Why would they be dodgy? The WD figures correlate to the Swedish data.

Probably time to admit your assertion was plain wrong.

 

The clearly contradictory statistics? Did you not see that post?

 

The clearly contradictory statistics? Did you not see that post?
[/quote]

Which stats were contradictory?

They all say Boxsters are not very reliable, certainly nowhere near as reliable as an S2000.

 

This is like trying to explain evolution to a creationist..

The stats first claim the 987 is more reliable than the 986 and then they go on to say the 986 is more reliable than the 987, both conclusions can't be true when looking at the same statistics.

Don't believe anything without doubt, question what is put in front of you. Warranty Direct is just an insurance company, don't take it as "gospel".

 

Why would WD and the Swedish insurer lie about it? They have no axe to grind so this data is the best we have, certainly a lot more reliable than owner surveys.

It doesn't change the fact that in every case an Boxster is less reliable than an S2000. It's definitely time for you to admit that at the very least.

So far you've not produced any evidence to the contrary, you seem to just believe that a Boxster is as reliable as an S2000 with no evidence other than your "belief" - sounds just like a Creationist!

As a reminder:

Where is the empirical data you claim to have looked at?

 

This index is worked out from number of failures and cost of repair. Not looked at the figures but if the 986 had less failures, but that typical failures were more expensive repairs then it's index score would suffer even though the 987 is less reliable.

 

Lots of good sh*t here.....

http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...e_Failures.htm

Owner bollox here......

http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforum...tter-info.html

PH tosh here.....

http://www.pistonheads.com/GASSING/topic.asp?t=564314


Seems that the pelicanparts one tells some depth towards the said issues.



Such a shame, for such a great car. I still say, its why its cheap now. Worth nearly a quarter of its asking price 6- 7 years ago, for a formidable sports car. A bit like.... E39 M5's. £50 odd Grand @ new, can be had for £5-£7k. I know they're 10 years + old, but the Vanos issue & parts repairs are stratospheric. Although it was one of the most reliable powerhouse cars in its class, it still was and IS a wallet buster with consumable replacements and the Vanos. Handy to have £2k spare in savings to spare blushes..
You just don't want that aggro with a Boxster It's a shame.

 

On the plus side it passed with no advisories!

 

I own 2 Citroen vans. The dispatch is now 5 years old, owned for 4 years. Never has one thing gone wrong on it in 60k. Same story with the Berlingo thats now 4 years old and 40k.

Also owned a MY99 Berlingo up until 2012 that in the 10 years of ownership, other than consumables, had a new clutch (at ~150k) and some anti roll bar links twice but was otherwise reliable.

Never had to top up oil on any of these between services and the engines have always been great. I'd say you can't beat PSA diesel engines from my experience.

Not sure where these myths of PSA unreliability come from. I've always found them massively good value for money. German cars arn't what they used to be in terms of reliability if my friends experiences are anything to go by. Don't think I know anyone with a VAG car/van who hasn't had problems with it!

Then again the S has been flawless for me in 5 years of ownership, maybe I just look after my vehicles.

 

These stats need sample sizes, i cant see that anywhere and without it theyre chocolate tea pots afaic

Go here and you'll see they're still pretty rare

About 3 times as popular as s2000s in 2009 by the look of it

They sold about 1,100 that year vs 400 s2s

So unless warranty direct have huge market share the data is pretty much bollox