Porsche Boxster...

helpimcrap

helpimcrap

helpimcrap

Soldato
Joined
13 Jan 2004
Posts
12,803
Location
Leicestershire
tell me about it.

5.7 Monaro is out due to stupid insurance (£3000 was the cheapest excess!) and a Westfield although would be cool is out as nowhere to store it and it's roofless. Leaves a Z4 and a Boxster. TTs out as crap and expensive. Plus I just don't like them. :p:D

Ao choices I havw left are a Porsche Boxster or Z4 and about £10,000. Would buy me a 2.7 Y/51 reg Boxster or a 2004ish 3.0 Z4.

I heard the 2.7 boxster lump is crap as it eats balance shafts costing an engine rebuild whereas the 3.2 is a touch pricier but better allround.

The Z4 will be the 3.0 but how does the 2.2 compare?

If I had access to storage it would be a westfield with a bike engine no question....
 
The Porsche is a better car than the Z4. The Z4 is less hassle to own, newer, and less of a pain in the neck at this sort of pricepoint.
 
[TW]Fox;16858724 said:
The Porsche is a better car than the Z4. The Z4 is less hassle to own, newer, and less of a pain in the neck at this sort of pricepoint.
Click to expand...

i get that and how is the 2.2 compared to the 3.0? thanks :)
 
helpimcrap said:
tell me about it.

5.7 Monaro is out due to stupid insurance (£3000 was the cheapest excess!) and a Westfield although would be cool is out as nowhere to store it and it's roofless. Leaves a Z4 and a Boxster. TTs out as crap and expensive. Plus I just don't like them. :p:D

Ao choices I havw left are a Porsche Boxster or Z4 and about £10,000. Would buy me a 2.7 Y/51 reg Boxster or a 2004ish 3.0 Z4.

I heard the 2.7 boxster lump is crap as it eats balance shafts costing an engine rebuild whereas the 3.2 is a touch pricier but better allround.

The Z4 will be the 3.0 but how does the 2.2 compare?

If I had access to storage it would be a westfield with a bike engine no question....
Click to expand...

2.7 engine is no worse than the 3.2 for reliability.

Get a proper Porsche specialist inspection done before you buy if you buy a Porsche, ala Peter Morgan.

Best 400 quid you can spend.
 
helpimcrap said:
i get that and how is the 2.2 compared to the 3.0? thanks :)
Click to expand...

It is exactly the same engine but with less power, slightly different internals and 800cc less displacement. Everything else - including the running costs and reliability - is the same.

In 3.0 form I would be bold enough to say the Z4 is a genuinelly fast car - 0-60 is 5.7 seconds. The 2.2 is not underpowered for the car, it's a light car and it has 170bhp, but it's nothing like the 3.0.
 
cheers chaps and i do agree Gadge in that i prefer the Z4 looks but been put off by the expensive coomon occurance of roof motor failures apparently.

Z4 or Porsche Boxster. Admittedly it's only the poor mans porsche but it's the quality i'd like in it and it may be a 30th birthday pressie to myself. :)
 
Considered an S2000? Revvy engine which which you'll be used to from bikes and could spend a fair bit less than £10k and still get a nice one... which could leave money for forced induction upgrades or just pocket the change :) . Just an option...
 
helpimcrap said:
cheers chaps and i do agree Gadge in that i prefer the Z4 looks but been put off by the expensive coomon occurance of roof motor failures apparently.

Z4 or Porsche Boxster. Admittedly it's only the poor mans porsche but it's the quality i'd like in it and it may be a 30th birthday pressie to myself. :)
Click to expand...

Forget that poor mans ****, all they are lacking over other Porsches is 2 seats.
 
helpimcrap said:
cheers chaps and i do agree Gadge in that i prefer the Z4 looks but been put off by the expensive coomon occurance of roof motor failures apparently.
Click to expand...

Don't buy a Boxster then either, neither car are safe havens from the odd £800 repair bill. They are not that sort of car.

Either get used to the fact it might break every so often, or buy a Focus CC on a 58 plate :)
 
[TW]Fox;16858724 said:
The Porsche is a better car than the Z4. The Z4 is less hassle to own, newer, and less of a pain in the neck at this sort of pricepoint.
Click to expand...

This.

I've had a Boxster S and a 330 sport cab (same engine as Z4)

If I were you I'd buy the Z4.
 
2.7 Boxsters are fairly slow for what you're paying. Pre-facelifts also look nasty and horrendously dated, IMO.

Z4 certainly isn't a safe haven from bills - I had a £650 bill for a replacement airbag control unit (though just warranty excess, for me). In the last few months I've also had a mouse chew through my gearbox wiring loom, took some labour ££ to spot, annoyingly.

The roof motor thing is 'common', but like anything, you're far more likely to not suffer it than to suffer. Either get one that's had it done already or run a warranty like most other folk.
 
Spuderoony said:
The roof motor thing is 'common', but like anything, you're far more likely to not suffer it than to suffer.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Of the people I know who have a Z4 (either through this forum or elsewhere) thats older than 2006, I don't know a single one who has not had a roof motor fail.
 
Totality said:
What year is the facelift model of the Boxster?
Click to expand...

The 986 was replaced by the 987 in 2005. There was a minor facelift before that but the only noticeable difference was the clear lights.

If you look at my picture bellow you can see a good example of the non facelift 986 lights. The facelift replaced the orange bits with "clear" bits on the back, front and side repeaters.
 
Last edited:
helpimcrap said:
i prefer the Z4 looks but been put off by the expensive coomon occurance of roof motor failures apparently.
Click to expand...

If the roof motor puts you off the Z4 (cost wise) then i'd say the Boxster isn't the car for you, words "tip of the iceberg" come to mind.

I'd look at something with lesser running costs (S2000 / MX-5).
 
I think I'd rather have a newer Z4 than a 10 year old bottom of the market boxster. :o
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom