MR2 SpyderChat banner
41 - 60 of 60 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I also own a 982 "718" Cayman S. it is superior to my 2ZZ swapped 05 in every way except price, and the MR2 feels slightly more nimble. That being said it is a different car experience.
You can't compare a 718 to a 20 year old car's performance. We're talking first gen base 986 Boxster to a ZZW30. I can buy 5+ ZZW30s for the price of a used 718.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,739 Posts
Having owned a 718 Boxster for three years, there is no way it is "more of a GT car" than a sports car. At the Porsche experience day at Silverstone, on their tight tracks, I spent an afternoon going past 911's and I am no F1 driver.

The handling on the 718 is simply incredible.

Now, my current car, a 2020 BMW Z4 30i is, imo, more of a GT car. I bought the 30i over the M40i as it is more than fast enough for what I need it for, and cheaper to run and maintain. It has a roomier and nicer cabin than the 718 also.

Of course for performance, I have this;

Wheel Tire Land vehicle Fuel tank Vehicle
 
  • Like
Reactions: New2me

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,739 Posts
You can't compare a 718 to a 20 year old car's performance. We're talking first gen base 986 Boxster to a ZZW30. I can buy 5+ ZZW30s for the price of a used 718.
No you can't.
Just as you can't compare a 986 to an MR2 spyder. You are deluding yourself if you think the spyder is in the same league.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
No you can't.
Just as you can't compare a 986 to an MR2 spyder. You are deluding yourself if you think the spyder is in the same league.
Agreed.

Horses or courses can make it confusing though.
You also write that the ZZW30 feels more nimble. Easy; it ís. Lots lighter, less rotational inertia (MR2) so it cán be more suited to specific purposes. For mine the 718 is even wórse than the 968 ;)
Yet the 718 is way better than the 986 and bétter cars than the ZZW30.

Enjoy your stable!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
Having owned a 718 Boxster for three years, there is no way it is "more of a GT car" than a sports car. At the Porsche experience day at Silverstone, on their tight tracks, I spent an afternoon going past 911's and I am no F1 driver.
You fall in the same trap of equalling performance with sports car.
It is the ´sports car conundrum´ created by motoring journalists.
In the real world faster does not equal better or more sporty.
The track is totally disconnected from real world roads. Surface, conditions, general traffic are but three aspects.
But then one simply changes the definition of ´sports car´ away from nimble, spirited driving in the real world and presto!

The creature comfort things in the Boxster family but for the track versions says it all.
They are superb, awesome, period, but more autobahn & comfort than Touge roads nimble ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,739 Posts
Again, I disagree. The two tracks at the Porsche experience centre are short and twisty, the 718 was built for them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
Again, I disagree. The two tracks at the Porsche experience centre are short and twisty, the 718 was built for them.
Ofcourse you would disagree when you keep confusing track use with driving open to traffic mountain roads. The 718 is indeed built for ´them´, not back road mountain passes.

Take the 911 Nürburgring Special. An awesomely fast car. A REALLY góód car. Imo Porsche is the summit for that type of car. Superb engineering; both specs and quality. Still, my crappy old MR2 is a better one for a spirited fun run from my place to neighbouring Archidona over the ´molinillo´ inner road.
The 911 would probably be faster but you´d get out with the pants soiled whereas with a smile out of mine. Horses for courses. The better/best horse is not always the good one.
Also about what makes a ´sports car´ for the real world roads. In mý opinion as an old racer, a too powerful/capable a car does not cut it there on the nimble, sprited, fun charts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,739 Posts
That's the only time i've been on a track. I have driven the 718 spiritedly in the Scottish highlands and borders and the car was perfect for those roads. Personally I don't consider any Boxster to be track focused.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,723 Posts
A 718 Boxter/cayman is going to be better for any type of driving compared to a MR2. It handles better, is more comfortable, quieter, more powerful, and more stable. Literally better in every way except price.

And the PDK is light years better than our SMT. Manuals are roughy equivalent (I actually prefer the shift feel on the MR2 a little more but is a preference thing).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
There you have it FunkyCheeze. With the PDK to SMT you nail it. The PDK is better yet...
On the roads I refer to there is very, véry little shifting though. In the Porsches less still.

Surprising and a bit disappointing that the crux of lightweight and léss power lights no bulbs. Ah well, tant pis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
Petrus believe in the Colin Chapman sayings.

Colin Chapman:
"Simplify, then add lightness"
"Adding power makes you faster on the straights; subtracting weight makes you faster everywhere"

Of course the Porsche 550 was an early example of this thinking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
Petrus believe in the Colin Chapman sayings.

