I saw more incorrect car "facts" in that 1 thread than I've seen on this board . . . EVER. I particularly liked learning that the Boxster had an H4 and the Boxster S had 320 HP.

The "subjective" comparisons were also entertaining - the S2000 was alternately compared with Civics and Vipers?

 

good thing this isn't a golf forum or that would maket hose ppl pretty intelligent

 

Ok... my personal opinion.


Boxster S = nice porsche car.
S2000 = boxster S eater, with an extra $20k in your pocket.

 

S2000 = Rice

Stupid equation

 

I think that's a little optimistic. The S2000's bang for the buck is obviously higher, but I don't see the S2000 as superior. Nearly on-par performance with fewer creature comforts is a little more realistic.

 

exactly! does it matter what some loosers on some lame ass forum, or for that fact, what anyone says? If they came to our forum and started Sh$t then I'd be but until then what they say on their own forum is

 

I think Porshe makes some of the ugliest cars out on the market(almost as bad as a veilside kit on an S2K ). If I had all the money in the world I still wouldnt have one in my garage. The 911 turbo is fast but for that kinda money I would rather go with a Ferrari Maranello or a Modena. Thats just my opinion.

 

how much does cost now days for a cheap farrari?

 

Thanks for reminding me the reason I stopped visiting the HardOCP site

 

Quote from hardforum: "Well I don't know much butt Boxster has flat 4 cylinder engine and Honda S2K I4.
"

What are these guys taking? Flat 4 engine? At least we know what kind of engine the S has.