How I saved £40,000 - 991.1 Targa 4S - Page 2 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK

981 Cayman a great car. Six-cylinder engine. Better looking than the 982/718. And you don’t need a load of power to make decent progress and enjoy yourself.

I tested a used 991.1 Targa 4S today with the idea I could P/ex my 2014 Cayman 981 2.7 PDK. I've never been a 911 fan boy but had a bee in my bonnet about open top motoring for the three warm sunny days a year we get. I've had convertibles before E46 325ci; E46 330ci; E-class 350 over 15 years but switched to the Cayman over a Boxster as the Cayman looks great and the 981 Boxster not so. The Targa with its dramatic roof operation appealed as it's not too open to the world, roof off... https://youtu.be/I-C1NKNBAhs The 991.1 Targa I drove is a 2014 model too. Great condition. I'd read and watched the reviews saying the wind buffeting at speed and rattling roof were the weak points. This one had SC; PSE; PASM; 14-ways (these last two same as my 981) and every option I'd want. Sitting in it I was immediately at home, it's the same cockpit as my 981. Set off with roof off, felt very similar suspension-wise to my 981, found a small open stretch and I could feel the extra power, 395BHP vs. my 275. Along some winding country roads, again not much different, no chance of using that power. I couldn't hear any exhaust note at all, nothing, maybe it's the wind noise? Pressed the PSE button, absolutely no change, no sound at all from the exhausts whereas my non-PSE 981 would be making a racket, foot down, with its roof up. Well, it's always up, it's a coupe! It must be the wind I thought. I'll try it with the roof back on in a bit. The expected buffeting wasn't too bad and with the windows down a few inches, a fix I'd read about, was fine. Same at 70MPH when driven at a steady pace. Well, when I say "fine" that's fine for someone used to open top driving. Then onto a dual carriageway and blasted past the traffic. Stopped in a lay-by and put the roof on. Off I went again, nope, still no exhaust note with PSE on. I switched between on/off PSE and... nothing, no exhaust sound, zilch. However, returning on the dual carriageway roof up there was a constant drone from the exhaust, identical whether PSE was on or off. At that point I decided I couldn't live with that awful noise. My 981, when cruising, is perfectly drone-less but this was awful. I can only imagine that a new to Porsche buyer might accept this as normal, or not notice it. I certainly did. Rattles-wise, nothing from the roof, on or off, but an annoying driver's door rattle which I could stop by pressing my elbow into the door. Possibly an easy fix, or not. In conclusion the 991.1 Targa is a lovely looking car and the roof a work of art. If you want something special, a "look at me" car, it's fine. But the "must have" PSE is a pain in the ears when cruising, due to the droning. I could look for one without PSE of course, but driving home swiftly in my lowly 981C I revelled in the exhaust and mechanical sounds, its perfect balance and lightness, and the ability to wring so much more out of its engine than the more powerful Targa's. Then I thought back to 2015 when I'd decided on the base 981 engine over the S. Similar reasons back then. I should have known better. A useful test which has got the Targa bug out of my system and made me realise, as many say, that the Cayman is the better driver's car, at least for me. I'll be keeping my £40k trade up money for now. Edited by DJMC on Saturday 4th April 23:11

Cayman/Boxster platform, midship engine mounted - for the street, easier to drive. Get in, start her up and fly around corners like you re a driving God. 911 s are different - you have to learn the car, the driving dynamics, the sound, the heritage. They re harder to drive and get especially on a short test drive. Most don t get them, so they say the mid engined cars are better, faster, etc. For me, no car drives like a 2wd 911. I get the mid engined cars, I ve had one, but they re way off in my view. Heads Porsche wins, tails Porsche wins. There s a car in their line for all.

2.7 986/7/1 boxsters and caymans are some the best cars Porsche have ever made. With the engine right behind your ears you get great intake and engine noise often missing in a 911 so easy to understand how the OP feels. If you get 911s they are also quite special themselves but in a different way to the mid engine cars. I would say a targa is unlikely to float your boat if you like the purity of a base cayman 981. Maybe try a base Carrera next and see what you think. That or a GT3

maz8062 said: Cayman/Boxster platform, midship engine mounted - for the street, easier to drive. Get in, start her up and fly around corners like you re a driving God. 911 s are different - you have to learn the car, the driving dynamics, the sound, the heritage. They re harder to drive and get especially on a short test drive. Most don t get them, so they say the mid engined cars are better, faster, etc. For me, no car drives like a 2wd 911. I get the mid engined cars, I ve had one, but they re way off in my view. Heads Porsche wins, tails Porsche wins. There s a car in their line for all. I totally agree with this. I grew up admiring the 993 then finally got a chance to drive a 987 and a 996 C4S. I was expecting it to blow my mind but it didn't. Instead these cars just fit like a glove. I found I could just get in it and drive without learning them. All the controls and weights were just perfect and positioned in the right places. The 987 just felt so efficient at going fast, so balanced, so neutral. Then I had the chance to drive a C4S many years later and loved it. I wasn't driving on the limit but you could feel the weight of the rear end moving and the car felt alive (and that was 4WD). I just loved that feeling. The 981 is my favourite Boxster. It has the most balanced shape and profile of them all and best sounding engine but I would take a 993 or a 996 over this

It sounds like the PSE wasn t working on that car. Even on tickover you should hear a distinct difference between on and off. With the PSE off the car is fairly quiet below 3k revs then you get a real growl above that when accelerating. At a constant speed it s surprisingly quiet. With PSE on you get more noise throughout with pops on the over run. At a constant motorway speed there is a tone but I wouldn t say an unpleasant drone as such. I ve found PSE to be perfect. Sedate or raucous at the touch of a button. It sounds like you enjoyed the rest of the Targa experience. Try another before you draw a conclusion. Edited by Maxus on Monday 6th April 08:03 Edited by Maxus on Monday 6th April 08:03

