987 Base Cayman vs 987 Cayman S

Evening all, I got speaking to someone who has owed both versions of the 987.1 Cayman , and he said that he couldn’t tell the difference between the base and the S version. I personally find this hard to believe because the S version to me seems like the version to have unless you manage to own an R. Can anyone else confirm that the 2.7 base isn’t really different from the 3.4 S? I know the spec on paper is different, but can you tell? 🤔

It depends. You're in the UK? Major roads in the UK are heavily patrolled IIRC from when I visited... so you won't get to use the extra power the S provides a lot.. and the UK has lots of small twisty lanes and roads - where you will get to use the handling, which is the same S or base. And some of us realize it's more fun making a slow car go fast than going slow in a fast car. The 2.7L engine can be made to sing on some of your back roads. An S would be lugging. You have a Tiptronic? If I had to guess - the difference between the S and base in a Tip is possibly even less since neither of them really encourages manual gear changing. Maybe if both were a 6-speed... but even then - using the 2.7L engine to close to its capabilities is an exciting way to drive..

Thats an interesting way to look at it. Very rarely do I get to use the full power of the S. most of the time I’m cruising around in 3rd or 4th gear because of the speed limits.

This has softened massively in the last 10 years to the point i rarely see any traffic police full stop. I also think the midrange power of the S is where its benefits are. Wringing it around to 8krpm is best saved for the twisties as there is nothing to be gained on the large motorways. I think it's just a way of learning to be always in the higher end of the rev range when you want to play. I came up from honda and rotary so was naturally this way. Its a different way of driving from a big torque low rpm motor.

(This is my personal opinion / experience) Yes, I can tell the difference but not significantly different, as I have a 2005 Boxster 2.7 (5MT) and my buddy has a 2008 BS (6MT) - please note that each person will have different perspectives (e.g., if you ask my wife all F1 cars are the same, and if you ask Adrian Newey...well.... ) Based on my experience: 1. S seems "smoother" (both tranny and engine wise) 2. You can feel better / stronger lower-end torque (esp around 2500 - 4000) - on my Base model, you don't get / feel any "pull" until 4000 or above 3. S engine seems to have lower exhaust notes as the base seems to "growl" more (but this is purely a personal taste / choise as either one is fine) - I joke with my friend "you BS sounds like a Lexus " ;-) 4. Couldn't feel any significant difference in handling / suspension but I was not flooring in 3th gear going through a high speed corner / twisty roads If we are talking about speed / torque difference @ 5000RPM, taking a corner @ 50 MPH vs. 55 MPH, you track and want to improve your lap time by 1 sec, etc., then somewhat of a different car but for me (I don't track / autocross), they are basically the same in my book, as you friend indicated. Some folks here track so the differences do matter significantly but for me, a weekend driver (at least for now ) I am not sure there are significant differences, resulting in "oh I must get an S." On a side note, I was not specifically looking for a base or an S to buy but just jumped on the best deal at the time, and had experience driving my friend's 986 base and 987 S before the purchase. As my last note, hope you are not a Gunners or a Man U fan ;-)

Thanks for your input on the boxsters 👍🏻 BTW I’m Tottenham 😏

Nufc here!!! We're on our way back to the top!! Exciting times ahead!

I got an S because . . . they make an S! As one of my old bosses used to say years ago: why get a V6 when there's a V8 to be had!

Its a case of the s is better because of the power and torque but the base is still a fantastic car. If its a newer base over a rough S then the base is the better choice. If you can get either then make your choice

Didn't realize Alan Shearer was making a come back....

Actually, I have never driven a cayman ...is there a significant difference between a boxster and a cayman ? I would imagine cayman being a bit stiffer due to its roof but any other differences, whether it is a base vs S.....?

I always prefer a coupe over a soft top. The balance and the way it grips the road makes it levels above imo.

I have a 987.2 Cayman 2.9L, 6MT that I've had for the past year and a half or so. It's the sweet spot for me - I don't track the car, I live in a high-traffic area but still enjoy some weekend driving, so the extra HP would be wasted on me. For less $$ than a 987.1 CS, it made sense for me. Not to mention I had a hard time finding a 987.2 CS as an alternative. When this one came up, my wife said "shift or get off the pot" (I was looking for a manual transmission car for a while, bid on a few on BAT, and finally found a good one at a good price). No regrets here - I'm hoping I can reach the same 200K miles+ that others have.

So I purchased a 2.7 987 earlier this year, after test driving both. The 2.7 felt like a better all around car to me. Almost peppier and more lively (maybe something to do with its weight) the S felt like it had more midrange grunt, but not to the point where I felt it was significantly quicker. Then when I considered the higher risks associated with ‘S’ ownership I decided to find a 2.7. There was no real difference in price between the S and the 2.7 here in the UK. So as I say, I plumped for the 2.7 because it’s arguably more reliable and I preferred the all round package.

I think unfortunately now you just need to go and try yourself. The owners of the 2.7 will sway that way and the 3.4 owners the other.

