Is a Boxster Better?

OK. Made you look. This is my first post here. I�ve been lurking for a few months. I�m considering buying either a 1999-2004 Boxster or 996. My thinking is both cars seem to be at the bottom of their depreciation curves and both seem to be pretty reliable if they�re well taken care of. I did a comparison of what�s selling and both �vanilla� cars (no Boxster S, C4S, etc) with no big issues. The 996 averages at about $19K and the Boxster is $8.5K. The 996 seems to depreciate down to $10-$12K as the miles go on and the Boxster seems to get down to ~$4K. Insurance would be about $200/year less for the Boxster. Not a huge difference. Anyway, I feel like the 996 would probably lose less value over time unless I really packed on the miles and would have a better chance of appreciating, not that I�m counting on that. Can you tell that I�m trying to justify the extra cost of the 996? So, random questions: I know many people say buy the newest car you can afford but I feel like If I bought a car under 20 years old it might take a depreciation hit after it hits 20. Thoughts? Or do you think it�s more mileage? I know both have the same engine and same IMS issues. Are maintenance costs about the same for both? I read in another post to budget around $4K/year for maintenance. Does that sound right? I�d like to put in a head unit with Car Play. Can you get a double DIN in a 1999-2001? I�m not trying to count pennies here. Just trying to make a good comparison and go in with both eyes open. Thanks for any help you can give!

A Boxster is better if you won�t ever use the rear seats because it�s a tad simpler and has a mid-engine layout. But I�d go with a Boxster S, compared to a 911, as the early base Boxsters are just too low on power for me. The 2000 model year Boxster S still has the double-row IMS, so it�s comparable to the 1999 911, and might cost $8k less. But save the $8k for future maintenance costs, because you aren�t saving too much compared to a 911 Cabriolet. Depreciation is trivial at this age - they have all bottomed out at 15-20 years old.

I can't specifically talk of the 986 vs 996 but I can the 987 vs 997. Very different cars to me. I prefer the 987 because I spend most of my time on curvy back roads and I like the smaller, more agile feel. On the other hand, I think the 997 is much more comfortable for highway driving.

I was legitimately just having a conversation 5 minutes ago with a guy that comes into our shop that has a boxster. He likes it but says he wish he had the S model. My best suggestion is to just drive the cars you are interested in and go from there.

For me it'll just never look as good. Half of the reason to buy a Porsche is for the way it looks, and no Porsche looks as good as a 911. A newer Cayman might be a better car than an old 911, but I just can't get over the fact it doesn't look as good to me. I'd also think a lot of service jobs might be harder on the mid-engine cars. I don't know for a fact since I've never really looked at a Boxster or worked on one, but a lot of the minor work I've done on mine (e.g. fixing vacuum leaks and stuff) seems like it would be a lot harder if you couldn't get to the top of the engine. In a 911 you have pretty reasonable access to the top, "front" (non-transmission-end), and bottom of the engine.

Quotes source post: 16358506

Boxster has much better engine access than a 996 & from the doors forward they are the same. Have you ever replaced the AOS on a 996 ?

I never had any respect for any Porsche because my Muscle cars would outrun them in a street race easily & I disliked the spartan interiors. In 2000 I got a job as a test driver for a automotive press fleet management company. One of their clients was Porsche, the 1st one I drove was a 2000 C2. It was love at 1st drive for me being a longtime cornering enthusiast. The next day I test drove a 2000 Boxster S, I really enjoyed it as well. Eventually I test drove 80% of the new vehicles available from 2000-2003. When a management change made me want to quit the only job I had ever loved I did. My 1st project after quiting was to buy my own 2000 Boxster S. I had realized it made me feel like a better driver than I am & I made sure to buy one without PSM. The only thing it lacked was the power of a 996 but I fixed that too.

Sounds like you�re putting a lot of focus on depreciation. Personally, I don�t think that�s of much value with either car. Neither will appreciate or depreciate much during your ownership. Why? You�re correct in saying both are at the bottom of their value. But millennials don�t care about cars like every generation before them, most can�t wait for autonomous cars and Uber at every opportunity. GenX is the last of the car loving generations, so anyone that says get a 996 before they go up is baseless imo. What is important is buying the better car for your needs and the only way to do that is to spend time with both. Sit in each, look at each and most importantly: drive each. I�d recommend several of both models as all are not equal. This is paramount in determining which way you go. I personally have no desire to have a convertible sports car, but if that�s what your after, that won�t have much impact in your world. The Boxster is just as fun but the 996 has more performance and feels like a true sports car whereas the Boxster feels more like a sporty car. I also think the 996 is much better looking, but to each their own. Hope that helps.

Hi there. I own a 1999 996 and a 1999 Boxster. Both are wonderful cars in their own way. Surprisingly different as well. I suggest you drive each and see which one you prefer. I owned a 2007 Cayman S prior to the 996. It was a great car as well, but different. You need to drive them to see the differences. Yes, you can hack a double-DIN unit into these older cars. I went the other way with mine - back to stock. All the best in your search.

The only regret I have about buying my 996: giving up my 986 in trade. The 996 is a fantastic car to drive, but I sorely miss my seal grey '03. I'm not sure how much more running 986's can depreciate and still sell for more than rollers. If I had the urge to blow a few grand on something fun, I'd be willing to roll the dice on a 986. I would be far less inclined to make a cavalier decision about a mid-range 996. Spending twice as much doesn't reduce the risk of getting boned by half, and unless you're buying a 996 with a brand-new crate engine or something that just came off the truck from Raby, the potential exposure is non-negligible... Unsolicited Boxster pic. Damn, I miss this car.

Unless you own multiple vehicles a 911 is more realistic because you can carry a child and/or items on rear seats. Boxster/Cayman looks very space limited. Expect to spend $30-35k total for 996 model over a few years, 997 more due to higher initial price. Some report they spend much less than that. Our 996 is a daily driver and I would do it all again.

Quotes source post: 16356894

Yes, costs will be similar. Your mechanic won’t care which Porsche you bring in for service. And many parts are the same. Check out the tech articles on PelicanParts to get some ideas about what various projects have in common. Yes, you can put in any new radio you want, but it will never sound good by today’s standards. At least not without spending a lot $. I had an 03 986S before my 99 996, and for normal (not at the limit) driving I would say they are pretty similar. I prefer a coupe and wanted the 911 experience, which is why I switched. Whichever route you go, you’ll enjoy it more if it has a full leather interior!

Quotes source post: 16358815

The Boxster does have 2 trunks, so the space difference isn�t that big.

You can get an early Cayman for less than a well sorted 996 these days. Food for thot if you don't want a Boxster/convertible.

Last June I had similar thoughts. I missed my old 996.2 and was looking to get a 996.1 or 986. I test drove a 986 base with the 2.5 and found it to be a lot more fun than I thought. Everybody craps on their lower power output but I still had a good time. I ended up finding a 99 996 with a rebuilt engine using LN Nickies so that won me over. Pro's for boxster: - No bore scoring issues - Can run a square tire setup and rotate tires easier - AOS is easier to change - Cheaper entry price - Mid engine balance is usually preferred for spirited driving Pro's for 996: - I prefer a coupe to a convertible for noise and protection - I like the shape of the 996 better than 986 although I still think the 986 looks great. - More power - Quicker access to the front of the engine

Thanks for all the input! I did some research a few days ago and got the low down on the 986 vs 996 as far as how they drive. I agree about the coupe vs the cab. I'm not much of a convertible person either. While a cab isn't out of the question I'd prefer the coupe or the Cayman. I think I'd love driving either to tell you the truth. The fastest thing I've owned so far was a 200 HP MkIII Supra (I miss that car. Blown head gasket). The Boxster/Cayman S is a good idea. I'm willing to pay the higher entry price for the 996 if I have a decent chance of getting most of it back when (if) I sell it, especially if the maintenance costs are the same for both. I'm definitely leaning towards the 996. My thinking is if I'm going to pay for the PPI and possibly put it in the shop to get the IMS done if needed, clutch, etc I'd be more willing to do all that for a 996 rather than the Boxster. I also think most of the previous owners treat the 996 better than the Boxster. Thanks again! I'm sure I'll have more questions.

I was in a similar position. Was between a s2000 and a 996 (sadly can't get over the boxters looks). Ultimately they were the same price but the 996 had 100 more hp and back seats. I love my 996 and drive it daily.

What year did you end up with? Had the IMS already been done?

I had both at the same time (sold the boxster last year) and I'd say it really depends on what your looking for. I love the look of the 996 over the 986 and loved that the 996 could get up and go way more then the 986 but as far as handling and driving experience the boxster really did handle different and better ... in my opinion. I have more room for modding my 996 then the boxster but I do wish I had kept the boxster.

Never driven a boxster, and I am sure a Boxster S would be a super fun car to drive. Had a similar dilemma but went for the 996: - Kids love to sit in the back, especially with the roof down - 996s are beautiful cars, from certain angles they are very good looking. (Boxster/Caymans less so) At least when I was looking you could buy used Boxster engines on ebay for a few thousands, so I wouldn't be concerned about blown engines on a boxster.