Maxym said: 981 Cayman a great car. Six-cylinder engine. Better looking than the 982/718. And you don t need a load of power to make decent progress and enjoy yourself. Not sure I agree with that, it s a great car sure but if looking to upgrade a 2014 I d go newer. People often say the Porsche 981 Cayman 2.7 is the sweet spot of the modern Cayman range. Naturally aspirated flat-six, great steering, perfect balance, etc. And honestly, none of that is wrong. It s a fantastic car and probably one of the purest mid-engine sports cars Porsche has made. But I do think there s a strong case that moving to a Porsche 718 Cayman is a genuine upgrade rather than just swapping one Cayman for another. First thing is the engine characteristics. The 981 s 2.7 flat-six is lovely but it s not exactly torquey. You really have to work it and keep it up the rev range to get the best out of it. That s part of the charm, but it also means that in normal driving it can feel a bit flat until you re properly on it. The 718 changes that completely. Even the base 2.0 turbo has a big torque advantage and you feel that immediately. Overtakes, pulling out of junctions, exiting corners it just punches much harder without needing to wring its neck. On paper the power increase doesn t look huge, but the torque difference makes the car feel significantly quicker in real-world driving. The other thing people often overlook is the tuning headroom. A naturally aspirated engine like the 2.7 is pretty much what it is. A turbo engine isn t. With the 718 there s huge scope for simple ECU tuning to unlock a lot more performance if you want it. It s basically a platform that has a lot of headroom built into it. Then there s the chassis development. The Porsche 718 Cayman isn t a completely new car, it s an evolution of the 981 platform, but Porsche spent several more years refining the suspension, steering calibration, electronics and stability systems. The result is a car that still has that brilliant mid-engine balance but feels a bit more planted and capable when you start pushing it harder. The interior and tech difference is also bigger than people remember. The updated PCM system, better connectivity, Apple CarPlay, improved interface if you actually use the car regularly those things do make a difference. After a while the Porsche 981 Cayman cabin does start to feel slightly of its era. Where the 981 probably still wins is the emotional side. The naturally aspirated flat-six noise is special and there s no getting around that. The turbo four in the 718 simply doesn t have the same soundtrack. For some people that s reason enough to stick with the older car. But if you step back and look at the overall package performance, torque, usability, technology and tuning potential the Porsche 718 Cayman is arguably the more complete car. So I d put it this way: The Porsche 981 Cayman 2.7 is the emotional choice. The Porsche 718 Cayman is the rational upgrade. Neither is wrong, but if someone is already used to the Cayman formula and wants the next step rather than a completely different car, the 718 makes a lot of sense, certainly more so than the 911 targa you test drove I d politely suggest.

I didn’t say a 981 is a better car than a 982, just that it’s better looking. You could have saved yourself a lot of words. :-)

Does sound like the valves weren’t working for PSE. I did find, though, that I had terrible drone in my 981 with PSE. Did my head in.

Early-bird said: But I do think there s a strong case that moving to a Porsche 718 Cayman is a genuine upgrade rather than just swapping one Cayman for another. First thing is the engine characteristics. The 981 s 2.7 flat-six is lovely but it s not exactly torquey. You really have to work it and keep it up the rev range to get the best out of it. That s part of the charm, but it also means that in normal driving it can feel a bit flat until you re properly on it.. A base 718 would be an upgrade in some ways, a downgrade in others. It all depends on your preferences how those balance out. You absolutely get more torque and accessible shove with the 718. The car generally is updated in other ways, too, that make it a superior drive. But if we're just talking engine, the 718 has lag, a more disconnected throttle interaction, it doesn't build to a crescendo the harder you rev it like the NA engine, and that's before we get onto the sound track. Personally, I wouldn't want a 718 purely on the basis of the throttle response and power delivery characteristics. The noise would also be a deal breaker, too, but I don't really need to factor that in because the dynamics of the engine rule it out before you get there. Long story short, I'm not a fan of modern smaller capacity turbo engines in sports cars. Of course the emphasis there is on what I like. But then so should it have been for your point. You obviously value the things the 718 does well. Were I choosing between the two, the 981 powertrain does what I like better, so it would be a "rational" "upgrade" over the 718 for me. From there you'd be looking at things like steering maps and so on to improve some of the 981's weakness versus the 718, though obviously the 718 (982) is a facelifted 981, not a new model. Having said all that, I don't actually buy the base model argument with the 981. The 3.4 itself is no rocket ship, but it is a lot torquier and gives you more options in terms of power deployment and enjoyment return for basically zero downsides bar initial purchase price. You can enjoy the 3.4 in both the mid-range and wringing it out, whereas the 2.7 really is pretty gutless unless you and really hammering it. In that sense, I'd say the oft repeated argument that the 2.7 is more real-world usable because of the lower power doesn't really add up. You really do have to wring the 2.7 out mercilessly to get it going (as you say, it's flat unless you're hammering it), and then the question is opportunity to do that. Pretty much anywhere you can wring a 2.7 out you can do the same in a 3.4. The 3.4 is not a 750S. But where you're not doing that, you can tip in and out of the torque in a more satisfying fashion given the 3.4 gives the sense of quite a lot more mid-range muscle. Edited by housemouse on Tuesday 7th April 14:09

housemouse said: Early-bird said: But I do think there s a strong case that moving to a Porsche 718 Cayman is a genuine upgrade rather than just swapping one Cayman for another. First thing is the engine characteristics. The 981 s 2.7 flat-six is lovely but it s not exactly torquey. You really have to work it and keep it up the rev range to get the best out of it. That s part of the charm, but it also means that in normal driving it can feel a bit flat until you re properly on it.. A base 718 would be an upgrade in some ways, a downgrade in others. It all depends on your preferences how those balance out. You absolutely get more torque and accessible shove with the 718. The car generally is updated in other ways, too, that make it a superior drive. But if we're just talking engine, the 718 has lag, a more disconnected throttle interaction, it doesn't build to a crescendo the harder you rev it like the NA engine, and that's before we get onto the sound track. Personally, I wouldn't want a 718 purely on the basis of the throttle response and power delivery characteristics. The noise would also be a deal breaker, too, but I don't really need to factor that in because the dynamics of the engine rule it out before you get there. Long story short, I'm not a fan of modern smaller capacity turbo engines in sports cars. Of course the emphasis there is on what I like. But then so should it have been for your point. You obviously value the things the 718 does well. Were I choosing between the two, the 981 powertrain does what I like better, so it would be a "rational" "upgrade" over the 718 for me. From there you'd be looking at things like steering maps and so on to improve some of the 981's weakness versus the 718, though obviously the 718 (982) is a facelifted 981, not a new model. Having said all that, I don't actually buy the base model argument with the 981. The 3.4 itself is no rocket ship, but it is a lot torquier and gives you more options in terms of power deployment and enjoyment return for basically zero downsides bar initial purchase price. You can enjoy the 3.4 in both the mid-range and wringing it out, whereas the 2.7 really is pretty gutless unless you and really hammering it. In that sense, I'd say the oft repeated argument that the 2.7 is more real-world usable because of the lower power doesn't really add up. You really do have to wring the 2.7 out mercilessly to get it going (as you say, it's flat unless you're hammering it), and then the question is opportunity to do that. Pretty much anywhere you can wring a 2.7 out you can do the same in a 3.4. The 3.4 is not a 750S. But where you're not doing that, you can tip in and out of the torque in a more satisfying fashion given the 3.4 gives the sense of quite a lot more mid-range muscle. Edited by housemouse on Tuesday 7th April 14:09 I think you’re actually proving the point about the 2.7 more than undermining it. We agree on one key thing: the 2.7 is gutless unless you’re absolutely wringing its neck. That’s been the criticism of that engine since the day the Porsche 981 Cayman and Porsche 981 Boxster launched. A naturally aspirated flat-six is a lovely thing in principle, but the base 2.7 simply doesn’t have enough displacement to deliver meaningful shove anywhere other than the last couple of thousand rpm. And that’s exactly where the Porsche 718 Cayman fundamentally improves the driving experience. The turbo engine’s torque curve transforms the usability of the car. With 380Nm arriving far earlier in the rev range, the 718 responds immediately when you squeeze the throttle rather than asking you to drop two gears and chase the redline. In real-world driving—overtakes, corner exits, short straights—the 718 just gets on with it. The 981 2.7, by contrast, often feels like you’re working hard to extract modest performance. That’s why the whole “you have to rev it out to enjoy it” argument has always struck me as a bit of romantic revisionism. Yes, revving an engine out can be satisfying. But if the only time the car feels properly alive is north of 6,000rpm, then by definition it’s lacking the breadth of performance a modern sports car should have. And as you rightly say, the 3.4 fixes that to a degree, which rather highlights the weakness of the 2.7 in the first place. The 3.4 is the engine the chassis really deserved from the start. Where I’d push back a bit is on the idea that the 718 is merely a “facelifted 981”. That undersells just how much Porsche reworked the car. Yes, the basic platform carries over, but the steering hardware and calibration were significantly revised. Porsche adopted a steering rack derived from the Porsche 911 (991), giving the 718 a quicker ratio and noticeably sharper off-centre response. Drive the two back to back and the difference is pretty clear: the 718 has a more precise front end and better weighting, particularly when you start leaning on it through quicker corners. The suspension and tyre setup also evolved. The 718 runs wider rear tyres, revised dampers, and updated geometry, which collectively give the car a bit more composure at the limit and more traction on corner exit—again something that pairs very well with the extra torque. On the subject of lag and throttle response, I think that criticism tends to be overstated. Compared to old-school turbo engines, the 718’s response is remarkably immediate, particularly in Sport mode. The reality is that modern turbocharging allows Porsche to deliver more performance across the entire rev range, not just a narrow band at the top. And while the engine note debate will probably run forever, I’d argue that focusing too heavily on the soundtrack misses the bigger picture. Porsche themselves implicitly acknowledged this when they put the flat-six back into the Porsche 718 Cayman GTS 4.0 and Porsche 718 Cayman GT4—because the 718 chassis and steering are actually the better driver’s platform. Combine that improved platform with a naturally aspirated engine and you get the best of both worlds. Which really tells the story. If you want the soundtrack above all else, the 981 2.7 scratches that itch. But if we’re talking about the overall driving machine—performance, steering precision, torque delivery, real-world pace—the 718 is simply the more developed sports car. And frankly, once you’ve experienced that instant shove out of corners and the sharper steering response, the slightly romantic charm of a small-capacity flat-six working very hard to go moderately quickly starts to feel a bit overrated.

Early-bird said: Where I d push back a bit is on the idea that the 718 is merely a facelifted 981 . That undersells just how much Porsche reworked the car. Yes, the basic platform carries over, but the steering hardware and calibration were significantly revised. Porsche adopted a steering rack derived from the Porsche 911 (991), giving the 718 a quicker ratio and noticeably sharper off-centre response. Drive the two back to back and the difference is pretty clear: the 718 has a more precise front end and better weighting, particularly when you start leaning on it through quicker corners. The suspension and tyre setup also evolved. The 718 runs wider rear tyres, revised dampers, and updated geometry, which collectively give the car a bit more composure at the limit and more traction on corner exit again something that pairs very well with the extra torque. On the subject of lag and throttle response, I think that criticism tends to be overstated. Compared to old-school turbo engines, the 718 s response is remarkably immediate, particularly in Sport mode. The reality is that modern turbocharging allows Porsche to deliver more performance across the entire rev range, not just a narrow band at the top. Ummm, the 981's rack is as much 911 derived as the 982's. The 981 rack is the same as the 991.1 Carrera rack. It's just Porsche updated the racks for the 991 facelift and the 981 facelift (ie the 982). None of the racks are really "911 derived". 981/2 and 991 are variations of a shared platform. Rather than Boxster and 911 being different cars that share some parts, they are better thought of versions of the same core architecture including things like much of the monocoque, steering racks, suspension arms and so on, where some parts are changed to achieve various layouts. The front half of the platform is more or less the same throughout (there are obviously some monocoque differences for 4WD drive models etc), with changes made at the rear to support the two engine installations. It's worth remembering that the 987/997 facelift received brand new engines and gearboxes, introduced PDK, had a new electrical system, new infotainment, new front and rear bumpers and light units etc. That was every bit as big a transition if not more so than 981 to 982. Are you saying they weren't facelifts? Is the 991.2 not a facelift? Anyway, the 982 definitely has some dynamic advantages over the 981, the steering is a bit better, but the differences are minor compared the change in character and dynamics of the powertrain. Moreover, that the flat four is good compared to old-school turbo engines is irrelevant when what you like is a precise, musical NA engine that builds to an exciting crescendo when you rev it out. Oh and the 718 doesn't have wider rear tyres, don't know where you got that idea. And the last thing these cars need is wider rear tyres! They already have too much tyre for safety reasons!

housemouse said: Ummm, the 981's rack is as much 911 derived as the 982's. The 981 rack is the same as the 991.1 Carrera rack. It's just Porsche updated the racks for the 991 facelift and the 981 facelift (ie the 982). None of the racks are really "911 derived". 981/2 and 991 are variations of a shared platform. Rather than Boxster and 911 being different cars that share some parts, they are better thought of versions of the same core architecture including things like much of the monocoque, steering racks, suspension arms and so on, where some parts are changed to achieve various layouts. The front half of the platform is more or less the same throughout (there are obviously some monocoque differences for 4WD drive models etc), with changes made at the rear to support the two engine installations. It's worth remembering that the 987/997 facelift received brand new engines and gearboxes, introduced PDK, had a new electrical system, new infotainment, new front and rear bumpers and light units etc. That was every bit as big a transition if not more so than 981 to 982. Are you saying they weren't facelifts? Is the 991.2 not a facelift? Anyway, the 982 definitely has some dynamic advantages over the 981, the steering is a bit better, but the differences are minor compared the change in character and dynamics of the powertrain. Moreover, that the flat four is good compared to old-school turbo engines is irrelevant when what you like is a precise, musical NA engine that builds to an exciting crescendo when you rev it out. Oh and the 718 doesn't have wider rear tyres, don't know where you got that idea. And the last thing these cars need is wider rear tyres! They already have too much tyre for safety reasons! I think you’re slightly talking past the point I was making. On the tyre point first — the numbers are actually easy enough to check. Both the Porsche 981 Cayman and the Porsche 718 Cayman run broadly similar factory tyre widths in base trim, typically 235 front / 265 rear across 18, 19 and 20 inch wheel options. Where the change comes in isn’t always the nominal tyre width, but the wheel width and tyre specifications Porsche paired with them as the platform evolved. On the 718 you start seeing wider rear wheel options (for example 10J rears on some 19-inch setups vs 9.5J previously) which changes the contact patch shape and how the tyre sits under load. So yes, the headline tyre width number might still say 265, but the rear footprint and chassis tuning around it did evolve, particularly to deal with the much stronger torque delivery of the turbo engine. The 718 had to manage significantly more mid-range torque than the naturally aspirated base engines ever produced. And that really gets to the broader point. I completely understand why people enjoy the character of the NA engine in the Porsche 981 Boxster and Cayman. The sound and the way it builds revs is appealing. But that doesn’t automatically make it the more effective or more modern powertrain. The base 2.7 simply doesn’t have much urgency until the very top of the rev range. You yourself described having to wring it out constantly, which is exactly the criticism many people have of it. By contrast, the turbo motor in the Porsche 718 Boxster and Cayman produces dramatically more mid-range torque and makes the car feel far more responsive in everyday driving. And that’s before you get to the chassis refinements. You acknowledge yourself that the steering is improved in the 718. I’d argue that improvement is quite noticeable once you start driving the cars properly. The front end is more precise off-centre and the car just feels a little more keyed in overall. None of that means the 981 is a bad car — far from it. It’s an excellent sports car and the engine sound is a huge part of its appeal. But if you step back and look at the car as a complete driving tool rather than purely through the lens of engine character, the 718 is very clearly the more developed evolution of the platform. And when you’re talking about the base models in particular, the difference in real-world performance between the turbo engine and the 2.7 flat-six is actually pretty substantial.

