Which 987 2.7 should I buy : High mileage or low mileage?
Discussion
Hi all,
I'm pretty interested in buying a 987 2.7 as I'm looking for a car that's as fast as my kseries elise but with more comfort for longer trips, a good sounding engine and fun handling.
I was initially interested in an S but I honestly don't want to buy one to potentially have to pay 10k to rebuild the engine 1 or 2 years down the line, so the 2.7 seems like a safe bet.
So I've been looking at classifieds and found a 2.7 example with good history and 120 k miles for much less than a similar example with half the mileage.
I normally drive 10-15k miles per year, so I'm wondering if maybe I should just buy a high miles example, since I'll quickly add miles to it anyway? I'm just wondering about the durability of the 2.7 engines, if anyone can share their experience?
I'm pretty interested in buying a 987 2.7 as I'm looking for a car that's as fast as my kseries elise but with more comfort for longer trips, a good sounding engine and fun handling.
I was initially interested in an S but I honestly don't want to buy one to potentially have to pay 10k to rebuild the engine 1 or 2 years down the line, so the 2.7 seems like a safe bet.
So I've been looking at classifieds and found a 2.7 example with good history and 120 k miles for much less than a similar example with half the mileage.
I normally drive 10-15k miles per year, so I'm wondering if maybe I should just buy a high miles example, since I'll quickly add miles to it anyway? I'm just wondering about the durability of the 2.7 engines, if anyone can share their experience?
Hi Loafers,
I was in a similar position to you, having owned a VX220 for 10.5 years. The sold it as I moved abroad for a couple of years and when I got back I wanted something almost as fun, but with a few more creature comforts. I also had a similar dilemma, initially looking at the S for the extra pace etc. Again, after reading further into them decided that a base model would be better for me, as to be honest I'm not likely to notice the difference in pace too much, even on track.
Fortunately my budget allowed me to go for a 987.2 base model with the 2.9, these, like many cars, have now gone up in price though.
For your specific dilemma though, as always I'd buy on history/condition etc, over mileage, though I guess it depends on just how different the price is.
I was in a similar position to you, having owned a VX220 for 10.5 years. The sold it as I moved abroad for a couple of years and when I got back I wanted something almost as fun, but with a few more creature comforts. I also had a similar dilemma, initially looking at the S for the extra pace etc. Again, after reading further into them decided that a base model would be better for me, as to be honest I'm not likely to notice the difference in pace too much, even on track.
Fortunately my budget allowed me to go for a 987.2 base model with the 2.9, these, like many cars, have now gone up in price though.
For your specific dilemma though, as always I'd buy on history/condition etc, over mileage, though I guess it depends on just how different the price is.
You'll have to contend with a few more rusty fasteners or bolts on something that has presumably been used in all weathers but fundamentally there's nothing that would worry me about putting 10,000 miles on a 120k mile car. I had a 2006 2.7 with 90k on it 18 months ago and I loved it. The exhaust bolts holding the manifolds to the silencers rusted through and sheared on a spirited drive but aside from it was lovely.
Here's a curveball for you:
Consider an 05 987 3.2S.
No bore scoring on the 3.2. The IMS bearing can be upgraded with the LN Ceramic bearing. No bork factor at this point, and more power than the 2.7.
What's not to like?
It will certainly give you more of the performance that you're used to, probably comparable to the K-Series Elise in terms of acceleration.
Consider an 05 987 3.2S.
No bore scoring on the 3.2. The IMS bearing can be upgraded with the LN Ceramic bearing. No bork factor at this point, and more power than the 2.7.
What's not to like?
It will certainly give you more of the performance that you're used to, probably comparable to the K-Series Elise in terms of acceleration.
Ash_ said:
Hi Loafers,
I was in a similar position to you, having owned a VX220 for 10.5 years. The sold it as I moved abroad for a couple of years and when I got back I wanted something almost as fun, but with a few more creature comforts. I also had a similar dilemma, initially looking at the S for the extra pace etc. Again, after reading further into them decided that a base model would be better for me, as to be honest I'm not likely to notice the difference in pace too much, even on track.
