Its for occasional use, bit of brand-whoring, possibly a track day if feeling brave but mainly just having weekend fun and a run to work when its nice across the cotswolds. 2.7 seems far less likely for failures, likely less hard driven (I'd guess) and more plentiful. But ideally 3.4. Suspect its one of those things I'll buy something, own for 6m then sell on having said 'I've owned one!'
Fella at work collects them, and suggested if at the cheaper end a 996 first edition 98/99 better bet as they had nickel plated bores (or something) and a twin-thingy that means the IME is less of a problem. Found this https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.co.uk/ulk/itm/122834626327 he reckoned very good buy if as described 'I'd buy that myself...' and I contacted and they sold today. So a) looks like I missed a good one (thats been available for weeks) and b) have I just learned a lesson....!
I have found a C2 cab, 58k miles, pretty complete service history, dark metallic blue with blue leather, black cab roof (no hardtop) with clear lights upgrade and 19" wheels but otherwise looks standard. What do you reckon @airduck @Wayne58 @El Vikingo Tropical
“If as described” is an interesting phrase. Just checked the MoT history and that car has done 500 miles in the last 4 years and the front driver’s seat wear says a lot more than the 77,800 miles at the MoT in February. Looking at the reasons for MoT failure and being maintained by a “specialust”, I think you have had a near miss mate. Andy
Where are you checking that? Tough to see in the pics tho, bit 77k would suggest its sat somewhere for a while, or my other thought was used as track car. But its probably 4k under for mileage..according to the fella who knows (and has 6)
I don’t have the knowledge or experience with Porsche to second guess your mate, nor would I but I do know the performance car trade and IMO that car has the potential to be a money pit due to inadequate servicing. MoT history here https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/ Andy
911 and Boxsters had the same IMS problem because the units....... A Boxster is a 911 but with the engine in the correct place not at the rear. The only cost difference producing a Boxster S (986,987) or a 911 (996) is the rear seats. You can interchange all parts between a 986 and a 996 as the have the same components. What Porsches always have made is putting a engine with less power in the midengine cars because if not they should make ridiculous the jewl of the crown = 911. I have been selling, building and racing them during a long time
So thoughts on an early one? Slightly different engine design/materials that makes them less likely to bore scoring and IMS failure (98/99 only)? I quite like a cab, which is why the boxster appeals too, and I can get a 2007 for the same money with less miles
Because playtime car. Sunny days and holibobs... no mileage annually and sold every few years. Standard performance car schtick.
You got it! If you want the best one then you purchase a Boxster with a blown engin then you bolt in a 911 unit and it rocks
ive done the porsche thing, some one wise said if you cant afford to buy a new one, you probably cant afford to run a second hand one. Sad but true, its the reason why most buy for 12 months and move it on. Subsequently, many, but not all have skimpted on servicing and repairs, quite often selling when you need a big repair. Tread with caution
The fact that most tend to be over 100k miles would suggest they are pretty reliable. It’s nit a Ferrari or Aston or big jag
I have used my Porsche for everything until my kids didn’t get in the rear seat any longer I didn’t have any other brand (Cayenne doesn’t count as Porsche) my work was comercial visiting clients whole the days. The maintenance is not much more than if you has a BMW except somethings like tyres, if you have a local good workshop that make it the labour cost the same. Spare partes: Porsche doesn’t make, Electrical systems =Bosch Clutch = luk or sache Brake pads= jurid or pagid Etc etc.......