Early-bird said: On the tyre point first the numbers are actually easy enough to check. Both the Porsche 981 Cayman and the Porsche 718 Cayman run broadly similar factory tyre widths in base trim, typically 235 front / 265 rear across 18, 19 and 20 inch wheel options. Where the change comes in isn t always the nominal tyre width, but the wheel width and tyre specifications Porsche paired with them as the platform evolved. On the 718 you start seeing wider rear wheel options (for example 10J rears on some 19-inch setups vs 9.5J previously) which changes the contact patch shape and how the tyre sits under load. So yes, the headline tyre width number might still say 265, but the rear footprint and chassis tuning around it did evolve, particularly to deal with the much stronger torque delivery of the turbo engine. The 718 had to manage significantly more mid-range torque than the naturally aspirated base engines ever produced. The numbers are easy enough to check, and they say the tyres aren't wider! The rim thing is, I would have to say, slightly ridiculous. Even a much wider rim is going to make only small tiny difference in terms of the contact patch given the same tyre. And in any case, a wider wheel will be heavier. Which comes with plenty of dynamic downsides. If you're sensitive enough to feel the tiny delta in grip, you'll feel the downsides of the heavier wheel much more. But actually, it's half an inch. It's nothing, will have a microscopic impact on the contact patch, won't actually weigh much more, etc. People read far, far too much into things like wheel and tyre specs. Re Caysters, Porsche has been fitting 235 front and 265 rear tyres on everything from 240hp 2.7 987s over 20 years ago to 400hp 4.0 982 GTS's and everything in between. Somehow, that's the perfect, forensically tuned solution for both a 240hp 987 and a 400hp 982. Come on, that's not a remotely credible position, is it? Heck, it's the same tyre width on all of the non-GT 718 models, despite up to 100hp delta and a fair old torque gap, too. The idea that Porsche is sensitively tuning the tyre and wheel specs to the extent that half an inch on the wheel width with the same tyre is very much material, but somehow three very different engines with quite distinct power and torque characteristics are all perfectly suited to exactly the same wheels and tyres pretty obviously doesn't make sense. There are all sorts of factors that go into that setup beyond the finer details of handling, everything from just dialling in a bit of blunt understeer for safety to cost considerations and, frankly, habit. Long story short, the idea that the half-inch wider wheels are offered for dynamics is highly fanciful. They'll have been introduced for styling reasons. Early-bird said: I completely understand why people enjoy the character of the NA engine in the Porsche 981 Boxster and Cayman. The sound and the way it builds revs is appealing. But that doesn t automatically make it the more effective or more modern powertrain. Nobody said it does. I really just said if you prefer those NA characteristics, the 718 lump isn't an upgrade in rational terms. It's a downgrade. Early-bird said: But if you step back and look at the car as a complete driving tool rather than purely through the lens of engine character, the 718 is very clearly the more developed evolution of the platform. And when you re talking about the base models in particular, the difference in real-world performance between the turbo engine and the 2.7 flat-six is actually pretty substantial. Only for someone with your preferences. For someone else, the 718 might be a net regression. If you prefer NA characteristics and also a musical engine note, the engine might be a very large regression. For some, that may not be offset by the more marginal improvements in the steering. Or maybe they would. It's all down to preference. Not saying you're wrong to prefer the 718. If it does what you like, it's going to be a great car for sure. What's wrong is to say it's objectively better. Whether it's better or not entirely depends on how you weight all the various attributes. And that's inherently subjective, isn't it?

One OT reply leads to thread morph.