Quotes source post: 16358848

^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^ Full leather really makes a huge difference.

Quotes source post: 16359261

I bought a 02 that had the motor replaced under CPO with a 997 version. I assume I paid less because it had a replaced motor but the reality was that it made it more valuable to me. I drive it without concern or fear. Also I have kids, and I've learned if I can't take the kids then I rarely get to drive it.

Quotes source post: 16356894

I don't think people say this. They say "get the best one you can afford" (rather than the "newest"). The newest is definitely not always better. For any older car, it's important to first pick the exact year/model you want based on your own preferences and the known plusses and minuses of each model/year. Once you've decided on model/year, then find the best example you afford. The context of "best" in that statement is typically about how well maintained it was. A cosmetically imperfect car that has been well maintained will be discounted for its cosmetic faults and can easily be cleaned up to perfect. A cosmetically beautiful car that has been poorly maintained can easily be a money pit (especially for the 996) and it's very difficult (expensive) to undo the years of neglect. Whether it's 15, 20, of 25 years old doesn't matter much with regard to valuation -- people pick the model they want and they will buy that. If they prefer 996.1, they are probably going to buy that model without doing any math on how old the car is. For your concern about the long-term value equation, it's probably safer to target an early 996.1 that has the dual row IMS. Nothing is foolproof and there are plusses and minuses for every year, but that probably is most likely to have the fewest issues. As far as driving feel on the 996, three options make a significant difference on weight (and hence driving feel) -- cab (174 lbs), AWD (131 lbs), and Tiptronic (108 lbs) -- get those options only if you really need them. As mentioned by vitaminC, full leather makes a surprisingly huge difference on interior feel. Unfortunately I've never driven a Boxster, so can't comment on the comparison. .

Other then the look of the rear end, the Boxter S is better than the 996 in EVERY way. Don't believe me? Just drive one. It has the engine where is was supposed to be..

Never driven an "S," but the poise and balance of my base Boxster was remarkable. I had an instructor in my 986 during my first or second autocross, one of the more accomplished air-cooled 911 drivers. After an especially sloppy lap, he suggested turning off PSM (so I could better see the side effects of my ridiculously exaggerated inputs) and was blown away when he realized the car didn't have PSM (just ABS). I didn't understand his amazement until I moved from the 986 to the 996 and saw what jerky, exaggerated inputs do to a car that isn't as balanced and settled as the Boxster. All this said, I love my 996, but I definitely underappreciated the 986's handling while I had it.

Here's a pic of my car with double-DIN Carplay. Sounds good enough to my non-audiophile ears. I agree with @peterp 100% -- hold out for a model with full leather interior.

In sig block notice I've owned a Boxster - I liked my 944 Turbo and 968 way more than the Boxster. Best Porsche I've owned is my current 02 996 C2. 1. Hated the way it handled, pushing in the corners, no butt feel when it's going to let go, then wham, all four wheels let go at the same time and you almost kissed a guard rail. 2. Feel claustrophobic in the Boxster. Bottom line, quit looking at numbers and drive them both and buy the one you like the best!

Quotes source post: 16359254

Plus you don't have to constantly shift the Porsche like you do the S2000, I rented a S2000 before buying my Boxster "S" & soon after solved the power issue.

Quotes source post: 16360113

When I was shopping for my 1st & only Porsche I focused on 2000 MY because they were least likely to have PSM which I did not want.

Quotes source post: 16360325

There was something wrong with your boxster. I've tracked mine for years, and the handling is absolutely outstanding. There is no question in my mind that it handles better than the 911.

The standard Boxster and 911 aren't even on the same planet. That's totally apples to oranges, unless your only goal is to get something with a Porsche badge. I test drove a standard Boxster years ago and found the power totally underwhelming. If you're in the market for the most inexpensive modern Porsche then Boxster S is probably your best route. The best advice I can give you would be to go test drive them both and see what you think. The 911 should feel like a rocketship compared to a Boxster, especially at higher speeds like on the highway.

FWIW, I drove a Boxter S and a 911 GTS back to back at the Atlanta PDE. Both cars were great. The Boxter S was quick and superbly balanced - handled like it was on rails. This being said, the 911 GTS was in a different class** - while handling is clearly different (and needs to be driven differently) it's still amazing, and with trail braking and throttle steering, the "twisties" are way more fun! In contrast, the Boxster was almost too well behaved. **The only exception to this that I can think of is the Boxster Spyder - these are special cars, fast and super agile...still different than a 911, but a true competitor.

