On 6 May, 22:33, Tom De Moor wrote:
In article 416725f9-a3fa-45f1-860f-3f12e180458a@
2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com, says...



Drove a 2007 Porsche 911 Carrera 4S yesterday.

Not as quick as you'd think off the mark (might be something to do
with the fact I'm used to the performance big bikes put out)... but
ever so smooth and feels really well built.

Once you're in the upper gears though... I can see why people lose
their licences with one of these. :-D

I want one... badly. :-)

Buy one.

If you'd just like to supply me with the winning numbers for the next
Euro Millions lottery... ;-)

--
JackH

wrote:
On 6 May, 22:33, Tom De Moor wrote:
In article 416725f9-a3fa-45f1-860f-3f12e180458a@
2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com, says...



Drove a 2007 Porsche 911 Carrera 4S yesterday.
Not as quick as you'd think off the mark (might be something to do
with the fact I'm used to the performance big bikes put out)... but
ever so smooth and feels really well built.
Once you're in the upper gears though... I can see why people lose
their licences with one of these. :-D
I want one... badly. :-)
Buy one.

If you'd just like to supply me with the winning numbers for the next
Euro Millions lottery... ;-)

I will give you the numbers, but first you have to give me ~£80k in cash.

--
Douglas

In article ,
says...

Claiming it is a superior car to the competition is rather funny: the
key to the Boxster is shape and desing, it's assembled out of obsolete
Porsche parts, reason number 1 why Porsche makes such interesting
profits out of it. Reason also why Porsche does not race it.

Someone I know got within .25 of a second of a 2001 Boxster S in his
1998 MX-5 at a Sprint I was at a few weekends ago.

This means that Boxsters cost a lot more than MX-5s but are only a
little bit faster. (c:



Nope: it means that on that particular track, on that day and with those
drivers that specific MX-5 was only a tiny bit slower than that specific
Boxster for reasons which we may or may not know at this point in time.

I quess you see I spent some time today with a lawyer ;-)

Sorry for the MX-5-affectionados: the Boxster (S) is a bit higher up,
performance-and pricewise.

But then again: if you put a race prepared MX5 against a streetdriven
Boxster, things could even up quite nicely. And if one put a compressor
fitted MX5 or a V8 powered one next to a Boxster, the German girlie
would be sucked into the induction and blown out through the exhaust.

But chanches of this happening are about the same as the margin during
that Sprint . :-)

Tom De Moot

In article c82f3d26-d6df-4fed-b11b-84f8b1e1cfa8
@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, says...

I want one... badly. :-)

Buy one.

If you'd just like to supply me with the winning numbers for the next
Euro Millions lottery... ;-)


Bugger, that's not easy. But what about the winning numbers of those
from last week?

Hey, we could split the earnings!

Tom De Moor



PS If you want a 911 4S, you can have it. But some things you have to
want very, very badly. ;-)

Best of luck!

Tom De Moor wrote:

I suppose Dan uses his CLio V6 every day too and that car (easiliy
some 20-30 others) will run circles around the Boxster. The new
2007-2008 Elise on its turn will run circles around Dan's car.

Dan may use his V6 every day, but I've met people who actually use their
boxster for repping, up and down the country, hundreds of miles per day,
with samples and overnight bags and things. Not something you can do in many
sports cars (luggage space - you gonna suggest an MX5?)


It can be
set up to be as pointy and nimble as a lotus

No, it can't.

From experience : a Boxster on *slicks* was outperformed by a 2007
Lotus Elise on road tires on a circuit. The 2007 Elise on his turn was
ridiculed by a 4-year old R340.

There are three performance definers: resistance, weight and power.
The Lotus Elise outclasses the Boxster on all three.

The lotus's lower resistance comes from its lower weight, the boxster I
drove (an early S) had that feeling of instant response that is rare in a
car, maybe it was a good one.


yet has ABS, aircon, heated
seats etc and doesn't weigh too much.

The Boxster weighs 30% more than the Lotus Elise S2 who has also ABS,
aircon.

It has also a proper engineered roof, isn't made of plastic, and has a six
cylinder engine and an optional autobox. And I would expect it to be far
more crashworthy though I don't think either have been compared in testing.

It has been said that given the same
power as a 911 the Boxster is faster point to point.What makes it
even more special is that it'll stand daily use as well as any
german saloon would.

Claiming it is a superior car to the competition is rather funny: the
key to the Boxster is shape and desing, it's assembled out of obsolete
Porsche parts, reason number 1 why Porsche makes such interesting
profits out of it. Reason also why Porsche does not race it.


Except the shape is its worst asset, it's ugly.

In article ,
says...
Tom De Moor wrote:

I suppose Dan uses his CLio V6 every day too and that car (easiliy
some 20-30 others) will run circles around the Boxster. The new
2007-2008 Elise on its turn will run circles around Dan's car.

