Picture Gallery: 2008 Porsche Boxster & Boxster S | Day 1 | Day 2 | Day 3 | Day 4 |Discuss
 Click Image to Enlarge |
This week it so happens that I am again in a Porsche, but this time the base model of the Porsche line-up the Boxster. A unique opportunity to have sampled both the Boxster and the more powerful S version within a few weeks of each of course demands something a little different — a comparison perhaps.
 Click Image to Enlarge |
The Boxster S I was sporting just over a week ago was optioned out quite spectacularly with a total out the door price tag of $84,005 after a market adjustment of $1,450 offered by Porsche to ease the cross border shopping urge. Porsches have always been pricey when adding up the options and my S tester was no exception.
The Boxster S comes in rather well equipped with a base price of $70,200, add in Atlas Grey Metallic paint at a whopping $4,390 and the price is just starting to skyrocket.
|
|
The standard Boxster I am testing this week comes in a very alluring red, otherwise known as “Guards Red”, starting at a base price of $58,100 this Boxster is not optioned up too much but still totals out at $65,525 including the $1,450 market adjustment. Options on the Boxster include: Automatic Climate Control, the Bose High End Sound System, Heated Front Seats (there are only front seats…), Bi-Xenon Headlamps and a few other odds and ends.
First and second impressions of the Boxsters? Well there is no denying these machines are a pleasure to drive; especially top down with the sun is shining and the wind in your face.
2008 Porsche Boxster and Boxster S
MSRP as tested (including destination): $65,525 & $84,005
For more information on Porsche and the Boxster visit Porsche Canada
 Click Image to Enlarge |
Another interesting day two observation — it doesn’t matter that the Boxster is 10 years old, nor does it matter if you drive a Boxster or a Boxster S: people notice and they stare. It is an interesting phenomenon. Personally, I don’t stare at Boxsters; they are a common sight but apparently, others still find it appealing.
 Click Image to Enlarge |
I’m sure this statement — “No two Porsches are the same” — is a little over the top, but with the amount of option choices available to you when purchasing one, it seems like this may be possible. My two testers had similar options; the most notable differences were the sports exhaust on the Boxster S (a $2,940 option) and coloured centre caps on the wheels. What does this mean in practice? It means you can pretty much gussy up a regular Boxster to the same trim as an S, leaving the difference down to the extra 50hp and a six-speed rather than five-speed transmission.
The interiors of both Boxsters were nearly identical, the most notable difference being white-faced gauges on the S version, which really did make the gauges easier to read. Both cars lack steering wheel audio controls… somewhat of an oversight in my opinion, even with the close quarters, that quick access to the volume adjustment is always nice to have.
Both testers were optioned with heated seats — lovely when it is 15 degrees out and the top is down; it really keeps your bones toasty on the inside. And both cars allow you to drop or raise the top when traveling under 50km/h, something a lot of convertibles allow you to do only when stopped. This is a great time saver when you are about to exit the vehicle and a real saviour if rain hits without warning.
 Click Image to Enlarge |
That’s the great thing about the Boxster and Boxster S — you can drive them like a bat out of hell, if you wish, and you can carve up corners like no tomorrow. But you can also cruise around in comfort as the suspension soaks up the bumps well and the chassis is so well-balanced that you can sit back and relax.
 Click Image to Enlarge |
On acceleration, of course, the Boxster S is faster and its six-speed transmission means smaller gaps between gears, allowing for quicker acceleration off the line as well as keeping the engine in the powerband more easily. The standard Boxster needs to be wound up more; it doesn’t really start to pull until 4,500 rpm, but then it begins to sing, and quick shifts keep the smaller flat six on boil.
Honestly, the standard Boxster is plenty fast around town, out on the open highway and for twisty back roads. It wasn’t long ago that 245hp was a massive amount of power, and in a vehicle that weights only 2,877lbs, most people would be quite happy indeed. I am certainly not complaining.
 Click Image to Enlarge |
Both cars returned respectable fuel economy for the week: the Boxster S averaged 12.3L/100km over the week and the smaller-engined Boxster managed 10.8L/100km. Both cars require premium fuel.