The mk. 1 996 has 50% more HP than the non-S 986 - they ARE apples and oranges as far as power output. The 986 handling is sublime, and I found its propensity to rotate rather than "911 spin" much more controllable. Sure, it's harder to spin a 996 than previous 911 generations, but once the grip in the back is gone, you're along for the ride. One of the SCCA enthusiast bloggers I occasionally follow makes the bold assertion that in the SCCA "stock" solo class, the Boxster eclipses pretty much everything except Vipers, '93-'95 Mazda RX-7 twin turbos, and some late-model Corvettes... It's a shame that the Boxster and Cayman will always play second fiddle to the 911, but Porsche will never allow the mid-engine cars to properly compete with the 911 for obvious reasons...

Quotes source post: 16360295

What year is that? I noticed the later models have double DIN head units built in. Also, several people have mentioned the full leather. Is there a way I can tell what's full leather from the pictures?

Quotes source post: 16360400

Why are you keep comparing the base Boxter to the 996? The Boxter S to the 996 is where you can really see how much superior the S is over the 996. The 911 has a huge design flaw and no amount of electronic aid will help when traction goes away in a turn. A car with a centre mass in the middle will out do a car that has majority of the mass BEHIND the rear a axles. Porsche tried to fix this with the introduction of the 928 but die hard fans kept wanting the image of the 911 and that's the reason the 911 survived. This same quest for this image still exists. The Boxter S is only a few hp down from the 996 so straight line acceleration is nearly identical but when it comes to cornering, it is way batter than a 996. Now you transplant a 996 engine into a Boxter S (or install one with the same displacement) and you have something that will blow the doors off it's *** dragging uncle. Remember that the Boxter S has the same brakes, suspension, transmission (only the differential spins the other way) also everything from the doors forward is the same (front bumper has a slightly different shape) so parts wise a Boxter S and a same year 996 are the esentially the same EXCEPT for displacement.

Quotes source post: 16359783

All great information. Thanks. I think I saw the "buy the newest" statement in the buying guide FAQ for this forum and other people have said it too. You make a good point with the double row IMS. I'm surprised the convertible ADDS weight! I'd rather have the coupe personally but so many of them out there seem to be cabs. Looking at the ads I'm getting some definite impressions on what separates a $12K C2 from a $30K one. I'll hold my tongue until I actually start seeing them in person though. Thanks again for all the good information.

Everyone's comments definitely echo the differences between the 986 and the 996 that I read about before posting. People say the Boxster/Cayman feels like it's on rails while the 996 feels like a rocket. I think I'd have a blast driving either so the driving difference doesn't concern me too much.That's why I was focusing this post more on $$$ questions. The 996 appeals more to me because of the looks, the extra power and I think it would hold its value better even though it does have a higher price of entry. This started out as me wanting to get a fun car to drive on weekends, etc. My criteria were 2 doors, stick shift and over 200 HP. Miata is too small and under powered. I couldn't see myself in an FR-S or BRZ at my age, 90s vintage Supras are astronomical & the new Supras are too new to tell. So, I started sniffing around the 996 & Boxsters. I just hope my Subaru Outback doesn't get too jealous and break down in spite.

Just sold my 00 S (some have dual IMS , some don't). Both cars are beautiful. I have a 02 C4S now. Which is a beautiful car too. I don't think you will really notice it being all that more powerful. They are both fast enough. I chose the 996 because I tend to do road trips and feel the heaviness of the 996 was better on the highway. If I was carving up corners and wanted a convertible, 986 S all day. So much fun. Also, I think the 986 is just so different looking than anything on the road. I think over time the entry level stigma will vanish and people will realize them for the awesome car they are. Regarding maintance, the only comparable I have is the water pump and that sucked on the 996 vs the Boxster. I though and think foolishly posted once that the 996 would be easier. The answer is: If you want a convertible, I would get the 986 S. Coupe obviously the other. I miss my Boxster and will be sending the buyer a letter about buying back when he is done. Have you considered a gen 1 or 2 Miata. Freeking awesome fun to drive. If your into straight line racing, get a Stang. Good luck and enjoy the search.

Sorry, missed your post. Scratch the Miata.

Quotes source post: 16360678

You probably wouldn't like the FR-S/BRZ either. It's an excellent car -- great handling, drives great, but zero torque. It's rated at 0-60 in 6.2 seconds, but if feels like it takes 9 seconds unless you take it to redline (and even then it didn't feel very fast). A turbo or supercharger would turn the BRZ into an awesome car though. When you look at pretty much all other cars in the 996 the price range, the 996 is a screaming deal in terms of driving experience and overall value.

