S2k. Vs Boxter s
Discussion
Ok so I'm thinking about either an s2k ,which my head tells me is way to go ,or a boxter S ,which my heart tells me to go for
I've a budget of 6-8 k for the right car circa 2000-2003 so I can insure on a classic ltd mileage policy .
Ive read some horror stories about IMS failures on the Boxter resulting in engine death syndrome ,but haven't heard as many similar stories about VTEC .
No doubt the Porsche is a high maintenance mistress to keep fettled cf Honda ,and although the Vtec engine is no doubt a masterpiece of engineering for its small capacity ,there is something about the Porsche which still makes me go all gooey .
I have to confess I haven't driven a Boxter yet and when I drove a well sorted 03 S2k it kind of felt uninvolving dare I say it .Alltough it felt nimble and quick enough and a nice compliant ride . My back wont take a bone hard ride any more as I'm an older bloke . it'll just be a fun car for weekends not a daily driver
So has anyone got out of a Boxter into a an S2k or indeed vice versa ?
If the Porsche was as reliable as the Honda then I think I'd go with the former just for the sense of occasion . It does indeed seem bizarre that for a premier marque The Boxter engine is so fatally flawed .
Obviously the price of parts and servicing is a big factor here and availability of a top local Honda dealer but no Porsche dealer or even an Indie where I am based .
Any thoughts or insight would be welcome as I am still swithering .
Regards,Brian
I've a budget of 6-8 k for the right car circa 2000-2003 so I can insure on a classic ltd mileage policy .
Ive read some horror stories about IMS failures on the Boxter resulting in engine death syndrome ,but haven't heard as many similar stories about VTEC .
No doubt the Porsche is a high maintenance mistress to keep fettled cf Honda ,and although the Vtec engine is no doubt a masterpiece of engineering for its small capacity ,there is something about the Porsche which still makes me go all gooey .
I have to confess I haven't driven a Boxter yet and when I drove a well sorted 03 S2k it kind of felt uninvolving dare I say it .Alltough it felt nimble and quick enough and a nice compliant ride . My back wont take a bone hard ride any more as I'm an older bloke . it'll just be a fun car for weekends not a daily driver
So has anyone got out of a Boxter into a an S2k or indeed vice versa ?
If the Porsche was as reliable as the Honda then I think I'd go with the former just for the sense of occasion . It does indeed seem bizarre that for a premier marque The Boxter engine is so fatally flawed .
Obviously the price of parts and servicing is a big factor here and availability of a top local Honda dealer but no Porsche dealer or even an Indie where I am based .
Any thoughts or insight would be welcome as I am still swithering .
Regards,Brian
Well I've had both, in summary:
Performance out and out nothing really in it (986) 3.2S v S2000.
Boxster more refined/quiet than S2000 especially on motorway.
Boxster more smoother flat 6 and more lower down torque v S2000 4cyl, but Honda far happier to bounce of the red line all day long, Boxster felt strained doing the same.
S2000 more reliable and far cheaper to run than Boxster. Far lower bork factor, but Boxster not necessarily unreliable.
Gearbox/gearchange better in S2000.
Boxster more "balanced" handling, dont recall a noticeable difference in ride quality between them.
More storage space in Boxster (front and back).
Stereos crap as standard in both cars, although Honda far easier to upgrade. The Boxster had a sound pack too and still rubbish.
Dont recall much difference in steering feel, although the Boxster wheel is massive.
You really need to drive the S2000 and red line through the gears to get an idea of the engine otherwise it will feel so so, but it depends on your driving style as to whether you prefer this over the Boxster.
Performance out and out nothing really in it (986) 3.2S v S2000.
Boxster more refined/quiet than S2000 especially on motorway.
Boxster more smoother flat 6 and more lower down torque v S2000 4cyl, but Honda far happier to bounce of the red line all day long, Boxster felt strained doing the same.
S2000 more reliable and far cheaper to run than Boxster. Far lower bork factor, but Boxster not necessarily unreliable.
Gearbox/gearchange better in S2000.
Boxster more "balanced" handling, dont recall a noticeable difference in ride quality between them.
More storage space in Boxster (front and back).
Stereos crap as standard in both cars, although Honda far easier to upgrade. The Boxster had a sound pack too and still rubbish.
Dont recall much difference in steering feel, although the Boxster wheel is massive.
You really need to drive the S2000 and red line through the gears to get an idea of the engine otherwise it will feel so so, but it depends on your driving style as to whether you prefer this over the Boxster.
It looks like you would really prefer the Boxster, so why go for your 2nd choice? As for reliability, yes in general the Honda should be better but not all Boxster engines blow up 
As for the S2000, you really need to 'get' the car and engine to have fun in it. On the right roads racing to 9k revs and using that lovely gearbox is quite an experience. But if you don't like that sort of thing it's probably much nicer to be in the Porsche!
As for the S2000, you really need to 'get' the car and engine to have fun in it. On the right roads racing to 9k revs and using that lovely gearbox is quite an experience. But if you don't like that sort of thing it's probably much nicer to be in the Porsche!
Lol not really I'm not from Germany (Holland actually) and drive an S2000. Personally the 986 boxster has never really appealed to me, but I understand the attraction. The 987 however I like a lot.
I have no doubt however that the Boxster is in many ways a nicer cast most of the time. It's just that the times when you can really use the S2000 it's quite magic. It can be a bit embarassing to screem past at 9k revs with the roof down though (especially with an induction kit), attracts a bit of attention (strangely some people look a bit annoyed/angry )
I'm not from Germany (Holland actually) and drive an S2000. Personally the 986 boxster has never really appealed to me, but I understand the attraction. The 987 however I like a lot.I have no doubt however that the Boxster is in many ways a nicer cast most of the time. It's just that the times when you can really use the S2000 it's quite magic. It can be a bit embarassing to screem past at 9k revs with the roof down though (especially with an induction kit), attracts a bit of attention (strangely some people look a bit annoyed/angry
)They're both hairdressers cars for a start....
Driven a Boxster S when I was looking for my current car. As above really, comparable performance but acheive it in a different way.
If its a weekend toy the S2K is definately the one I'd be going for - needs to be driven all the way to the redline or at least over 6000rpm to get the full experience, but that's what makes it a perfect second car. As far as I am concerned, the boxster is a nicely balanced mid engine convertable, but misses the final bit of excitment when really pushed on.
The only way is get a proper drive in both, stretching them to really get an idea, but if you don't want to always be chasing revs the boxster S would be a better choice as the S2K really is about the engine and gearbox.
Driven a Boxster S when I was looking for my current car. As above really, comparable performance but acheive it in a different way.
If its a weekend toy the S2K is definately the one I'd be going for - needs to be driven all the way to the redline or at least over 6000rpm to get the full experience, but that's what makes it a perfect second car. As far as I am concerned, the boxster is a nicely balanced mid engine convertable, but misses the final bit of excitment when really pushed on.
The only way is get a proper drive in both, stretching them to really get an idea, but if you don't want to always be chasing revs the boxster S would be a better choice as the S2K really is about the engine and gearbox.
Edited by TommyBuoy on Wednesday 3rd April 15:59
TommyBuoy said:
Good to know that it inspired you to comment on it 
You should set your sights higher chap, I'm usually found commenting on all sorts of dross,mire and retarded Internet behaviour. After all, I've nothing better to do with my poor existence. In fact, you ought to have sympathy for me too!....
And again! I'm on a roll.
Let us know what you do go for OP; for the budget mentioned you should be able to get a good condition 2004+ S2000 which, in my opinion, look smarter than the pre-2004 cars as well as the 986.
ETA: Mr N.Bloke, you can all the sympathy I have to offer, I'm not using it at the minute. Out of interest, do you have an opinion on the original query or did you just drop in to check no one was insulting your (and mine I might add) choice of car?
Let us know what you do go for OP; for the budget mentioned you should be able to get a good condition 2004+ S2000 which, in my opinion, look smarter than the pre-2004 cars as well as the 986.
ETA: Mr N.Bloke, you can all the sympathy I have to offer, I'm not using it at the minute. Out of interest, do you have an opinion on the original query or did you just drop in to check no one was insulting your (and mine I might add) choice of car?
Edited by TommyBuoy on Wednesday 3rd April 16:52
Hmm seen a real nice s2k in Wales ,is there anybody out there in the principality who is a qualified mechanic with a knowledge of s2k , who'd be prepared to go and inspect a car on my behalf for a fee , as I can't down there while my missus is away with having to look after our dogs .
Thought I'd ask even though its a long shot .
Regards,Brian
Thought I'd ask even though its a long shot .
