Be Excellent To Each Other

Fair do's mate; unless you're in the habit of having to transport two very small kids in the tiny rear seats, the Cayman is much the better car - lighter, much cheaper, better handling, similar performance. Sometimes people say to me the old Clarkson line "you got a Cayman because you couldn't afford a 911" and I always say "yup, you're right I can't afford one, or at least the 911 I would want", which stymies them somewhat.

If it wasn't for the Boxster/Cayman, I honestly don't know what cars I'd have been driving these last 10 years or so. But these Porsches aren't for everyone, far from it; most people would spend that sort of money on a much faster (on paper) sledgehammer V8 Merc AMG or somesuch, not a little rapier like the Cayman. More fool them.

... A Cayman GT4 is 'vile'?
Wow. Oh well, more left for me.

No, you're right, dude.
The Cayman GT4 is not MaliCool.

I think the two are quite different, though? A rear engined 2+2, conpared to a 2 seater mid engined thing. I think tbe Cayman is the prettier. It looks svelte and frisky . The 911s look plump and middle aged.

Change the brake caliper color to orange, add black zebra stripes* and we're there.

* Some guy i see fairly regularly on the road has had his A3 wrapped in black and white dazzle camoflage. That would be a tricky insurance claim "how was I meant to know which way it was going, that's why I hit it?"

I broadly agree (unless we're talking about the "super" 911s like the GT3, GT3-RS or 911R, but in that case you're spending £120k+ even assuming Porsche will let you have one, which they won't. 911Rs on the secondhand market go for £700,000. I wish I was joking ... people sure hate that turbo engine, huh)

It's a cachet/snob-factor thing, I think. To the layperson, 911 is more expensive and iconic than the Cayman, so it's better, right?
Wrong

Yup.
They're worth at least SIX TIMES their £130,000 list price - that's how much petrolheads HATE eco-turbos.
A half a million quid premium is a lot to pay - but if I had millions in the bank, I'd pay it. What price that soaring, spine-tingling 9,000 RPM flat-six hollow wail?

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-c ... 31-million

Christ, a 996 is less than a year's nursery.

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/ ... obcid=soc3



That is.

Until you factor in running costs and repairs.

I've thought about it, believe me.

I wouldn't mate - self destruct engines, hideously expensive to sort (a new engine, basically). Porsche has long since stopped paying out for these.
Sadly, the only safe choice is an old aircooled one (993 or earlier, and therefore megabucks), or an relatively new second-gen 997.2 (increasingly very expensive, a 6 year old GTS sells for almost as much as it cost brand new FFS, and the prices are only going one way, still, because electric steering and turbo engines BS = shit to drive)

For my money, a second gen Mark 1 (987.2) Cayman S or Boxster S is the way forward. But even a good one of these is now £30k minimum.

People get ever so sniffy about it (why FFS?), but I love 924s, 944s and especially 968s (and the Clubsport 968 is awesome, my bruv had one for years and it was filth)

But man, not in yellow.

I think I'll stick to my pretend one. Only cost me £9

928 or go home, IMO.

Not my bag TBH. A bit of a big, old, rather fugly '70s relic for me. But, I can see why some people like 'em, it's an interesting, marmite sort of car.

I posted an article many pages back about the 996, apparently they're not quite as awful in the self-destruction stakes as they're sometimes painted, and later revisions fixed the issues. Also there are (relatively-ish) inexpensive preventative measures you can take to stop them going pop too.

IIRC it was the early 3.4s that were really bad, the later 3.4s were better, and the final 3.6 iteration was fine.

In fact here it is - viewtopic.php?p=898384#p898384

"It's only the minority that have had problems"

Yeah, right. If only that were true.

Hearthly, not being funny and all that, but I am a Porsche guy; I mix with people who run these things on a weekly basis. Trust me - without wishing to get into a google link joust with you, the problem is, unfortunately, rather more deep seated than you appear to be suggesting. Stick to errant reversing sensors and haunted MP3 players old bean.

(I am, of course, excluding any GT3, GT2 (or GT1!) because these all have the Mezger engine as previously mentioned)

Well that's me told then.

Look, us sad old gits discuss little else - because the early Cayman (which is much less unreliable than the 996) makes for a great track car except for this very issue.
Quite a few of 'em have been bitten with this.

It's a bit like someone telling you that you could win on the fruities by letting the reels just spin if, after a losing nudge with two symbols on the winline, you get a hold. Don't believe everything you read on the web.

Well all the stats I've seen put the horrible failure rate at around 10%, and this is on the dodgiest of the early 3.4s, with the 2001 revision of the 3.4 being better and the later 3.6 pretty much sorted.

Admittedly bad enough odds that I'd be put off one, but considering the price you can snag one for, possibly worth taking a punt on.

The alternative is buying one that's had the remedial work already done to it, I suppose. Or a replacement engine, assuming the replacements are the ones that don't fail.

I'm not sure what "stats" you've "seen", but I'm talking about the collective (albeit anecdotal) opinions of Porsche enthusiasts at countless Oulton meets; guys who actually track and race these things and who, if you snapped them in half, would probably bear the Porsche logo like a stick of rock. I should note, also, that the cross section of vehicles spans from a 996 GT2, various GT3s and umpteen Caymans, all the way through to 968s and 944s. I myself am a whippersnapper only on my 4th Porsche, some of these guys have had 20, and used them vastly more intensively.