Quotes source post: 16360637

This is always the case with all cars. Removing the roof reduces rigidity, which needs to be added back somehow.

I went out for a desert blast a month or two back; a buddy in his new Toyota 86 tagged along. He was VERY frustrated by the inability to keep up with my 996.

Quotes source post: 16360595

My car is a model year 1999 built in December �98. I think factory double DIN was always part of the navigation package, but don�t quote me. Spotting full leather from pictures: look for stitched seams near the tops of the door cards and along the edge of the instrument binnacle. My �full leather� car still lacks many of the leather bits available on the options list, but it�s the leather doors that are a must-have IMHO. For me the 986 was simply not an option; I don�t fit.

Quotes source post: 16360845

I know, right? That's the conclusion I'm coming to. I like what people are saying about the reliability and they're generally well taken care of. The maintenance though...

I only wanted to add that it�s clear Porsche has now repositioned the Cayman as the true sports car and, from the 991 series on, the 911 is a GT car. I chose a 996 because I wanted a bigger interior, all wheel drive, to drive my kids to school and to put my bike on top. Without that, Cayman all day for pure driving.

Quotes source post: 16361131

Thanks for the tips! I'm well under 6' I fit in anything. Except for a 6' supermodel. I've never been able to fit into one of those.

I have both a 00 996 C2 and a 00 986 S. Honestly in day to day driving below 4k rpm, they are so similar but one is a vert. I love verts, so I have both. Miata is for sale. Above 4000 rpm the 996 is significantly quicker and the handling is trickier. The Boxster is a more civilized predictable car. No one thinks much of them. In a 996, everyone thinks you are a rich stuck up person. In either, the minivan econobox set will accelerate as hard as they can and cut you off to put you in your place. I never experienced that in domestic V8 cars as much.

Quotes source post: 16361163

Yeah, later on I plan on asking for advice on how to drive it so that I don't get in over my head at first. I also think I'm gonna need to be a lot nicer driving. I don't want to be "that guy" in the Porsche.

Non leather. Note the one-piece door cards and smooth binnacle. https://www.chrisrifephotography.com...-S/i-SVGfnjL/A Full leather. Note door seams and stitching on binnacle. https://www.chrisrifephotography.com...ra/i-DZTsB6s/A Kind of amazing how many of us have owned both! Still miss my Cayman, though...

Quotes source post: 16361321

Thank you! I see the difference in the stitching. I'm not crazy about that interior color but I'm definitely not opposed to a few more dead cows in the car!

Someone mentioned Miata, the 3rd gen is awesome. I have a 3rd gen chump/wrl Miata and we usually best the 1 and 2 ones. It's probably similar to a 2.5 boxsters with it's 165 whp (tune and headers). Weights 2366 with full of fuel and no driver. Also the spec 996 are pretty quick for what it is,look up some laptimes.

Quotes source post: 16361228

I think the 996 is old enough now to escape that effect. The looks I get are mostly approving, and people let me in. Having an early narrowbody car probably helps there.

Quotes source post: 16361228

Technically speaking, if you want to be "that guy", you've got to buy a Mustang PS : I'm not a Mustang hater, but it's a thing for some reason http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjQtU_B8TuA

"PS : I'm not a Mustang hater, but it's a thing for some reason" ^^^ Because generally speaking, they're overweight, over-powered, poor handling, relatively inexpensive, decent looking cars. So, everyone who really wants one can pretty much afford one. They're relatively easy and inexpensive to modify and make GOBS of power with. Once this is accomplished, the owner thinks he (or she - but 9 times out of 10 it's a he...) is a race car driver (regardless of their actual driving ability) makes a silly mistake (which is very easy with such a car...) and BAM! Yup, it's a thing - hopefully they don't hurt/kill others (or themselves).

Follow up thread: Is a Boxster a beater?

Quotes source post: 16360479

Wouldn't agree with that. More training/practice needed!

The regular Boxster is too slow. It's gotta be a Boxter S or 996. It also must be a manual. I looked at both, but I was hoping to find a 996 as I didn't really want a convertible. Look for both 996 and Boxster S models and go with the best deal. (Assuming you don't mind a convertible).

Nope. It's not a 911. Get the 911.