That’s kind of obvious though isn’t it. People bought what was right for them. In my instance it was the 2.7. I’d agree drive them both, if possible back to back. But the question was asked and I’d gone through the exact exercise this year, in the UK so felt my findings were slightly more balanced than a particular ‘fanboi’ posting what they own

I’ve had the 2.7 base in a boxster 987 and loved every second of it. It is amazing being able to use 100% of the power and was truly a very fun car. I currently have a 981S and while I love it I can’t use 100% of the power ever because you’re already at “go to jail” speeds in second gear. Depends what you’re going to use the car for- track, autocross, casual driving, etc etc

Let's not get too carried away with the HP differences. It is also worth mentioning with the S package you get the bigger Brembos . There are a few other nice perks that come with the S package as well.

I think today you can turn a base Cayman or Boxster into a S with software update.

Yes I think I recall a more aggressive throttle response profile, and shifting profile with the Tiptronic.

I am sure there is an app like everything else

Wow. Thats a lot of potential mileage. I will never get that high in my cars, as I normally get rid under 100k. My Cayman S will be gone before it reaches 60k.

Its all good mate. 👍 The premiership is the best league in the world because of the amount of high level clubs and fierce competition. To the OP sorry for the thread derail

Luckily I am the OP 🤣

Lol, i should have checked really 😅

My apologies as I started the whole thing by "wishing" the OP was not a Gunners / Manure United fan @Neil_jdmr Congrats on your recent win vs. MC....

It doesn't take much to start us brits off when football is mentioned

Half of my brit friends actually don't care about EPL I won't start yet another off topic of RWC.....

And please bring the thread back on topic - or at least avoid dragging it even further OT (especially since a lot of us know nothing about Brit "Football"..

I believe that the Brembo calipers on the S and Boxster are identical except for the colour (at least on the 981). The front discs of the S are larger than the Boxster but this doesn't actually translate to shorter stopping distances in normal use. As the brakes on all models (and indeed most cars) are capable of locking the wheels without electronic intervention, the most important factor determining stopping force/distance (all other factors such as mass, speed, road surface etc being equal) is the amount of mechanical grip between the tyres and the road surface. More powerful calipers and bigger discs cannot change this. Where larger brake discs are beneficial, though, is under repeated heavy braking such as on a racetrack. As brakes convert kinetic energy to heat energy, larger discs can absorb more heat energy because of their greater mass and are more efficient at dumping it into the environment by radiation and conduction (greater surface area). The downside is that the larger/heavier discs have greater unsprung weight. Hence I'm not sure that the different braking package on the S is beneficial for road use.

I am surprised at the balance in responses here. I figured it would be lopsided to the S. Maybe the fact that your run of the mill BEV can handily smoke both the 2.7 and the 3.4 from a stop light has changed the owner demographic of these things since 2008... But Bev don't dance. The 2.7 doesn't have as fat a mid range power band, if that is what is desired. The 50 horse itself is not as big a deal as is the characteristic of the power band. A fuel economy advantage is not a valid reason to opt for the 2.7 either. Personally, both at the similar cost I would go for the 3.4, but if it were a lot less money for the equivalent 2.7 I would do that. Which is what led me to one in the first place. So years in, nothing has changed on my opinion on this.

Couldn't have said better!!! And exactly how I felt when I drove my friend s S (3.4) a few times - I didn't come out thinking " wow, I gotta have an S now" But as you said that mid range torque was noticeable. Plus I was also looking for a S2000 AP1 with no low end torque so..... And in a long run, the resale value maybe better for S models, perhaps? My buddy gives me a hard time for not having an S....until another friend walks in the door....who has a 991 "S" Didn't think we actually think about fuel economy when we buy these Maybe I will upshift from 5500 instead of 6500 to save some gas

In my ongoing hunt to find my first 987 I’ve driven both. I don’t think there is a night and day difference per se, but I think it all comes down to getting the model/options/color that speaks to you. Also, after driving both I’d be happy with either.

And to confuse it further try a 987.2 base....265 hp. Brakes the same as an S (thinner rear rotors) and a 6 speed manual. Personally I think the sweet spot is 987.2 Base...

Old thread. My 2c When I was shopping for a sports car, the high gearing of the Porsches always came up. I was even looking at lowering the final drive. The seller of the car I eventually bought thought the 987.1 Cayman S had lower than standard gearing as “unlike my previous Porsche , I don’t have to shift down to overtake.” It doesn’t have lower gearing but the 3.8 FSI engine has extra midrange. Having extra midrange power means I can use 2nd and 3rd gears in the hills and enjoy changing between the 2. I can get it near the redline (or not, and it’s still fun) in 2nd, give it 3rd for a tiny bit, then heal toe back to second for the next bend. Still risking licence, but probably not prison. If it was for quickest time, rather than maximum fun, I could hold 2nd between bends (7200 redline). For me the extra midrange power means a better experience in most types of driving.

The base 2.9 actually has the lowest gearing. I know I would not drive any faster or slower on the street with an S or an R or GT4 .