great cars. Edited by Paul O on Wednesday 4th August 13:07

Of course the question must be asked at to whether you care about 3.4 vs 3.2. If you want the 3.4 then you have a lot more choice (and lower prices) with the cayman. Because of the later introduction of the 3.4 in the boxster, they remain somehat more costly.

thanks guys for all your inputs, as someone mentioned before, the boxster is a birds car, hence why i asked the questions in first place, now i have looked at few boxsters and caymans, i think the 19" alloys is a must but would the PCM be a deal breaker? are they the same on the 06 models as the 09 models? cheers

Cayman everytime because it:- i) Looks better ii) Handles better iii) Is less common than the Boxster iv) Isn't a birds car! Get one with 19s, PASM, Nav, Sports Chrono and bluetooth and come resale time you'll find it easier to shift.

less is more.my cayman runs on 18s no pasm(if your not in to track days not needed)and the handling is sublime and no psm(tomtoms are better). must haves imho are xenons, leather sports seats,sound pack/bose,and a decent colour(basalt black)also heated seats are good for the missus in winter. Edited by mayes911 on Friday 6th August 09:32

"Birds car"? Now what is that ?

chris7676 said: "Birds car"? Now what is that ? It's a stupid comment made by numpties.

The Boxster took its inspiration from the fabulous 356 Speedster/Roadster, 550, RSK, RS61.... It's as true to Porsche tradition as the GT3.

Hawmaws said: chris7676 said: "Birds car"? Now what is that ? It's a stupid comment made by numpties. good bite Geneve said: The Boxster took its inspiration from the fabulous 356 Speedster/Roadster, 550, RSK, RS61.... It's as true to Porsche tradition as the GT3. still a birds car Edited by caymanred on Friday 6th August 11:08

Geneve said: The Boxster took its inspiration from the fabulous 356 Speedster/Roadster, 550, RSK, RS61.... It's as true to Porsche tradition as the GT3. My Vauxhall Carlton 2.0L manual, took it's inspiration from the fabulous Lotus Carlton and therefore must be an ace car. Hmmm wait it's not... it's s t. so is the boxster.

caymanred said: Hawmaws said: chris7676 said: "Birds car"? Now what is that ? It's a stupid comment made by numpties. good bite Nope, I could detect the tongue in your cheek. Not sure that everyone else has.

caymanred said: Hawmaws said: chris7676 said: "Birds car"? Now what is that ? It's a stupid comment made by numpties. good bite Nope, I could detect the tongue in your cheek. Not sure that everyone else has.

boxster a birds car i dont think so!!!!! now any 911 cabrio thats a birds car cause a bloke knows they handle like a birds car so therefore they buy the coupe hence no gt2/3 ragtops which makes the boxster the only genuine softtop sports car porsche make therefore conclusion is not a birds car!!!! Edited by mayes911 on Friday 6th August 12:43

mayes911 said: boxster a birds car i dont think so!!!!! now any 911 cabrio thats a birds car cause a bloke knows they handle like a birds car so therefore they buy the coupe hence no gt2/3 ragtops which makes the boxster the only genuine softtop sports car porsche make therefore conclusion is not a birds car!!!! Edited by mayes911 on Friday 6th August 12:43 thats the worst conclusion ever! haha the reason there are no ragtop gt2/3s is because they are more focused then the others in the 911 fam. a ragtop gt3 would have to gain weight to strengthen up the car for cab capabilities, in essence killing the point of weight saving in the first place, as your just putting it back....

caymanred said: cayman all the way the boxsters a birds car Just don't get it in red - because everyone then knows it's a penis-extension

The cayman is just too funny. Any other car, you pay more for the cabrio (and they cost more to make). But Porsche have sold it as stiffer / better handling and people believe they can feel it. And to me, that's what this is really about - they're selling you the dream, not the car. A bit like when BMW made a 2 door 3 series and called it a coupe, thus justifying charging more for it. Any other car, you pay more for the 4/5 door as it costs more to make. You are being conned. Buy a Boxster. Or buy a Cayman. They're both great you know...