I’m sure most reading this will think I am crazy, but for everyday driving, without a shadow of a doubt, I would buy the regular Boxster over the S. You can never really use the S’ extra power on the street, and both cars feel exceptional anyways. If you are going to track your Boxster, you may want the extra grunt of the S, but unless you are a super driver, you most likely will not be tapping either car’s full potential anyways.
*Rating out of 5:
| 2008 Porsche Boxster & Boxster S | |
| Acceleration | 
|
| Handling |
|
| Comfort | |
| Interior | 
|
| Audio System | |
| Gas Mileage | |
*Rating based on vehicle’s classification
2008 Porsche Boxster and Boxster S
MSRP as tested (including destination): $65,525 & $84,005
For more information on Porsche and the Boxster visit Porsche Canada
September 11, 2008, 11:12:40 am I've driven an '05 (current generation) Boxster on a few occasions -- even back-to-back with my MX5. Aside from them both being small roadsters known for their handling prowess, the superiority of the solidity, sound (and yes, torquey pulling power) of the Boxster (even in non-S trim) is like night and day.
For anyone who turns their nose up to a late model Boxster, I can only assume they've never reached to the left, turned the ignition, powered down the top and then driven off with the boxer-engine music singing away behind their ears. To truly love it is to have experienced it for yourself. It's not the fastest car out there (though plenty quick enough), but it just does everything so well, it's a truly awesome machine.
Porsche. There is no substitute.
September 11, 2008, 08:10:17 pm
For anyone who turns their nose up to a late model Boxster, I can only assume they've never reached to the left, turned the ignition, powered down the top and then driven off with the boxer-engine music singing away behind their ears. To truly love it is to have experienced it for yourself. It's not the fastest car out there (though plenty quick enough), but it just does everything so well, it's a truly awesome machine.
Porsche. There is no substitute.
I admit it has its charm... but I'd rather have the other offerings 81something buys you.
All of that would sound reasonable at maybe 70.
September 11, 2008, 10:24:58 pm
I quite like the Cayman though. Those option prices are crazy...
September 12, 2008, 10:49:20 am
For anyone who turns their nose up to a late model Boxster, I can only assume they've never reached to the left, turned the ignition, powered down the top and then driven off with the boxer-engine music singing away behind their ears. To truly love it is to have experienced it for yourself. It's not the fastest car out there (though plenty quick enough), but it just does everything so well, it's a truly awesome machine.
Porsche. There is no substitute.
I admit it has its charm... but I'd rather have the other offerings 81something buys you.
All of that would sound reasonable at maybe 70.
Agreed, even as much as I do love Porsches, I'd have a really hard time buying a new one at Cdn prices. However, as a used car value in the States, an '05 can be had for what, low $40s, maybe high 30s? That's a pretty cool car for reasonable bucks.
I'd have to drive a C6 Vette before deciding for myself where I'd put down my $$$ if I were in the market though.
September 12, 2008, 11:00:29 am I have no interest in a Boxster.... just don't want to own a convertible as I'd never open the top. But a Cayman maybe if it was cheaper and I fit comfortably inside.
I have never ever wanted a 911. I dislike cars that try to kill their owners.
September 12, 2008, 11:51:15 am For the price I'd much rather have a Lotus ExigeS.
Although I did enjoy owning a Boxster, I don't think I'd like to own another convertible sports car again. I'm 6'1" and my head would stick above the roll-bars, same goes for the S2000 I test drove.
September 12, 2008, 08:35:46 pm I saw an interesting site on my way home from work today... was driving down Mary Hill bypass and observed a large cloud of smoke in front and then a second larger one maybe 1/2 km later that was so thick that it brought traffic to almost a standstill. As I crawled through the haze - behold - a newer model Boxster S pulled over minus one engine. I don't believe I've ever seen an engine go up like that other than in F1, Indy, etc.
I wasn't close enough to tell how it was being driven but that kinda sucks, since I do like the Porche brand.
September 12, 2008, 08:42:09 pm Early Boxsters were known to have bad engines. I thought they had fixed that problem, though.
September 12, 2008, 09:14:48 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
September 13, 2008, 08:50:26 pm But only in NA. In Euroland not so much .
