Porsche: Giving one back to the true enthusiasts
11-09-2009, 03:26 AM
#31
It just isn't that much weight reduction. More marketing gimmick than anything else. Sure, I like that it's lighter, but the base Boxster should be closer to 2500 anyway. How much does the radio and its speakers really weigh? Removing them is pure marketing gimmick, just as it was with the CR. A/C weight is going to be a bit more, maybe 75 lb. there?
Much ado about very little in the way of meaningful weight reduction. Very much more about "ooh, it's all stripped down" than about actually being lightweight (which it still isn't).
You can't add lightweight to an existing car very easily. Here's hoping there's SERIOUS consideration given to minimizing weight on the next Boxster/Cayman. I think they should go 4cylinder only with them, possibly with a turbo option...
Much ado about very little in the way of meaningful weight reduction. Very much more about "ooh, it's all stripped down" than about actually being lightweight (which it still isn't).
You can't add lightweight to an existing car very easily. Here's hoping there's SERIOUS consideration given to minimizing weight on the next Boxster/Cayman. I think they should go 4cylinder only with them, possibly with a turbo option...
11-09-2009, 05:01 AM
#33
It's not 200 lb. lighter. Only 176. At the brochure 
200 lb. on a 2800-3000 lb. car is nowhere NEAR "a second or two" on any tracks I've driven!
I've carried around very large passengers (like 280+ lb.) in my 2300 lb. Z, and lost *maybe* half a second at NHMS (then NHIS) chicane/chicane, which is a smallish, fairly low-speed track.
Of course, even half a second is huge. I'm all for weight reduction!
My primary complaint is that Porsche's "lightest car" is right at 3000 lb.
And it's difficult to "add light weight" to an existing platform, you end up spending thousands of dollars to save 10's of pounds. So we get a more-expensive "lightweight" Boxster that's STILL over 2800 lb.
Here's to the next Boxster/Cayman being lighter-weight cars from the get-go.
200 lb. on a 2800-3000 lb. car is nowhere NEAR "a second or two" on any tracks I've driven!
I've carried around very large passengers (like 280+ lb.) in my 2300 lb. Z, and lost *maybe* half a second at NHMS (then NHIS) chicane/chicane, which is a smallish, fairly low-speed track.
Of course, even half a second is huge. I'm all for weight reduction!
My primary complaint is that Porsche's "lightest car" is right at 3000 lb.
And it's difficult to "add light weight" to an existing platform, you end up spending thousands of dollars to save 10's of pounds. So we get a more-expensive "lightweight" Boxster that's STILL over 2800 lb.
Here's to the next Boxster/Cayman being lighter-weight cars from the get-go.
11-10-2009, 07:20 AM
#34
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Roswell
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But ZDan, if adding 280 lbs person to just 1 side of your car (far from an ideal distribution of weight) makes only a .5 sec. difference and cutting 176 lbs is negligible, I just don't understand how cutting 300 lbs to this magic 2500 lbs mark will make a car go from pig to "what a sports car should be."
As I've stated before, while I agree that lighter is better, weight is simply not the end all, be all in performance. This is a great sports car (arguably one of the best on sale in the US right now) which Porsche has decided to sharpen further with (but not limited to) some weight loss. Its not like we're being fans of a Lexus LS which lost 176 lbs and added 10 hp...
I agree that the crap stock stereo doesn't weight a whole lot and the A/C is probably more significant. I'd say the best part is actually the loss of the top and motor powering it, but only if the top actually does a good job of keeping out the elements. In any case, I'm glad they didn't add back the weight by putting a hardtop on it (i.e. CR).
Like you said though, you criticize b/c you love so we'll just agree to disagree and both look forward to the days sports cars don't weigh 2 tons.
Oh and to those who said its overpriced, for what you get in terms of raw performance numbers and creature comforts, I can't say I disagree. Furthermore, i realize my "good value" comment should have been tempered by "good value for a Porsche," which isn't saying a whole lot considering I also think the GT3 is a "good value for a Porsche." However, doesn't change the fact that if I had the coin, I'd buy it (hopefully, off the used market in 3 years!).
