Porsche Enthusiasts Club Forum

Just spent spent the afternoon driving an automatic Boxster S.

A contrast from my previous Boxster experince a year or so ago. That was in a manual non-S boxster (and also, later that day, a Cayman) with the top up, in the dark and drizzle. This was an auto S in the sunshine with the top down.

Nothing wrong with it all - remarkably non-crashy ride on poor surfaces / potholes, despite the slightly lower-profile tyres of the S. Fortunately it only had the standard S wheels, nothing larger.

However it made me realise what a good car my Mk3 MX-5 roadster-Coupe is, which I've had for the last two years. I'm in slightly less of a hurry now to change it. OK, I was driving on speed-resticted roads mainly, and more often than not behind other cars so little opportunity to experience the acceleration or overtaking performance (I didn't know the roads, the salesman was sitting alongside me, it wasn't my car and I'm generally a fairly cautious driver anyway).

But with the top and the windows down, it kept on reminding me that it felt much like my own car - especially being red! - although I actually think my seats were slightly more comfortable.

So: OK, but perhaps not sufficiently different from my Mk3 for me to want to spend a lot of money upgrading in the immediate future.

Regarding the auto 'box: it seemed excellent. As distinct from the previous Tiptronic (which, I understand, was a conventional torque-converter-type auto, but with finger-tip override), the current effort is a purely mechanical dual-clutch transmission but operated automatically, with auto or manual control.

According to the salesman, whereas the Tiptronic only represented about 20% of new Boxster sales previously, the current auto now represents over 50% of current sales. I find that quite amazing.

And very smooth it is, too. Like all autos, it fumbles a bit if you just floor the throttle when it is tootling along gently in 7th, but is lightning quick if you press the gear button instead to tell it to change.

Perhaps most amazing is if you press the up (or usually down) button but leave the throttle alone. The road speed doesn't change in the slightest, there is no snatch or jerk whatever, and you even have to listen carefully to hear the change in engine revs. The only way you can tell that you've actually changed gear is from the rev counter and the gear indicator light. Weird!

I could, just possibly, even be tempted to buy one! Only £1,920 extra which is amazing from a company which wants £2,191 off you just for a poncy set of wheels, £2,358 for partial leather adaptive sports seats, £1,904 for a comms package with Sat Nav, £2,005 for leather trim or £1,249 for a sports exhaust system ... Dur.

However, I'd need to try the auto 'box under hard-driving conditions to be fully convinced.

To sum up the comparison between a 2-litre MX-5 and the Boxster S:

For the Boxster: shakes and shudders slightly less on potholes. Very slightly sharper steering. Probably a lot quicker, but not really tested.

Against the Boxster: even bigger and more bulbous (as well as more bulbous-looking) than the Mk3 MX-5. A lot more expensive to buy. Vastly more expensive to run. Got "Porsche" written on it so attracts all the usual stupid Porsche comments and bullshine. Floppytop only, although (unlike the brilliant Mazda folding hard-top) it can be operated on the move. Only a 2-year warranty, and unlikely to have the extraordinary reliability of the Mazda.

To the non-motoring-enthusiast public, the Mazda has just as impressive an image as the slightly odd-looking Boxster. "Ooh look, it's a sports car! Love the colour!" is the frequent response in either case.

As one friend said (who knew exactly what an MX-5 was), when he saw my Mk3 "Coo! What do those things cost? £30 to 35,000?" and was amazed when I said "No, about half that!"

Hi Titus
I've only had my Boxter a short time having been a Lotus fanatic for years but find the comparison between an mx5 and the boxter very hard to take seriously. The power on the S is so smooth and just keeps coming. Although i dont do high miles in mine i am sure that it would cope well with this as many high milage examples can be found. I would by no means call myself a Porsche fan but i must say the boxter is a fairly inexpensive sports convertable with more than adequate performance.
Cheers
Paul

No doubt. This time I only drove the Boxster in traffic or on quite heavily trafficked roads, so wasn't really able to assess the power / performance. It certainly ought to be a lot quicker than the Mazda!

It was the other aspects of driving it that I was really commenting on. Have you driven a current MX-5 - with the suspension alignment adjusted correctly?

Hi Titus
No i have never had the pleasure of driving an Mx5, but having driven many types of cars over the years you cant beat pure engine size when push comes to shove !
You are right that the Mx5 represents good value for money, but never in any of my dreams was i driving along a winding country lane driving a Mx5 ! If i were you go and test drive a lotus exige, it will change your views and scare the pants off you.
Regards
paul

MX5 is a modern MG. Sweet handling & fun. But no guts. Theres no substitute for cubic inches! A 944 is a torque machine. I think Titus would really like a DB7. More a grand tourer. Or a 944 cab. The Boxster doesn't go until you cane it. Like an S2000. The exige is the same. It won't float his boat. Another option & more affordable would be an XKR 4 litre. Supercharged if you like. Last of the real Jags & very cheap now. More your sort of ride Titus.

You may be right! I find engines which you have to rev to get them to go are tedious - you spend all your time changing gear.

I grew up driving cars which (for their time) had loads of torque - TR2/3A, Reliant Scimitar - and greatly enjoyed driving 800 miles (on all sorts of roads) in a rented 3.8 E-type roadster.

Modern engines like that in the MX-5 are actually amazing tractible despite their high maximum specific power output, thanks of course to variable valve timing, fuel injection and electronic engine management.

I am indeed attracted to the latest 500bhp+ XKR Jaguar convertible and I was impressed by a 2008 XK convertible I drove. But none of these cars - not even the Boxster - are as compact and as nimble as the MX-5, and that is an important factor for me since many of the country roads I regularly drive on are fairly narrow and twisty.

Well if torque is the only measure of how good a car will be when will BMW develop the 3 ltr tdi Z4 ?

A BMW badge (like a Porsche badge, but in a very different way) brings its own baggage. One incidental advantage of an MX-5 is that no-one ever accuses you of trying to show off by owning one!

I like torque (although it is very far from being my only consideration!), I like 6-cylinder engines and I like the folding hard-top of the latest Z4. But that roof fills most of the boot (just as bad as the SLK350), unlike the MX-5 which is the only folding hard-top in the world which does not occupy any boot space. And reviews of the new Z4 are not wholly flattering of either its ride or its roadholding. It certainly doesn't seem to have the handling of a Boxster ...

I love the Lotus Exige. In fact it was driving a rather speical Lotus 7 that persuaded me that I had to sell my sensible hatch & get a real car. The 944 was as close as I could get & still be practical. You should try an XKR Titus. They feel much smaller inside & are very nimble across country. Used to have a job importing them for awhile. Great cars. But if you really love the MX5 then you should probably stick with it! There just too slow for me but each to his own! Will save a bundle on petrol & insurance.

Have driven an XK. Very impressed. Wrote about it here:

http://www.mx-5.com/Community/forums/Ad ... Quote=True

The chassis was so capable that it seemed underpowered - if I ever bought an XK, I'd buy an XKR, preferably the current 500+bhp version!

Financially, I guess I could probably run an XKR or my MX-5 and an E-type - when I can find a decent Series 1 roadster.