Colin Chapman:
"Simplify, then add lightness"
"Adding power makes you faster on the straights; subtracting weight makes you faster everywhere"

Of course the Porsche 550 was an early example of this thinking.
The original 718 too (y)
The colour scheme on mine is a wink and bow to the delightful little Le Mans racing Spyders. Thát is how I appreciate them and Porsche sports car engineering.



And the weight thing is not just belief.
Also, many engineers/tuners preceded Chapman in this. His is simply the most published. Ettore Bugatti is but one example in the car world. And Porsche OBVIOUSLY. I am no fan of attributing this so much to Chapman: It was common tuning knowledge. Heck, the whole literally chopper thing of army surplus bikes post WW2 was about it!!!
Anyway I raced for some 23 years. Mostly motorcycles, Then moved to Spain and switched to enduro bikes, later raids on four wheels with son as co-pilot.
Weight ís the crux for all but speed.

And we can add numbers even, Very to the point too.
The MR2 monniker is a pun by the Toyota engineers.
The moment of inertia; the mass times distance squared to the centre of rotation is a/the key factor in response to directional change. Do the math and the ZZW30 outscores the 718.
Also do the math of kinetic energy. A heavier car takes more than proportional effort to ... everything.
Lastly the tyre load sensitivity. Porsches wáy more sophisticated wheel control goes a long way to
compensate but the lighter MR2 is not thát outclassed.

It is no different with motorbikes. You can flóg a KTM 390 Duke up/over/down the passes here and any superbike rider trying to keep up will most likely come to grief. No doubt a BMW S 1000 RR is the way better bike.

Again, there is NO discussion from my part that the Boxter family is better, more sophisticated in every aspect than the ZZW30.
I am properly smitten with the 718 rag top. I think it the dog´s bollocks of cabrios.*
Still the Boxsters take a LOT more to extract the same level of fun out of it on the twisties here. It simply is overkill for the purpose.
I can naíl mine into the sheer endless series of switchbacks up the south side of the Puerto del Sol. Not worry about it trying to kill me, enjoy the sliding, enjoy how easy it is to slow down. It is user friendly when I make a mistake. In contrast I scared myself properly up a softer version pass with the 987 I tried before deciding on the MR2.

But... ok, by all means. the Boxsters are só much better than the MR2 that they are too good for me and my purpose.

Right can we put this to bed now:
The Boxter is a better car, The later the model the more better.
It may be too good, overkill for a specific driver or purpose.

* although for pósing over the paseo maritimo I´d opt for a Maserati BiTurbo Spyder or Ferrari Mondial Cabrio. Both pretty dismal cars yet übercool top down beach front cruisers; bétter for that.
Just as I prefer my ZZW30 for flogging over the back roads here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,923 Posts
My Porsche will never be able to keep up with my Spyder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,923 Posts
Nope, I take that back. It's appreciating much faster than my spyder ever will.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
A sports car is made in the UK, usually doesn't start and when it does the electrical system decides (or somebody named Lucas) whether you need headlights or not. First gear is non-syncro and the top has to be "erected" and take at least ½ hour to do so. Frame should be made of wood, rust will be installed at the factory where the car requires hand assembly because the unions insist on it for maximin labor participation. For further info, check with LJK Setright.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
the electrical system decides (or somebody named Lucas) whether you need headlights or not.
Ah, memory lane, intermittently lit by the Prince of Darkness. Had a 6V dynamo with electromechanical voltage irregulator by Lucas on my old Norton Type 7. Tar sealed bakelite battery too. At times it was better to just switch it off. Was in the days before omnipresent street lighting so good night riding training. Served me very well till today.

I have his book on the history of the car here btw. , Setright´s. His poem on the Daffodil (variomatic) too. Imo a pity that his quite knowledgeable writing was largely forgotten while the populist Top Gear fell upwards and the sports car conundrum was hallowed.

But to put a fine point on his tongue in cheek definition, the sports car was basically born with the small capacity 4 and 6 cil. open lightweight ´tourers´ of the nineteen twenties. The French leading the way with p.e. Amilcar.
The MG M-type was the best part of a decade later and the first British affordable open ´sports´ car. Had the lovely cross flow Wolsely engine in which the dynamo spindle doubled as the bevel drive to the overhead camshaft. It was available with a supercharger too.
Quite reliable and but for the first models had all metal chassis. Sorry Setright.

Anyway, thát were the archetypical sports cars which both the MX5 and MR2 Spyder holding that torch in the 21st C.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
451 Posts
Here you go- definitive proof that an MR2 is faster than a 718! Of course, I'm in the intermediate run group with an instructor, and I have a K24, LSD, etc...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts


and it is só much easier when you are quicker than the car. The later gens of the Boxster family is better than any mere mortal, better than open road conditions. Which Í think is paying a lot for a load of no good ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
I sat in a boxter once. Do they ALL have that horrid wheel well hump that removes the place my left foot would like to go?
I owned a 987 Cayman S for 8 years and have no idea what hump you're referring to. I'm also 6'2" and wish the seats went back 1-2 inches further.

The M96 and M97 engines just have very unreliable components and poor design in many ways. The rest of the car as far as I can tell is reasonably reliable, maybe with the exception of the soft top mechanism, and "user error" like people leaving the window down and the ECU getting soaked by rain.

It's not difficult to find the problems with the cars. You can go to LN Engineering for example and read up on it. The M96 and M97 engines have an open deck design with relatively thin cylinder walls and are cast high silicon alloy (weaker than normal aluminum). They can outright have a chunk break off, but more commonly the bores eventually get oval enough for the oil consumption to make an early 1ZZ blush. There are not a lot of these engines that survive into the high 100k mile range.

The water pumps are known for failure and are recommended to be replaced every few years. The chain guides on 5-chain engines wore quickly, I don't know if they ever fixed that problem in the later engines. Spark plugs are much more involved than your usual engine since they're not accessible from the top (Subarus also have this issue though). Oil starvation, AOS failure, and rod bearing failure are common on tracked cars, because they put scavenge pumps at opposite corners in the heads, so I think left turns with a forward negative acceleration component will pool oil where there is no scavenge pump. The AOS is just bad, you have to pony up 4 digits for the "Porsche Motorsports" upgrade, or figure out how to tuck an aftermarket catch can or AOS in as a custom job. Apparently, hydraulic lash adjuster failure is somewhat common. The crankshafts are not very strong and will snap without a dual mass flywheel or damped crank pulley.

A rebuild is going to run you at least 10k.

Pretty much all those problems were solved on the later cars, so you don't need to budget huge amounts of money for repairs generally speaking. That's why 987.2s get snapped up so quickly when they hit the market. On a 987.2, compared to a MR2 Spyder you're just looking at more expensive tires, brakes, and oil (10 quarts!), and getting kind of shafted when you eventually do less frequent service items like coolant, transmission fluid, spark plugs, etc. since the Porsche fluids are special and expensive. I think if you do the easier work yourself or have a good priced mechanic, it's easy to stay under 1k/year in service cost. The parts are more money than most cars, but mostly not outrageous because there are a lot of Porsches and they share parts.

Once you move to the 981 and up generations, I think it gets a little more expensive because there is a bunch of computer stuff that you're supposed to have a dealer (or indie with the equipment) set when they do mundane things like batteries. Or, you could just ignore the error messages that pop up on the screen to save money lol.
Really good summary here. Above I said I owned a Cayman S for 8 years. I don't own it anymore because I lost the rod bearings on cylinder #6 while attending an HPDE. I never bothered having the engine properly diagnosed for failure because why would I pay for that? I removed the oil pan (which was an aftermarket unit with increased capacity and upgraded baffles) and it looked like a glitter bomb had gone off in there. Only had 117,000 miles on the engine. Having driven the piss out of an Integra GS-R I used to own (past 340,000 miles) I found the engine failure inexcusable. Especially given the ridiculously cost of Porsche engines, which frankly, outside of GTx models, are nothing special. Installing a replacement, used, 3.4 M97 cost around $12-15k, and probably would have resulted in similar failure again. A built engine that would prevent failure from spirited track use cost about double, $30k. To hell with that, sold the car as a roller to a guy that, no joke, dropped in a K24 and is in the process of boosting it. Sidenote: there was another bone stock Cayman S at the track with me, on even stickier tires than me (me on 200TW, he on 100TW) and he had no issues. Blows your mind really.

I never worked on a Boxster, but working on the Cayman wasn't difficult. I'm not sure if the convertible top gets in the way much but accessing the engine wasn't difficult for me. Spark plugs were mentioned as being extra difficult. It's done in 3 hours and isn't a difficult procedure. Suspension and brake work is easy. Oil changes and air filter changes, easy. Replacing the accessory drive belt is easier than on most front engine cars. FYI you can buy almost anything you need for a Porsche on FCP Euro's website, and they warranty everything for life, even wear items. Brake components, suspension components, fluids, even wiper blades!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,923 Posts
Thanks, pricing out the 4.0 flywheel and RS clutch kit for my GT3 now...
 
  • Like
Reactions: nelix
41 - 60 of 60 Posts
Top