noumenon said: But Porsche have sold it as stiffer / better handling and people believe they can feel it. D'you mean you can't????! SS7

isee said: Geneve said: The Boxster took its inspiration from the fabulous 356 Speedster/Roadster, 550, RSK, RS61.... It's as true to Porsche tradition as the GT3. My Vauxhall Carlton 2.0L manual, took it's inspiration from the fabulous Lotus Carlton and therefore must be an ace car. Hmmm wait it's not... it's s t. so is the boxster. from someone with a M6

shoestring7 said: noumenon said: But Porsche have sold it as stiffer / better handling and people believe they can feel it. D'you mean you can't????! SS7 Despite nurburgring trips, dozens of track days, even more drifting days and professional driving tuition in all it's flavours - no - I can't. I owned a 986S for a couple of years and drove a Cayman for 50 miles or so. I noticed the extra grunt of the 3.4, didn't note any real handling difference. I guess I'm not a driving God after all... Edited by noumenon on Friday 6th August 15:22

Akajak said: isee said: Geneve said: The Boxster took its inspiration from the fabulous 356 Speedster/Roadster, 550, RSK, RS61.... It's as true to Porsche tradition as the GT3. My Vauxhall Carlton 2.0L manual, took it's inspiration from the fabulous Lotus Carlton and therefore must be an ace car. Hmmm wait it's not... it's s t. so is the boxster. from someone with a M6 heheh touche

mayes911 said: boxster a birds car i dont think so!!!!! now any 911 cabrio thats a birds car cause a bloke knows they handle like a birds car so therefore they buy the coupe hence no gt2/3 ragtops which makes the boxster the only genuine softtop sports car porsche make therefore conclusion is not a birds car!!!! Edited by mayes911 on Friday 6th August 12:43 this was a very funny post

isee said: Akajak said: isee said: Geneve said: The Boxster took its inspiration from the fabulous 356 Speedster/Roadster, 550, RSK, RS61.... It's as true to Porsche tradition as the GT3. My Vauxhall Carlton 2.0L manual, took it's inspiration from the fabulous Lotus Carlton and therefore must be an ace car. Hmmm wait it's not... it's s t. so is the boxster. from someone with a M6 heheh touche in reality I found the M6 pretty awesome

noumenon said: But Porsche have sold it as stiffer / better handling and people believe they can feel it having owned a boxster 986s for 6 years and a cayman s for nearly two years both with same suspension/tyre set up i can really notice the difference.for starters the boxster was a softer ride whereas the cayman is a harder ride but a lot sharper and turns in quicker and is lot more responsive.the cayman has a different chassis to the boxster and unlike what people think its not a boxster with a roof added.when any manufacturer makes a cabrio out of a saloon/coupe its basically a roof chop with a bit of stiffening and your charged a lot more for the privalage.whereas the cayman had to be designed from the ground up.boxster/cayman same but different Edited by mayes911 on Friday 6th August 21:10

mayes911 said: noumenon said: But Porsche have sold it as stiffer / better handling and people believe they can feel it having owned a boxster 986s for 6 years and a cayman s for nearly two years both with same suspension/tyre set up i can really notice the difference.for starters the boxster was a softer ride whereas the cayman is a harder ride but a lot sharper and turns in quicker and is lot more responsive.the cayman has a different chassis to the boxster and unlike what people think its not a boxster with a roof added.when any manufacturer makes a cabrio out of a saloon/coupe its basically a roof chop with a bit of stiffening and your charged a lot more for the privalage.whereas the cayman had to be designed from the ground up.boxster/cayman same but different Edited by mayes911 on Friday 6th August 21:10 I don't know what you mean by 'chassis', but if you mean the basic unitary contruction then the Cayman is just that: a roofed Boxster, but with different sheet metal from the B pillars back. Putting a steel roof over the hole increases torsional stiffness by something like 2x, so Porsche used different springs, dampers and ARB's. I've driven similar spec'd Boxster and Cayman (both new 2.7 demonstrators, 18's, non PASM suspension)within a couple of days of each other. Most noticibly the Cayman rides a little firmer, and the steering, particulalry initial turn-in is better. You also loose the odd tremor through the column - drive a Boxster over bumpy roads with your fingers on the inner door shuts and you can feel quite a lot of movement. However I was really looking for differences, they are both superb cars and each lead their class. My own Cayman made a £84k 997 C4S I tried feel like a sorry lumpen thing. SS7

Where's the option for a Boxster Spyder?

deano23 said: Convertible vs. non-convertible. Simple as. Never really understood why anyone would opt for a cab in the UK anyway. Why's that? If you're thinking of the weather, the UK generally is not too hot and not too cold and not too wet.

My boxster is the first cab I've ever owned and I didn't really see the point of convertibles before I bought it. I got it on a bit of an impulse with the intention of "upgrading" to a 911 probably about now. However I don't see the point of doing this now. I'm not a track-day god, yet, so I don't need the supposedly better handling characteristics that others claim to discern.The boxster is by far the best handling car I've ever driven..the ride to handling balance is amazing and the surprising comfort (on std suspension) is something that passengers always comment on. And I really like the convertible aspect, it makes the car feel a lot more special..I have the roof down whenever I can and on a cold crisp morning, woolly hat and jumper on it is fantastic fun at any speed. It also makes the car sound better..I've driven a Cayman and a 997 recently and they sounded really boring compared to the boxy with the roof down. In both cases I couldn't wait to get back into my own car. So to me...the advantages of the Boxster over the Cayman are..... 1) Feels more special with roof down 2) better sound 3) no need to lash it to have fun... burbling through villages with the roof down (maybe in second gear) can put as much of a smile on your face as 150 on the autobahn, from personal experience. 4) with the roof down it looks better 5) It is a serious babe magnet. Women absolutely love it. So I'm sold: it isn't an entry level Porsche to me..it's an extremely capable little car that I'm probably going to replace with a newer one, not a 911.

Hawmaws said: it's an extremely capable little car Agreed. BTW its about 15mm shorter than a 'big' 911 and the same width.. SS7

ss7 said:I don't know what you mean by 'chassis', but if you mean the basic unitary contruction then the Cayman is just that: a roofed Boxster, but with different sheet metal from the B pillars back. Putting a steel roof over the hole increases torsional stiffness by something like 2x, so Porsche used different springs, dampers and ARB's. if thats the case a 911 is boxster with the engine round the wrong way round. joking apart i was told by someone at porsche the cayman was designed ground up around the boxster platform but sharing components with the boxster/911 and not a sheet of metal put on like everyone thinks ?

Reminds me of a scene in Two and a Half Men....where Allan's 987 is stolen by his drunk date...

mayes911 said: ss7 said:I don't know what you mean by 'chassis', but if you mean the basic unitary contruction then the Cayman is just that: a roofed Boxster, but with different sheet metal from the B pillars back. Putting a steel roof over the hole increases torsional stiffness by something like 2x, so Porsche used different springs, dampers and ARB's. if thats the case a 911 is boxster with the engine round the wrong way round. Er, wasn't the 996 precisely that?

After a string of convertibles I fancied a coupe so I bought a Cayman. Really it does just come down to this when choosing between the two.

I'm not into opening can's of worms, and have no false ambitions of 997 ownership, but the Cayman is a distinctive car in its own right, I bought it because I liked it. Nobody has ever said to me, "Is that a boxster?" or "Is that a 911?" People find it interesting enough and have had a few welcomed cheers from lads, "nice Cayman mate..." Personally I think it has its own destinctive respect for being what it is. Buy one, and those who know, know you've made a well informed decision. Standing by for some flak... buy a Boxster and nobody will question why you've bought it.

