Introductions Make your introductions to the S2000 owner community. Discussions and comments from new and future S2000 owners. You will get a warm welcome, friendly and helpful advice. The 'Start Button' of the forums.

Boxster vs. S2000

Thread Tools
 
Old Sep 23, 2007 | 07:57 AM
  #51  
chickdr's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta
Default

Originally Posted by watermelonman,Sep 22 2007, 11:23 PM
Your point was that the current base Boxster is almost as powerful as the original Boxster S, and therefore is respectable. Now you're trying to say that the original base Boxster has respectable performance? Which is it?

If you're going to be impressed with the original base Boxster, then there's a whole lot of people that are going to disagree with you.
Huh? I said the original 2.5l car had respectable performance for a 1997 car(reread my post above...) I also said the car has kept up with time considering its continuous hp increases(currently at 245hp for a base model). Porsche has never been about having the most hp out there. Look at the Carerra vs Corvette for a good example. Porsche is about the overall driving experience. Every car from the base Boxstr to the 911 twin turbo gives you that...
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2007 | 08:21 AM
  #52  
Porsche951's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,227
Likes: 0
From: Bridgewater
Default

When I was considering the purchase of my S2000 nearly 6 years ago I also considered a 1997 base model Porsche Boxster. While the Honda is full .5-.75 faster thru the quarter mile the base Boxster felt quicker, probably due to the added torque provided by a 2.5 liter 6 cylinder. The reason I went with the Honda was new with warranty vs. 4 years old for similar money. Plus having owned 3 Porsches previously I am painfully aware of how expensive Porsches can be to upkeep. Five years nine months and 86,000 flawless miles later, I know I made the correct decision.
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2007 | 10:04 AM
  #53  
watermelonman's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: wishing I was in -
Default

Originally Posted by chickdr,Sep 23 2007, 07:57 AM
Huh? I said the original 2.5l car had respectable performance for a 1997 car(reread my post above...) I also said the car has kept up with time considering its continuous hp increases(currently at 245hp for a base model). Porsche has never been about having the most hp out there. Look at the Carerra vs Corvette for a good example. Porsche is about the overall driving experience. Every car from the base Boxstr to the 911 twin turbo gives you that...
At first you were talking about the current base Boxster, and now we're talking about the original one. I suppose you could claim that they both have respectable performance, but the S2000 sure seemed to make it look like a poor deal just two years later. That's not just raw speed or horsepower, that's the overall driving experience.
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2007 | 07:08 AM
  #54  
chickdr's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta
Default

Originally Posted by watermelonman,Sep 23 2007, 06:04 PM
"The S2000 sure seemed to make it look like a poor deal just two years later. That's not just raw speed or horsepower, that's the overall driving experience."
Can't agree with you there. The Boxster is way more car than the S2K- and should be for the price differential. I am not speaking of raw numbers(which are very close in most respects) but the driving feel, usability and comfort. The Boxster simply pulls away when you compare how they "feel". I had a 2002 Boxster 2.7 before my 06 S2K so have a little experience in the matter. The Boxster has so much more solidity and surefootedness than the S2K even with an identical curb weight. Magazine "bench testers" will say the S2K is the better car but most have not been behind the wheel to make a true comparison.
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2007 | 09:25 AM
  #55  
SkyRollin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
From: Feasterville, PA
Default

What I look for when buying a car..
02 S2k vs 02 Boxter




Value: Honda S2000, hands down
Reliabilty: Honda S2000, hands down
0-60: Honda S2000
Handling: Very close
TQ: Boxter
Depreciation: Boxter
Suggesting owner has a small wang: Boxter
$1400 for brakes and rotors: Boxter
$120 dollar oil changes: Boxter
Cheaper insurance: Honda S2000
Overall lower car payment: Honda S2000
Easier and cheaper to upgrade: Honda S2000
Curb appeal: Honda S2000
Ugly, halogen headlights: Boxter


Well, I guess you can say my breakdown may be slightly biased in a few of the facets from this comparison, but ONLY slightly. Most are dead on the money. Why buy a Boxter over an Audi TT, if a German roadster is what you're after? The new TTs whoop the new Boxters.







