Test drove the Boxster S
09-06-2001, 10:01 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Little London
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Test drove the Boxster S
I was bored at lunch today and so I went and test drove a Boxster S. I did about 20 miles and several different road surfaces.
What did I think?
1. What a gear change. I drove into the office this morning in the Shopping Trolley (Old Golf) and for a moment I thought I was back in it. The gear travel is loooong on the S.
2. Hard clutch pedal. Much harder to shift than the S.
3. Lots of torque. I liked the torque it was a nice change. I found myself changing down the gears unnecessarily early.
4. Wind Noise. With the windows down and travelling at 75 it was much noisier than the S. We had the huge windbreak behind us but it was still very, very noisy.
5. Why is there a digital speedo and an Analogue one? I ignored the analogue as it was useless.
6. We had 18" rims and the ride was OK. If anything it was quite bouncy compared to the S.
7. When I did 2 emergency stops I felt the ABS shudder each time. I have done these in my old S2000 and never felt a shudder.
8. Roadholding was very good in the S. I went round a roundabout at 37 and had no problem at all. The salesman told me that the S had no traction control or LSD. I was impressed.
9. It was very quiet with the roof up and the engine sounded best when at low speeds. I guess I missed the roar of the S2000. But then my S2000 sounds tame at standstill next to the Boxster S. They both sound tame compared to a TVR at rest.
10. When I mentioned build quality the salesmen was 'insulted' but 2 minutes later he asked me not to adjust the seat height as the handle had fallen off after another salesman being a little zealous.
Overall, the S is a nice car I think I expected a little more inside. It didn't seem very plush and the full leather of the car looked tired at only 4,000 miles.
I feel that the extra money would, for me, not be worth it. I prefer to stick with what I have. The S is a very nice car but in my mind is not quite as sharp as the S2000. I now know why the Boxster owners nearly always have their windows up.
The overriding memory will be of the gearshift. Huge.
Sam.
What did I think?
1. What a gear change. I drove into the office this morning in the Shopping Trolley (Old Golf) and for a moment I thought I was back in it. The gear travel is loooong on the S.
2. Hard clutch pedal. Much harder to shift than the S.
3. Lots of torque. I liked the torque it was a nice change. I found myself changing down the gears unnecessarily early.
4. Wind Noise. With the windows down and travelling at 75 it was much noisier than the S. We had the huge windbreak behind us but it was still very, very noisy.
5. Why is there a digital speedo and an Analogue one? I ignored the analogue as it was useless.
6. We had 18" rims and the ride was OK. If anything it was quite bouncy compared to the S.
7. When I did 2 emergency stops I felt the ABS shudder each time. I have done these in my old S2000 and never felt a shudder.
8. Roadholding was very good in the S. I went round a roundabout at 37 and had no problem at all. The salesman told me that the S had no traction control or LSD. I was impressed.
9. It was very quiet with the roof up and the engine sounded best when at low speeds. I guess I missed the roar of the S2000. But then my S2000 sounds tame at standstill next to the Boxster S. They both sound tame compared to a TVR at rest.
10. When I mentioned build quality the salesmen was 'insulted' but 2 minutes later he asked me not to adjust the seat height as the handle had fallen off after another salesman being a little zealous.
Overall, the S is a nice car I think I expected a little more inside. It didn't seem very plush and the full leather of the car looked tired at only 4,000 miles.
I feel that the extra money would, for me, not be worth it. I prefer to stick with what I have. The S is a very nice car but in my mind is not quite as sharp as the S2000. I now know why the Boxster owners nearly always have their windows up.
The overriding memory will be of the gearshift. Huge.
Sam.
09-06-2001, 03:37 PM
#4
I drove a 2,5 before ordering my S2K. I have to agree about the noise and the gearchange. I felt that, although it is a lovely car, it is generally set up for ham-fisted Germans and does not have the delicate, razor-sharp special feel of the S2K.
The S2K may use cheaper materials, but the build quality seems better.
And you can ogle the engine!
The S2K may use cheaper materials, but the build quality seems better.