Dan may use his V6 every day, but I've met people who actually use their
boxster for repping, up and down the country, hundreds of miles per day,
with samples and overnight bags and things. Not something you can do in many
sports cars (luggage space - you gonna suggest an MX5?)

No but a BMW M3 would do that very nicely indeed ... and if you'd take a
330d idem on one tank of fuel.

What's a sportscar? Is a Subaru Impreza Turbo a sportscar? Is an Audi
(R)S4 one?



It can be
set up to be as pointy and nimble as a lotus

No, it can't.

From experience : a Boxster on *slicks* was outperformed by a 2007
Lotus Elise on road tires on a circuit. The 2007 Elise on his turn was
ridiculed by a 4-year old R340.

There are three performance definers: resistance, weight and power.
The Lotus Elise outclasses the Boxster on all three.

The lotus's lower resistance comes from its lower weight, the boxster I
drove (an early S) had that feeling of instant response that is rare in a
car, maybe it was a good one.

I presume you know what to compare it too. Can you compare the throttle
response of an M3, a Boxster, a Mercedes C with the V8-engine? Or do
you compare the Boxster to normal shopping trolley?

Resistance in my list of three is not linked to weight: it is air
resistance, drag.

There the Lotus with its completely flat undertray and *working*
diffuser is far superior to the Boxster whose aerodynamics are so bad
that the Porsche factory opted for a moving spoiler in order to keep the
car stable at speed.



yet has ABS, aircon, heated
seats etc and doesn't weigh too much.

The Boxster weighs 30% more than the Lotus Elise S2 who has also ABS,
aircon.

It has also a proper engineered roof, isn't made of plastic, and has a six
cylinder engine and an optional autobox. And I would expect it to be far
more crashworthy though I don't think either have been compared in testing.


Yep: a proper engineered roof, a six cilinder engine with autobox. I
presume you call those the sportscars ingredients? The Porsche six-
potter is indeed a work of art and very innovatif: it's been around for
how many decades?

Personaly I don't give a toss what engine is in a sportscar as long as
it delivers the power needed. Nor do I give a damn if the car is made
out of steel, wood or plastic as long as the materials choosen do the
job.

Finally the crashworthyness: both cars passed them. It should stand to
reason that the Lotus with its lesser weight and aluminium structure
(which absorbs energy more efficiently than steel) is superior to the
Boxster.

Imho you base your opinion on the dynamics of the Boxster on feelings
not on actual facts. As stated befo the Boxster is made up using
obsolete Porsche parts, it is shape before fonction and its technical
design is nowhere innovatif nor dared but that was (is) quite OK for
those people who buy it.

Lotus customers however are the exact opposite: lightweight and sporty.
They even kept up with (former Lotus) cars and their bad to worse
reliability. Go to any trackday and count the Lotusses compared to the
Boxsters...

It has been said that given the same
power as a 911 the Boxster is faster point to point.What makes it
even more special is that it'll stand daily use as well as any
german saloon would.

Claiming it is a superior car to the competition is rather funny: the
key to the Boxster is shape and desing, it's assembled out of obsolete
Porsche parts, reason number 1 why Porsche makes such interesting
profits out of it. Reason also why Porsche does not race it.


Except the shape is its worst asset, it's ugly.

So you say... but when the Boxster was presented as a prototype at the
1993 Detroit Motor Show, it caused such a enthusiastic response from the
public that it was put into production.

The Detroit proto was a mockup: it had no engine, you couldn't sit in
it. What other criteria than shape and overal appearance made around
3000 people to put an upfront payment down to have one?

Tom De Moor

Tom De Moor wrote:
Dan may use his V6 every day, but I've met people who actually use
their boxster for repping, up and down the country, hundreds of
miles per day, with samples and overnight bags and things. Not
something you can do in many sports cars (luggage space - you gonna
suggest an MX5?)

No but a BMW M3 would do that very nicely indeed ... and if you'd
take a 330d idem on one tank of fuel.

What's a sportscar? Is a Subaru Impreza Turbo a sportscar? Is an Audi
(R)S4 one?

OK, let's make the phrase Roadster, or 2 seater convertible car, or whatever
you want to call it. The only RS4 I've been in was an estate, previous type
(2.7), full on MTM + nitrous - fast yes, but fun? Not from the passenger
seat.

I presume you know what to compare it too. Can you compare the
throttle response of an M3, a Boxster, a Mercedes C with the
V8-engine? Or do you compare the Boxster to normal shopping trolley?

Resistance in my list of three is not linked to weight: it is air
resistance, drag.