Reply
Old Sep 24, 2007 | 10:09 AM
  #56  
beanolo's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 24,767
Likes: 1
From: soopasoak dat hoe.
Default

Originally Posted by chickdr,Sep 23 2007, 07:57 AM
Huh? I said the original 2.5l car had respectable performance for a 1997 car(reread my post above...) I also said the car has kept up with time considering its continuous hp increases(currently at 245hp for a base model). Porsche has never been about having the most hp out there. Look at the Carerra vs Corvette for a good example. Porsche is about the overall driving experience. Every car from the base Boxstr to the 911 twin turbo gives you that...
I agreed somewhat with you on page 1. But now I'm starting to feel you were just trying to justify a car you've owned for 4 years.

I'm sorry, I could afford both when I purchased my S2k as well, but just didn't want to get the "cheap man's porsche" IMO.

No doubt I'm gonna sell my S in the future for a Carrera, but you can't justify the cost of a boxster for what you get in return in comparison with the S2k. At least the older years, I have not seen anything after 05+. Either way, if I'm gonna dump the money on a Porsche, I'm gonna go with a real one.
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2007 | 04:59 PM
  #57  
chickdr's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta
Default

Originally Posted by beanolo,Sep 24 2007, 06:09 PM
I agreed somewhat with you on page 1. But now I'm starting to feel you were just trying to justify a car you've owned for 4 years.

I'm sorry, I could afford both when I purchased my S2k as well, but just didn't want to get the "cheap man's porsche" IMO.

No doubt I'm gonna sell my S in the future for a Carrera, but you can't justify the cost of a boxster for what you get in return in comparison with the S2k. At least the older years, I have not seen anything after 05+. Either way, if I'm gonna dump the money on a Porsche, I'm gonna go with a real one.
See now your true colors show...

A Boxster is not a "real" Porsche? Give me a break. It is the truest example of a Porsche available. Much more in the spirit of the original 356 than the Carrera. How much more of Porsche could it be: 2800lbs, mid-engine, amazing handling/brakes.
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2007 | 05:06 PM
  #58  
chickdr's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta
Default

Originally Posted by Ermac!,Sep 24 2007, 05:25 PM
What I look for when buying a car..
02 S2k vs 02 Boxter

Value: Honda S2000, hands down
Reliabilty: Honda S2000, hands down
0-60: Honda S2000
Handling: Very close
TQ: Boxter
Depreciation: Boxter
Suggesting owner has a small wang: Boxter
$1400 for brakes and rotors: Boxter
$120 dollar oil changes: Boxter
Cheaper insurance: Honda S2000
Overall lower car payment: Honda S2000
Easier and cheaper to upgrade: Honda S2000
Curb appeal: Honda S2000
Ugly, halogen headlights: Boxter


Well, I guess you can say my breakdown may be slightly biased in a few of the facets from this comparison, but ONLY slightly. Most are dead on the money. Why buy a Boxter over an Audi TT, if a German roadster is what you're after? The new TTs whoop the new Boxters.
If you are going to write a long comparison as least spell the name right. It is BoxSter.

Sure brakes and oil changes cost a bunch if you get them done by the dealer - they are expensive at the Honda dealer too. The thing is, oil changes and brakes are easy to do yourself for a whole lot less. Also remember the oil change interval on a Boxster is 15k miles and oil capacity is 10qts. When you factor that in the cost is a lot more comparable to the S2K...

You also listed a lot of subjective cosmetic issues. Many would not agree(me being one). Xenons are available on the Boxster if you don't like halogens. Curb appeal is funny too. You really think a Honda has more curb appeal than a Porsche(in what country are we talking about...)
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2007 | 06:04 PM
  #59  
LostMotion's Avatar
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 4
Default

[QUOTE=chickdr,Sep 24 2007, 08:08 AM] Can't agree with you there.
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2007 | 06:06 PM
  #60  
SkyRollin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
From: Feasterville, PA
Default



Curb appeal of a real Porsche is certainly higher than an S2000, but I'm comparing an 02 box""""""""""""""""s""""""""""""""ter.
Hey, at least you have a Porsche crest on your hood, right?
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:56 AM.