Regards,Brian
Owned the S2000, driven the Boxster.
My S2000 was later model with updated chassis, very low miles, took 6 months to find and turned out to be a bit disappointing:
Tiny sparse cabin (smaller than MX5's), seat way too high, steering lifeless and chassis scared me - the only car I've spun (twice) in 25 years. Epic engine, great gearchange, not enough to offset the flaws, took itself too seriously and lacked the joie de vivre of an MX5, got bored with it much sooner than I expected.
Boxster S was stronger low down, sounded lovely (sports exhaust), more comfy, more exotic, felt much nicer inside and would slide anywhere at will. As a daily it murders the S2000, brilliant all rounder but spoilt a bit by over long gearing (115mph indicated in third!) and the need to really rag it for excitement.
My S2000 was later model with updated chassis, very low miles, took 6 months to find and turned out to be a bit disappointing:
Tiny sparse cabin (smaller than MX5's), seat way too high, steering lifeless and chassis scared me - the only car I've spun (twice) in 25 years. Epic engine, great gearchange, not enough to offset the flaws, took itself too seriously and lacked the joie de vivre of an MX5, got bored with it much sooner than I expected.
Boxster S was stronger low down, sounded lovely (sports exhaust), more comfy, more exotic, felt much nicer inside and would slide anywhere at will. As a daily it murders the S2000, brilliant all rounder but spoilt a bit by over long gearing (115mph indicated in third!) and the need to really rag it for excitement.
I can relate to what you say about the steering and chassis ,I drove a 2005 dealer example today and I found the handling to be wee bit vague when pushed ,it didn't install me with the confidence I was expecting .Perhaps it wasn't set up properly ? On the plus side it feels like a proper well built car , no rattles or scuttle shake at all cf my Mx5 . Ok so it's tad slow at lower revs ,but my gosh in third gear on full chat , it's totally bonkers and sounds utterly like an F1 car . Like others have said here I found myself continually changing down to get on the vtec band . It's rather additive and I could see myself getting points .
I like the cabin but then I'm only 5-8 so it feels nice and snug ,if I was much taller it would be a problem .Seats not electric and steering wheel not adjustable so tricky to get a perfect driving position .
Gearbox is just fantastic and brakes are brilliant ,progressive and powerful .
I would want to drive one in the wet as I am not sold on the handling ,but as I said it could just be the geo on this car not being spot on ,even though its an approved Honda with only 29k miles .
So this has given me more food for thought ,I didn't have that tingle factor when I got out ,but its a Honda so it's going to be robust and won't let me down ,and much cheaper than an equivalent vintage boxter .
hmmm...........
I like the cabin but then I'm only 5-8 so it feels nice and snug ,if I was much taller it would be a problem .Seats not electric and steering wheel not adjustable so tricky to get a perfect driving position .
Gearbox is just fantastic and brakes are brilliant ,progressive and powerful .
I would want to drive one in the wet as I am not sold on the handling ,but as I said it could just be the geo on this car not being spot on ,even though its an approved Honda with only 29k miles .
So this has given me more food for thought ,I didn't have that tingle factor when I got out ,but its a Honda so it's going to be robust and won't let me down ,and much cheaper than an equivalent vintage boxter .
hmmm...........
doclip said:
I can relate to what you say about the steering and chassis ,I drove a 2005 dealer example today and I found the handling to be wee bit vague when pushed ,it didn't install me with the confidence I was expecting .Perhaps it wasn't set up properly ? On the plus side it feels like a proper well built car , no rattles or scuttle shake at all cf my Mx5 . Ok so it's tad slow at lower revs ,but my gosh in third gear on full chat , it's totally bonkers and sounds utterly like an F1 car . Like others have said here I found myself continually changing down to get on the vtec band . It's rather additive and I could see myself getting points .
I like the cabin but then I'm only 5-8 so it feels nice and snug ,if I was much taller it would be a problem .Seats not electric and steering wheel not adjustable so tricky to get a perfect driving position .
Gearbox is just fantastic and brakes are brilliant ,progressive and powerful .
I would want to drive one in the wet as I am not sold on the handling ,but as I said it could just be the geo on this car not being spot on ,even though its an approved Honda with only 29k miles .
So this has given me more food for thought ,I didn't have that tingle factor when I got out ,but its a Honda so it's going to be robust and won't let me down ,and much cheaper than an equivalent vintage boxter .
hmmm...........