September 13, 2008, 08:57:16 pm turkhics
September 13, 2008, 09:38:03 pm Railton
September 13, 2008, 10:13:51 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
I agree. Have a look at the Porsche section of Pistonheads if you want to see some truly shocking stories of engine failures and dealer/manufacturer mismanagement. Even though they are reliable compared to Ferrari's etc. they are still fragile. A friend of mine in work had to replace the engine in his boxster, not cheap.
September 14, 2008, 12:01:29 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
Not all of the German brands have poor reliability. At least the air(oil) cooled 993s (and to a lesser extent 964s and 911SCs) are pretty reliable. Minor niggling problems exist, but none debilitating. Newer model year Boxsters (post '99) and most Caymans are fairly reliable AFAIK.
And since in the States it's much cheaper to buy a Cayman S, especially when one can find with little effort a dealer who's willing to sell for a lot under MSRP, it's much more enticing.
FWIW an Exige S might be a more desirable car in that it's a "purer" car than the CS as it's not saddled with luxury items, but that bonded aluminum chassis is really fragile. One encounter with even a wood block, a gnash in the belly and that car is totaled. This is not even considering how easy it is to get cracks in the FRP front clam which could lead to replacement...
September 14, 2008, 01:27:43 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
The same way a Tiger tank in WWII could wipe the floor with the competition. Except it was not exactly easy to maintian..
September 14, 2008, 04:26:49 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
The same way a Tiger tank in WWII could wipe the floor with the competition. Except it was not exactly easy to maintian..
Exactly….then it was not successful if utilization was poor. What is the point of having the best if it spends most of its time in the shop?
September 14, 2008, 07:31:32 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
The same way a Tiger tank in WWII could wipe the floor with the competition. Except it was not exactly easy to maintian..
Exactly….then it was not successful if utilization was poor. What is the point of having the best if it spends most of its time in the shop?
Ah yes, but ask any WWII tank man if he'd have taken a Sherman over being in a Tiger or Panther.
September 14, 2008, 08:05:03 pm
F1 cars are extremely highly engineered, yet they have what we would call appalling reliability. I think higher-engineering has a lower tolerance for failure. Now, does that make Porsche's reliability acceptable? Not particularly. But assuming higher engineering = higher reliability is a fallacy, imho.
September 14, 2008, 08:28:13 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
The same way a Tiger tank in WWII could wipe the floor with the competition. Except it was not exactly easy to maintian..
Exactly….then it was not successful if utilization was poor. What is the point of having the best if it spends most of its time in the shop?
Ah yes, but ask any WWII tank man if he'd have taken a Sherman over being in a Tiger or Panther.
The guys in the Sherman won
September 14, 2008, 11:44:19 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
Not all of the German brands have poor reliability. At least the air(oil) cooled 993s (and to a lesser extent 964s and 911SCs) are pretty reliable. Minor niggling problems exist, but none debilitating. Newer model year Boxsters (post '99) and most Caymans are fairly reliable AFAIK.
And since in the States it's much cheaper to buy a Cayman S, especially when one can find with little effort a dealer who's willing to sell for a lot under MSRP, it's much more enticing.
FWIW an Exige S might be a more desirable car in that it's a "purer" car than the CS as it's not saddled with luxury items, but that bonded aluminum chassis is really fragile. One encounter with even a wood block, a gnash in the belly and that car is totaled. This is not even considering how easy it is to get cracks in the FRP front clam which could lead to replacement...
There is a big difference between damage you can claim on insurance and engine failure... On an Exige the underside is pretty well protected, I should know I ran over a few things at very high speed and there was never any obvious damage. Even when I bounced it up a kerb backwards!
Anyway I didn't say it wasn't a sports car, just not my cup of tea...
September 15, 2008, 11:15:00 am
The guys in the Sherman won
I'd give more credit to the swarm of guys in T34s. But details, details.
I'd rather that Ladas not get into this discussion.
September 16, 2008, 10:44:51 am j0IjcB it`realy.... good info.... imho
September 16, 2008, 06:23:04 pm
OK...this is my big laugh of the day...but that's just my kind of humour.
September 16, 2008, 06:26:04 pm
I will never understand why the Germans claim they have superior automotive engineering when all of their brands have such poor reliability.
Well put Snowy...it's always been a mystery to me...perhaps a triumph of marketing over reason.
September 16, 2008, 10:53:38 pm You vil obey ze superior carz!