As I've said, this subject matter comes up again and again; I'm not going to pretend to understand the mechanics of the (multiple) problems underpinning the issues but if these guys say they're "undetectable and can strike - in an engine-lunching kind of way - at any time", and has actually happened to some of them, well, I'm gonna listen. That's me, I guess.

But hey, I'm sure your armchair-based enquiries count for so much more. Seriously mate, why do I bother. You're never gonna change.

That's 10% so far. It might be 20% by now. It might also be 50% or more of the cars that get used properly. Some of these cars probably hardly get driven.

Almost all Porsches are driven by very infirm old men. Short runs out in dry weather to stock up on Werthingtons.

You want a GT-R really.

Ugh. Very impressive and all that, but I *hate* them mate, the very opposite of everything I love about cars. Just an unfeasibly fast, hulking great computer-driven turbo-fest of a car, all grip, traction, immense turbo push, 4wd and traction control intervention. You can steer these things with your little finger (what is it about Japanese cars, don't they have any arm strength or something..? They all seem to be so horribly over-assisted).

If you want to be the quickest guy on the road, get a GT-R.

If you want to actually drive the car yourself and enjoy it once the initial 5 min rush of being *that* fast has worn off, get a good ol' analogue Cayman.

You're right about the Werthers though of course.

Well only a fool would argue with the science of word-of-mouth reports from men who actually have the Porsche logo running through their bodies like sticks of rock. Irrefutable proof.

Your crab linguine crits me for 30K. Sir, I concede.

...Really?

Man, you sound bitter. I miss the old you.
(Blimey, that poor old crab linguine has much to answer for eh. What is it with you and crustaceans, or bivalve molluscs for that matter? Is now a bad time to mention I like native rock oysters with a touch of Tabasco or shallot vinegar, washed down with a lovely, dry glass of chilled Vintage Moet - or even just a spot of Lobster Thermidor perhaps? )

Have you driven a GT-R, Cavey? And I mean properly driven one in anger, not just taking one up the road?

Gotta be honest, it was only a "taking it up the road" (about 2-3 miles with some pretty amazeballs overtaking warp-speed), and the particular example had been massively modified with 820bhp

Later that day we smoked a GSX-R1000 at the lights. 2-up, in _a_four_seater_car_. Lulz.
Don't get me wrong, Gaz, the engineer in me loves these things, and man alive, this thing has presence. It's a beast, and no mistake; made my Boxster S-Black look like it had a 1.0 A-series under the bonnet.

They are amazing on track, and yes they are full of driver aids, but you can turn those off and then it's even more incredible.

I've never tracked one, but surely the brakes are cooked and the tyres shredded after a few laps, Gaz? They're too damn heavy for prolonged track use, surely? Same sort of deal with an AMG Merc; I'm sure they have their attractions but that type of car just isn't for me.

I *do* love your Celica, though. Now that is filth.

Everyone repeats the same boring arguments against the GT-R. "Too many driving aids", "too heavy", "it's like driving a PlayStation", "the car may as well drive itself"

They all fail to take into account that the car was designed to have all of this stuff for a very specific reason - even the weight is precisely calculated to keep it finely balanced on the road. And 1,600kg (which I think is about the weight of it, or certainly the original, not sure about more recent model years) really isn't that heavy these days - hell, my Celica is 1,460kg.

It's a car designed to be used on track, while also having a softer side. The brakes and tyres don't get cooked after a few laps Ironically, my Celica's do, as I found out to the cost of a pair of perfectly nice trousers when approaching the end of the home straight at Silverstone at ~120mph.

//edit: 1,730kg, so about 60kg heavier than a similar-age M3 and a full 200kg lighter than an M5.

Yeah, about ~1800kg according to my sources which, I'm sorry Gaz, may well be lighter than an M5, but it's still bloody heavy for a track car.

Look, I'm not saying "it's shit" or anything even remotely approaching it; and yes, I've only driven one for a few miles (and that wasn't the best example, it being a pretty heavily molested one). But seriously, these big uber-saloons are simply not my bag, what can I say? They are just not my thing, I like effete, lightweight, girly cars like Boxsters, Caymans, Lotuses and MX5s.

Now motorbikes, well, that's a different matter entirely. The CVO is absurdly heavy and is an 1800cc monstrous black behemoth. So fook knows really. I am not a logical man.

I'm not particularly into Porsches, but that does look really nice. Except for the stupid vent running along the underneath of the bonnet, that bit looks a bit like a gurny smile. Otherwise, very nice.

"But seriously, these big uber-saloons"

Speaking of which (sort of), 2011-ish e63 wagons are getting mighty 'affordable'.

Obviously I'm only looking because I need the extra boot volume over the 5series touring. Which needs a transmission rebuild and also something to keep the magic blue smoke in.

Porsche seems to be a very divisive marque (IMO); perhaps there's still the whiff of 80s yuppie excess about them; I don't know. (Seems a bit unfair, if that's true, but perceptions be perceptions and all that, fairness doesn't come into it)

I honestly believe that if the Cayman S cost £100,000 instead of £50,000, was red and had a Ferrari badge on the bonnet, and was otherwise exactly the same car, people would be falling over themselves talking about the "beautifully made junior Ferrari" and stuff?

To me, whilst the colour might not be to everyone's taste (lulz), it really is a beautiful little sports car, and that's before you drive it.

Good to hear from you Bik!
Not much wrong with an E63 wagon, it's a beast of a thing and sounds better than just about anything this side of a hot Mustang! Enjoy these fabulous large displacement, naturally aspirated V8 gems whilst you still can, I say.

Unfortunately, there're a couple of engine-killers in there - snapping head bolts (one time fix) and another thing I've forgotten (lifters maybe?) that is a 'replace every 60k' fix.

They fixed the head bolts from the factory late 2011 and I believe never fixed the other.

But so, so tempting.

(As is reinforcing the transmission and upgrading the turbos on the 535d. There's something hilarious about the idea of a 400+bhp/600ftlb grey, automatic, diesel estate)

Eh? Turbos? Diesel?

Hang on, isn't the E63 a chuffing great atmo 6200cc (non turbo) petrol V8?

S4 has started nagging me for a service, 500 miles to go a few days ago, now 400 miles to go.

It was sold as 'SERVICED TO DATE' and I did note it was only about 3000 miles off needing its next service so not unexpected.

It's coming up to 50K so I'll just book it in and get whatever is recommended at 50K, at least I got the Mechantronic (gearbox) oil done as part of the original sale.

At the risk of tempting fate it's running perfectly and all is well, so hopefully it'll just be a 'fluid and filters' kind of deal, albeit at S4 prices.

Fuel isn't working out too bad at least, it's averaged 24.5mpg since I got it, which admittedly is about a tie with the Scooby in terms of the guzzlingest car I've ever had, but considering the performance on tap isn't too shabby either.

Part of me wishes they'd bring in a national speed limit over here, then there'd be no point whatsoever in having a fast car, and I could just get a Ford Fucking Fiesta 1.0 Ecoboost or something and keep it until it fell apart. I'd save a bastard fortune.

It is - the 535d I have now is what is tempting to keep and upgrade. At least I know how to fix (and have already fixed most of) the problems with that.

Freaky. I felt like someone had walked over my grave*.



*"Described what I am doing down to a tee"

Insurance renewal is due before the end of the month, got the letter in the post a few days ago.

It appears that the 'word-of-mouth' quote I got from the local broker of 'about £300' on the S4 was wildly optimistic, as the letter came through offering a premium of £456 with a local insurer having 'surveyed the market'.

Quick fiddle about online and Elephant managed £390 but Direct Line (who we've had our house insurance with for a decade already) came in at £377. (Interestingly, if you go to confused.com, my car doesn't exist, so it's impossible to get a quote on it. I suppose I could ring them up but fuck that.)

Went back to the broker and asked them if there could be any movement on the price, and said that whilst I wasn't expecting them to match online, I'd like them to get within £20 or so. Not only did the chap say he couldn't get close to £377, he was reporting his computer as serving up £473 as the best price, although he said they'd honour the £456 quote on my letter. (He was very polite and apologetic about it, and said come back again next year and we'll see if we can be more competitive.)

Needless to say I went with Direct Line, £377 isn't a bad price considering the S4's insurance group I suppose.

I don't mind paying a bit more to stay local, but £377 or £456 is quite a difference.

Cars are so fucking expensive, there's something to be said for just walking/cycling everywhere, or using public transport. I mean, I can completely afford the S4, it's not like it's ruining us financially for me to have the thing, but sometimes I do think about all the tens of thousands of pounds I've spunked on cars over the years, and wonder if the money could have been better spent. Blackjack and hookers, for example.

I didn't even learn to drive until a few years after I moved to the Isle of Man, back in Manchester I always got by with my feet, my pushbike, and the excellent public transport, particularly the Metrolink. (Well, and the Dad/Family/Friends Taxi Service, in all fairness.)

Took the car to the garage to get this exhaust issue sorted once and for all. He's 99% sure it needs a new catalyst - he's been quoted £2200 for a genuine new one. So he's recommended I try to find one online and they'll fit it.

Jesus fuck, for probably about a quarter of that you could have an entirely new custom exhaust fabricated with either no cat (which would be dodgy MOT time) or a sports cat fitted.

//edit: Give this guy a call and tell him Gaz sent you, and ask him how much it'd be. This is the only guy I trust with the Celica, their workmanship is second to none. https://www.mkautorepairsandtuning.uk/

Cheers. I'm currently looking at breaker yards to see if I can get one there. I've seen cheap ones on eBay (~£150) but I don't trust that they'll be any good.

Are they a legal requirement in the UK? When I had my 200SX I just got them to take both the cats out and replace them with a straight-through pipe kit.

Yep, it'll fail the MOT with no cat.

If the car was manufactured before 1995 and was a JDM import, then they're not legally required.

Any UK car that came with a cat from the factory has to keep it.