rai

I know its not out yet. I was looking at some data from the Boxster S and thought I could bring up a few points. Mentioned a bit in the Z06 thread but I didn't want to hijack that thread.

I've read the Cayman S will weigh close to the same as a BS. Some say less, some say the same. Either way, if it weighs less it won't be much less. I'll be generous and say it'll weigh 50 lbs less than a BS. With 15 more hp. Maybe it'll be geared different and maybe it'll have more tire. I'll go out on a limb and say the Cayman S will be close to a BS in most acceleration tests, if one has to be faster maybe it's the Cayman S by a fraction.

Handling is where the Cayman may be better than the BS. Its stiffer so it's suspension should be easier to tune. That's one of the big benefits of a stiffer structure. More control over the wheel position. Maybe the Cayman will have better brakes or tires (don't know). I'll say the Cayman S should out handle the BS.

I know taking one test has it's pitfalls if the surface was extra grippy in one test and not so grippy in another you can have larger than expected differences.

But anyway without any back-to-back-to-back tests between several cars on the same day we'll have to go mag racing.

I'm just using some data from R&T because its handy and I don't want to waste all kinds of time cross referencing tests from various mags. So if any if the times are way off the norm forgive me. I use the CTS-V not because it's a direct competition to the Cayman by any means, just b/c it's a moderately quick car but not much faster than a BS to 60mph so you'll have to say the BS is a little quick, but of all the data the acceleration is the weak point of the BS. Handling it's one of the best at least at putting up numbers:

Some isolated numbers from R&T road test summary:

Top speed:

05 BS 167 mph
Cayman S (est.) 172 mph
NSX 175mph
C6 coupe 186mph
CTS-V 163 mph

0-60/0-100 mph
Elsie 4.6/12.4 sec
BS 5.0/12.2 sec
NSX 5.0/12.0 sec
CTS-V 5.0/11.4 sec
C6 coupe 4.5/9.8 sec

Braking from 60mph/80mph
NSX 117 ft/215 ft
C6 coupe 110 ft/194 ft
BS 107 ft/187 ft
Enzo 109 ft/188 ft
Elise 115 ft/203 ft

skidpad (g)/Slalom (MPH)
NSX .91g/65.8 mph
C6 .98g/70.2 mph
Enzo 1.01g/73mph
BS 1.0g/73.9 mph
Elise 1.03g/72.6mph

rai

I know all the handling numbers don't add up to much at the track. An Elise and a BS and a Cayman S will always be slower than a Vette or a Enzo for gods sake especially if the track has any straights to speak of.

I know people can quote "Ring" lap times showing all kinds of cars faster than a Cayman S (reported lap), but this probably comes down to horse power. Probably a Cayman S doesn't loose much time to an Enzo in the braking and in the corners, but it gets eaten up coming out of the corners and in the straights.

DavidM

Probably a Cayman S doesn't loose much time to an Enzo in the braking and in the corners, but it gets eaten up coming out of the corners and in the straights.

I'd ay that's the case with practicaly any sports/perfromance car. You could say the above about the S2000 as well as Interga Type-R if you wanted.

vroom

rai - have you seen the video of the Elise (Euro version with rover engine) chasing a Z06 - C5 -at the ring? Granted, different drivers so who knows the skill level, but the Z06 would become a DOT on the longer straights, but it was amazing how the Elise would eat it up under braking and in more complex sections. You'd never think it could catch up after the vette put major distance on it.

Anyway, I've done exactly what you did - looked at the BS numbers (and reread evals). The bottom line is the BS is an amazing handling car. Amazing brakes, transition (based on slalom times) and great steady state grip - which I don't put as much strength on as I could put sticky tires on a cavalier and get good skidpad numbers. If I'm not mistaken, one of the comparo tests had a BS outrunning am Elise on track. I forget the track (I believe it was the R&T comparo) and that can be a factor - though with cars of similar pace it's not the same as BS vs C5 on Road America or Lime Rock, two vastly different tracks.

I think the Cayman performance in the handling realm should be phenomenal. I think it should be a very nice ride accelerating as well - as long as you're not comparing it to a monster like a Z06 (or a C5, or C6, etc). Our S2000 is on average 1/2 seconds slower to 60, ~1 second slower in the 1/4 with about a 3 mph trap speed deficit. Our car is 'quick'. So in relative terms the Cayman won't disappoint in the positive longitudinal plane. But just pretend you're looking for some change when you see some of the above mentioned metal next to you .

Funny thing, I went and checked how well a 99 BS compared in it's drag numbers to a Mustang GT - just about even. Then I did the same for a 2005 BS vs MGT - same. Why on earth would I do that? Well it's just one of those idiotic things, but I think that you should at least be able to match America

rai

Vroom, for me, the biggest direct competition to a Cayman S is a Boxster S. For less I can get a BS at almost the same performance and have a vert.

If I get a Cayman S and want a vert also, I'd have to keep my S2000. Not very practical when I can get a BS to do both jobs (coupe and vert). Sure it's not a coupe even with a hard top, and it probably isn't as good a performer as a Cayman S. But it'd be a lot cheaper since I'd get to trade in my S2000 towards the cost and wouldn't have two 2-seaters to insure.

rai

I really don't think so. The BS had the shortest braking time recorded for a production car (in this R&T summary). Granted there are others not far off, but someone has to be the best.

I wouldn't say practicaly any sports car, there are a few like the C6 and the Elise, but the S2000 (at least in this summary) took 29 extra feet to stop from 80 mph and was 4mph slower in the slalom and off in the skid pad .91g vs 1.0g (BS)

The BS had the highest slalom speed in this summary only a few cars were over 70mph: BS, C6, Viper, Enzo, Carrera GT, Saleen S7 and that's it.

They didn't have a intergr-R listed, but maybe a comp car a Mini-S was over 4 mph slower in the slalom and took 30 extra feet to stop from 80mph. Most fwd cars did the slalom in the low 60s mph while the BS did it in the low 70s.

PsychoBen

I think the official numbers have already came out that the Cayman S is 17lb. lighter than BS and .1 sec quicker to 0-60. Where the Cayman S will clearly edge the BS is in the handling department - that is scary.

Both have same standard brakes. Different wheels. Don't know about tires, but it is tough to find better streetable tires than the Pilot Sports that BS has.

DavidM

I really don't think so. The BS had the shortest braking time recorded for a production car (in this R&T summary). Granted there are others not far off, but someone has to be the best.

Not saying that Boxtser S does not have great brakes, but on different day and different place the results might be different for all the performance/sportscars listed. Just because one test has one car posting better (let's say) braking numbers than another does not mean that that car will always post better braking numbers.

Even though I said the the above, I'd take the Boxster S brakes over S2000's any day and I'd put more faith in Boxster's braking than the S2000's.

Though, my point was that the braking/cornering for therse kind of cars are always relatively close. It's the acceleration/power on the straights that really makes all the difference. Afterall, if you look at it on an larger scale - the cars with the quickest lap-times always have a lot of power.

rai

Yes, plus I'm sure power out of a turn is the fun part.

I believe I read that a Maybach sedan (over 5000 lbs) had as good a lap time at "the ring" as the previous gen Boxster S. I'm sure the BS beat the Maybach in the turns, but the MAybach with twice the HP and close to 3 times the TQ made up in the straits.