Fortunately my budget allowed me to go for a 987.2 base model with the 2.9, these, like many cars, have now gone up in price though.
For your specific dilemma though, as always I'd buy on history/condition etc, over mileage, though I guess it depends on just how different the price is.
Hey Ash, yea I think I remember you mentioning your vx220 in another thread I started a while ago. Exactly in the same boat as you were I think - love the elise but I think I'm ready to move on. I was in a similar position to you, having owned a VX220 for 10.5 years. The sold it as I moved abroad for a couple of years and when I got back I wanted something almost as fun, but with a few more creature comforts. I also had a similar dilemma, initially looking at the S for the extra pace etc. Again, after reading further into them decided that a base model would be better for me, as to be honest I'm not likely to notice the difference in pace too much, even on track.
Fortunately my budget allowed me to go for a 987.2 base model with the 2.9, these, like many cars, have now gone up in price though.
For your specific dilemma though, as always I'd buy on history/condition etc, over mileage, though I guess it depends on just how different the price is.
I'd love a 2.9 but they're at the top end of my budget, with similar mileages as 2.7s. The 2.7s are a good 5 - 7 k less in the country i'm in, and abundant in manual form (set on a manual).
The 120k mile example is 7k less than all the 60k mile examples, but besides seeing that it has full Porsche history service, I have no idea of its condition (haven't been to see it yet). I just wonder if maybe its a risk worth taking - if I could see that the engine could last well into 180k+ miles with the correct maintenance (no rebuilds) I think it'd be quite tempting. No need to fret over putting miles on it and lose value, as the worst it could happen is that it'd lose another couple of thousands and that's it!
olv said:
You'll have to contend with a few more rusty fasteners or bolts on something that has presumably been used in all weathers but fundamentally there's nothing that would worry me about putting 10,000 miles on a 120k mile car. I had a 2006 2.7 with 90k on it 18 months ago and I loved it. The exhaust bolts holding the manifolds to the silencers rusted through and sheared on a spirited drive but aside from it was lovely.
That doesn't really bother me, I'd rather deal with rusty nuts than a lunched engine! How did the car feel at 90k? Magnum 475 said:
Here's a curveball for you:
Consider an 05 987 3.2S.
No bore scoring on the 3.2. The IMS bearing can be upgraded with the LN Ceramic bearing. No bork factor at this point, and more power than the 2.7.
What's not to like?
It will certainly give you more of the performance that you're used to, probably comparable to the K-Series Elise in terms of acceleration.
To be honest, I didn't even know Cayman Ss came at first in 3.2 form! I've been trying to find information on these 3.2s, so the only issue they have is the IMS? No issues with chain tensioners or scored bores? If so, then it becomes a very interesting proposition!Consider an 05 987 3.2S.
No bore scoring on the 3.2. The IMS bearing can be upgraded with the LN Ceramic bearing. No bork factor at this point, and more power than the 2.7.
What's not to like?
It will certainly give you more of the performance that you're used to, probably comparable to the K-Series Elise in terms of acceleration.
Magnum 475 said:
Here's a curveball for you:
Consider an 05 987 3.2S.
No bore scoring on the 3.2. The IMS bearing can be upgraded with the LN Ceramic bearing. No bork factor at this point, and more power than the 2.7.
What's not to like?
It will certainly give you more of the performance that you're used to, probably comparable to the K-Series Elise in terms of acceleration.
The Cayman S always came with the 3.4 I thought?Consider an 05 987 3.2S.
No bore scoring on the 3.2. The IMS bearing can be upgraded with the LN Ceramic bearing. No bork factor at this point, and more power than the 2.7.
What's not to like?
It will certainly give you more of the performance that you're used to, probably comparable to the K-Series Elise in terms of acceleration.
They’re great cars the 2.7 manual, loved mine.
Just one thing I’m sure you might have thought of already OP - how easy will it be to sell the car with >120k miles when the time comes. The lower mileage cars might be more expensive now but you should get the additional back again when you sell (and you benefit from a lower mileage car under your ownership).
As always though buying on condition/maintenance is generally best.