And you can ogle the engine!
09-06-2001, 11:05 PM
#6
About an hour after first pulling up at work I got this in my mail:
Important things first, I like your new car. It nice to see a non-boxter for a change, now I really am jealous.
His spelling. There's a lot of nice cars in the car park here. Something like 8 Boxsters. 2 S2000s - Na$ty's and mine. The Boxsters are still great cars, but my S2000 cost a lot less, is faster and more special to me.
In Carney's S2000 book he seems to think that the Boxster S came about because of the S2000 being a lot quicker than a normal Boxster. I don't know how much, if any, truth there is in that, but it would be nice to think that there are people out there with Boxster S's because of the S2000.
It's nice to be driving at a time when there are a lot of great cars to chose from.
-Brian.
Important things first, I like your new car. It nice to see a non-boxter for a change, now I really am jealous.
His spelling. There's a lot of nice cars in the car park here. Something like 8 Boxsters. 2 S2000s - Na$ty's and mine. The Boxsters are still great cars, but my S2000 cost a lot less, is faster and more special to me.
In Carney's S2000 book he seems to think that the Boxster S came about because of the S2000 being a lot quicker than a normal Boxster. I don't know how much, if any, truth there is in that, but it would be nice to think that there are people out there with Boxster S's because of the S2000.
It's nice to be driving at a time when there are a lot of great cars to chose from.
-Brian.
09-06-2001, 11:10 PM
#7
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Little London
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick,
I forgot about the engine. I am completely hamfisted with cars but when I go to buy a car normally we stand gazing down on the engine bay for a few minutes whilst the salesman tells me that it was actually lifted straight from the Saturn V moonrocket.
I can suck my teeth and nod with the best of them.
But the S has no engine and to go that well without one was very impressive. Apparently depending on the type and size of the luggage you pop into the front and rear you can get quite differing speeds. Apparently I would need to order the 252bhp German underwear and tank top...
It does have more storage space than the S2000 but inside the car the storage behind the seats isn't as accessible as the secret compartment. It has a sideways sliding cover over a 6-8inch deep shelf. But the height is only about 3 inches and so thnigs are a squeeze to get in and out.
It does have door pockets though but I found these a little fiddly too with their covers.
As I said this is not a flame - It is the Boxster S a very nice car just not for me overall.
Sam.
I forgot about the engine. I am completely hamfisted with cars but when I go to buy a car normally we stand gazing down on the engine bay for a few minutes whilst the salesman tells me that it was actually lifted straight from the Saturn V moonrocket.
I can suck my teeth and nod with the best of them.
But the S has no engine and to go that well without one was very impressive. Apparently depending on the type and size of the luggage you pop into the front and rear you can get quite differing speeds. Apparently I would need to order the 252bhp German underwear and tank top...
It does have more storage space than the S2000 but inside the car the storage behind the seats isn't as accessible as the secret compartment. It has a sideways sliding cover over a 6-8inch deep shelf. But the height is only about 3 inches and so thnigs are a squeeze to get in and out.
It does have door pockets though but I found these a little fiddly too with their covers.
As I said this is not a flame - It is the Boxster S a very nice car just not for me overall.
Sam.
Trending Topics
09-07-2001, 03:55 AM
#8
Registered User
I keep meaning to try and get a drive of Boxster - but they never have any manual versions for demo - always auto tiptronic. I still find it strange that so many Porsche are sold as an auto box - maybe something to do with the profile of the buyer?
The only thing which attracts me to the Boxster is that it is a Porsche. Even with the badges removed - most people would guess it was a Porsche. A Porsche might not appeal to everybody, but the company does know a bit about making fast cars - which must count for something.
My only gripe about the S2000 is that it's another faceless Japanese design - without any ancestoral features. It can be described as sharp - or distinctive, but it's just another random point on a graph.
Get 10 Japanese cars without badges - and the average punter could not guess who was the manufacturer of any of them.