Quotes source post: 16360598

Woah, sorry if I hit a nerve... I brought up the standard Boxster because that's exactly what the OP was asking about (last I checked there are no Boxster S for sale in the 8k range). You're gravely mistaken if you believe the Boxster S and the 996 are only a few hp apart. 50% more power is going to be noticeable and very significant. I'm sure the Boxster S is a great car, but I stand by my original assessment that (in the 996 and 986 generation) they're in two totally different performance classes. Even if they had identical power output I'd still put my money on the 996 in straight line acceleration due to that design flaw you mentioned putting a ton of weight on the rear wheels and providing insane traction off the line. I'm not a professional driver by any means, but I have owned and driven mid engine rear wheel, front engine rear wheel, front engine all wheel, and now rear engine all wheel drive vehicles and the 996 is by FAR the most planted and predictable of them all. In fact, I've spun out every one of the cars I've owned with the exception of this one, and I've drive this one on a track - again never even coming close to losing it. Maybe unpredictable oversteer was a problem with earlier generations but I haven't found that to be true with my car. It is worth noting that I have a C4S, so the extra wide rear tires may be a contributing factor, and it does have PSM which I have gotten to click on from time to time.

Quotes source post: 16362638

I'll be the first to admit that I'm a third-rate driver - but having driven both for multiple years, I stick by my assertion that the 986 is much more forgiving/"catchable" than the 996.

Quotes source post: 16368144

50%?!? Where did you get this from?

The posted 0-60 and 1/4 times shows the 996 to be faster than a Boxster S. Is this mostly due to traction? I can never spin my 996 in the dry (almost hard in the wet too). I know 0-60 is kinda pointless but might be a good indication if straight line is important.

Quotes source post: 16368197

It almost has to be. I once came off the expressway ramp at �way too fast,� and had to brake hard while turning right. I was in my 2000 986S at the time, and the rear end started coming around. But I had no choice but to keep turning, and the rear kept on coming around. I finally was able to 4-wheel slide through, and straightened it out. I bet if I was in the 911, it would have been worse - the 911 is less likely to 4-Wheel slide given the way it turns in and Trail-brakes so lovely. In the 911, I�d have been better off stomping the brakes in a straight line - it probably out-performs a Boxster in straight line braking? They are both, though, pretty easy to control with practice. To maximize the capability of each requires a little driving style adjustment.

Quotes source post: 16368293

haha that sounds insane. You have to driving crazy fast to loose control of a 996 on the street imo. (Unless you have crappy 400tw all season tires or something)

Quotes source post: 16368266

Base 986 was 200HP, base 996 is ~300HP. 300 is 50% more than 200 (200 * 1.5)...

Quotes source post: 16368303

Yeah I looked at the wrong figure when I did the math though. I meant to compare the Boxster S, so it's actually 25%, still a pretty significant amount of power so I stand by everything else except for the math. I've only ever driven a standard Boxster, but I did own a 3 liter Z4 for a while with 255hp so I imagine that was similar to a Boxster S (in terms of power, I am well aware the Boxster S should be able to run circles around a Z4 in terms of handling). The difference was very noticeable, I don't consider the two cars in the same league by any stretch of the imagination and I think the market price for used accurately reflects that.

Also this is interesting: Boxster S, 3.2L 250hp = 78 HP/L 996 3.4L, 300hp = 88 HP/L Is the Boxster S less sporty and revvs less? That could explain the performance difference. Never driven a Boxster S but I would assume the handling to be fantastic.

Quotes source post: 16368340

i.e. intentionally hobbled with less power so it can't compete with the 911? Definitely.

So if you don't have kids to drive around in the back you should get a 996 swapped Boxster?

Quotes source post: 16368518

or simply add a full exhaust and 3.4 intake to your boxster.

2001 boxster S 8 minutes from selling on BaT. currently only bid to $8,100. https://bringatrailer.com/listing/20...-boxster-s-43/

Quotes source post: 16368317

I've driven both, a '00 Boxter S and a '99 996 C2. Don't worry about the math, drive both and you will know what I mean. The straight line acceleration difference is not relay noticeable between the two but the superior handling and braking of the S is. The regular Boxter has many differences between the S, it is not just the engine. The springs are different, the brakes are too, I would think so are the shocks and so on. Also has a 6-speed transmission instead of the 5.

I believe the Boxster S weighs 200 lbs less than a 996 Cabriolet, so even though it�s 50HP down, you get a non-trivial weight savings with the Boxster S. It�s probably 95% as fast as the 911 at a much reduced acquisition cost.