Just one thing I’m sure you might have thought of already OP - how easy will it be to sell the car with >120k miles when the time comes. The lower mileage cars might be more expensive now but you should get the additional back again when you sell (and you benefit from a lower mileage car under your ownership).
As always though buying on condition/maintenance is generally best.
Ah right! I spent a while last night looking for 05 Cayman Ss and was surprised they were all 3.4 
And you're right TP - a high mileage example will be hard to move on when I'll eventually would like to change it for something else..I might have to either wait and save up for a 2.9 or get a cheaper 2.7!
I've never tried a 2.7, only a 3.4 and really really liked everything about it - such a shame about the issues with the bigger engine! Or else I'd get an S in a heartbeat
Really looking forward to getting behind the wheel of one! They look like they're a perfect mix of roadtrip car + fun enough for b-road blasts!
And you're right TP - a high mileage example will be hard to move on when I'll eventually would like to change it for something else..I might have to either wait and save up for a 2.9 or get a cheaper 2.7!
I've never tried a 2.7, only a 3.4 and really really liked everything about it - such a shame about the issues with the bigger engine! Or else I'd get an S in a heartbeat
Really looking forward to getting behind the wheel of one! They look like they're a perfect mix of roadtrip car + fun enough for b-road blasts!
Yeah, its almost a bit of a shame the early Cayman S didn't come with the 3.2, especially pre-March 2006 reg ones.
I found the 2.9 Gen 2s have climbed significantly in the last year or so, typically gone from from mid to high teens to low 20s.
Re bore score, I would have considered a Gen 1 3.4 with a quality rebuilt engine e.g. Hartech but couldn't find any - certainly none in budget - so plumped for a 2008 2.7 in the end, and have only owned for a couple of months.
Whether it feels fast enough depends on what you are coming from. Its quite linear, and surprisingly not that gutless lower down, but get it singing higher up the rev range and its nippy enough for me. The handling and steering is superb. Mine is on 74k and feels as tight as a drum, seems to have been very well maintained with all the common things addressed. Keep us posted if you get a chance to try one.
I found the 2.9 Gen 2s have climbed significantly in the last year or so, typically gone from from mid to high teens to low 20s.
Re bore score, I would have considered a Gen 1 3.4 with a quality rebuilt engine e.g. Hartech but couldn't find any - certainly none in budget - so plumped for a 2008 2.7 in the end, and have only owned for a couple of months.
Whether it feels fast enough depends on what you are coming from. Its quite linear, and surprisingly not that gutless lower down, but get it singing higher up the rev range and its nippy enough for me. The handling and steering is superb. Mine is on 74k and feels as tight as a drum, seems to have been very well maintained with all the common things addressed. Keep us posted if you get a chance to try one.
Loafers92 said:
Ash_ said:
Hi Loafers,
I was in a similar position to you, having owned a VX220 for 10.5 years. The sold it as I moved abroad for a couple of years and when I got back I wanted something almost as fun, but with a few more creature comforts. I also had a similar dilemma, initially looking at the S for the extra pace etc. Again, after reading further into them decided that a base model would be better for me, as to be honest I'm not likely to notice the difference in pace too much, even on track.
Fortunately my budget allowed me to go for a 987.2 base model with the 2.9, these, like many cars, have now gone up in price though.
For your specific dilemma though, as always I'd buy on history/condition etc, over mileage, though I guess it depends on just how different the price is.
Hey Ash, yea I think I remember you mentioning your vx220 in another thread I started a while ago. Exactly in the same boat as you were I think - love the elise but I think I'm ready to move on. I was in a similar position to you, having owned a VX220 for 10.5 years. The sold it as I moved abroad for a couple of years and when I got back I wanted something almost as fun, but with a few more creature comforts. I also had a similar dilemma, initially looking at the S for the extra pace etc. Again, after reading further into them decided that a base model would be better for me, as to be honest I'm not likely to notice the difference in pace too much, even on track.
Fortunately my budget allowed me to go for a 987.2 base model with the 2.9, these, like many cars, have now gone up in price though.
For your specific dilemma though, as always I'd buy on history/condition etc, over mileage, though I guess it depends on just how different the price is.
