Cayman/Boxster 211: The "I really just want the badge" Porsche

"Milky" (jordanmielke)
09/16/2014 at 09:47 • Filed to: Porsche, Cayman, Boxster, 211, 911 RS

Ever think to yourself - "It would be really awesome if my neighbors thought I was rich and drove a Porsche. But I don't give a shit about driving". Then rejoice my friend because now Porsche has a car for you!

There has been a long rumored 4 cylinder powered Porsche, but that would make you seem like a peasant. These new models have the 'ol 2.7L boxer 6 now just detuned, to you guessed it, 211 horsepower. Down from 265hp in the Boxster and 275hp in the Cayman.

The new 211 now brings the Boxster and Cayman right in line with Porsche's very own 1973 Carrera RS that developed 210hp from a 2.7L. So if you want to feel like your driving a car from the 70's look no further (except for the added 500+lbs.)!!!

Sadly this is a European only model.

Source: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

DISCUSSION (29)

JR1 > Milky
09/16/2014 at 09:57

I imagine the car is still loads of fun.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Milky
09/16/2014 at 09:57

"...But I don't give a shit about driving"

Flag on the play. Association of power and power only with driving experience, 5 yards. Power is *nice*, but some people might for practical reasons regularly drive a Porsche with less power and milder tune for reliability - it handles the same, after all. Who is the better standard-bearer for the enthusiast, someone who drives a compromise *every day* or only drives his top tier model on alternate weekends?

K-Roll-PorscheTamer > Milky
09/16/2014 at 10:00

You should call the Boxster the Badgester. :p

Milky > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
09/16/2014 at 10:12

Don't piss on my face and tell me its a shower. Its not detuned for reliability and you know it.

Yes a BRZ is great sports car with 200hp. But its also a 2.0L. 211hp out a 2.7 is honestly terrible.

Milky > JR1
09/16/2014 at 10:13

Probably. But probably not as mush fun as a normal Boxster/Cayman.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Milky
09/16/2014 at 10:46

Okay. The usual argument for producing a reduced performance model is having a cheaper engine on hand. Since this is the same engine, that's clearly not the case. This leaves two options: one, axing performance for reliability, or two, for mileage. These are frequently comorbid syndromes, and neither is *inherently bad*. Except, of course, that one no longer has a top-of-the-line performing Porsche. Whether you know it or not, there have been significant problems with the M96 engine, problems that a detune for better mileage in a less-enthusiast version would go a long way to address. Are they also choosing to use up some B-grade block spares like Rover did with defect V8 blocks in the late 90s and late 3.5 production? Also a possibility.

211 from 2.7 isn't great for a turbo, but is well beyond decent for an NA. Just because we've all had our expectations normed upward by Ford and other cheap mini-turbo engines does not make that the best way to build an engine by default. Most of the engines you hear people bragging on the longevity and torque delivery of are abysmal even compared to that. Also, how is it delivered compared with the BRZ? We don't know yet. The BRZ is notably a lot better on paper than it comes across viscerally. Also, what, I ask you, is the key element of the word detuned? The word "tune". Depending on how it's accomplished, it might be as little as an ECU flash away from better performance... if Porsche wants to sell a car that handles well, drives well, and looks good with a few fewer horsies to meet this or that emission requirement/make some practicality sales, that's Fine. With. Me.

It's pure crazy to hold Porsche to a power standard - that's never been what Porsche was about. Modern Porsche sales-maker versus a fragile RS model from the 70s is apples to oranges.

pjrebordao > Milky
09/16/2014 at 10:52

Where did you get that information... I can't see it anywhere else

Dslay04 > Milky
09/16/2014 at 10:57

Or you could just retune it back to 275 after you buy.

pjrebordao > Milky
09/16/2014 at 10:59

Ok, I found it, but only in the Belgium and Norwegian Porsche websites. I wonder if it was created just for fiscal / tax reasons in some countries...

Milky > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
09/16/2014 at 11:15

Okay what about comparing to another base model? How about one from 2000 …. oh hey there Boxster with your 2.7L making 217hp.

"211 from 2.7 isn't great for a turbo, but is well beyond decent for an NA." just isn't true. Please find any other engine around this size making those few of horses. Don't worry, I'll wait.

Kinja'd!!!

Just fyi if they gave us a flat four with low 200's HP I wouldn't of never made this post.

Textured Soy Protein > Milky
09/16/2014 at 11:16

Probably more like, "I really wish I had a Porsche but damn I live in Norway where gas costs just shy of 10 bucks a gallon ."

(The only markets it's being sold in are Norway and Belgium, where gas is an oh-so-affordable $8.68/gal .)

Milky > Dslay04
09/16/2014 at 11:18

….. aaaannnnndddd there goes your warranty.

Kinja'd!!!

