New "Baby 911"

Kirby

Kirby

2
#1
Messages
4,917
Likes
18
Location
Reading,PA
#1
"Porsche is heading back to its sporting roots with a new 300bhp coupé and, this week, Autocar can tell you how. The new C7S, hitherto known as the Boxster Coupé and the GTS, will endear Porsche, a company whose production is now dominated by the Cayenne offroader, to a new generation of driving enthusiasts.

Packing 300bhp and stiffly-tuned suspension, Autocar can reveal that the C7S will be powered by a 3.4-litre flat six, and will cost around £50,000 when it arrives in the UK later this year. A cheaper and less powerful 3.2-litre C7 will join it, as well as a more focusses C7 Club Sport to appeal to the real hardcore."

(FYI £50,000 = $100,000)
 

Attachments

E

epj3

Senior Member
#2
Messages
7,370
Likes
0
Location
Lancaster, PA
#2
Why do people call the boxster a mini-911, baby 911, or poor man's porsche?! It's a roadster...the idea of a roadster is to be relatively cheap, have good handling, a FAIRLY spartain interior, and basically built just to put a smile on your face. Totally different concept from a sports coupe.


Or... Is this NOT considered a roadster since it doesn't have a soft top?
 
Chesty Bonds

Chesty Bonds

2
#3
Messages
1,715
Likes
0
Location
Melbourne, AUS
#3
I wouldn't be surprised if this was a new way for Porsche to phase out the 911. They've tried it before and with the new Boxter platform being so findamentally brilliant, this time around seems like a good opportunity to do so.

One of the Porsche engineers from Weissach said this about the new Boxter: "We had the money to do the Boxter properly this time around". Given how good the old one was, this statement must mean quite something.
 
Average Jae

Average Jae

2
#4
Messages
1,869
Likes
0
Location
Mo town
#4
epj3 said:
Why do people call the boxster a mini-911, baby 911, or poor man's porsche?! It's a roadster...the idea of a roadster is to be relatively cheap, have good handling, a FAIRLY spartain interior, and basically built just to put a smile on your face. Totally different concept from a sports coupe.


Or... Is this NOT considered a roadster since it doesn't have a soft top?
Click to expand...
£50,000 = cheap? even in $50k US, it wouldn't be cheap. but i know what you mean. i think the basic aboxter concept was that of a roadster, but year after year, it keeps getting more and more added to it and i don't know how spartan the boxter really is..

as for boxters phasing out the 911, why? Pete, you know how nice the 997s are and besides, 911s and boxters are different cars, for different type of drivers imo. man i sooo want a 997.
 
Tom

Tom

1
Staff Team
#6
Messages
8,351
Likes
13
Location
Southwest
#6
Its good that Porsche is going back to it's root, but for $100k and only 300hp, that's really too much money for me.
 
Kirby

Kirby

2
#7
Messages
4,917
Likes
18
Location
Reading,PA
#7
FWIW - "Baby Boxster" was the title of the AutoCar article, I didn't pin that name on it.....

I thought exactly what Tom said, $100K seems to be too much, and definitely confuses the marketing. Are 911s going away? Why buy this over a 911 for $100K? If it's in the Boxster family, shouldn't it be $45 - $60K?

And this brings back the same old discussion about price and performance. No matter what badge is on it, and no matter how well it handles, would I spend $80K - $100K on a car that can get outrun by a WRX or 400hp Corvette? If I am gonna get my a$$ handed to me, I'll stick with a $50K roadster like a Z4. etc.
 
MrElussive

MrElussive

2
#10
Messages
6,984
Likes
0
Location
New Jersey
#10
You guys are getting confused by the pricing of the car. By converting the 50,000 pounds you get about $100,000 USD but remember that cars are MUCH more expensive in other countries than in the US. For example, the new Range Rover costs us approximately $75,000 USD. In Australia, they pay around $130,000 USD (assuming you convert it) for the same car.
The US version of this Boxster Coupe will be similarly priced with the Boxster roadster.

My question is (towards Chesty), why would Porsche want to phaise out the 911? The 911 is arguably the greatest car on the road. For example, if aliens suddenly visited us and they wanted to know more about our main method of transportation (cars), the vehicle we'd send to them to represent cars in general would be a Porsche 911. Why would they want to get rid of a legend? The 911 is a better performer than the Boxster is....
 
Q-tuned

Q-tuned

Member
#11
Messages
76
Likes
0
Location
Weehawken
#11
Chesty Bonds said:
I wouldn't be surprised if this was a new way for Porsche to phase out the 911. They've tried it before and with the new Boxter platform being so findamentally brilliant, this time around seems like a good opportunity to do so.

One of the Porsche engineers from Weissach said this about the new Boxter: "We had the money to do the Boxter properly this time around". Given how good the old one was, this statement must mean quite something.
Click to expand...

i think they should bring back the front engine cars. the 944 turbo, 951, are sexy looking cars.
 
Chesty Bonds

Chesty Bonds

2
#12
Messages
1,715
Likes
0
Location
Melbourne, AUS
#12
Average Jae said:
as for boxters phasing out the 911, why? Pete, you know how nice the 997s are and besides, 911s and boxters are different cars, for different type of drivers imo. man i sooo want a 997.
Click to expand...
I know, it seems far-fetched doesn't it. But bear in mind that Porsche tried for 25-odd years to do just that: to phase out the evergreen 911. The intoduction of a coupe version of the Boxter will not only be a massive threat to it's direct rivals but also to the 911 itself because it's handling/speed are (reputedly) flawless.

I know I'm going out on a limb here but what I said does make some sense to me. I just love the 911 to bits and it's such a complete, composed package that you really would be hard pressed to find a car with a similar breadth of ability (perhaps the E46 M3). But I just think that when the Boxter is this good it really does push into the 911s performance bracket more and more.

Time will tell if I'm right, of course. Anyone else?[hihi]
 
Average Jae

Average Jae

2
#13
Messages
1,869
Likes
0
Location
Mo town
#13
hey pete, i'll bet you a pint of Fosters, Australian for bee-er (from what i hear, the Australians don't really like Fosters, calling it a piss water, etc.) i'm ok w/ it, but it just seems like really expensive imported bud. (there's a difference of course, but you know what i mean.)

how about a pint of Detroit ghetto blaster? i love that name. beer is eh.. ok. too sweet for me, but nice name. we'll figure that out later. [cheers] (oh and sorry about potential jacking of this thread Kirby.)
 
Chesty Bonds

Chesty Bonds

2
#14
Messages
1,715
Likes
0
Location
Melbourne, AUS
#14
Jae you're quite right: Fosters is shit! LOL

I've actually never tried Bud but from all accounts it sounds pretty bad. Of course, you guys might absolutely love it. For most Australians the poor-man's choice of beer is VB (Victoria Bitter) and on tap it tastes superb so we'll go a pint of that if you like!

Yeah I think we're jacking this thread badly...
 
Kirby

Kirby

2
#16
Messages
4,917
Likes
18
Location
Reading,PA
#16
Chesty Bonds said:
Jae you're quite right: Fosters is shit! LOL

I've actually never tried Bud but from all accounts it sounds pretty bad.
Yeah I think we're jacking this thread badly...
Click to expand...
Since I started the thread, I declare that it is OK to jack the thread if the discussion is BEER!!! [cheers]

And there IS a car related issue here - Budweiser uses RICE as one of it "premier" ingredients, LOL. But that's really a cheap way to ferment cheap beer. All good Germans (and German car fans!!) know that Reinheitsgebot dictates only four ingrdients: Barley, Hops, Water and Yeast!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Top