It's all very subjective isn't it but for me (& I did look at both cars before buying my car) I just think that for all the caymens advantages over the boxster in the handling department the boxster beats it simply down to the fact that you can enjoy open top motoring in it. & I like that. For me (& I do a lot of track days) the advantages of the caymen are all outweighed by the 911, now I'm not saying that a basic 911 is necessarily a better car than a well specced caymenS but I didn't grow up wanting a caymen. I can't believe that anyone goes out & decides to buy a car simply down to torsional rigidity & precision of turn in. The 911 brings with it so much more. Therefore: open top motoring,buy a boxster precision of dynamics,buy a caymen living the dream,buy an (older) 911

baz1985 said: Reminds me of a scene in Two and a Half Men....where Allan's 987 is stolen by his drunk date... 986 i think you'll find siiir

I would agree with the sentiment wrt new cars. I think a new cayman and a new boxster are close as makes no difference in performance terms. However, the boxster also has a roof which comes off and it costs less. Almost a no brainer to me. But second hand is different. Unless buying a very recent car, the cayman does offer a genuine performance advantage.

It's important to remember that the Cayman is a Boxster with a hard top added "afterwards". That's how the car was designed, ground up. Think about that for a minute. Buy the Boxster and have the option of getting the top down and wind in your hair. The sound from the engine is so much better without a tin roof and nothing looks better than a 2 seater sports car with the top down. The top goes up and down in just a few seconds even when driving at more than 30 mph. I've driven many Caymans and Boxsters back to back on Porsche's Silverstone track, and there is absolutely zero difference in the way they handle. Edited by ICEforever on Tuesday 7th September 15:18

Holy thread resurrection!

ICEforever said: It's important to remember that the Cayman is a Boxster with a hard top added "afterwards". That's how the car was designed, ground up. Think about that for a minute. Buy the Boxster and have the option of getting the top down and wind in your hair. The sound from the engine is so much better without a tin roof and nothing looks better than a 2 seater sports car with the top down. The top goes up and down in just a few seconds even when driving at more than 30 mph. I've driven many Caymans and Boxsters back to back on Porsche's Silverstone track, and there is absolutely zero difference in the way they handle. Edited by ICEforever on Tuesday 7th September 15:18 Serious thread resurrection. FYI the 986/7 Caymans were boxters with a roof bolted on after. The 981 Cayman/Boxter were designed from the ground up concurrently. The 981 Cayman is 40% stiffer than the 981 Boxter. If you don’t notice that on track, then that probably says more about you. The answer is still the same. If you want a convertible, get a Boxter.

Royal Jelly said: Serious thread resurrection. FYI the 986/7 Caymans were boxters with a roof bolted on after. The 981 Cayman/Boxter were designed from the ground up concurrently. The 981 Cayman is 40% stiffer than the 981 Boxter. If you don’t notice that on track, then that probably says more about you. The answer is still the same. If you want a convertible, get a Boxter. Not sure what you mean by 987 Caymans were boxsters with the roof added on? the 987 also has 40% more torsional rigidity over the 987 Boxster.

I was responding to ICEForever’s comments that the Cayman was a Boxter with the roof bolted on afterwards.. which was true of the 987. I’m not entirely sure how else to put it; The original Cayman was a roofed version of the existing boxter. The 981 Cayman was designed from the ground up alongside the 981 Boxter - the fresh design sheet freed the designers from the constraints of working on an existing car design. That’s a key reason for its more coherent design language. It also meant that they could engineer a car that was hugely stiffer than the e previous Cayman, as well as the concurrent Boxter. Anyway, we’re off track.. If you want a convertible - get the boxter.

Where are these 'bolts' you speak off...I'm off to garage for a closer look

Good one.

Royal Jelly said: The original Cayman was a roofed version of the existing boxter. Royal Jelly said: I was responding to ICEForever’s comments that the Cayman was a Boxter with the roof bolted on afterwards.. which was true of the 987. Entirely false. 987 Cayman was designed in 1999 and presented to Porsche executives in early 2000. Yes, 2000, five years before it was launched. It was part of the 987 design cycle from day one. You're repeating myth. Not sure where this myth came from, probably just the simple fact that the 987 Cayman was launched after the Boxster.

