Thoughts on 981 Boxster 2.7/3.4 ownership & Retrofit Cruise Control?

[Riddo]

Hello Boxster Corner,

Whilst I've been a PCGB member for a while this is my first venture onto the Forum's. I have been a lifelong Porsche enthusiast for longer than I care to remember after a ride in a childhood friends father's Martini liveried 930 Turbo. It left a pretty indelible mark on a 12 year old! I have yet to bite the proverbial bullet and become a Porsche owner. However, I am looking at a 2016 Boxster (981) 2.7 (265bhp). My question:
It doesn't have Cruise Control, is it possible to have it retro-fitted?
While I'm here any comments/feedback regarding any differences between and 'ordinary' Boxster and the 'S' model? Real world driving etc?
I hope you're all keeping safe in this rather crazy situation we find ourselves currently living through? Look forward to reading your replies.

--Ian (RiDDO)

 

[Chappelle]

This on Pistonheads:

"I had cruise retro fitted to my 981 Boxster last October by Porsche Tonbridge for £480 incl VAT.
They made an excellent job of it and it looks/operates exactly the same as if fitted in production"


I've added it to my older 987. Did it for a fraction of the above cost. Needed a few parts including the stalk and half an hour at the OPC for them to do the coding

 

[Riddo]

Thanks Richard, appreciate.

 

[Motorhead]

Ian,

As Richard has said it's possible to retro-fit cruise control. Any Porsche Centre and many Porsche Independents can do this for you, so it's worth shopping around to check prices. Personally I wouldn't spec a car without CC these days, and I'm surprised that Porsche don't fit it as standard on what is after all a premium car.

I run a Gen2 987 Cayman S which has the same 3.4L engine as that fitted in the 981 car, but I've driven a 981 with the smaller engine. There's no doubt that the bigger engine has more power, and torque in particular, but in normal driving there's probably not going to be much in it. You'll probably be swapping gears more often with the smaller engine to achieve rapid progress, but that's hardly a handicap. I'd suggest driving both if you can before making a final decision.

Good luck with your quest to become a Porsche owner... at last! You won't be disappointed with the Boxster.

Jeff

 

[s999sws]

I had it fitted to my 981 Cayman. No problem. I find that having the base 981 means you can really use the engine and revs without doing silly speeds. The sound when it’s in the 7000 rpm range is quite exhilarating. And you're not doing 120 mph plus.
I certainly wouldn’t change mine now for the S version. I do think that sometimes it’s "mine is bigger than yours.”
But what do i know?
SWS

 

[Riddo]

Hi Motorhead & SWS,

Thanks for your comments. I'm pleased to learn that 'cruise' can be retrofitted quite why the first owner didn't 'tick' the relevant box when ordering the car leaves me somewhat perplexed bearing in mind they managed to tick almost £19K's worth of other extras.............

As you say SWS, sometimes less is more. I am certainly no speed freak, although I will admit that I do enjoy an early morning 'cruise' during the warmer months. The appeal for me is roof down motoring and just enjoying the moment, just enjoying driving. Motorhead your words are wise with regard of trying the 'S', I will caveat though, if I don't try the 'S' then I won't know what I'm missing and hopefully won't then develop 'S' envy if I do test drive one. Hmm!

I'm in no rush to buy, I imagine it will be pretty difficult to complete a car purchase with the current restrictions we find ourselves living with. I am waiting for the vendor to email me........

For the record this won't be my first Porsche, I did own a 2001 model 996 Carrera 4 (Tiptronic) back in 2003. Sadly I sold it after 4 months and used the funds raised to expand my business.

 

[Motorhead]

Ian,

Just a further thought on 2.7L vs 3.4L. You could find that in general the spec for 3.4L cars will be better - maybe people purchasing the more expensive car have more cash to spend? Although from what you say, the first owner of the 2.7L you're looking at went completely OTT.

I'm sure that there are plenty of very nice versions of both cars out there, which is a bonus if you're prepared to bide your time.

Jeff

 

[Gazoak]

I've never really understood the concept of cruise control on a Porsche! I wouldn't let the lack of it put you off going ahead with the purchase.

 

[Gazoak]

Between 2.7 & 3.4. I drove a 2.7 first and was happy with that. However, once I drove the 3.4, it had to be the 3.4!

 

[Riddo]

Hi Jeff,
I agree entirely, if you're buying a Boxster and planning on spending such a large amount on options why not start with the 'S' instead of a standard model? It makes no sense to me, but I am sure if I were able to sit with the original owner they would provide a valid explanation. As it is a one owner car it obviously wasn't a dealer demonstrator/press car. It has covered very few miles as well bearing in mind it is only 4 years old.
I am in no rush to buy Jeff, this individual usually knows the right car when he see's it. This Boxster certainly piqued my interest, it's a bit of a unicorn in itself. In essence it is 'dressed' to look like a GTS, quite why I don't know, it would probably have been cheaper to buy a GTS.

 

[dpoynton]

I've never really understood the concept of cruise control on a Porsche! I wouldn't let the lack of it put you off going ahead with the purchase.

I'm sure we all like to drive our Porsches in a "spirited" manner whenever we can. We wouldn't otherwise have them.

However, cruise, for me, is invaluable. There are many times when I set cruise, even in low speed limit areas (30/40). This allows me to concentrate more fully on the road/pedestrians and not need to keep looking down to see if I'm keeping within the speed limit.

I had cruise retro-fitted on a 987 Cayman in the past without any issues.

ATB
David

 

[Riddo]

Gazoak,

Each to their own. For me cruise is a must have, I have family in Cornwall & the Highlands and live in the midlands, I usually travel during darkness (especially in the Summer) to avoid the tourist traffic, cruise is a 'nice to have' when your sat on the M5/A30 or M6/M74 at 2am engrossed in an audiobook and really on focused on just getting 'home'!

 

[Riddo]

Thanks David. I concur.

 

[Peter_Bull]

CC is a must for me too. I had it retro fitted to my 996 years ago by the OPC and it was as if fitted by the factory. Best decision I had made especially when cruise teh autobahns.

I always use it and set it for speed limit at the time, and it’s saved me countless speeding points / fines. Mind you I usually have a convoy behind me in the lower speed limits as they always want to get somewhere faster irrespective of the speed limit. As my wife says, they should get out of bed 5 minutes earlier.

More than happy with my 2.7 and never need the extra 700cc in 6 years of ownership. It certainly doesn’t need to keep changing down or hunting for different gears that’s for sure, its a sweet engine that certainly delivers all I need.

IMHO you have chosen the best model series. 6 is best!!

 

[Motorhead]

I agree entirely Ian. In fact it's the one option that I wouldn't do without, especially on a performance car. It's so easy to exceed the highly-regulated speed limits in this country owing to the huge number of fixed and average speed cameras being rolled-out. My North Beds village, which is about 1/4-mile square, has no less than 4 average speed cameras..!

I use CC all the time, even in built-up areas - it's so much less stressful to just set-and-forget. I think the term "cruise control" is inappropriate for the modern driving environment. Maybe something like "speed regulator" would be better? Anyway, it's not going to be long before all new European vehicles will have software which controls the allowable max speed according to location.

Jeff

 

[kitchens]

Who needs CC just take the wife out with you[]

 

[Riddo]

Hi Jeff,
I'm about to go way of topic here, but as I'm the original post owner it's my choice to digress! Your last sentence is interesting. Autonomy and electronics have created some fantastic driving aids in the latest generations of vehicles. I came out of a 2012 Range Rover in January 2019 and bought a 'new' (ex dealer demonstrator) VW Touareg in April. It had lots of technology and a degree of autonomy. When 'active' you could not exceed the speed limit period, that was good, it was clever enough to read road signs, for example a road local to me had the limit altered from 60 to 50 mph last March, the sat-nav data in the car knew it should be a 60, but the camera would override that because the signs said 50, like I say, speed regulation I believe, clever stuff and well implemented.

The car could also partially steer itself and had a more advanced lane departure system, that was not so good. My Mitsubishi L200 has the previous version of this technology, if it detects the vehicle 'leaving its lane' it beeps to advise me, quite acceptable if you can live with the beep! It was also possible to disable the feature if the driver wished either for the duration of the journey or permanently so it stays off until such time as the driver re-activates the functionality. Now my VW had the same lane departure warning although enhanced/upgraded which is now connected to the steering. This was dangerous, as an example if you attempted to pass a cyclist the system would attempt to 'steer' you back into the lane you were leaving, not good for the cyclist! To make matters worse the camera system would also detect oncoming traffic several hundred yards/metres away whilst attempting to pass this poor cyclist. If you tried to continue the manoeuvre the car would just execute emergency braking from the forward collision mitigation system because it assumes the driver is a) out of his lane, b) out to collide with an oncoming vehicle (that you will not collide with because the manoeuvre will be complete before the collision occurs). In these circumstances the poor vehicle behind you is exposed to the potential of a rear end shunt. To make matters worse you could not completely deactivate the technology. After several near misses with this change of underwear technology as it became known I gave up and traded the VW for a Range Rover Sport in January of this year, it has some of this more advanced technology too, but at least it can be disabled if the drivers chooses, unlike the VW which was dangerous. It will be interesting to see if any lawsuits are initiated in the US or even the UK as decisions the car makes are putting other road users lives at risk.

 

[Riddo]

Wisely I have never had a wife Kitchens []

 

[Riddo]

Thanks Peter. 6 is indeed best. Fancy fitting a Subaru engine to a Boxster? Oops, did I just say that out loud?

 

[Motorhead]

You're perfectly entitled to off-topic Ian - everyone else does on these forums..!

Last year I visited a German friend who had an E-Class Merc with the features you describe - speed limit recognition, lane departure "steering", as well as recognising hands-off the steering wheel and applying the brakes if necessary. That seemed OK to me most of the time, but the scariest thing for me was the automatic speed control. It seemed to work well when we were driving at speed on the Autobahns, but when approaching stationary traffic my right foot was already hard into the passenger footwell well before the auto-brake application - rather scary! Maybe it's just a case of calibration which an individual driver can tailor to meet their preference?

Jeff