housemouse said: Early-bird said: On the tyre point first the numbers are actually easy enough to check. Both the Porsche 981 Cayman and the Porsche 718 Cayman run broadly similar factory tyre widths in base trim, typically 235 front / 265 rear across 18, 19 and 20 inch wheel options. Where the change comes in isn t always the nominal tyre width, but the wheel width and tyre specifications Porsche paired with them as the platform evolved. On the 718 you start seeing wider rear wheel options (for example 10J rears on some 19-inch setups vs 9.5J previously) which changes the contact patch shape and how the tyre sits under load. So yes, the headline tyre width number might still say 265, but the rear footprint and chassis tuning around it did evolve, particularly to deal with the much stronger torque delivery of the turbo engine. The 718 had to manage significantly more mid-range torque than the naturally aspirated base engines ever produced. The numbers are easy enough to check, and they say the tyres aren't wider! The rim thing is, I would have to say, slightly ridiculous. Even a much wider rim is going to make only small tiny difference in terms of the contact patch given the same tyre. And in any case, a wider wheel will be heavier. Which comes with plenty of dynamic downsides. If you're sensitive enough to feel the tiny delta in grip, you'll feel the downsides of the heavier wheel much more. But actually, it's half an inch. It's nothing, will have a microscopic impact on the contact patch, won't actually weigh much more, etc. People read far, far too much into things like wheel and tyre specs. Re Caysters, Porsche has been fitting 235 front and 265 rear tyres on everything from 240hp 2.7 987s over 20 years ago to 400hp 4.0 982 GTS's and everything in between. Somehow, that's the perfect, forensically tuned solution for both a 240hp 987 and a 400hp 982. Come on, that's not a remotely credible position, is it? Heck, it's the same tyre width on all of the non-GT 718 models, despite up to 100hp delta and a fair old torque gap, too. The idea that Porsche is sensitively tuning the tyre and wheel specs to the extent that half an inch on the wheel width with the same tyre is very much material, but somehow three very different engines with quite distinct power and torque characteristics are all perfectly suited to exactly the same wheels and tyres pretty obviously doesn't make sense. There are all sorts of factors that go into that setup beyond the finer details of handling, everything from just dialling in a bit of blunt understeer for safety to cost considerations and, frankly, habit. Long story short, the idea that the half-inch wider wheels are offered for dynamics is highly fanciful. They'll have been introduced for styling reasons. Early-bird said: I completely understand why people enjoy the character of the NA engine in the Porsche 981 Boxster and Cayman. The sound and the way it builds revs is appealing. But that doesn t automatically make it the more effective or more modern powertrain. Nobody said it does. I really just said if you prefer those NA characteristics, the 718 lump isn't an upgrade in rational terms. It's a downgrade. Early-bird said: But if you step back and look at the car as a complete driving tool rather than purely through the lens of engine character, the 718 is very clearly the more developed evolution of the platform. And when you re talking about the base models in particular, the difference in real-world performance between the turbo engine and the 2.7 flat-six is actually pretty substantial. Only for someone with your preferences. For someone else, the 718 might be a net regression. If you prefer NA characteristics and also a musical engine note, the engine might be a very large regression. For some, that may not be offset by the more marginal improvements in the steering. Or maybe they would. It's all down to preference. Not saying you're wrong to prefer the 718. If it does what you like, it's going to be a great car for sure. What's wrong is to say it's objectively better. Whether it's better or not entirely depends on how you weight all the various attributes. And that's inherently subjective, isn't it? You’re over-intellectualising this to the point where it stops matching reality. Yes, you can say the numbers are “easy to check”, but the mistake you’re making is assuming tyre width alone defines grip. It doesn’t. Anyone who has spent any time around chassis setup knows rim width absolutely affects how the tyre works. The same tyre on a wider rim changes sidewall support, slip angle behaviour, and how the contact patch loads up under lateral force. It’s not just static contact patch area on a spreadsheet. Half an inch might sound trivial when you say it quickly, but in chassis tuning terms it’s exactly the sort of incremental change manufacturers use constantly. Porsche isn’t guessing here. They spend thousands of development hours chasing fractions. The idea they’d change wheel width purely for “styling reasons” on a car whose entire reputation rests on chassis balance is a bit far-fetched. And the “wider wheel equals heavier therefore worse” argument is also a bit of a dead end. The weight delta between a half-inch wider forged wheel is tiny, often measured in a few hundred grams. Meanwhile the gain in tyre support and steering precision is something you absolutely can feel when pressing on. Porsche clearly thinks it’s worthwhile, otherwise they wouldn’t bother. The tyre width argument also misses how Porsche actually engineers these cars. The fact that multiple generations run similar nominal widths isn’t proof they’re lazy or stylistically driven. It’s proof the basic balance of the Cayman/Boxster platform works extremely well in that window. What changes is compound, construction, suspension geometry, damping, bushings, PASM calibration, torque vectoring, diff tuning, and electronics. That’s where the real gains come from, not simply slapping another 10mm on the sidewall. Which brings us to the bigger point you’re glossing over: the 718 as a whole package is simply the better sports car. The chassis is stiffer, the steering rack is quicker, the front end bites harder, the damping is better controlled, and the torque delivery completely transforms how quickly the car actually moves down the road. On real roads — not spec sheets — a 718 is materially faster point-to-point than a 981. Anyone who has driven both properly knows this. The engine debate is really the only place the 981 has a foothold, and even there the argument gets exaggerated. Yes, the naturally aspirated flat six has a nicer soundtrack. Nobody disputes that. But from a performance standpoint the 2.0 and 2.5 turbo engines are far more effective. They produce vastly more mid-range torque, respond better in real-world driving, and make the car significantly quicker everywhere except perhaps the final 1,000rpm before the limiter. Calling that a “downgrade in rational terms” only works if you define a sports car almost entirely by engine noise and throttle response character. Plenty of people do, which is fine, but that’s a preference rather than an objective assessment of performance. And that’s really where your argument collapses a bit. You’re framing the 718 as a sideways move that depends entirely on taste, when in reality Porsche improved almost every measurable aspect of the car: pace, grip, braking performance, chassis response, structural rigidity, and real-world usability. You can absolutely prefer the character of the 981. Lots of people do. But pretending the 718 isn’t the dynamically superior and faster sports car just because you like naturally aspirated engines more is a bit like arguing a newer 911 isn’t better because the old one sounded nicer. Enjoying the old one more is perfectly reasonable. Claiming it’s the better sports car overall is a much harder case to make.

Maxym said: One OT reply leads to thread morph. The huge re quotes don't help either...

I can relate to the OP’s sentiment - with Porsches, very often ‘Less is More’ . Same goes for thread replies

Early-bird said: stuff We'll have to agree to disagree. What you're saying about the tyres and wheels is clearly gibberish. But the fundamental issue is that you're confusing your preference for objective fact. The two cars have a different characteristics, that's objectively true. What's actually better within that is entirely subjective. Even something as simple as grip is subjective. One person might want more grip. Another might want less. More grip isn't automatically objectively better.

in a very different scale - I had the same 'experience' c. 15yrs -20yrs ago After running a NA MX5 for five years, a mate was looking to get out of / sell his S2000. I thought it would be an obvious step up. Electric roof, bigger boot, more cosseted and long legged - and THAT engine. A test drive, suggested that once the thrill of the engine thrust was over - was it worth at the time, me dipping £12k to upgrade? Now, I still have that NA MX5, albeit earmarked to Rocketeer it..

housemouse said: We'll have to agree to disagree. What you're saying about the tyres and wheels is clearly gibberish. But the fundamental issue is that you're confusing your preference for objective fact. The two cars have a different characteristics, that's objectively true. What's actually better within that is entirely subjective. Even something as simple as grip is subjective. One person might want more grip. Another might want less. More grip isn't automatically objectively better. Calling it “gibberish” doesn’t really substitute for an argument though. Manufacturers absolutely use rim width to influence how a tyre behaves — sidewall support, slip angles, steering response. That’s basic chassis setup, not internet folklore. And the “grip is subjective” line is a bit of a reach. You can prefer a car that moves around more, sure. But objectively more grip, better damping control, a stiffer structure and far stronger mid-range performance is exactly why the 718 is quicker and more capable than the 981 in every independent test. You can like the character of the older car more — plenty of people do — but that doesn’t suddenly make the underlying performance envelope a matter of opinion.

Early-bird said: Calling it gibberish doesn t really substitute for an argument though. No, but I made that earlier and you ignored what I said. You didn't remotely account for how a 265 tyre can be perfectly calibrated for both a 2.7 240PS 987 and a 400PS 718. Or indeed how exactly the same wheel and tyre is perfectly calibrated for both a 300PS base 718 and a 400PS 4.0 718. That very obviously can't be the case. Clearly, there are other factors going into the wheel and tyre size specs beyond careful calibration for handling. In short, the idea that they introduced some option wheels with half an inch of extra width but kept the tyres sizes to finely tune the balance is clearly nonsense. Not sure why it even needs to be discussed it's so obviously not true. In that context, the rest of the discussion is a bit moot, because we're into dying on hills territory, I fear!

Expect the Cayman sounded better because you are sat closer to the engine. The enjoyable noise is mostly induction rather than exhaust.