Quotes source post: 16368631

Agree - standard base 986 is best compared to a Miata

Quotes source post: 16368144

OP here. I know the below question about comparing the non-S Boxster with the 996 wasn't directed at me but I wanted to chime in. My questions (despite the title) were more about comparing the two cars from a cost of ownership perspective with a focus on maintenance and depreciation. NOT driving experience. Because of that, I decided to compare a vanilla 996 to a vanilla Boxster. It was a judgement call but I thought that was the best way to compare the two cost-wise. I totally agree that driving-wise it would be better to compare the Boxster S. After reading all the comments, had I decided to go with a Boxster, I'd probably be limiting my search to the S.

Maintenance cost between the Boxter S and a 996 C2 Coupe will be pretty much the same.

Quotes source post: 16368631

So that's how my Box S+ 3.6 has been kicking 996 butt for 10 years

Quotes source post: 16368293

A couple times in PCA DE, 1 at Putnam on at Mid Ohio spun the Boxster S, both 360 spins, never left the track,, To which I thought I heard unless you leave the track put it in gear and continue. Instructor said No, pull in, Little did I know he couldn't get over it rotated 360 w/o leaving the track. Brakes on 986S are same as on a 996 Coupe, just Red in Color. Glad I kept my Hawk Plus's.

Has anyone seen any fast laptimes posted in a Boxster S? Sounds like a great track car but don't see them often at the track. (Maybe I go to the wrong tracks)

Quotes source post: 16368871

There are many places that don�t allow cabs to run/race without a rollcage, so that could be why.

Quotes source post: 16368949

fast times for a Boxster S. Like fast times for a 944 914 or whatever else it�s all relative. If you�ve never driven one we�ll never have fast times I�m assuming .

I currently own both a 996 C2 and 986 S. The power difference is way beyond noticeable especially after 5k rpm. When the 996 really shines the 986 S falls flat in its face. I�ve been told all the difference is in the longer more restrictive exhaust and intake manifold by a very reputable engine rebuilder. It�s so noticeable, I�m not convinced the cams and timing aren�t slightly different as well as the ECU tune. No way in heck a Boxster S stays with its counterpart year 911 after 60 mph. By 100, it would be a multi car length difference.

Quotes source post: 16368871

Are you looking for stock figures? I can give you some northeast track times but my car isn't stock and runs r-comps

Quotes source post: 16370130

Would be interesting to see what a modded Boxster S could do at let's say COTA. (Coilovers, bolt ons, etc) If it has similar power to weight ratio as a 996 and much better handling it could be a rocket.

Quotes source post: 16368670

Awesome, good luck with your search! I'm sure you'll love it. I'd restrict my search to the S as well. If you happen to come across a great looking non-S variant, at least take the time to test drive an S as well.

Quotes source post: 16370130

Not scientific, and lots of variables, but at least it�s a database: Boxster S Nordsheife: 8:32 911 996 Nordshleife: 8:17 97% as fast, but not nearly as quick (0-60). https://fastestlaps.com/models/porsche-boxster-s-986 and https://fastestlaps.com/models/porsche-911-carrera-996

A pic of my past triple black Boxster, and my current 996. Very different cars. I loved the Boxster - such a fun and nimble car. But after driving the 996 on track I was hooked. The 996 is much more of a beast and is so rewarding once you learn how to drive it to it's potential. For me the Boxster was much more economical to run and had fewer issues, but maybe I was lucky. Wish I could have kept both.

Quotes source post: 16358902

+1...having owned both, I didn't find the Boxster to have dramatically less or more room to carry stuff outside of the passenger compartment. Inside the passenger compartment - different story due to the 911's back seat. (But this benefit will feel at least a little offset when time comes to do maintenance. You can just sit right in the passenger compartment of the Boxster and work on much of the engine; pretty cool). Otherwise, the 911 is faster for any year than the Boxster, but a newer Boxster will run with an older 911...

Quotes source post: 16371637

I have so often had to explain what �triple black� means that I had started to wonder if the phrase was wholly a product of my own imagination. Thanks for the reassurance! Now back to your regularly scheduled forum thread...

Quotes source post: 16373254

It�s not that common a phrase, as it often only applies to cabs: Black exterior, black interior, black convertible top. And a lot of triple black cars have black logos/badging where applicable. Now, as far as the color black goes, there are many different kinds of black. Not sure how many types Porsche uses - I suspect just one for the 996-era?

Not including PTS colors I believe just black (non metallic) and basalt black metallic.

