Boxster S vs. S2000 quick and dirty comparasion

[penaj778]

Since im a pre-owned service manager at a chevrolet dealership, on occasion i get the opportunity to drive some very nice cars. Well today i got a 2004 Porsche Boxster S with 37k on the odometer, so i got the keys and took off. The interior is very nice probably better than the s2k (by the way i drive a 2002 seabring (sp) silver s2k). However the seats are nicer in the s2k and the steering wheel seems to fell better also. Other than that the fit and finish of the interior of the Boxster is a bit better than the s2k. Throttle response on the boxster is much less responive compared to the s2k, but acceleration to me felt much the same as the s2k. I will give the boxster a thumbs up in the exhaust note department. in stock trim the boxster s has a much more thrilling note compared to the s2000's exhaust note in stock trim. Turning abilities of the boxster s was my biggest disapointment. there was so much more body roll on the boxster as compared to the s2k which has minimal body roll. also the suspension was not nearly as sporty and stiff while driving on the highway at speed (75-85mph) and almost felt like i was floating on the road rather than being planted to it and on rails like the s2k. at one point i felt like i was driving a cadilac instead of a sports car. i doubt there was anything wrong with the boxster suspension as it was just certified by a Porsche dealership. Over all im more impressed now with the s2k than i was before i drove the boxster s. i hope this comparision ,allbeit by an amatuer driver and writer, puts to rest some questions about what car is better the Boxster or the S2000. if you have more questions for me about the boxster s vs. the s2000 post it and ill try my best to answer them.

[phins2rt]

You're preaching to the choir!! Nice write up!

[Vezna31]

I sat in a Boxster once. As soon as I felt how sloppy the shifter was, I turned down the opp to test drive, and it had a plastic back window.

[Dr. Jimbo]

Boxster is goofy looking. Now the Cayman, pretty bitchin' looking, but I'll keep my S. I like a car I can work on and if someone else has to, it doesn't cost an arm and a leg and a testicle (Ovary for you female Porsche owners).

[Dr. Jimbo]

BTW,
Vinny, congrats on your 1000th post. I'm right behind you.
Jimbo

[Maus2k]

Just one more instance where you are paying more for the name than the actual product. I have not driven one myself but if it is how everyone here makes it seem to be id pay $25k for it no more. I dont know much they cost new but im sure its around 60 or more. too much for too little. Every company compares their roadster to the Miata because of its history but if you see year after year our cars out perform the miata in almost every area. And I can atest to this, the s2k is much more comfortable and the engineering feels much more solid and stable than any other car ive driven.

[Pablo]

Thanks for the personal road test comparison 778. I've never had the opportunity to try a Boxter and reading your report was interesting. I have owned a Porsche 356B and also a 1966 911, both VERY vintage at this point, but the S2K beats them both in every respect except nostalgia.

[sfkjeld]

I was a Boxster S owner up to about 3 weeks ago. Perfect car, owned, maintained, and driven by 2 senior citizens. The car had 33k, perfect maintenance record. Was driving over the San Mateo bridge and the engine completely imploded. Toast. Blown. Towed it a Porsche dealer who confirmed it. 33k mi!. There is no repair, only a factory engine replacement. Est was $15k. Porsche of America acted like this was a maintenance issue. Scumbags. I sold it as a roller for $8k.

Having owned a number of 911's which I loved, but after this, I am going Japanese. I wound up buying an s2k.

I have only driven the s2k a few times during test drives. Frankly, I don't think there is an acceleration comparison. The Boxster has too much torque. Feels like a missle. Beyond performance, the sound of the Boxster is the sweetest. The s2k is not in that league.

Okay, that said. If you hear a Boxster "on song", it is inhaling fuel. Think Corevette. It is a big car. As another post said, there is little feel. No doubt capable, you never feel like you are in control. It is only the Pcar tech that controls it.

I feel better about the carbon foot print aspect of the s2k. I also think the Vtech is a proven mill. The Boxster motor has a horrid rep. Not to mention a staggering replace cost.

