Porsche Boxster 987 2.7 vs 3.2S

lmccauley

Well-known Member
The price of 2nd hand performance cars seems to be dropping (or is it my imagination?), and it looks like I may be able to afford a new-shape Boxster in the spring. Whilst I'm enjoying not having to make any more payments on my Civic Type-R, I'm itching for a 2-seat convertible, and I've always hankered after a Porsche since I was a kid. I'm looking at the figures for the 2.7 and 3.2S in the new shape (987) and my heart is saying go for the 3.2S, whereas my head is saying stick with the 2.7.

A decent 2005/05 2.7 is going for about £18-19k trade (e.g this one with PASM and 18" S wheels), and 3.2S for £3-4k more. The 2.7 will be in the 2nd top VED bracket, compared to the 3.2S in the top.

Has anyone compared the 2.7 against the 3.2S? How much difference does the extra power and torque make?
 

SteveTDCI

Active Member
i'm still dreaming but if you were to pick one i'd say the 3.2 running costs are going to be similar but the 3.2 gets better brakes etc and it seems they are cheaper than the 2.7
 

Ian J

Banned
I bought J a 3.2S last week and although I didn't actually drive any of the smaller engined cars I did quite a lot of reading up and there does seem to be a noticeable difference between the two engines with the performance of the larger one quite a lot better in all departments but with negligible increase in running costs.
 

lmccauley

Well-known Member
I bought J a 3.2S last week and although I didn't actually drive any of the smaller engined cars I did quite a lot of reading up and there does seem to be a noticeable difference between the two engines with the performance of the larger one quite a lot better in all departments but with negligible increase in running costs.
Yeah, I've been following your six-monthly car threads, and it's your fault I looked again at a Boxster :D

I'd be doing about 10k miles pa, but you're right that the running costs aren't that much higher for the S. It's more the extra £3k up front, which would translate into about another 9 months of payments.
 

Ian J

Banned
Have a look at Parkers Guide here and there are a couple of Porsche forums worth looking at too.

They will definately take the mileage as Porsches are reknowned for high milages but it is a "proper sports car" and a completely different type of drive to "normal" cars.

The 3.2S is very fast, has superb handling and of course is topless whenever the sun comes out but it's also small, a bit cramped with a firm ride and poorly specified unless loaded up with optional extras. I'm not sure that I would want one as my daily driver as I prefer my creature comforts but you are younger than me so may have different priorities.

You are also taller than me so check it carefully for size.
 

inkinoo

Distinguished Member
Has anyone compared the 2.7 against the 3.2S? How much difference does the extra power and torque make?

If you never drive a 3.2 then the 2.7 is ok to live with.

However if you are over 6 feet tall then forget the Boxster. Even with the seat all the way back I still could not stretch my legs out.

Personally I think the Boxster is rubbish but each to their own. If you want a fun performance car then the Elise runs rings around the Boxster. Yes the Elise is cramped but it has more than enough leg room, looks so much cooler and is a lot better drive.

Or go utterly mental and get one of these: Racing Green Cars : 3.6L Lazer Blue

:thumbsup:
 

lovegroova

Well-known Member
The 2.7 is not really any faster than your CTR, the 3.2 is.

I've only ever test driven a 3.2 and is was fast but I found it a bit dull, unless silly speeds were being driven. In other words, it's a bit too good, if that's a fault. The ride left a lot to be desired (was on 19" wheels with no PASM) so I really culdn't see any reason to change to one over my S2000 which is a lot more fun at real-world speeds (and much, much cheaper to buy and run, especially at the moment).

I'm 6ft and fit into both cars with ease.
 

lovegroova

Well-known Member
Really? How long are your legs? I struggled to get in (6"1) and had my knees up on the steering wheel.

Inside leg 32" The wheel is adjustable though. I found the elise much more cramped than a Boxster
 

inkinoo

Distinguished Member
Inside leg 32" The wheel is adjustable though. I found the elise much more cramped than a Boxster

Same as mine; how odd.

The Elise is more cramped in terms of the whole cabin but has the legroom (ie I can fully stretch my legs out). However driving wise, other than high speeds, the Elise is better in every respect.
 

lovegroova

Well-known Member
Same as mine; how odd.

However driving wise, other than high speeds, the Elise is better in every respect.