Early-bird said: You can like the character of the older car more plenty of people do but that doesn t suddenly make the underlying performance envelope a matter of opinion. Well, if that's what you care about, you're doing it wrong with a 718. For the same money, there are cars that will get down the road faster. Of course, they won't be mid-engined sports cars and won't give the same experience, but then you're all about the objectives, so it's get the stop watch out and purchase on that basis.

housemouse said: Early-bird said: Calling it gibberish doesn t really substitute for an argument though. No, but I made that earlier and you ignored what I said. You didn't remotely account for how a 265 tyre can be perfectly calibrated for both a 2.7 240PS 987 and a 400PS 718. Or indeed how exactly the same wheel and tyre is perfectly calibrated for both a 300PS base 718 and a 400PS 4.0 718. That very obviously can't be the case. Clearly, there are other factors going into the wheel and tyre size specs beyond careful calibration for handling. In short, the idea that they introduced some option wheels with half an inch of extra width but kept the tyres sizes to finely tune the balance is clearly nonsense. Not sure why it even needs to be discussed it's so obviously not true. In that context, the rest of the discussion is a bit moot, because we're into dying on hills territory, I fear! I get what you’re saying, but you’re oversimplifying how Porsche approaches tyres and wheels. It’s not about each tyre literally being “perfect” for every power output. A 265 on the rear of a 240hp 987 isn’t identical in behaviour to the same tyre on a 400hp 718 — the suspension, damping, diff, geometry, and electronic aids all interact to make it work. Tyre width is only one piece of a much bigger puzzle. So yes, the half-inch wider wheels might seem tiny, but combined with all the other chassis tweaks, they absolutely can have a meaningful effect. Dismissing it as “obviously nonsense” ignores the way these cars are engineered.

housemouse said: Early-bird said: You can like the character of the older car more plenty of people do but that doesn t suddenly make the underlying performance envelope a matter of opinion. Well, if that's what you care about, you're doing it wrong with a 718. For the same money, there are cars that will get down the road faster. Of course, they won't be mid-engined sports cars and won't give the same experience, but then you're all about the objectives, so it's get the stop watch out and purchase on that basis. Sure, if your only metric is a stopwatch, you’re missing the point entirely. The 718 isn’t just “mid-engined for style” — it’s faster, sharper, and more capable on real roads than the 981 ever was. The chassis, steering, and engine delivery all combine to make it objectively quicker and more composed, not just a subjective experience. Mid-engined layout plus real-world pace isn’t a compromise here; it’s an improvement. You can chase raw times elsewhere, but you won’t get the same balance of agility, feedback, and everyday usability in anything remotely like the 718.

Early-bird said: I get what you re saying, but you re oversimplifying how Porsche approaches tyres and wheels. It s not about each tyre literally being perfect for every power output. A 265 on the rear of a 240hp 987 isn t identical in behaviour to the same tyre on a 400hp 718 the suspension, damping, diff, geometry, and electronic aids all interact to make it work. Tyre width is only one piece of a much bigger puzzle. So yes, the half-inch wider wheels might seem tiny, but combined with all the other chassis tweaks, they absolutely can have a meaningful effect. Dismissing it as obviously nonsense ignores the way these cars are engineered. Uh huh. So, how is exactly the same tyre and wheel combo "engineered" for both a base 300hp 718 and a 400hp 4.0 718? I'm not over simplifying anything, but you are clearly very drunk on the marketing Kool Aid. Anyway, this is getting silly, so bon chance and all that.

Early-bird said: Sure, if your only metric is a stopwatch, you re missing the point entirely. Sorry, what? It was you talking about the importance of "performance envelopes". You want it both ways. Whatever. The 718 is amazing and the best at everything. Hooray. Edited by housemouse on Wednesday 8th April 12:30

Early-bird said: Mid-engined layout plus real-world pace isn t a compromise here; it s an improvement. You can chase raw times elsewhere, but you won t get the same balance of agility, feedback, and everyday usability in anything remotely like the 718. See, you do get the subjectives. You can chase raw times with a 718, but you won't get the throttle response, power delivery or soundtrack of the 981. Is the penny dropping...? No, of course not. The subjectives only count when they are in favour of the 718, the ultimate in everything. Apologies, I really will leave it there!

housemouse said: Early-bird said: Sure, if your only metric is a stopwatch, you re missing the point entirely. Sorry, what? It was you talking about the importance of "performance envelopes". You want it both ways. Whatever. The 718 is amazing and the best at everything. Hooray. Edited by housemouse on Wednesday 8th April 12:30 I think that’s missing the nuance of the argument. No one is saying the 718 is just about lap times or a stopwatch metric — that’s exactly why we talk about “performance envelopes” in the first place. It’s about how the car behaves in real-world driving: how the steering communicates, how the chassis reacts at the limit, how torque is delivered in everyday cornering and overtakes. The point isn’t that one car is “faster in a straight line” and that’s the end of the story. It’s that the 718 delivers a more usable, more composed, and more confidence-inspiring package across the range of normal driving scenarios. That’s what the term performance envelope is meant to capture — not just absolute 0–60 times. Saying “the 718 is amazing and best at everything” is a bit of a lazy summary. It is technically a more evolved car in chassis, steering, and torque usability, yes, but calling it the outright best ignores subjective factors like engine sound, NA character, and personal preference. The truth is somewhere in the middle: for a driver who values usable performance, responsiveness, and modern steering feel, the 718 clearly has the edge, while the 981 2.7 still has a compelling emotional draw if what matters most is the naturally aspirated experience. So it’s not a contradiction — it’s just separating usable engineering improvements from purely emotional preferences.

housemouse said: Uh huh. So, how is exactly the same tyre and wheel combo "engineered" for both a base 300hp 718 and a 400hp 4.0 718? I'm not over simplifying anything, but you are clearly very drunk on the marketing Kool Aid. Anyway, this is getting silly, so bon chance and all that. I see what you mean, but it’s not about magic tyres — it’s about how the platform is calibrated around the powertrain. The base 718 300hp and the 4.0 400hp don’t just bolt the same wheels and call it a day. Porsche adjusts spring rates, damper valving, anti-roll bars, alignment, and even tyre pressures to match the torque delivery, weight distribution, and intended driving dynamics of each variant. That’s why the 4.0 feels so planted despite sharing nominal wheel and tyre sizes with the base car. It’s not marketing hype — it’s engineering reality. Two cars can have the same tyre dimensions and still behave very differently if the chassis tuning and suspension setup are adapted to the power and torque characteristics. The 718 platform was designed to be modular and flexible, and Porsche has always leveraged that to make the turbo, base, and GT variants drive differently. So no, it’s not about “Kool Aid” — it’s about understanding that the dynamic envelope of a car isn’t dictated solely by what’s written on the tyre sidewall. And that’s why a 300hp 718 can feel lighter, sharper, and more responsive in some ways, while the 4.0 is more planted and explosive — same wheels, very different experience.

housemouse said: See, you do get the subjectives. You can chase raw times with a 718, but you won't get the throttle response, power delivery or soundtrack of the 981. Is the penny dropping...? No, of course not. The subjectives only count when they are in favour of the 718, the ultimate in everything. Apologies, I really will leave it there! Ah, now we’re back to the heart of the matter — and yes, the penny has dropped. I get it: subjective factors like engine note, throttle character, and emotional connection absolutely matter. The 981 2.7 flat-six delivers a crescendo, a natural sound and feel that the turbo 718 simply doesn’t replicate. If those are the qualities that define “fun” for you, then the 981 is very hard to beat. The point I’ve been making all along isn’t that those things don’t matter. It’s that they’re one part of the puzzle, not the whole picture. The 718 isn’t about nostalgia or NA theatre — it’s about making the car more usable, responsive, and confidence-inspiring across the spectrum of real-world driving. Torque delivery, steering feel, and chassis composure are tangible, measurable improvements that exist independently of how intoxicating the exhaust note is. So yes, the subjectives count both ways. If your metric is soundtrack and high-rev drama, the 981 wins. If your metric is usable performance, mid-range shove, and a sharper chassis, the 718 is superior. It’s not about crowning one car as “ultimate in everything,” it’s about recognising that different cars excel in different ways, and both have their merits depending on what you personally value. It’s entirely fair to love the 981 — it’s a beautiful, characterful machine. But dismissing the 718’s improvements because it doesn’t sound like an NA six is missing what Porsche actually set out to achieve with that generation.

