http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/11...he-boxster.html

I'm a little surprised it made it around the track quicker.

Sorry if repost I did a search.

 

I hadn't seen this article. Interesting. 1.4 seconds on a track that short is pretty serious. Based on the combination of straight line and skid pad numbers, I'm a little surprised. I wonder if the Porsche was hurting for tires?

I wasn't aware of the brick-like aero for the Solstice.

 

They said it handled very sloppy, with lots of body-roll/understeer, and that it was the stronger mid-range torque that gave it the faster lap time. Although a bit overpriced IMO, I'd still take the Boxster.

 

What's with them calling the Boxster the purest driving roadster on the market? Does anyone remember a comparison test a few years ago where an AP1 beat a Boxster? One of the big magazines needs to run a GXP/Boxster/S2k/350Z comparison. Even though it's an older design, I still think the S has the best combination of value, performance, and driving fun out of the group. Especially the white ones.

 

They said it had more brake dive and body roll than the Boxster. They didn't say it had lots of body roll/understeer. I got the impression it was set up with a bias towards understeer, but no where did it give the article say that the understeer was a problem. If so, then getting on the gas to use that torque would push you right off the edge of the track.

With no more of a straight line advantage than it has, see the 0-60 and 1/4 times, the handling couldn't be that bad or there's no way it could put well over a second on the P car on that tight a track.

 

Solstice has a 0.45 drag coefficient? I think that's even worse than the S2000 (which is about as bad as it gets....or so I thought).

 

Solstice GXP and Boxster?? Wow, I guess the S2000 really is forgotten...

 

What about 'driver' dependent times? If a magazine gets xyz time with a car, can you assume that's the best time that car can do? Obviously not. So I take these contests with a grain of salt.

 

I absolutely could not be less interested in a 260 hp RWD sports car for around $26K than I am in the turbo Solstice/Sky. I could also say that I absolutely could not be less interested in a 500 hp RWD sporty car for under $50K than I am in the Shelby GT500. IMO, the inherent design flaws/corner-cutting in both cars far outweigh their stats on paper, whereas a car like the S2000 is, to me, far more than the sum of its stats.

 

wait a sec...
am I to believe this guy bought a 2006 Boxster w/ 4000 miles for 35k????

Does anyone else find this to be umm how should I put this ....a LIE!!!