I'd love a 2.9 but they're at the top end of my budget, with similar mileages as 2.7s. The 2.7s are a good 5 - 7 k less in the country i'm in, and abundant in manual form (set on a manual).
The 120k mile example is 7k less than all the 60k mile examples, but besides seeing that it has full Porsche history service, I have no idea of its condition (haven't been to see it yet). I just wonder if maybe its a risk worth taking - if I could see that the engine could last well into 180k+ miles with the correct maintenance (no rebuilds) I think it'd be quite tempting. No need to fret over putting miles on it and lose value, as the worst it could happen is that it'd lose another couple of thousands and that's it!
Loafers92 said:
I've never tried a 2.7, only a 3.4 and really really liked everything about it - such a shame about the issues with the bigger engine! Or else I'd get an S in a heartbeat
Really looking forward to getting behind the wheel of one! They look like they're a perfect mix of roadtrip car + fun enough for b-road blasts!
That's exactly what they are! Although admittedly I've always used both of mine (2.7 previously, now 3.4 987.2) more for b-road blasting than road trips, when I have been on longer journeys I've always been pleasantly surprised how decent they can be for that too. Really looking forward to getting behind the wheel of one! They look like they're a perfect mix of roadtrip car + fun enough for b-road blasts!
Have fun test driving
Had my 987 2.7 for 8 years now and it's a car I don't plan to ever sell,have covered 1000's of miles on trips all over Europe and has been good as gold and 100% reliable,if your intending to buy one with 100k+ miles try and find one from an enthusiast who has kept 'on top' of the car as although they can take the miles well bills can quickly rack up if they've been poorly looked after.
I've owned and driven much faster cars but the little 2.7 is such a sweet engine,does 34-35mpg touring and according to my Boxster bible does 0-60 in 6.2 and will hit a 100mph in 14.5.The S ofcourse is faster at 5.5 with 100mph coming up in 12.3 respectively.Tbh the only time I've found my 2.7 lacking in grunt on the road is on the autobahn with acceleration well above 100mph,not sure even an S would satisfy that but for fast B road driving in the UK fully wrung out I've never found the 2.7 lacking.
I've owned and driven much faster cars but the little 2.7 is such a sweet engine,does 34-35mpg touring and according to my Boxster bible does 0-60 in 6.2 and will hit a 100mph in 14.5.The S ofcourse is faster at 5.5 with 100mph coming up in 12.3 respectively.Tbh the only time I've found my 2.7 lacking in grunt on the road is on the autobahn with acceleration well above 100mph,not sure even an S would satisfy that but for fast B road driving in the UK fully wrung out I've never found the 2.7 lacking.
Just to echo the above, I too have a 2.7 and it is utterly fantastic. I use mine purely for b-roads and track days and despite having bought it on 95k 2 years ago, the only spend it has actually needed (above and beyond servicing) was £77 for a new coffin arm (although in fairness, I have opted to spend much more than that on a full suspension upgrade, new mounts, better tyres etc).
On a twisty b-road, there really are few cars which could touch it. The balance is incredible and the engine/gearing lends itself well to spirited driving.The only time it ever feels lacking is pure straight-line acceleration (as in, literally flooring it from say 30mph on a totally straight road) but to be honest I don't really think that is what this car is about and if you are buying one for straight line speed you're kind of missing the point - Even the S models don't feel particular quick in these days of turbocharger torque. On track it is equally fantastic and the 2.7 has no problem keeping up with and even passing far more powerful machines.
If it were me, I'd buy one with a higher mileage and use the money I had saved to refresh the suspension. A car with 50-60k miles would still benefit from having it done (age will kill many of the rubber parts) and yet you're paying a premium for the imaginary benefit of low miles. Resale may be harder and necessitate a lower price but to be honest we're talking about fairly cheap cars here and so the amount you'll "lose" (if any) come resale by choosing a higher mileage car is going to be low (1-2k at worst).