There's endless "It needs a geo set up" threads on here concerning 'poor' handling S2000's but my experience make me doubt it - the wayward, confidence sapping chassis been talked too many times to be taken lightly.I like the cabin but then I'm only 5-8 so it feels nice and snug ,if I was much taller it would be a problem .Seats not electric and steering wheel not adjustable so tricky to get a perfect driving position .
Gearbox is just fantastic and brakes are brilliant ,progressive and powerful .
I would want to drive one in the wet as I am not sold on the handling ,but as I said it could just be the geo on this car not being spot on ,even though its an approved Honda with only 29k miles .
So this has given me more food for thought ,I didn't have that tingle factor when I got out ,but its a Honda so it's going to be robust and won't let me down ,and much cheaper than an equivalent vintage boxter .
hmmm...........
My car was owned by a grandmother (an embroiderer for our local cathedral - you couldn't make it up) and was in perfect order - I still had it aligned by a local geo whizz but it scared me at anything over 8/10ths (make that 5/10ths in the wet) no matter what we tried. I tried different tyres, all high end stuff, different pressures, everything.
The torsen diff is one of the keys, back off mid-slide and you're gone, be quick with the wheel and keep on it and it should come back, that took balls and learning to master and I never really cracked it, others might tell you my balls are tiny and my bag of talent empty but I'm not that bad.....
You're right about the engine yowl - utterly addictive - try removing the airfilter, it multiply's the sound by 3 and given that I lived next door to a mile long tunnel I'm surprised I kept my licence, I can still hear it now. It is one amazing engine and it took other manufacturers over ten years to beat its record breaking NA bhp/litre figure.
That gearbox? Sublime thing that had me changing gear twice as much as I needed to.
I had some amazing runs in it and will always have fond memories but I'll also remember its scary side, bad driving position and one dimensional personality.
You might just need to scratch the itch yourself, I doubt you'll regret it......
Had a 2001 S2000 and a 2004 Boxster S (265bhp)
The Boxster had a better feel with more confidence in the grip of the car, but then its tyres (265) were a lot wider than the early Boxster I had.
Stereo in the S2000 is utter crap, the Boxster was Ok (Bose)
S2000 feels a far cheaper place to be, but the Boxster is really dated, but solid compared to the tinny S2000. Roofs get noisy on S2000, its an easy fix with spacers, also roof rip's behind the door.
Both have glass windows on later cars, but rubbish plastic screens on early ones.
MPG is better in the Boxster (34 mpg to 29mpg in S2000 going to my workplace), you have to rev the knackers off the S2000 to go anywhere (Hence the lower MPG), but when you did it was well worth it.
Boxster's have a few problems which can be expensive if you don't shop around. S2000 is generally bulletproof mechanically.
I've just bought a 3.0 Z4 which is similar to both, but a much harder ride with silly runflats, however its a much nicer and better build quality than the S2000, and more modern than the Boxster with far more toys than any (10 peakers, sat nav, auto lights/ wipers etc)
Drive them both and see.... personally I would buy another M3
its in another league performance wise.
The Boxster had a better feel with more confidence in the grip of the car, but then its tyres (265) were a lot wider than the early Boxster I had.
Stereo in the S2000 is utter crap, the Boxster was Ok (Bose)
S2000 feels a far cheaper place to be, but the Boxster is really dated, but solid compared to the tinny S2000. Roofs get noisy on S2000, its an easy fix with spacers, also roof rip's behind the door.
Both have glass windows on later cars, but rubbish plastic screens on early ones.
MPG is better in the Boxster (34 mpg to 29mpg in S2000 going to my workplace), you have to rev the knackers off the S2000 to go anywhere (Hence the lower MPG), but when you did it was well worth it.
Boxster's have a few problems which can be expensive if you don't shop around. S2000 is generally bulletproof mechanically.
I've just bought a 3.0 Z4 which is similar to both, but a much harder ride with silly runflats, however its a much nicer and better build quality than the S2000, and more modern than the Boxster with far more toys than any (10 peakers, sat nav, auto lights/ wipers etc)
Drive them both and see.... personally I would buy another M3
its in another league performance wise.Edited by nottyash on Thursday 4th April 22:55
Edited by nottyash on Thursday 4th April 22:56
Gassing Station | Honda | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff