Automobile mag comparo: Z4 M Roadster vs Boxster S
 

http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews...r_s/index.html

"But the high note undoubtedly remains the Boxster S, because the two days we've spent in these two highly desirable sports cars has confirmed that the Porsche is still the one to beat."

subjectivity is nice and everything, but the problem is those criteria can be argued.

i'd like to see the data for max g loading, braking and laptimes. they'll be out soon enough.

just for reference, i'm going to guess that on a long track with big straights like the 'ring, the M roadster will be about 10 seconds ahead per lap.

That will be important to know if my normal driving ever starts to resemble the Nurburgring. :)

Until then... meaningless.

So? :dunno:

my usual opinion of Porsche's middle ground product applies.

on principle alone, i couldn't ever buy a cayman or a boxster simply because an a priori glass ceiling for performance imposed upon a car that still costs a lot of money seems....wrong to me.

i don't doubt that boxster has better subjective attributes, but my own philosophy is that i'd rather have the most OEM power I can find and dial in the suspension because, in my experience, it's a far easier thing to dial power into suspension bits than it is to dial up the power of an OEM n/a engine.

:dunno: right back at both of you.

So let me bring up my usual point again. I Porsche offered the 997S 3.8L engine in a Cayman or Boxster and charged 997S money for them, you would buy them?

If Porsche offered a 82K 355hp 3.8L Boxster and a 280hp 3.2L Boxster for 27K less, I'd feel the 55K Boxster would be bargain. 0.6L of OEM displacement is not worth 27K to me. 997's are cash cows.

Disagree on both points.

While marketing ruling engineering is annoying (particularly in the case of the cayman as it is a fresh design), there is always a higher performance car so I suspect there is some flawed logic supporting an emotional like of the 911 (which I share as well).

987 -> 987S -> Cayman S -> 997 -> 997S -> GT3 -> CGT (not counting the turbo branch). Where do you draw the line? For me, the 986S had "enough" (obviously subjective). Maybe the 987 is borderline - I'm not sure. The 986 was indeed "not enough" for me and a large number of enthusiasts - hence the reputation for what was a really nice car.

Even harder than upping power in n/a engines is changing the weight distribution. With RR you enter slow, turn-in slow and accelerate early. Some ppl may find it more fun to turn faster in a lower hp FR/MR car. Even in just everyday driving, there is a fun turny feel to low polar moment of inertia cars (s2000, rx8, boxster,...) that I haven't experienced in an RR car.

All fresh in my mind as I just spent a yummy afternoon driving the s2000 and the boxster S.

hmmm.....i think i had the word subjective in there a few times.....;)

This reminds me of a conversation about sleeping with a hot girl's sister....

was really just hoping to bait clyde and JV into the thread since it was quiet.

:D

if i could make room for a boxster, i'd own a boxster (it just wouldn't be my car).