Call it brand image, status - whatever.....it's what makes the best stand out from the rest. When I was looking for my S2000 - my Japanese colleagues were trying to convince me to get a 911 or a Boxster - Why? Just for the status symbol I think.
The only thing which attracts me to the Boxster is that it is a Porsche. Even with the badges removed - most people would guess it was a Porsche. A Porsche might not appeal to everybody, but the company does know a bit about making fast cars - which must count for something.
My only gripe about the S2000 is that it's another faceless Japanese design - without any ancestoral features. It can be described as sharp - or distinctive, but it's just another random point on a graph.
Get 10 Japanese cars without badges - and the average punter could not guess who was the manufacturer of any of them.
Call it brand image, status - whatever.....it's what makes the best stand out from the rest. When I was looking for my S2000 - my Japanese colleagues were trying to convince me to get a 911 or a Boxster - Why? Just for the status symbol I think.
09-07-2001, 05:54 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New Forest
Posts: 1,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think opinion on car design varies wildly across the globe. Take the Prelude. The old (4th Gen) shape was loved in the UK, but, was apparently changed to the bug-eye 5th Gen for the US market. In the UK, they've dropped the 5th Gen because no-one wants to buy it.
In Europe, it's a widely held belief that Japanese/Asian cars (with a few exceptions) are bland and anonymous. Identifying the manufacturer in amongst unbadged Toyota/Kia/Daewoo/Hyundai/etc boxy saloons (e.g. Camry) is nigh on impossible. The designs change too often, and there are no common features between different generations of the same car, or across ranges - like you would see in a BMW or Mercedes. There's no brand identity, so, as Kobe says "it's just another random point on a graph". They're trying to make the designs more Euro-friendly - e.g. Toyota Yaris, but I'd put money on no other future Toyota looking anything like it, and that includes the next gen Yaris itself.
So, reading magazines in the UK, you don't get universal adoration of the S2000's lines. Personally, I think it's stunning, but I'm biased. I think it will be timeless, but only in Honda land. In 10/20 years time, when you ask people about the roadster boom, the car that most will remember is the Miata or maybe the Z3, just because they are the most common. Everyone will remember the Porsche, but that's because of the badge.
Steve
In Europe, it's a widely held belief that Japanese/Asian cars (with a few exceptions) are bland and anonymous. Identifying the manufacturer in amongst unbadged Toyota/Kia/Daewoo/Hyundai/etc boxy saloons (e.g. Camry) is nigh on impossible. The designs change too often, and there are no common features between different generations of the same car, or across ranges - like you would see in a BMW or Mercedes. There's no brand identity, so, as Kobe says "it's just another random point on a graph". They're trying to make the designs more Euro-friendly - e.g. Toyota Yaris, but I'd put money on no other future Toyota looking anything like it, and that includes the next gen Yaris itself.
So, reading magazines in the UK, you don't get universal adoration of the S2000's lines. Personally, I think it's stunning, but I'm biased. I think it will be timeless, but only in Honda land. In 10/20 years time, when you ask people about the roadster boom, the car that most will remember is the Miata or maybe the Z3, just because they are the most common. Everyone will remember the Porsche, but that's because of the badge.
Steve
09-07-2001, 08:43 AM
#10
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Little London
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The S2000 lines are beautiful but I would change just obe thing. The dip at the top of the bonnet forshortens the S2000 in my mind.
I agree that population makes a difference on how a car is perceived. The S2000 does indeed take cues from previous Honda's and this has been stressed by the compnay. However, these Honda's were not sold all that widely in our market and so the S2000 appears as that random point on the map.
A shame but I am not crying. Unlike the Porsche or Z3 the S2000 has a classic sports car shape low, long nose, subtle sides, etc, etc.
Sam.
I agree that population makes a difference on how a car is perceived. The S2000 does indeed take cues from previous Honda's and this has been stressed by the compnay. However, these Honda's were not sold all that widely in our market and so the S2000 appears as that random point on the map.
A shame but I am not crying. Unlike the Porsche or Z3 the S2000 has a classic sports car shape low, long nose, subtle sides, etc, etc.
Sam.