Quotes source post: 16373311

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/2000x1198/b4_c4ba0ce194ca16370041b7ef3480d3ae2b785415.jpg

Miss my S It just did everything really well and the shape was so different than anything else on the road. Finding cost between 4S and Boxster the same. Box easier to work on for the stuff I did on both.

Quotes source post: 16368670

I started my Porsche ownership with a Boxster, ended up buying 3 boxsters before moving to a 996. I love driving the Boxster, and it got me hooked on Porsche ownership. One thing to consider is that the cost of repairs are going to be about similar between the boxster and the 911. It is harder to justify the repair costs with the boxster compared to the 911. A $1,500 repair relative to the cost of a boxster feels like a lot more money than a $1,500 repair on a 911. If you buy a Boxster to 'test out' Porsche ownership, it should not devalue much over a year or two of ownership. The one thing that cause me to spend more money is I mod my 911 a WHOLE LOT, whereas I did not do as much with the Boxster. The Boxster was a transition car for me, so I always knew that I want to get a 911. With the 911, I justify spending more money because I plan to keep it for a long time. My justification for moving to the 996 was because of the back seats with the ability to carry kids. It turns out that the additional space of the back seats allow me to carry a lot more cargo than the trunk in the Boxster.

Quotes source post: 16374158

Totally agree with the relative cost! That's why I'm going with the 996 over the Boxster. The Boxsters also seem to depreciate much like normal cars where the 996 seems to get to a certain point and stay there.

Quotes source post: 16374091

Yeah, the inspiration of the shape had some 550 Spyder DNA in it. If that�s not True Porsche, then I don�t know what is. 550 Spyder

Quotes source post: 16374251

Wish they were inspired a little more. The back end of the Boxter turns a lot of people off and gave it a "hairdresser's" car label.

Quotes source post: 16356894

Some say (me) a combo is best :

I have a couple of Boxsters, a couple of Boxster S and a 996C4. That way I can spend all day arguing with myself over which is the better car.

Quotes source post: 16375515

For real?

Quotes source post: 16375515

Really? Ha, that's a lot.

Quotes source post: 16375525

No. I really don't argue with myself. The simplest, most fun of the three models to drive is a base 986. 5 - 1999 Boxster 1 - 2000 Boxster 1 - 2001 Boxster S 1 - 2002 Boxster S 1 - 1999 996 C4 And yes, they all run and drive. It's an out of control hobby.

Quotes source post: 16375544

Lol. Why is the most fun the base Boxster? Just curious if your reasons are any different than what has been discussed so far.

Quotes source post: 16375552

Once you learn how to drive a slow car fast on the track, there's not much more satisfaction than seeing the look of concern in the rear view mirror of a GT3, 996 turbo, or new model 'Vette as you're hanging onto their butt in the corners. And the few times they've had to give me a passing signal is worth the price of admission. Yeah, they kill me on the straights, but who cares. There's always, always someone that's faster in a straight line, it's the corners that matter. That's what driving a Porsche is really about. Most guys don't get it. They think horsepower is the ultimate tool. It's not. Not even close.

Quotes source post: 16375580

I agree - you said the magic words - �the track.� Driven like a pro, a base Boxster is downright lethal.

One of the Boxster study cars at the Porsche Museum.....below that the only 996 I saw in the place other than the blue 996 from "Cars" Boxster proto 996 C4 cab with hard top and roof rack

Quotes source post: 16374692

The only people I've heard refer to the 996 as a "hairdresser's car" are Porsche snobs. Never heard it a single time in "real life," even when I wore my finest silk scarfs and buttless corduroy chaps while driving the 986. The 986 sh*t-talking, like the 928, 944, and 996 sh*t-talking, always comes from "real" 911 owners. Owning an ill-handling lawnmower seems to mess with one's social skills...

Quotes source post: 16375580

Sweet looking Boxster! What rear spoiler is that?

Quotes source post: 16376968

It's the first generation factory aerokit for the Boxster. It deletes the rear "pop-up" spoiler. The deck lid is make of fiberglass and is extended to cover the opening where the pop-up spoiler would be. The factory aerokit also adds side skirts and has a different front bumper cover. These pictures are from another of my '99 Boxsters with the factory aerokit and hardtop and factory M030 Sport Suspension. Boxsters put together right have every bit the appeal and looks of a 996. Anyone that calls one of these two cars a "hairdresser car" needs to come ride shotgun with me on the track for an afternoon.

I�m going to add the 986.2 factory aerokit to my speed yellow S soon. It�s a bit different but will really make the car look the part. Suncoast is selling them dirt cheap to get them gone too. The front alone is worth it if you wanted to put it on a 996.1 too.