Early-bird said: I see what you mean, but it s not about magic tyres it s about how the platform is calibrated around the powertrain. The base 718 300hp and the 4.0 400hp don t just bolt the same wheels and call it a day. Porsche adjusts spring rates, damper valving, anti-roll bars, alignment, and even tyre pressures to match the torque delivery, weight distribution, and intended driving dynamics of each variant. That s why the 4.0 feels so planted despite sharing nominal wheel and tyre sizes with the base car. You've been reading to many brochures. Porsche doesn't change springs, dampers or digital tuning to suit the various different wheel and tyre combos for a model. Those remain the same regardless of which wheel and tyre option you choose. Sometimes those options can be dramatically different. Like 235 on 17s or 265s on 19s on the same car with the same chassis tuning, same springs, same dampers. And equally, they offer exactly the same wheel and tyre with, say, the base passive suspension, with PASM, Sport PASM, Sport passive. As a matter of clear and objective fact, these things are not matched and tuned in the way that you are saying. What you're saying is, I'm afraid, flowery marketing nonsense. And with that, I'm definitely done. I can read the brochures without the intermediary!

housemouse said: You've been reading to many brochures. Porsche doesn't change springs, dampers or digital tuning to suit the various different wheel and tyre combos for a model. Those remain the same regardless of which wheel and tyre option you choose. Sometimes those options can be dramatically different. Like 235 on 17s or 265s on 19s on the same car with the same chassis tuning, same springs, same dampers. And equally, they offer exactly the same wheel and tyre with, say, the base passive suspension, with PASM, Sport PASM, Sport passive. As a matter of clear and objective fact, these things are not matched and tuned in the way that you are saying. What you're saying is, I'm afraid, flowery marketing nonsense. And with that, I'm definitely done. I can read the brochures without the intermediary! Let’s cut through the nonsense. Your argument that two 718 variants “feel the same because they share tyre and spring specs” is complete rubbish. You’re conflating visible numbers on a brochure with how a car actually behaves. Wheel width and nominal tyre sizes are literally the least important part of the performance equation. They tell you nothing about alignment, anti-roll bars, damper valving, bump stops, steering calibration, or electronic damping mapping — all of which are meticulously tuned to suit each engine’s torque curve and the car’s intended character. Claiming that the cars drive the same because a base 300hp 718 and a 400hp 4.0 718 might share 265mm rears is like saying a 911 Turbo and a Carrera are identical because they both have four wheels. You insist that spring rates and dampers being fixed somehow nullifies Porsche’s engineering. That is laughably false. A fixed spring rate is just one ingredient in a complex dynamic system. Two cars with identical springs and tyres can corner, exit turns, and respond to throttle input in completely different ways depending on torque delivery, weight distribution, suspension geometry, and damper mapping. Anyone who’s driven a 981 2.7 and a base 718 back-to-back knows this instantly — the 718 feels sharper, more responsive, and far more usable in real-world driving. That’s not marketing hype, it’s physics. Your repeated flippant claims about brochures and “Kool Aid” don’t hold up because this isn’t speculation. These are verifiable, tangible engineering changes. Steering calibration, chassis tweaks, mid-range torque delivery, and platform refinements all combine to create a car that feels completely different despite superficial spec similarities. To dismiss all of that as “marketing nonsense” is willful ignorance — it’s an argument that collapses under the slightest scrutiny. And let’s not even get started on your claim that “nothing matters unless the wheels and tyres change.” That’s absurd. If that were true, a base 718 turbo, a GT4, and a Cayman S would all feel identical. Anyone who’s driven them knows they don’t. The handling, mid-corner composure, and throttle response are night and day, precisely because Porsche engineers tailor the entire platform around the engine and intended driving dynamics. So yes, your argument fails entirely. The 718 is objectively a more refined, responsive, and usable sports car in everyday driving and at the limit, regardless of tyre numbers on a page. Pretending otherwise because you can read a brochure and think you understand it doesn’t make it true — it just makes you look like someone who confuses paper specs with actual engineering. End of story.

Early-bird said: Let s cut through the nonsense. Your argument that two 718 variants feel the same because they share tyre and spring specs is complete rubbish. I never said that or implied that. You made that up because you're in internet-forum-dying-on-hill mode. Pretty much everything you've just said is gibberish. Like this: Early-bird said: You insist that spring rates and dampers being fixed somehow nullifies Porsche s engineering. That is laughably false. Nope. Didn't say or imply that. Early-bird said: And let s not even get started on your claim that nothing matters unless the wheels and tyres change. That s absurd. Yes, it is indeed absurd to claim I said that. I didn't say or imply anything to the sort. I was replying to your claim that Porsche added half an inch to the wheel width on the 718/982 while keeping the tyres the same for chassis tuning reasons. This is also something you made up. It's complete nonsense. The whole tyre and wheel thing is far more of a rough compromise than you are claiming. On the 718 base, S and GTS, they use the same wheel; and tyre combo across the models. They also use the same chassis setup regardless of which of the N spec tyre options are used. Moreover, there are other factors, like dialling in some blunt safety understeer, styling, cost and so on that all feed into the wheel and tyre choices. The fact that Porsche has specced 235 front and 265 rears on Caysters for 20 odd years should be enough alone for anyone rational to twig that those tyre sizes aren't chosen purely to suit the precise characteristics of each individual model, engine and chassis spec. There's a lot of compromise going on. None of that is to say or imply any of the frank bizarre things you've claimed I said. For instance, none of that implies that "that two 718 variants feel the same because they share tyre and spring specs" as you said. You made that up, I simply didn't say or imply that before or now. I repeat, I am not saying that! Ditto, "You insist that spring rates and dampers being fixed somehow nullifies Porsche s engineering." Again, no, I didn't say or imply that and what I just said in this post doesn't imply that. Etc. It would probably help the quality of discussion and also any hope of your coming across as vaguely rational if you addressed things people actually say as opposed to coming up with a peculiar list of made up assertions that you then claim someone said! At the moment you sound like a low parameter / small model size chatbot running locally, being fed with Porsche brochures and RLHF'ed to f kery to have a misaligned personality disorder!

