Boxter 3.2S or Z4 3.0?

Morba said:
i was stating that tommy isnt the only one to think that people with money only buy the best of the best of the best.
Click to expand...

Could you explain how a Porsche 911 is the 'the best of the best of the best' in terms of Roadsters? I was always under the impression that the absolute pinnacle of the Porsche roadster range was the Boxster S RS50 Spyder. Perhaps I was mistaken?
 
[TW]Fox;11757610 said:
Could you explain how a Porsche 911 is the 'the best of the best of the best' in terms of Roadsters? I was always under the impression that the absolute pinnacle of the Porsche roadster range was the Boxster S RS50 Spyder. Perhaps I was mistaken?
Click to expand...

sigh. you are a plonker you know that.
 
My point throughout this thread has always been that the Boxster is a different type of car to a 911 (Which makes my previous comments weeks ago about a 525d and a 530d, the same type of car, not relevant) and if that makes me a plonker then so be it :)

You are not forced to read or comment on what I write.
 
Morba said:
Why wouldnt you?
Fox is another believer of what you are saying, if you are rich you buy the best and only the best!!!!!!!!!
this is not the case, when you are rich its generally because you are sensible with your money, you buy what you like without being overly crazy. you have a grip on spending and know you can get what you want without spending top dollar.
Click to expand...

I dont know why you've got some vendetta in picking apart arguments, but from what I see you've made a SWEEPING statement about people that are 'rich'. I think you'll find that the majority of people who are wealthy enough to choose between a 911 and a Boxster would get the more expensive one. Just like they would buy a Range Rover S/C over a RR Sport. Just because they buy heavily expensive cars doesnt mean they 'dont have a grip on spending' they have enough money regardless. In my book you 'dont have a grip on spending' when you are bankrupt and have no money to buy such things in the first place.

I think the argument you and fox was pointless and you had pulled out comments like 'you are a plonker' and how fox 'looks down' etc. Stop making it personal and make real statements for your argument. Why do threads in Motors always turn out with people nit-picking at each other :mad:
 
Kappa said:
I dont know why you've got some vendetta in picking apart arguments, but from what I see you've made a SWEEPING statement about people that are 'rich'. I think you'll find that the majority of people who are wealthy enough to choose between a 911 and a Boxster would get the more expensive one. Just like they would buy a Range Rover S/C over a RR Sport. Just because they buy heavily expensive cars doesnt mean they 'dont have a grip on spending' they have enough money regardless. In my book you 'dont have a grip on spending' when you are bankrupt and have no money to buy such things in the first place.
Click to expand...

eh?
it has been shown in plenty of threads (to which said people say 'exception to the rule!!') that rich people do not just buy the best that can be afforded! i didnt say that people who buy very expensive cars do not have a grip on spending either.

Why would someone with money choose a more expensive one? purely because it costs more? yes to some people that matters, but to most it doesnt.
 
To be fair, rightly or wrongly, some people will perceive the boxster that way.
I was watching Top Gear the other day (comparing Z4/Boxster/S2000) and they were doing all the ribbing about it being a poor man's 911, so it's obviously something which crosses people's minds.
 
[TW]Fox;11757173 said:
You can pick holes in analogies all you want - the point remains the same, the Boxster is not a poor mans 911.
Click to expand...

The fact also remains the 911 is more desirable than a Boxster.
 
Well a porsche 911 cabrio has never been a big seller as to many it misses the wholepoint of what a 911 is about.

In the past (pre-boxster) the 911 cabrio range, had more scuttle and shake, so you compromised to get that open top.

Now you can buy a boxster for half the price of a 911 cabrio and it's just as fast, rated to handle even better in many peoples minds and was designed from the out set as a roadster so no loss of body rigidty as a result.

While i can see why people would choose a 911 over a boxster (it's an all time classic design), i do struggle to get my head round the assertions that a 911 cabrio is better for open top motoring? it compromises on the virtues of a hardtop 911 to offer what a boxster does at like twice the price...
 
Peter450 said:
Well a porsche 911 cabrio has never been a big seller as to many it misses the wholepoint of what a 911 is about.

In the past (pre-boxster) the 911 cabrio range, had more scuttle and shake, so you compromised to get that open top.

Now you can buy a boxster for half the price of a 911 cabrio and it's just as fast, rated to handle even better in many peoples minds and was designed from the out set as a roadster so no loss of body rigidty as a result.

While i can see why people would choose a 911 over a boxster (it's an all time classic design), i do struggle to get my head round the assertions that a 911 cabrio is better for open top motoring? it compromises on the virtues of a hardtop 911 to offer what a boxster does at like twice the price...
Click to expand...

The first post that doesn't sound like it has originated from a sexually frustrated teenager with serious aggression problems. Thank you.

I can see exactly what you are saying, it makes sense. So why does the fact remain that so many people view the Boxster as a poor man's 911. Obviously this is not the case in these forums, as the users are supposedly motor enthusiasts. But outside the confined walls of these forums, this general view is shared by many. Why?
 
Tommy B said:
I can see exactly what you are saying, it makes sense. So why does the fact remain that so many people view the Boxster as a poor man's 911. Obviously this is not the case in these forums, as the users are supposedly motor enthusiasts. But outside the confined walls of these forums, this general view is shared by many. Why?
Click to expand...

It's simple, when the boxster was paper released, the motoring press speculated its arrival, what it would be like, who it would be targetted at, etc etc. At this time, it was labled "the cheap porsche", or "the poor mans porsche", without anyone having driven it, or even seen it in the flesh.

This stigma remained attached once released, and unfortunately, due to the uneducated masses not actually being interested in cars, this name remained.
 
I'd be happy with either, but would probably go for the Porsche. I guess it depends on how you choose your car and whether peoples' perceptions of your car bother you. A lot of people who know little about cars would probably treat it as a poor-mans car but anybody who knows anything about motors would know it's a class act in its own right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom