07 987S... hp AND handling imprevements?

[FC]

Got an email from PNA today to go check out my local dealer among the models mentioned, there was this on the Boxster models:

Few things deliver as visceral an experience as driving a true mid-engine roadster like the Boxster or Boxster S. And once again, Porsche engineers have advanced the art by updating them where it counts. Both models now come standard with VarioCam Plus, resulting in improved low-end torque. Horsepower is also up to 245 hp in the Boxster and 295 hp in the Boxster S. Cornering is even more stable and reassuring thanks to a wider track and a lower ride height. Come see the more powerful Boxster models at your Porsche dealer.

I did not hear any of this. I'm sure the effect is rather minor if this is true at all, but still.

I'll do some digging later. I'm off to the Mazda Zoom Zoom Live event.

[lemming]

i love the fact that they build the Detuned S, but now that the boxster gets the same engine, it makes very little sense to me to charge MORE for the Detuned S.

and i hate convertibles, but i'd be hard pressed to turn down a Boxster if it was so desired.

[FC]

i love the fact that they build the Detuned S, but now that the boxster gets the same engine, it makes very little sense to me to charge MORE for the Detuned S.

and i hate convertibles, but i'd be hard pressed to turn down a Boxster if it was so desired.

To be fair, the price delta has shrunk, since they hiked up the price for the 987S and held that of the Cayman S.

987S = $55,500
Cayman S = $58,900

The $3,400 difference is much less than the prior ~5K delta. But still, with the same engine on both cars, it's hard to justify $1 more for the coupe.

[FT@SGP]

I think the real difference between the 3.2 Variocam and 3.4 Variocam Pls engines is the torque curve. The 3.4 VCP has a flat one between 4400-6000 RPMs, which not bad at all in a NA engine, and you can really feel the difference between them.

[equ]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=116535#7

It "looks' lower though there's no mention. By the way, it seems that edmunds has a pretty good idea of their 'mudgeon readership:

"Peak torque sticks around until 6000 rpm, so the big six has plenty of midrange. Big-block junkies might complain about a light bottom end, but they've spent too much time under the hoods of their Novas. The transmission's shorter 1st and 2nd gears make it way easy to get the engine up to its happy zone and keep it there, even on the tightest mountain roads."

Those junkies know who they are :lol: :lol:

[JST]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=116535#7

It "looks' lower though there's no mention. By the way, it seems that edmunds has a pretty good idea of their 'mudgeon readership:

"Peak torque sticks around until 6000 rpm, so the big six has plenty of midrange. Big-block junkies might complain about a light bottom end, but they've spent too much time under the hoods of their Novas. The transmission's shorter 1st and 2nd gears make it way easy to get the engine up to its happy zone and keep it there, even on the tightest mountain roads."

Those junkies know who they are :lol: :lol:

Are you saying that Chevy is bringing back the Nova?

Cool.

:lol:

[JST]

Are you saying that Chevy is bringing back the Nova?

Cool.

:lol:

EDIT:

Now that the Boxster S has a real engine, it is starting to be a somewhat tempting proposition.

[lemming]

EDIT:

Now that the Boxster S has a real engine, it is starting to be a somewhat tempting proposition.


same sentiment here. with all due respect to JV --i love the way the boxster handles, but i was and am always wishing for more power. the chassis is brilliant and can certainly handle it.

[equ]

same sentiment here. with all due respect to JV --i love the way the boxster handles, but i was and am always wishing for more power. the chassis is brilliant and can certainly handle it.

But more importantly, how much of a Nova fan are you? :eeps:

[FC]

EDIT:

Now that the Boxster S has a real engine, it is starting to be a somewhat tempting proposition.

I always liked it. But it has reached my personal bar for a car that not only handles better than my 330i (it always did), but gets to a 10lb/hp ratio or better.

I mean, really, what's not to like? Great brakes, mid-engine, fast, finely tuned, sounds good, looks *good,* decent quality and reliability. The only drawback is that it isn't cheap. Oh well.

[lemming]

But more importantly, how much of a Nova fan are you? :eeps:


in its day, the Nova was fantastic and served its purpose really well. it was one of the few cars that were insurable at the height of the muscle car madness in the day because it was a true sleeper. i appreciate that.

;)

i know this is really stubborn, but i still feel like the boxster is too many things to too many people and until they make a version that is focused right at our demographic, i'm still ambivalent about it. something like an RS or GTx version. the S is still just hiding profit behind an options package, to me. i want the real deal. and i promise i'd buy one.

[FC]

i know this is really stubborn, but i still feel like the boxster is too many things to too many people and until they make a version that is focused right at our demographic, i'm still ambivalent about it. something like an RS or GTx version. the S is still just hiding profit behind an options package, to me. i want the real deal. and i promise i'd buy one.

And I will repeat that I can't afford the "real deal" if it's ever offered, so I'll take what they've got.

And, since I'm a poseur, if I had $110K to spend on a car, I'd get a 997 GT3, rear-engined and all.;)

[JST]

The only drawback is that it isn't cheap.

And it only has two seats.

[FC]

And it only has two seats.

True, but I was working under the premise of wanting a roadster.

[lemming]

And I will repeat that I can't afford the "real deal" if it's ever offered, so I'll take what they've got.

And, since I'm a poseur, if I had $110K to spend on a car, I'd get a 997 GT3, rear-engined and all.;)

i like the 997GT3, but the mid-engined 998GT3 911 will be better.

[FC]

i like the 997GT3, but the mid-engined 998GT3 911 will be better.

It ought to be.

[John V]

same sentiment here. with all due respect to JV --i love the way the boxster handles, but i was and am always wishing for more power. the chassis is brilliant and can certainly handle it.

I have no insecurity whatsoever for buying the 986. I bought what I could afford and I still like it. When the 987S 3.4L becomes affordable, I'll probably look into one of those.

[FC]

I have no insecurity whatsoever for buying the 986. I bought what I could afford and I still like it. When the 987S 3.4L becomes affordable, I'll probably look into one of those.

I am glad the 3.4L was added for '07. That way, come '09 I'll have the choice of new or 2-year old to pick from (or 3-year old Cayman S if I choose to go Coupe). And the cool parts is that the Cayman beta-tested the engine for a year prior, so no worries about buying the first-year 3.4L 987S. As it is, the engine is largely not new. Just bolt-on bin parts, really.

[John V]

That's my thinking. A 2-3 year old Boxster S 3.4L with the much-nicer 987 exterior and interior... yum. :D

[lemming]

That's my thinking. A 2-3 year old Boxster S 3.4L with the much-nicer 987 exterior and interior... yum. :D

it wasn't meant as a dig. we just have different priorities in cars. i will always give up some feel and handling for rawness and power. i'd like to have all of the above, but even if you unlimit the budget, it's still relatively difficult to get all of the above in a single car, no?

the 3.4 in the 987 goes a long way toward that.

[lemming]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=116535

[FC]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=116535

Repost, but certainly a great review.