Royal Jelly said: The 981 Cayman was designed from the ground up alongside the 981 Boxter - the fresh design sheet freed the designers from the constraints of working on an existing car design. That’s a key reason for its more coherent design language. It also meant that they could engineer a car that was hugely stiffer than the e previous Cayman, as well as the concurrent Boxter. You making a lot of stuff up. 981 is stiffer because it's a newer car on an all-new more modern platform shared with the 991. 981 Boxster is much stiffer. 981 Cayman. 991 911. The lot. The 981 Cayman being stiffer than 987 Cayman is nothing to do with the made up narrative that the 987 Cayman was an afterthought. It wasn't. By the by, the 987 Cayman is very similar in stiffness to the 997 coupe, with which it shares its platform. Cayman and Boxster and just brand names. 987 comes in coupe and cabrio formats. Both were in the design brief from the beginning. As was the 997 coupe and cabrio, which are on the same platform. All are closely related and designed in parallel on a single architecture.

I think that the guy meant the hardtop you could buy for the 986 Boxster. It looked rather smart, but of course they were never called Caymans. IMHO it has always been possible to feel the handling difference between Boxster and Cayman.

F6C said: Entirely false. 987 Cayman was designed in 1999 and presented to Porsche executives in early 2000. Yes, 2000, five years before it was launched. It was part of the 987 design cycle from day one. You're repeating myth. Not sure where this myth came from, probably just the simple fact that the 987 Cayman was launched after the Boxster. Happy to be corrected, thank you. I’ve got better things to do than make this up, mind you. I’m sure you’ve seen plenty of sources where this ‘myth’ is being pedalled. Either way, I don’t care. I have a mild dislike for convertibles. So, in the spirit of the thread, “buy a Cayman. Unless you like convertibles.”

Boxster with the PSE and hood down you hear that flat 6...

For what its worth, the Boxster has a great roof. fast, quiet and very liveable everyday at motorway speeds

Unless its a Spyder.

I bought my 2006 987 Boxster manual about six weeks or so ago. What I really wanted was a Cayman, but now, in hindsight, I'm glad I got the Boxster after all. Why? I wanted the Cayman because I prefer the way they look (but neither is exactly bad looking, are they?) and because I had heard the Cayman is stiffer. I'd come from a 2006 MR2 Roadster, and although the MR2 is known to be stiff as convertibles in general go, it was my first convertible and I was feeling the flex quite obviously and this was blunting my enjoyment of the car considerably. So as not to repeat this disappointment I thought I'd better get the Cayman rather than the Box. What I've found is, my Box is very, very stiff - certainly compared to the MR2. I haven't so far found any road situation where I've noticed any flex, and I've no intention to ever track day the car. So, I'm totally happy with the level of stiffness. The Cayman might be even stiffer, but I don't need it. But there's another, less talked about issue, which makes me definitely prefer my Box to a Croc for what I use it for. My car is an 80% daily runner, about 8,000 miles a year. The first thing I noticed about the car's handling is how firm the ride is, even on the standard 17" rims. It's obviously firmer than the MR2 was, and I was running that on steel reinforced Yoko AD08RS road legal track day tyres. It also seems quite loud to my ear, even on it's standard exhaust. Don't get me wrong, I love the classic flat six sound track. But when I'm tired after work and I'm on a run, I don't want too much banging and crashing over the Surrey back roads, and I don't want too much engine noise. It's not an exaggeration to say that I can just tolerate the ride quality and noise when I'm not in the mood. If it was any worse at all in these respects, I wouldn't like it. And, since buying my car I've learned that the Cayman is actually at least a little louder. I wouldn't like that. I've also heard some people say (but have yet to be able to ascertain whether it's true, or not) that the Cayman rides a little firmer. Again, I wouldn't like that. So, I'm actually glad I ended up with a Box after all.

Box rules & you can get a sun tan. Cayman does have a bit more luggage space in the back boot & above the engine though.

The Boxster is brilliant, and covers all the bases. It is sharp, but I always felt that the Cayman was always that fraction sharper (and I was always a Boxster man - a 986 3.2S and a 981 GTS, both collected from Zuffenhausen - and both beyond sublime.

Had a Boxster now got a Cayman, both great. Found the Boxster was quieter, Cayman tends to be a more noisy as probably less sound insulation but a bit less claustrophobic feeling. Both are great cars, just need everyone to go back to work/foreign holidays and get off our local Welsh roads so we can enjoy it.

ExecutiveAction said: The Boxster is brilliant, and covers all the bases. It is sharp, but I always felt that the Cayman was always that fraction sharper (and I was always a Boxster man - a 986 3.2S and a 981 GTS, both collected from Zuffenhausen - and both beyond sublime. Yup. I think that’s because it is sharper. There’s just no way around that - it’s far, far more torsionally stiff. I have, however, always been curious why they have the 981 caymans a few more horses than the Boxster. Again - the answer is obvious get a convertible if you like them. I don’t, but I get the appeal.

Royal Jelly said: I have, however, always been curious why they have the 981 caymans a few more horses than the Boxster. Market positioning, plain and simple. 987 Cayman was significantly more expensive than the Boxster at launch - 987.1 Cayman S was £4k more than the Boxster S (there was no base Cayman at launch). Hence a more powerful 3.4 lump at launch versus Box's 3.2. Oddly, the 987.1 Boxster got the Cayman's full engine spec for a year at the end of the cycle. But for the for 987.2, the Cayman models got 10PS more than the Boxes and the price premium remained, albeit somewhat narrowed. For 981, again it was a 10PS delta and again a price premium for the Cayman, but narrowed yet further. For the 718 Porsche arguably reverted to more conventional positioning and started charging slightly more for the open top model and at that point the engine spec was identical and likewise the handful of styling differences between Box and Cayman were ditched - Box and Cayman now had the same bumpers etc. 987 Cayman didn't sell terribly well once the initial hype died down, so perhaps the slightly unusual market positioning was deemed unsustainable. Have to hand it to Porsche, they play a good long game. If you think that the coupe would typically be cheaper than the cab, and assume for sake of argument that, normally, the coupe would have sold for something like £2k less than the cab, that's an extra £6k per unit over conventional positioning. Porsche flogged loads of 987.1 3.4 Caymans in the first year, something like 15 or 16,000 - far, far more than later years. Do the maths and that's getting on for £100 million of additional revenue in one year on top of whatever they would have made, which must have been pretty much pure profit compared to positioning the Cayman below the Boxster. After cashing in on that year-one new model novelty, they gradually, imperceptibly flipped the two models around. Clever, really, and just one example of why the company has been such a huge profit generator over recent decades. They don't miss a trick.

Royal Jelly said: Serious thread resurrection. FYI the 986/7 Caymans were boxters with a roof bolted on after. The 981 Cayman/Boxter were designed from the ground up concurrently. The 981 Cayman is 40% stiffer than the 981 Boxter. If you don’t notice that on track, then that probably says more about you. The answer is still the same. If you want a convertible, get a Boxter. Is a Boxter a similar model to a Boxster? And when discussing the chassis stiffness bear in mind that the 981 platform is an awful lot stiffer than the 987, and the 982 is stiffer still. How much chassis stiffness is enough? * I think 50% stiffer was quoted but I can't quite be sure

Wollemi said: Is a Boxter a similar model to a Boxster? And when discussing the chassis stiffness bear in mind that the 981 platform is an awful lot stiffer than the 987, and the 982 is stiffer still. How much chassis stiffness is enough? * I think 50% stiffer was quoted but I can't quite be sure My sincerest apologies for the misspelling. FYI there was a huge leap in torsional rigidity from the 987 Cayman to 981. Then there was a tiny jump from 981 to 718. The figures: 718: 41,000nm/degree 981: 40,500nn/degree 987: 31,500nm/degree Boxster figures are 19,000, 17,000 & 12,600 for 718/981/987 respectively. So - as you can see, the vast jump was 987-981, and as far as coupe vs convertible, the stiffness gap between them is decreasing.

987/997 is based on a revised version of the 986/996 platform, hence the relatively modest jump in stiffness. 981/991 was on a wholly new platform. Hence a really big jump. 718/982 is just a mid cycle facelift, similar to 987.1 to 987.2.