Milky > pjrebordao
09/16/2014 at 11:19

According to Autoblog (the linked article) its for MPGs / emissions.

Milky > Textured Soy Protein
09/16/2014 at 11:21

Then they should of gave the people the long rumored flat four. Not the engine out of a base model Boxster from 2000 (btw that engine makes slightly more power).

Dslay04 > Milky
09/16/2014 at 11:22

They're going to be cheap as hell with you on the warranty anyways

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Milky
09/16/2014 at 11:47

The J30A5 from Honda - fairly modern (2006), a six, 3.0 L: 244 horses after a series of continual improvements, and even VTEC, yo. Hp if it were a 2.7? That's 219.6, pretty similar. Going a touch more modern, the 3.5L J-series which is still in production, has 278 in Accord version, which - if it were a 2.7 - would be 214. If we go to a higher tune, as found in the Acura, it's more in line with the higher Porsche numbers. Going beyond Honda to Nissan, let's take the 2.5l VQ, still in use by quite a few people. It has 210hp, very much in line with what we're looking at.

Take all this with the fact that it's very small for a six in modern use (most small six roles being usurped with turbo fours), and output seems low, but it isn't. It's just... good to decent normal car output per NA cube, rather than very high performance. Further, with it as a flat six and wet non-steel liner design, it's probably (haven't checked) far lighter per cube.

Where we're going wrong here is to assume a Boxster *needs*, for everyone, a high output engine. Lotus Elise/Exige and their dichotomy of Toyota passenger car engine builds beg to differ... as does Porsche with the 914 vs. 914/6 and 924 with celebrated "van engine". As long as the engine delivers the right torque in the right band *for the car variant it's in*, who cares if it peaks a bit lower? The Boxster is not and never has been Porsche's performance standard, end of. I'd honestly rather have a good engine in both variants with the non-po one tuned weak than a weak engine overtuned in the performance engine, but maybe you wouldn't? And for what are Porsche going to pull a flat four out of their rectum? The flat six is sure to sound better and be more in keeping with a Porsche ethos, final straight-line speed be damned. You seem as if you're offended by them offering a non-performance version of (of all things) the Boxster, which seems like missing the point.

Milky > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
09/16/2014 at 12:08

So an old honda engine, another old honda engine (carryover from last gen accord) which btw they are probably maxed out chassis wise for HP considering they are front drivers. And who the hell used that VQ engine still? That thing was criticized left and right when it came out for being bad and only lasted like 2 years in the G.

" You seem as if you're offended by them offering a non-performance version of (of all things) the Boxster" ….. no I'm offended they are offering the base engine from 2000. Progress is a wonderful thing, regression isn't.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Milky
09/16/2014 at 12:26

I cited Honda because they're (surprise!) one of the only comparable data sets for well built low displacement sixes in modern production. The peak HP numbers are also quite favorable for a passenger car due to VTEC, Yo, but miss something in power distribution in day-to-day driving that the Porsche no doubt produces perfectly well. Torque/L information I don't think we have yet, and detuning typically hits the top end and peak more than the mid-range, which is where it matters.

Oh, and that VQ 2.5? Renault. Again, mentioned due to a dearth of low cube sixes.

I note that the point raised in other replies to you that it's for very few markets for MPG has not entered this discussion. I think it's perfectly relevant - R&D cost money, and a limited market is a limited market.

So rather than pull a new and magical four out of their nether regions to sell to Norwegians and Belgians, they game the MPG numbers for those countries by offering a gimped version of a good engine which might do better for its owners in the long run, and could probably be easily hacked otherwise? In a model which has never been about performance? I still *really don't get* why this offends you as much as at does. Touching once again on my primary point: a "weak" Porsche does not offend the broader image line of Porsche. You seem more focused on low relative displacement offending the broader image, but does it really matter that much how the lower output is delivered? I'm unsure whether you're just offended by detuning on principle, maintain some very weird relative standard w.r.t. relative output, hold that Porsches should always be optimally tuned for whatever engine they have because Porsche (ignoring that this makes more sense than offering an engine size for every output), or just don't like that they haven't announced a four...

Confidentially? Fuck making a flat four. I like small engines with a lot of cylinders, and always have. I don't care that the per-cylinder exhaust pulse noise is "better" with lower cylinder count, never have. I don't care that they turbo better. I take sixes over fours, eights over sixes, and (sometimes) twelves over eights for given displacements, boost discouraged. I have my own machine porn fetish, and you have yours - we'll agree to disagree?

Milky > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
09/16/2014 at 12:40

"I'm unsure whether you're just offended by detuning on principle"

Excatly that.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Milky
09/16/2014 at 12:44

Fair enough. Assuage your rage by starting a business selling bootleg ECMs to Norwegians and Belgians. It's the neighborly thing to do.

Milky > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
09/16/2014 at 12:55

I'd just sell them hellcats instead.