As I've stated before, while I agree that lighter is better, weight is simply not the end all, be all in performance. This is a great sports car (arguably one of the best on sale in the US right now) which Porsche has decided to sharpen further with (but not limited to) some weight loss. Its not like we're being fans of a Lexus LS which lost 176 lbs and added 10 hp...
I agree that the crap stock stereo doesn't weight a whole lot and the A/C is probably more significant. I'd say the best part is actually the loss of the top and motor powering it, but only if the top actually does a good job of keeping out the elements. In any case, I'm glad they didn't add back the weight by putting a hardtop on it (i.e. CR).
Like you said though, you criticize b/c you love so we'll just agree to disagree and both look forward to the days sports cars don't weigh 2 tons.
Oh and to those who said its overpriced, for what you get in terms of raw performance numbers and creature comforts, I can't say I disagree. Furthermore, i realize my "good value" comment should have been tempered by "good value for a Porsche," which isn't saying a whole lot considering I also think the GT3 is a "good value for a Porsche." However, doesn't change the fact that if I had the coin, I'd buy it (hopefully, off the used market in 3 years!).
11-10-2009, 04:46 PM
#35
The top won't do a thing to keep out the elements, as it was said, the top is basically like a sunshade. I don't think it even has side windows.
So for any kind of functionality, the car has no top. Zero top. Toy car only. Like I said. Hell, if I had one of them, I'd probably take out what little it has as a soft top too.
So for any kind of functionality, the car has no top. Zero top. Toy car only. Like I said. Hell, if I had one of them, I'd probably take out what little it has as a soft top too.
11-10-2009, 06:53 PM
#36
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Roswell
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GinoGT,Nov 10 2009, 08:46 PM
The top won't do a thing to keep out the elements, as it was said, the top is basically like a sunshade. I don't think it even has side windows.
So for any kind of functionality, the car has no top. Zero top. Toy car only. Like I said. Hell, if I had one of them, I'd probably take out what little it has as a soft top too.
So for any kind of functionality, the car has no top. Zero top. Toy car only. Like I said. Hell, if I had one of them, I'd probably take out what little it has as a soft top too.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. It wouldn't really surprise me if you are right - its partially wishful thinking on my part as I would not mind a manual top even if it took some time to put in place but I would like it to be at least moderately successful in keeping out the rain.
Quote:
Its low-slung, lightweight soft top – when closed – extends far to the rear to protect the driver and passenger from bright sunshine, wind and weather. This top, when combined with extra-low side windows and two striking bulges on the single-piece rear lid, provides the Boxster Spyder with a sleek silhouette reminiscent of the Carrera GT.
11-10-2009, 07:19 PM
#37
Registered User
Hmm, I found one interesting tidbit.
On the steering wheel there are only two buttons.
One called "Sport Plus."
The other is called "Launch Control."
Do the regular Porsches have this?
Has ANY car ever had such a clearly marked launch control interface, rather than having to know the special multi-button, brake, and gas pedal operation sequence that's never published anywhere but all the journalists seem to know?
On the steering wheel there are only two buttons.
One called "Sport Plus."
The other is called "Launch Control."
Do the regular Porsches have this?
Has ANY car ever had such a clearly marked launch control interface, rather than having to know the special multi-button, brake, and gas pedal operation sequence that's never published anywhere but all the journalists seem to know?
11-10-2009, 07:21 PM
#38
Registered User
Oh, and Porsche has a history of occasionally producing limited run speedster models. Same concept as the Boxster Spyder, including the lack of a "real" top.
11-10-2009, 07:28 PM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZDan,Nov 9 2009, 06:01 AM
Here's to the next Boxster/Cayman being lighter-weight cars from the get-go.
You want a car precisely between a Lotus Elise and a Boxster. And logic says if the performance and ride quality goals lie somewhere between, it'll have to cost ~50K. Would it have sales between 5K and 20K when every buyer can choose more performance or a better ride for the same money? And precisely where in that range would sales lie? You'd need to know that as a manufacturer before you can predict what kind of money could be safely invested in that project. That's a daunting prospect for any manufacturer. I'm not surprised there are no takers.
As much as you want to believe less weight means less cost, you ought to know that's a load of BS in the real world. There is so much more to it than "adding lightness."