Roadster Choice

manufacturers

The 240Z arrived in 1969, the 924 in the late 70's, no? Them people at Datsun were so good at copying they did it 5+ years in advance?

The 1st and 2nd generation RX-7's did resemble earlier Porsche designs, but the 3rd generation was a true masterpiece. Among the best looking modern sports cars in my opinion.

I am all for a lighter, cheaper Boxster (or any other kind of a Porsche sport car) - but even at 2,500lbs it would still be 600lbs heavier than the porky US spec Elise - not to mention the 1,600lbs European versions.

There is almost nothing wrong with the current Boxster in my opinion - a bit cheaper and maybe easier access to the engine would be really great. I would hate to think what the service costs of these are going to be once they are getting older.

Ron.

Maybe I'm confusing my rice-mobiles.

I like the 3rd gen. a lot. To bad the Turbo model was built to blow, not to last.

But with 210Hp and proper torque from a well tuned 2.5 Flat 6 with Variocam it'd have a big output advantage over the torqueless 1.8 litre Toyota motor Lotus is using for the Elise. I can't imagine how bad the old Rover K series motor they were using before must have been. Brilliant car overall though.

Needs more power in both trim levels. The Z4 3.0 is quicker, even with the SMT. I propose a 3.2 for the base model and a 3.5 for the S. Cap it at 300Hp to avoid hitting 911 numbers and you've still got a very quick car.

I've never seen anyone try to sell a pre-88, maybe that's the problem.

That's a good indicator of why the car didn't sell. I've seen 94-95' GTSs go for $50-60k out here in So. Cal. But they're rare and did 0-60 in 5.0 out of the box.

That should be $30-40k, sorry!

No need to resort to name calling.

Actually, if the oil filters are properly replaced - they last rather well. It's unfortunate that it is so hard to replace them.

I think you have no idea what a really light car is to drive - even with the K series engine it should be a great driving machine. My 7 with it's stock F.I. Zetec (not an engine I like at all) is an absolute blast to drive. Very light cars do not need mega motors - and 600lbs make a huge difference in the driving dynamics. Even with the "torqueless" Toyota engine it should be too fast to be properly enjoyed anywhere but on a race track.

I disagree - it has, in my opinion, all the power you really need. It is, generally speaking, more fun to drive a slow car fast - and even the current Boxster is not a slow car, but the car buying public et large needs "more". So what if the Z4 is in some incarnations academically faster?

Ron.

couldn't sell it! I'm glad I couldn't sell it, the old lady is pissed! She hates it and wants it gone! I just asked for offers and I didn't get one single offer! I love it! It's the funnest car I've ever driven and I've driven a lot of cars! NADA says it's worth up to $18,150.00 and I couldn't get a half of that if I tried! (Check ebay) You now know of a 928 that didn't sell!

Here it's Mercedes and BMW! I toast them, vipers, Z06's and most crotch-rocket motorcycles all the time! To me the 928 is the most under rated car I've seen! It's just too much fun and too damn sexy to sell! If I sold it right now they would have to give me at least $15,000.00 but I don't have to worry, nobody is going to give me THAT kind of money for a 1984 928 no matter HOW fast it is! Besides, I want to keep it! Just had to jump in and let you know that not ALL

928's sell for a decent price!

As someone shopping for a 928, let me point out that the original message mentioned the 88-95 cars - the later models with 32-valve engines are *much* more popular than the early cars. Nicer looking, insanely fast, comfortable - the 928S4 is the best value in the world for a supercar, period. Amazingly under-appreciated. The 16-valve cars are tougher to sell *because* the later cars are such a good value. Once you get much over $6000, you're in the range of either an S3 (old body, new engine) or can save a bit more for an S4. I was offered a 1990 928S4 with FSH for $9000 recently, and that puppy was *mint* inside and out. Same problem with the 944: once you get close to 5 thousand bucks, your buyer can get 85.5 models with the nicer interior, or a high-miles but decent 951. At nine grand or more, you're talking pristine n/a cars and pretty nice turbos. It doesn't matter how nice your car is - if the buyer can get something newer and faster for less, that's where he's headed. Emanuel

I don't see how NADA can say a 84 is worth $18k, when S4s (87 to 91) routinely sell way below that, with their 315hp, 320lb/ft motors. I was fortune when I sold my 88 S4 (50k miles) a year and a half ago for $17.5k, but my car was pretty mint, and had some performance mods.

Unless you've got a stroker and a supercharger under the hood, I can't see how you are beating these cars with a 84 928S (even assuming its a

5 speed, not the more common automatic AND assuming its a Euro version with the more powerful motor). maybe top end you can hold on, but any decent sport bike can pretty much dust any production road car from a traffic light.

To me the 928 is the most under

928 has a cult following, and unless the cult is somewhere in your towm, or close enough to make shipping cost effective, good luck selling!

Although I can't say you're wrong, this doesn't seem to be the case. The 3rd. Gen. RX-7 Turbo was a problematic vehicle and it's well documented. A brilliant drive though.

I never doubted the Elise's capabilities, nor did a I say that 600 Lbs. won't make a dynamic difference. What I am saying is that a flat-6 powered, 210Hp Porsche with a 2,500 pound curb weight should be able to match the the Elise's raw numbers - or get VERY close and have a degree of civility and "everydayness" absent in the Lotus. It's not a car even many enthusiasts would want to drive every day.

It's nice to see that you're not as power hungry as some of us. On the other hand, proposing this question is similar to asking why people would rather have poorly built Z06 Corvettes for $50k than a nicer, but slower 911 for over $70k. Performance for the dollar is often what makes sales in these markets. And people expect a Porsche to be faster than a BMW.

Get a 'real' Roadster, a Porsche one at that. The Porsche Roadster for the model years of 1959-1962.

Austin Healeys are also cool. :)

I saw a mint condition Mercedes 100 series roadster(circa 1965, IIRC) on the road the other day. Very cool as well.

It's interesting stuff. Ford aquired Mazda, Volvo and Jaguar. Mazda typically builds a solid car and this didn't change when Ford bought them, but Ford's cars (the trucks are a different issue) have learned no new lesssons. They managed to fix many of the problems older Volvo's suffered. But the C70 continued unreliably till' it's recent demise, and the T6 powered S80 seems to have lots of problems. Plus, the Jags are still quirky. I wonder how Ford has, if at all, affected Aston Martin?