There the Lotus with its completely flat undertray and *working*
diffuser is far superior to the Boxster whose aerodynamics are so bad
that the Porsche factory opted for a moving spoiler in order to keep
the car stable at speed.

Ahh drag. So small frontal area, which means small car, for small people,
with small luggage. And I think the elise has an integrated spoiler in its
rear edge. So what? It's the way it's designed.

The Boxster weighs 30% more than the Lotus Elise S2 who has also
ABS, aircon.

It has also a proper engineered roof, isn't made of plastic, and has
a six cylinder engine and an optional autobox. And I would expect it
to be far more crashworthy though I don't think either have been
compared in testing.


Yep: a proper engineered roof, a six cilinder engine with autobox. I
presume you call those the sportscars ingredients? The Porsche six-
potter is indeed a work of art and very innovatif: it's been around
for how many decades?

Personaly I don't give a toss what engine is in a sportscar as long as
it delivers the power needed. Nor do I give a damn if the car is made
out of steel, wood or plastic as long as the materials choosen do the
job.

Finally the crashworthyness: both cars passed them. It should stand to
reason that the Lotus with its lesser weight and aluminium structure
(which absorbs energy more efficiently than steel) is superior to the
Boxster.

Imho you base your opinion on the dynamics of the Boxster on feelings
not on actual facts. As stated befo the Boxster is made up using
obsolete Porsche parts, it is shape before fonction and its technical
design is nowhere innovatif nor dared but that was (is) quite OK for
those people who buy it.

Lotus customers however are the exact opposite: lightweight and
sporty. They even kept up with (former Lotus) cars and their bad to
worse reliability. Go to any trackday and count the Lotusses compared
to the Boxsters...


Used lotus in the UK - 10000 quid, spares available from local breakers
yard in the Austin Metro section. Used boxster? More money. Spares available
at local porsche dealer for arm + leg. We were talking about road use, and a
K powered elise isn't going to get past 100k miles without a headgasket,
lots of little bits and a visit to a chiropractor every 10k miles. The
Boxster will be fresh and reliable.

BTW - Sport Auto reckon Exige (179ps yr 2000) 8min42, Boxster S (252PS 1999)
8min 32 around the 'ring, not a conclusive thing but hey, the elise is
faster on the track eh tom?

"Tim S Kemp" wrote in message
...
Tom De Moor wrote:
Dan may use his V6 every day, but I've met people who actually use
their boxster for repping, up and down the country, hundreds of
miles per day, with samples and overnight bags and things. Not
something you can do in many sports cars (luggage space - you gonna
suggest an MX5?)

No but a BMW M3 would do that very nicely indeed ... and if you'd
take a 330d idem on one tank of fuel.

What's a sportscar? Is a Subaru Impreza Turbo a sportscar? Is an Audi
(R)S4 one?

OK, let's make the phrase Roadster, or 2 seater convertible car, or
whatever you want to call it. The only RS4 I've been in was an estate,
previous type (2.7), full on MTM + nitrous - fast yes, but fun? Not from
the passenger seat.

I presume you know what to compare it too. Can you compare the
throttle response of an M3, a Boxster, a Mercedes C with the
V8-engine? Or do you compare the Boxster to normal shopping trolley?

Resistance in my list of three is not linked to weight: it is air
resistance, drag.

There the Lotus with its completely flat undertray and *working*
diffuser is far superior to the Boxster whose aerodynamics are so bad
that the Porsche factory opted for a moving spoiler in order to keep
the car stable at speed.

Ahh drag. So small frontal area, which means small car, for small people,
with small luggage. And I think the elise has an integrated spoiler in its
rear edge. So what? It's the way it's designed.

The Boxster weighs 30% more than the Lotus Elise S2 who has also
ABS, aircon.

It has also a proper engineered roof, isn't made of plastic, and has
a six cylinder engine and an optional autobox. And I would expect it
to be far more crashworthy though I don't think either have been
compared in testing.


Yep: a proper engineered roof, a six cilinder engine with autobox. I
presume you call those the sportscars ingredients? The Porsche six-
potter is indeed a work of art and very innovatif: it's been around
for how many decades?

Personaly I don't give a toss what engine is in a sportscar as long as
it delivers the power needed. Nor do I give a damn if the car is made
out of steel, wood or plastic as long as the materials choosen do the
job.

Finally the crashworthyness: both cars passed them. It should stand to
reason that the Lotus with its lesser weight and aluminium structure
(which absorbs energy more efficiently than steel) is superior to the
Boxster.

Imho you base your opinion on the dynamics of the Boxster on feelings
not on actual facts. As stated befo the Boxster is made up using
obsolete Porsche parts, it is shape before fonction and its technical
design is nowhere innovatif nor dared but that was (is) quite OK for
those people who buy it.

Lotus customers however are the exact opposite: lightweight and
sporty. They even kept up with (former Lotus) cars and their bad to
worse reliability. Go to any trackday and count the Lotusses compared
to the Boxsters...


Used lotus in the UK - 10000 quid, spares available from local breakers
yard in the Austin Metro section. Used boxster? More money. Spares
available at local porsche dealer for arm + leg. We were talking about
road use, and a K powered elise isn't going to get past 100k miles without
a headgasket, lots of little bits and a visit to a chiropractor every 10k
miles. The Boxster will be fresh and reliable.

Couldn't care less about the Elise vs Boxster debate, but I was discussing
seats with a mate the other day. He's got a VX220, so similar seats to the
Elise I'd guess (so on the floor buckets with no adjustment (apart from
fwd/bkwd)), and he's also got a dodgy back. The VX has been one of the only
cars he hasn't had backache in. And on the longish journeys I've been with
him neither have I - apart from the lack of space width-wise I actually
found it quite comfortable. Weird.

Anyway, carry on.

"Carl Gibbs" wrote in message
...

"Tim S Kemp" wrote in message
...
Tom De Moor wrote:
Dan may use his V6 every day, but I've met people who actually use
their boxster for repping, up and down the country, hundreds of
miles per day, with samples and overnight bags and things. Not
something you can do in many sports cars (luggage space - you gonna
suggest an MX5?)

No but a BMW M3 would do that very nicely indeed ... and if you'd
take a 330d idem on one tank of fuel.

What's a sportscar? Is a Subaru Impreza Turbo a sportscar? Is an Audi
(R)S4 one?

OK, let's make the phrase Roadster, or 2 seater convertible car, or
whatever you want to call it. The only RS4 I've been in was an estate,
previous type (2.7), full on MTM + nitrous - fast yes, but fun? Not from
the passenger seat.

I presume you know what to compare it too. Can you compare the
throttle response of an M3, a Boxster, a Mercedes C with the
V8-engine? Or do you compare the Boxster to normal shopping trolley?

Resistance in my list of three is not linked to weight: it is air
resistance, drag.

There the Lotus with its completely flat undertray and *working*
diffuser is far superior to the Boxster whose aerodynamics are so bad
that the Porsche factory opted for a moving spoiler in order to keep
the car stable at speed.

Ahh drag. So small frontal area, which means small car, for small people,
with small luggage. And I think the elise has an integrated spoiler in
its rear edge. So what? It's the way it's designed.

The Boxster weighs 30% more than the Lotus Elise S2 who has also
ABS, aircon.

It has also a proper engineered roof, isn't made of plastic, and has
a six cylinder engine and an optional autobox. And I would expect it
to be far more crashworthy though I don't think either have been
compared in testing.


Yep: a proper engineered roof, a six cilinder engine with autobox. I
presume you call those the sportscars ingredients? The Porsche six-
potter is indeed a work of art and very innovatif: it's been around
for how many decades?

Personaly I don't give a toss what engine is in a sportscar as long as
it delivers the power needed. Nor do I give a damn if the car is made
out of steel, wood or plastic as long as the materials choosen do the
job.

Finally the crashworthyness: both cars passed them. It should stand to
reason that the Lotus with its lesser weight and aluminium structure
(which absorbs energy more efficiently than steel) is superior to the
Boxster.

Imho you base your opinion on the dynamics of the Boxster on feelings
not on actual facts. As stated befo the Boxster is made up using
obsolete Porsche parts, it is shape before fonction and its technical
design is nowhere innovatif nor dared but that was (is) quite OK for
those people who buy it.

Lotus customers however are the exact opposite: lightweight and
sporty. They even kept up with (former Lotus) cars and their bad to
worse reliability. Go to any trackday and count the Lotusses compared
to the Boxsters...


Used lotus in the UK - 10000 quid, spares available from local breakers
yard in the Austin Metro section. Used boxster? More money. Spares
available at local porsche dealer for arm + leg. We were talking about
road use, and a K powered elise isn't going to get past 100k miles
without a headgasket, lots of little bits and a visit to a chiropractor
every 10k miles. The Boxster will be fresh and reliable.

Couldn't care less about the Elise vs Boxster debate, but I was discussing
seats with a mate the other day. He's got a VX220, so similar seats to
the Elise I'd guess (so on the floor buckets with no adjustment (apart
from fwd/bkwd)), and he's also got a dodgy back. The VX has been one of
the only cars he hasn't had backache in. And on the longish journeys I've
been with him neither have I - apart from the lack of space width-wise I
actually found it quite comfortable. Weird.

Anyway, carry on.


Here too - VX220 is a very comfy place to be a long trip, even better with a
hard top. Unless it's really warm I imagine heh!

--
Dan
Clio V6