[s2k2000]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

[s2k2000]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M--kA...eature=related

[Pablo]

S2K2000 WROTE: this is how i feel

+1

[Joyce]

Originally Posted by s2k2000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M--kA...eature=related

I love that video, thanks for posting it--------J

[s2k2000]

yea i love that video after reading this thread an the comments i had to see for my self . an i seen this video it made me smile. glad you all liked it

[davemedsker]

After losing a 67 911 in a divorce I had to own the Boxster S, 2002, 30K Silver over Black. Here's what I found...
I thought a Porsche S should have been faster. The power comes on immediately, but it still felt slow. My Dad's 1979 911SC is a lot quicker. In cornering there was body roll. In drifting it was hard to manage, as it slid you have to let off the gas to straighten it out, there's a lot of weight in the back and it doesn't want to run down the street sideways, it wasnt to keep going or jerk back into straight, nothing smooth about it. If the check engine light comes on it costs minimum $1500 to turn it back off. There is a crank position sensor that goes bad that requires engine removal. ENGINE REMOVAL FOR A FAULTY SENSOR!!! I bought the car for five grand back of NADA book and after six months and 2000 miles the most I could get for it was 8000 back of NADA book, and the car was mint.
took the money and bought an S2000 silver over red/red/red. 2002, 30K and mint condition. It's a little slower off the line but if I spin tires it's just as fast and it drifts soooooo smooth. You can power back to straight or keep it sideways and there's no jerking, just pavement one moment then ice then back to pavement. Glass back window. And I think the car is better looking. I just came back from the SEMA show and saw two Nissan GTRs, which I thought could get me away from the S2000 (like I could afford the Nissan) but I still like my S2000 more than those two cars I saw.

[sfkjeld]

I thought I'd chime in this thread one more time, since have been thinking about it recently.

First, the boxster s is faster than an sk2. All stock, it is not close. Tho one poster claimed a 79sc was quicker than the s. Somethings wrong with the s.

Handling is tough for me to assess. Am convinced my 02 s2k has issues, between tires, alignment. While I was comfortable driving the boxster much faster, I could never get over how huge the car felt. Weight wise tho, not much diff than an s2k.

The s2k is much more comfortable than an boxster, for tall drivers. Like the bmw z's, the driving position is more akin to a stockcar. I will concede the interior is otherwise much nicer in the boxster.

But here is the biggest diff and the main reason I will never own a pcar again. Cost of ownership is ridiculou and the boxster is probably the worst of them. It is so easy to get buried financially in these cars. I'll bet the s2k is <1/3 the cost. Probably way less.

Miss the music of that flat 6 mill. But brother, only the very wealthy or very masochistic should own one of those cars.

[JakeO5]

I did a search for 0-60 times for both cars. The consensus seems to be that in stock mode, the BoxterS is faster but not in the realm of no comparison. Making everything equal including use of a professional driver it looks like the BoxterS would take the S2K by about two tenths of a second. Not much. There was a race in Japan with professional drivers working a BMW, S2K, 350Z, and a Porsche. Porsche came in a significant last. It was on a very tight curvey track. You can see the race by using google in a video search if your interested. I don't race, fun factor is the big thing for me. I have 4 friends who own 5 Porsches between them. They all concur that upkeep cost is very expensive. Worth it to 3 of them because, hey, its a porsche. When I drive over they spend a lot of time looking over the S2K. Once they found out it wasn't built like a miata, or ran like one, they had a much different attitude. One is looking at shifting over. Not because he was blown away by my car, he had been thinking about it for a while but getting a close look at it and seeing it run has only made him more interested.

[BlitzX]

Boxsters are for people who can't afford a 911. That is all.

[erenyes]

Originally Posted by BlitzX

Boxsters are for people who can't afford a 911. That is all.

why dont you scurry down to your local Porsche dealer and drive a Boxter/Cayman and see which handles better.....

[s2kx2]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The 7 speed dual clutch is a $3,420 option

2. The dynmaic shocks are a $1,990 option

3. Bi xenon headlights are a $1,560 option

4. Power seats are a $1,550 option

5. 19 inch rims are a $1,550 option

6. Heated seats are a $550 option

7. A Porsche GT-3 is Gods car (he is afterall a jealous God)

8. You have more money than God

9. The floor mats are only a $90 option

10 .Because you like the idea of spending $23,000 to $40,000 more on a car that is only marginally better in performance than the S2000 and that would be dependent on the drivers skill.