No argument from me there. It's just too impractical for me to live with, and getting in and out is too much of a palaver for this old fellow :)

Having said that, the Elise is no fun for ordinary driving, pootling about town and so on, especially being so low that other drivers don't see you. Parking is not easy either!
 

lmccauley

Well-known Member
Have a look at Parkers Guide here and there are a couple of Porsche forums worth looking at too.
Thanks - I've registered with Boxa.net
They will definately take the mileage as Porsches are reknowned for high milages but it is a "proper sports car" and a completely different type of drive to "normal" cars.
Yeah, a friend has a 911, and we talk a lot about cars, so I have some idea of the pros and cons of a 911/Boxster.

The 3.2S is very fast, has superb handling and of course is topless whenever the sun comes out but it's also small, a bit cramped with a firm ride and poorly specified unless loaded up with optional extras. I'm not sure that I would want one as my daily driver as I prefer my creature comforts but you are younger than me so may have different priorities.

You are also taller than me so check it carefully for size.
I'm used to a firm ride in my CTR, and I've ridden in my friend's 911 which doesn't feel much harder. I'm only 6' tall, so wouldn't expect too much of a problem. In fact, now that I think about it, I've sat in the driver's seat of a Boxster too, and didn't notice any problem with my size. I know you like your autos, Ian, but you're young at heart, too ;)
 

lmccauley

Well-known Member
The 2.7 is not really any faster than your CTR, the 3.2 is.

I've only ever test driven a 3.2 and is was fast but I found it a bit dull, unless silly speeds were being driven. In other words, it's a bit too good, if that's a fault. The ride left a lot to be desired (was on 19" wheels with no PASM) so I really culdn't see any reason to change to one over my S2000 which is a lot more fun at real-world speeds (and much, much cheaper to buy and run, especially at the moment).

I'm 6ft and fit into both cars with ease.
My thoughts keep swaying between a S2000 and Boxster - which you may have noticed over the last couple of years! I've already discounted an Elise/Exige, another hot-hatch or Evo/Scooby for various reasons.
 

SteveTDCI

Active Member
porsche or honda .... let me think about that :rolleyes: :smashin:
 

SteveTDCI

Active Member
yeah but its not a proper sports car, its just an engine, still a boxer flat 6 sounds nice
 

Ian J

Banned
still a boxer flat 6 sounds nice

We probably bought ours at the wrong time of the year but I did take advantage of the warm sunshine on Sunday to take the top down before taking it for a run down a quiet three mile stretch of straight country road where I can confirm that not only is it completely stable at quite naughty speeds with the roof down but that the engine sounds wonderful too
 

SteveTDCI

Active Member
Go on then, I'll bite, why not?

I think Honda are great at producing engines but when it comes to chassis and quality of materials they just arn't in the same league as Porsche. I'll let you have the NSX as an engineering point inc chassis but that had some influence by a half decent racing driver :smashin:
 

lovegroova

Well-known Member
I think Honda are great at producing engines but when it comes to chassis and quality of materials they just arn't in the same league as Porsche. I'll let you have the NSX as an engineering point inc chassis but that had some influence by a half decent racing driver :smashin:

Well, the suspension of the S2000 is very similar to that of the NSX, except it's not made from aluminium. Double wishbones all around, fully adjustable for camber, toe, and castor (fronts only of course).

Materials have nothing to do with "sportscariness". Is an Elise not a sportscar?
 

Ian J

Banned
I think that we're all a bit prejudiced one way or another regarding cars and will very rarely agree with each other.

Personally I would group a Honda S2000 and Porsche Boxster together as similar types of car but as Liam said in his original post "I have always wanted a Porsche". We looked at sporty two seaters a couple of weeks for my wife and compared a BMW Z4 3.0i with every imaginable extra fitted plus a BMW warranty with a Boxster that was two years older, didn't have many of the desirable extras and an insurance warranty that never covers anything that actually breaks and we ended up buying the Porsche for exactly the same reason - it was a Porsche.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Star Wars Andor, Woman King, more Star Trek 4K, Rings of Power & the latest TV, movies & 4K releases
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

Sky set to launch its plug-and-play Sky Stream solution
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Movies Podcast: 26th September 2022
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
AV Podcast: 26th September 2022
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
REL Acoustics announces new Serie HT subwoofer trio
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Marantz set to launch new Cinema Series of AV receivers
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom