Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtGigglebox
This was a really tough one for me. I had been on the fence between a red boxster with the black 20" wheels and the m40i. The porshe was, without question a visually beautiful car and quite fun to drive. The whole precision thing is legit. That said, dollar for dollar, it was a pretty significant mismatch.
The boxster was a base (non s) and all it had was the PDK, heated seats and black sport tailpipes as options. Like, you still had to insert the key into the dash to turn it on. Manual seats, no nav, no sport chrono.
In the end, i couldnt justify spending an extra $100/mo to give up 100 hp and all the tech thats in these m40i's for something that was visually better. The porsche might move more precisely, but the missing 100 hp is something that is plainly obvious when driving it (in the US anyway).
I beleive that the problem (from a leasing standpoint) is that the porsche residual numbers are pretty low and theyre not competitive with even such a new car as the z4. Plus, the interior was visually identical to my brother's old 2013 boxster s.
The value prop just wasnt there and the z is definitely more fun. Maybe it would have been closer if it was the boxster s with sport chrono and a few gizmos like nav & power seats, but then your le talking about a VERY large price gap. Just not seeing it.
Obviously its not terribly fair to compare a base boxster with an m40i from a performance standpoint, but porsche is the one that set that comparison up via pricing.
|
Totally agree on leasing. I lease through my business and not only are the lease terms egregious for the Boxster the MRM is a deal breaker. For me to option a Boxster to where I would like and still not going overboard I get above the maximum residualized value.