[lonestarbuzz]

nicely said!

[ol rich]

"Okay, that said. If you hear a Boxster "on song", it is inhaling fuel. Think Corevette"

that quote only is reason for my reply- early vettes=gas hogs however since the 70's and especially on the C4's and newer fuel milage is very reasonable (i.e. hwy with cruising mode of travel well over 25 MPG) Even up to 30 mpg if you actually WANT to save gas. Of course with a Vette you're gonna stomp on it a lot but even so with my C-4's I always got over 20mpg even driving very "spiritedly"

And BTW it's "CORVETTE" with 2 e's.

[Jim21680]

In all fairness, the Boxster is a damn fine sports car. It's ridiculously, absurdly expensive for us normal folk, and it's mid-engine design might leave us scratching our head when it comes to servicing (hence, the three-figure oil changes). But it's a nice car, and I no longer call this thing the "poor man's 911". Rest assured, no poor man is buying one at what these things are selling for. If I had a bit more money, I'd probably own one. If I had even more money, I'd go for a 911. Even more money? We're talking Ferraris & stuff. I don't know any millionaires who drive an S2000, but that doesn't mean its any less of a good car. We all know that, it's just that the rich people don't.

[Glenn1]

Originally Posted by Maus2k

Just one more instance where you are paying more for the name than the actual product. I have not driven one myself but if it is how everyone here makes it seem to be id pay $25k for it no more. I dont know much they cost new but im sure its around 60 or more. too much for too little. Every company compares their roadster to the Miata because of its history but if you see year after year our cars out perform the miata in almost every area. And I can atest to this, the s2k is much more comfortable and the engineering feels much more solid and stable than any other car ive driven.

.......I just traded my 08 Miata 6 spd, suspension package, for my 08 s2k. Had it for 1 yr and 7500 miles. I guess the Miata has a lot of hype attached to it (being the best selling sports car in history, et al.) The Miata felt like a softer, gentler, gt type car, than a sports car, maybe 75% of a s2k. Engine, handling and structure are not in the same league as a s2k. Having said that, the Miata appeals to a broader audience and sells in larger numbers. But, if you want a pure sports car, the s2k is it. Now about that Boxster S.........hmm

[MutantCheese]

I have driven a 2006 Caymen S and a 2006 911 (same day). The Caymen S is much more fun to drive IMO than the 911. For the price difference, I'll stick with my S2000 tho. It is way more FUN to drive than both of the others which felt very heavy. Oh and the clutch on the Caymen S was ridiculously stiff, not traffic friendly at all.

[gerry100]

I've been testing and trying to decide between a BoxsterS an an S2000.

IMHO-

The BoxsterS is a is an overall better vehicle with better touring capabilites, luxury and performance at the margins.

That being said the Porsche will cost 30-70% more to purchase , and at least 2x$(probably 3x) to maintain.

The pre owned Boxsters in the S2000 price range have a potentially fatal engine flaw which Porsche is stonewalling. Porsches' response is creating fear( or paranoia) among used buyers and suppressing resale prices.

The S2000 is a hell of a value and a hell of a drive.

For me its' probably the best decision.

[Pablo]

Originally Posted by gerry100

The Porsche will cost 30-70% more to purchase , and at least 2x$(probably 3x) to maintain.
The S2000 is a hell of a value and a hell of a drive.
For me its' probably the best decision.

+1

[lakersfan]

Originally Posted by s2k2000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M--kA...eature=related

The link takes me to Youtube's home page and not to a specific video.

[gomarlins3]

Originally Posted by MutantCheese

The Caymen S is much more fun to drive IMO than the 911. For the price difference, I'll stick with my S2000 tho. It is way more FUN to drive than both of the others which felt very heavy.

I have to disagree with "WAY" more fun. I would take my Cayman S over a stock S2000 any day. Having said that, I feel my S2000 as it sits now (Sced, lowered, and geared) is more fun to drive than my Cayman S, but I do like the torque of the Cayman. The Cayman is also a much better DD than the S2K IMO.

As for the clutch, I went with the Tiptronic since the Cayman is my DD so I can not speak about how heavy it is.

[gomarlins3]

Originally Posted by gerry100

IThe pre owned Boxsters in the S2000 price range have a potentially fatal engine flaw which Porsche is stonewalling.

Are you sure you aren't talking about the 996 (911) engine problems and not the Boxsters? I haven't heard much about a Boxster engine problem. The 996 engine problem on the other hand is fairly well known among Porsche owners.

[skatepozer23]

I was a 2002 boxster s owner before my 05 suzuka blue S and i gotta say the biggest thing i like about the s over the boxster is that the S2k has a hood and under the hood is the engine.

In the boxster you have to manually disengage the rear window part of the soft top to bring it out of the way. Then you unscrew 2 latches to remove the engine bay door. With the door removed u get an awesome view of the intake manifold and thats it. All you can do by yourself is add oil to the engine. Porsche techs have to remove the engine to change the sparkplugs cause the engine bay is so cramped. Talk about terrible engineering on the germans part.

[gerry100]

The Boxsters and the 996(911) share a basic engine design known as the M96 that uses an intermediate shaft.
The shaft bearings fail which causes total engine failure in most cases.
Later models are supposedly better but becuase Porsche has not acknowledged the flaw the cyber rumor mill has taken over and the convnetional wisdom is that the failure rate is up to 20%.

In my opinion, the rate is probably much lower. But I by a car like this for fun and relaxation not so I can worry about engine failure and a $15k bill

[gomarlins3]

I have also heard that the failure rate is about 20% once the engine has reached 75,000 miles. That was one of the reasons I stayed away from buying a used 996. I didn't realize that the Boxster had the same engine design. Learn something new every day.

[MutantCheese]

Does the Caymen have the same issue?

[gerry100]

The Caymans use the late rversion of the M96(M97) which supposedly has a more robust design around the Imtermediate shaft(IMS).

Few failures have been heard of but that may be because of lower accumulated mileage. With no good data or details available , most potentail used buyers will assume the worst.

For 09 Porsche introduced a DFI engine for the Boxster/Cayman that does not incorporate an Intermediate shaft.

BTW - I have an 86 911 Carrera and have driven a few Boxster S models.
No way the 86 is as fast as the BoxsterS. It is quicker than an early Boxster.IMHO.

[wgrandmont]

Originally Posted by JakeO5

I did a search for 0-60 times for both cars. The consensus seems to be that in stock mode, the BoxterS is faster but not in the realm of no comparison. Making everything equal including use of a professional driver it looks like the BoxterS would take the S2K by about two tenths of a second. Not much. There was a race in Japan with professional drivers working a BMW, S2K, 350Z, and a Porsche. Porsche came in a significant last. It was on a very tight curvey track. You can see the race by using google in a video search if your interested. I don't race, fun factor is the big thing for me. I have 4 friends who own 5 Porsches between them. They all concur that upkeep cost is very expensive. Worth it to 3 of them because, hey, its a porsche. When I drive over they spend a lot of time looking over the S2K. Once they found out it wasn't built like a miata, or ran like one, they had a much different attitude. One is looking at shifting over. Not because he was blown away by my car, he had been thinking about it for a while but getting a close look at it and seeing it run has only made him more interested.

In Autocross A-stock the S2000 pretty much dominates. The boxter just isn't as competitive.

[gomarlins3]

Originally Posted by wgrandmont

In Autocross A-stock the S2000 pretty much dominates. The boxter just isn't as competitive.

**OR** People that own Boxsters don't autoX them.

A stock was won by a Boxster over an S2000 this year in our region.

[gerry100]

0 -60 means nothing in these cars and if you try to drag race them you'll waste time and money ( a lot of money for a Porsche clutch).

It's 40-70 and 70-40 times that are more important.

[Neil]

Why do we continue to put the s2000 against 6 cyl vehicles with a lot more torque ?
I bought the Honda for what it is, pure and simple.

[MutantCheese]

Because no other N/A 4 cylinder comes close

[bbcricketta]

Originally Posted by gerry100

0 -60 means nothing in these cars, and if you try to drag race them you'll waste time and money.

Originally Posted by Neil

I bought the Honda for what it is: pure and simple.

two of the best things i have ever read on this forum.