Early-bird said: housemouse said: Early-bird said: On the tyre point first the numbers are actually easy enough to check. Both the Porsche 981 Cayman and the Porsche 718 Cayman run broadly similar factory tyre widths in base trim, typically 235 front / 265 rear across 18, 19 and 20 inch wheel options. Where the change comes in isn t always the nominal tyre width, but the wheel width and tyre specifications Porsche paired with them as the platform evolved. On the 718 you start seeing wider rear wheel options (for example 10J rears on some 19-inch setups vs 9.5J previously) which changes the contact patch shape and how the tyre sits under load. So yes, the headline tyre width number might still say 265, but the rear footprint and chassis tuning around it did evolve, particularly to deal with the much stronger torque delivery of the turbo engine. The 718 had to manage significantly more mid-range torque than the naturally aspirated base engines ever produced. The numbers are easy enough to check, and they say the tyres aren't wider! The rim thing is, I would have to say, slightly ridiculous. Even a much wider rim is going to make only small tiny difference in terms of the contact patch given the same tyre. And in any case, a wider wheel will be heavier. Which comes with plenty of dynamic downsides. If you're sensitive enough to feel the tiny delta in grip, you'll feel the downsides of the heavier wheel much more. But actually, it's half an inch. It's nothing, will have a microscopic impact on the contact patch, won't actually weigh much more, etc. People read far, far too much into things like wheel and tyre specs. Re Caysters, Porsche has been fitting 235 front and 265 rear tyres on everything from 240hp 2.7 987s over 20 years ago to 400hp 4.0 982 GTS's and everything in between. Somehow, that's the perfect, forensically tuned solution for both a 240hp 987 and a 400hp 982. Come on, that's not a remotely credible position, is it? Heck, it's the same tyre width on all of the non-GT 718 models, despite up to 100hp delta and a fair old torque gap, too. The idea that Porsche is sensitively tuning the tyre and wheel specs to the extent that half an inch on the wheel width with the same tyre is very much material, but somehow three very different engines with quite distinct power and torque characteristics are all perfectly suited to exactly the same wheels and tyres pretty obviously doesn't make sense. There are all sorts of factors that go into that setup beyond the finer details of handling, everything from just dialling in a bit of blunt understeer for safety to cost considerations and, frankly, habit. Long story short, the idea that the half-inch wider wheels are offered for dynamics is highly fanciful. They'll have been introduced for styling reasons. Early-bird said: I completely understand why people enjoy the character of the NA engine in the Porsche 981 Boxster and Cayman. The sound and the way it builds revs is appealing. But that doesn t automatically make it the more effective or more modern powertrain. Nobody said it does. I really just said if you prefer those NA characteristics, the 718 lump isn't an upgrade in rational terms. It's a downgrade. Early-bird said: But if you step back and look at the car as a complete driving tool rather than purely through the lens of engine character, the 718 is very clearly the more developed evolution of the platform. And when you re talking about the base models in particular, the difference in real-world performance between the turbo engine and the 2.7 flat-six is actually pretty substantial. Only for someone with your preferences. For someone else, the 718 might be a net regression. If you prefer NA characteristics and also a musical engine note, the engine might be a very large regression. For some, that may not be offset by the more marginal improvements in the steering. Or maybe they would. It's all down to preference. Not saying you're wrong to prefer the 718. If it does what you like, it's going to be a great car for sure. What's wrong is to say it's objectively better. Whether it's better or not entirely depends on how you weight all the various attributes. And that's inherently subjective, isn't it? You re over-intellectualising this to the point where it stops matching reality. Yes, you can say the numbers are easy to check , but the mistake you re making is assuming tyre width alone defines grip. It doesn t. Anyone who has spent any time around chassis setup knows rim width absolutely affects how the tyre works. The same tyre on a wider rim changes sidewall support, slip angle behaviour, and how the contact patch loads up under lateral force. It s not just static contact patch area on a spreadsheet. Half an inch might sound trivial when you say it quickly, but in chassis tuning terms it s exactly the sort of incremental change manufacturers use constantly. Porsche isn t guessing here. They spend thousands of development hours chasing fractions. The idea they d change wheel width purely for styling reasons on a car whose entire reputation rests on chassis balance is a bit far-fetched. And the wider wheel equals heavier therefore worse argument is also a bit of a dead end. The weight delta between a half-inch wider forged wheel is tiny, often measured in a few hundred grams. Meanwhile the gain in tyre support and steering precision is something you absolutely can feel when pressing on. Porsche clearly thinks it s worthwhile, otherwise they wouldn t bother. The tyre width argument also misses how Porsche actually engineers these cars. The fact that multiple generations run similar nominal widths isn t proof they re lazy or stylistically driven. It s proof the basic balance of the Cayman/Boxster platform works extremely well in that window. What changes is compound, construction, suspension geometry, damping, bushings, PASM calibration, torque vectoring, diff tuning, and electronics. That s where the real gains come from, not simply slapping another 10mm on the sidewall. Which brings us to the bigger point you re glossing over: the 718 as a whole package is simply the better sports car. The chassis is stiffer, the steering rack is quicker, the front end bites harder, the damping is better controlled, and the torque delivery completely transforms how quickly the car actually moves down the road. On real roads not spec sheets a 718 is materially faster point-to-point than a 981. Anyone who has driven both properly knows this. The engine debate is really the only place the 981 has a foothold, and even there the argument gets exaggerated. Yes, the naturally aspirated flat six has a nicer soundtrack. Nobody disputes that. But from a performance standpoint the 2.0 and 2.5 turbo engines are far more effective. They produce vastly more mid-range torque, respond better in real-world driving, and make the car significantly quicker everywhere except perhaps the final 1,000rpm before the limiter. Calling that a downgrade in rational terms only works if you define a sports car almost entirely by engine noise and throttle response character. Plenty of people do, which is fine, but that s a preference rather than an objective assessment of performance. And that s really where your argument collapses a bit. You re framing the 718 as a sideways move that depends entirely on taste, when in reality Porsche improved almost every measurable aspect of the car: pace, grip, braking performance, chassis response, structural rigidity, and real-world usability. You can absolutely prefer the character of the 981. Lots of people do. But pretending the 718 isn t the dynamically superior and faster sports car just because you like naturally aspirated engines more is a bit like arguing a newer 911 isn t better because the old one sounded nicer. Enjoying the old one more is perfectly reasonable. Claiming it s the better sports car overall is a much harder case to make. Wow! you must like typing...

Break-up time for this ill-matched couple…

Having bought a 987.1 Cayman S, I now see what the fuss is about with these cars vs a 911. Put simply, they're aimed at different market segments, which Porsche seems to be adept at doing when it comes to product placement and positioning. The Cayman, at least the 987 variant, is more sports car than a luxury product, like the 911, which is aimed at customers looking for a car that can do the pootling around stuff, mincing, and switch on beast mode when required. The Cayman is in beast mode all of the time. I've tried and owned 997, 996, 986, and now 987. Of the lot, the Cayman is the more focused car, the Boxster the softer car with good handling characteristics, and the 911 is a mixture of the 2. I still prefer the 911, though, but that's just me.