On a twisty b-road, there really are few cars which could touch it. The balance is incredible and the engine/gearing lends itself well to spirited driving.The only time it ever feels lacking is pure straight-line acceleration (as in, literally flooring it from say 30mph on a totally straight road) but to be honest I don't really think that is what this car is about and if you are buying one for straight line speed you're kind of missing the point - Even the S models don't feel particular quick in these days of turbocharger torque. On track it is equally fantastic and the 2.7 has no problem keeping up with and even passing far more powerful machines.
If it were me, I'd buy one with a higher mileage and use the money I had saved to refresh the suspension. A car with 50-60k miles would still benefit from having it done (age will kill many of the rubber parts) and yet you're paying a premium for the imaginary benefit of low miles. Resale may be harder and necessitate a lower price but to be honest we're talking about fairly cheap cars here and so the amount you'll "lose" (if any) come resale by choosing a higher mileage car is going to be low (1-2k at worst).
JayEmm review of the base 987 Cayman here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bfAZVea6nE
And some Aussie blokes reviewing similar:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ov3GnpF-Cw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bfAZVea6nE
And some Aussie blokes reviewing similar:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ov3GnpF-Cw
Drekly said:
Yeah, its almost a bit of a shame the early Cayman S didn't come with the 3.2, especially pre-March 2006 reg ones.
I found the 2.9 Gen 2s have climbed significantly in the last year or so, typically gone from from mid to high teens to low 20s.
Re bore score, I would have considered a Gen 1 3.4 with a quality rebuilt engine e.g. Hartech but couldn't find any - certainly none in budget - so plumped for a 2008 2.7 in the end, and have only owned for a couple of months.
Whether it feels fast enough depends on what you are coming from. Its quite linear, and surprisingly not that gutless lower down, but get it singing higher up the rev range and its nippy enough for me. The handling and steering is superb. Mine is on 74k and feels as tight as a drum, seems to have been very well maintained with all the common things addressed. Keep us posted if you get a chance to try one.
That was my original plan, but 2.9s have indeed gone up in price (actually, pretty much everything with 4 wheels has!) so it means it’s unfortunately out of budget for me at the moment..i found a low mileage and keenly priced S that needs an engine rebuild so I’ve contacted Hartech for some info and they’ve sent me some info- all very interesting. Although to be quite honest, I’m not looking for outright speed but fun, a gorgeous engine note, practicality and good looks so the 2.7 should do just fine! I’ve put the Elise up for sale so hopefully I’ll get to try a 2.7 soon. I’ve tried an S a couple of years ago and loved it (that engine! And handling!) so I wonder how much of a difference there really is I found the 2.9 Gen 2s have climbed significantly in the last year or so, typically gone from from mid to high teens to low 20s.
Re bore score, I would have considered a Gen 1 3.4 with a quality rebuilt engine e.g. Hartech but couldn't find any - certainly none in budget - so plumped for a 2008 2.7 in the end, and have only owned for a couple of months.
Whether it feels fast enough depends on what you are coming from. Its quite linear, and surprisingly not that gutless lower down, but get it singing higher up the rev range and its nippy enough for me. The handling and steering is superb. Mine is on 74k and feels as tight as a drum, seems to have been very well maintained with all the common things addressed. Keep us posted if you get a chance to try one.
Ash_ said:
With the saving you'd make by getting a higher mileage one, I guess you could use that money to right on top of any niggles too, to bring it right up condition-wise, thorough service, suspension refresh etc, etc.
Very good point. It’s certainly something I’m considering. The price difference around here for a high mileage example and regular miles car is around 6/8€k (that’s a lot of money that could be spent on petrol and maintenance !)T1547 said:
That's exactly what they are! Although admittedly I've always used both of mine (2.7 previously, now 3.4 987.2) more for b-road blasting than road trips, when I have been on longer journeys I've always been pleasantly surprised how decent they can be for that too.
Have fun test driving
That’s pretty much how I’ve been using my Elise! I work from home so whenever I need a break I go out to my local roads for a blast in the countryside (where it’s brilliant) as well as using it for longer trips (where it makes me question my sanity), so I think a cayman is the answer. Can’t wait!!Have fun test driving
Gassing Station | Boxster/Cayman | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff