Ol' Shatterhand

I second the VDO/Continental suggestion (if you're going single DIN). I did it to my car, it looks great, I have bluetooth and DAB and I just use my phone on a separate magnetic mount if I need maps. I'd be looking into the PCCM solution if I wanted double DIN. It is expensive, but if, like me, you intend to keep the car indefinitely, the current value of the car does not come into the equation. Think of it as an avionics upgrade on a 3rd gen fighter jet. All that said, I am sure there are other double DIN head units, like the Pioneer one, that do everything PCCM does, for less. 

Don't mind me folks. My previous post was by accident while researching clutch pedal issues. Mine's gone weird at the top of travel and is affecting the brake pedal as well, so it's either the brake fluid or the pedal linkage. 

On 9/20/2021 at 5:26 PM, joeluth said:

there's

For me it was important to find a car that was equipped with PSM. My previous (and first) car was a Y-reg VW Polo, so without any previous driving experience of performance cars, I felt it was essential. Some macho drivers will tell you you don't need it or even that it neuters the car, but I think that's BS. To be fair, I've only ever really seen it kick in on a sharp bend covered in black ice, at low speed. The back stepped out unexpectedly, maybe my own correction would have been sufficient, but I was happy PSM was there.

Mine's a daily so it also had to have climate control, and the six speaker (non-BOSE, therefore easily upgradable) stereo.

Litronics are a good thing to have as the standard halogens are very poor and tend to melt their Fresnel lenses. You can retrofit litronics at considerable cost, but you won't have the full self-levelling functionality and software integration of factory fitted units. All that said, I have recently had a good experience with 220% brighter H7 bulbs from Halfords. 

I wouldn't have minded having heated and/or sports seats, or M030 suspension, but you can have fun making potentially superior non-OEM upgrades yourself. Not cheap though... 

PCM is obsolete now, as is the very 90s in-car phone, the CD changer in the boot, and CDR units with cassette players and sticky plastic buttons. Throw that junk out. If you must have double DIN, you can get PCCM these days. 

Cruise control is worthwhile on motorways and seamlessly retrofittable on any e-gas car, ie anything other than early 2.5l cars with cable throttles.

The OEM parking sensors look hideous. A discrete aftermarket installation should be relatively cheap to install, and useful. 

In terms of cosmetics, look for a car with the extended leather option (look at the door cards for obvious clues). Cars without it have a cheap feeling cabin. Combine that with no aircon and dashboard-only speakers and you have a recipe for dreariness.

The chromeline trim gearknob and handbrake options are very expensive and look good, IF they're in good condition, but personally these days I find a rounder knob feels better in the palm of my hand. No sniggering at the back...

What else? Oh, if you get a Tiptronic car, you can upgrade to paddle-shift and pre-2002 car hoods can be replaced with heated glass rear window aftermarket ones.

Some pre-facelift cars had optional clip-on cupholders that attach to the side air vents. If your air vents do not have the cupholder lug holes in them, you won't be able to use the OEM cupholders, at least not without changing the air vents as well.

The cheapest and most practical solution is Halfords cup holders, these hook into the window sill, can be used with the windows up or down, fit neatly into the door pockets when not in use, do not block the air vents, do not compromise use of the lockable  console cubby hole and can accomodate mobile phones or drinks cups of nearly any size, much more securely than even 987 OEM cupholders and without the risk of spilling you drink over the centre console electronics. OK, there's always the risk you passenger will spill their drink and fry the very expensive electronics module under the passenger seat, but no cupholder can protect against that.

7 minutes ago, ½cwt said:

Unless someone spent a lot of money on updating my 2000 car, I beg to differ.  The part catalogue supports this as there is only one set of part numbers for LHD and on for RHD Litronics whereas standard lights have up to '02 and '03 onwards for LHD and RHD.

I stand corrected. You could get ambers with washer jets, but they were not Litronics. Just ugly. Only the Americans are allowed to run HIDs without the ugly washer jets, and they can even legally modify their old halogen lights to retrofit projector lenses and HID bulbs. Oh well, at least we don't have to run on 93 Octane fuel... 

And another thing: some people complain about the push-me pull-me looks of both the 986 and 987, that is to say, facetiously, that the front looks too much like the back. While I also like the more modern, wedgier aesthetic of the Carrera GT, 981 and 982, I don't understand this particular criticism for the older cars, given that nobody complains about it when commenting on the looks of the original 550 and 718 racing cars. 

7 minutes ago, ½cwt said:

I meant buy a car equipped with Litronics as a factory option.  Litronic head lamp units do not have the amber even on older cars.

I think pre-facelift 986.1 cars that had Litronics had the amber on them, and jet washers and everything. You could always buy clears and cover the lower sections in orange film, if going for an amber look. Easier than an 'amberectomy' when going from amber to clear without replacing the headlight units... In any case, a pair of ambers is only £150 on ebay, compared to £600 for clears. 

Lots of amateur aerodynamicists here and we've gone off topic.

I should not have called it a boundary layer diverter, it is a spoiler. Its function is to prevent rain ingestion when the car is on the move, so as not to get air filter wet.

I don't expect there is any laminar flow in this region at full scale Reynolds numbers in the real world, definitely not past a surface discontinuity of this magnitude, and I doubt the engine suction and duct curvature are anywhere near sufficient to strain the flow to the point where it re-laminarises.

Going back to fried eggs:

a) Why did this term persist even after the lights were de-ambered? 

b) If they did look like fried eggs, wouldn't it be the round part of the light, housing the main and dipped beams and round like a yolk, that should amber?

I suppose there would be nicknames for distinctive features on the 987 too, if it had any... 

14 hours ago, Scubaregs said:

Exactly and it suited the car perfectly. Loved mine.

It did suit the MR2 perfectly. Great car. Like a faster X1/9, I gather... 

14 hours ago, GmanB said:

I think the biggest thing that annoys me about the side vents is the horrendous million part bracket that holds it in place. The plastic tends to crumble over time and rattle a bit, especially on the offside where hot air exits the engine compartment. 

It screams Mk1 MR2. I'd be looking to back-date it to 986.1.

It's interesting how the 986 near-side air intake has a boundary layer diverter on it, whereas on the off-side hot air vent they didn't bother. The aero skirts under the front radiators are very subtle too. 

I was thinking more of the side vents on the 986.2. In a dark colour like yours, the radiator inlet slats don't look bad at all! The more prominent square lips on either side of the radiator intakes give the bumper a more jowly, less pebble-shaped appearance, but in that respect it's closer to the sculpting on the concept car I guess. I still prefer the 986.1, but I will admit I am jealous of your glovebox and the revised design of the retractable rear spoiler. 

Facelifted 987s with their DFI engines, PASM suspension and last-of-the-line hydraulic steering are in some respects peak Boxster but my God are they ugly! They had an opportunity to fix the aesthetic misgivings I have with the 987.1 and they made matters even worse. They squared off the wrong part of the re-designed headlights (how annoying!), and added fussy grilles to the radiator intakes which look like something out of the late 80s, a problem they share with the apertures on the facelifted 986. What a shame. 

And yet, I still like the look of plenty of models I can't afford (doesn't everyone?).

987s are getting cheap now too...

I'm happy I bought the car that captured my imagination when I first saw a picture of it in concept form, aged 12, in a car magazine in 1993. At the time it didn't look like something that would ever be as obtainable as it became. 

What can I say, German cars of the late 80s to the mid-90s, with their Bauhaus aesthetic, looked amazing. Consider the 989, the Panamericana, the Audi Quattro Spyder, the Avus, the BMW Z1, the New Beetle... More recently, only the concept cars that eventually became the R8, the i8 and the Taycan had such a startling effect on me. Oh, and Bangle's GINA. 

53 minutes ago, Menoporsche said:

I don't like the 986 as the designer got frustrated and threw his breakfast at the front of the car.

But that's just my opinion.

I guess you didn't like the 1993 concept car either, then. They did have to accommodate radiators in the nose of the production car, hence the larger overhang, but Harm Laggay's all-in-one idea for the headlights was already part of the design brief for the concept car and they made into production largely unchanged. Let us not mix opinions with facts. 

Nobody is denying the 987 is a more refined and mature package. Of course it is better in a lot of ways than the car it replaced, but not all the changes are important to everybody. Looks-wise, it just boils down to a preference between lines drawn by Grant Larson and lines drawn by Pinky Lai. I know which I prefer, and I have good idea of what design tweaks I would have made if I had a say in the styling of the other car. Just a couple of curvature radius revisions to one or two splines on the exterior (around the lights and the intakes), some very minor tweaks to the seat, binnacle, steering wheel hub, centre console and vent shapes in the interior, that's all really.

37 minutes ago, Daboy3000 said:

I don't think the mk3 was facelifted was it, I was a VW salesman during that period and I don't remember it, sure you don't mean the mk4?

I had a few company mk3 Polo GTI's, they were cracking, as was the Lupo GTi.

I mean the 1999-2002 Mk3 Phase 2, also known as the 6N2. A vast improvement over the pre-1999 cars. I used to own a 3-door one that was registered in November 2001 and I loved it, especially because of the way it looked and the clever boat-tailing around the rear hatch area. Went from that to my Boxster which was registered in October 2001.

With rare expections, I just don't like most of the newer trends in car design, bike design, or popular music...

47 minutes ago, Billzeebub said:

I have only ever owned 986s. I think they feel more analogue and old Porsche than the 987. I do prefer the 987 headlights and front end look, but most other things I prefer a good 986. The interior of the 986 (although snugger than 987) feels more Porsche to me with the way it is laid out. Also there is the possibility to delete the lower centre console making it even more 'old school porsche' feeling. I have deleted the console on many of my 986s which increases leg room and gives the cool stripped out/weight saving GT3 911 look. I also am edging towards preferring 986.1 to the facelift 986.2. I feel the fried-egg ambers are just looking so right these days as it places the car in classic status. Finding a good original early car for me is the perfect 986 now. There are compromises as a daily driver over the facelift 986, but this is part of the appeal for me. The plastic rear screen just means that engine and mechanical noise is a little more audible and the smaller 17" wheels make the car ride so sweetly. 

I think they ruined the looks of the 986 with the facelift front bumper and air intake re-design. Much as they ruined the 996's looks when they re-designed the headlights for 996.2 and turbo cars.

I can think of very few succesful facelifts. A facelifted Mk3 VW Polo does indeed look better than the pre-facelift car. The new GR86 looks much better than the GT86 and of course it finally has the engine it deserves. A 512TR looks marginally better than a Testarossa (but let's forget about the 512M). Anything looks better than the original Panamera. I think I'm out of examples. 

22 minutes ago, bally4563 said:

It’s simply known as progression , case rested !

Try telling that to the air-cooled cork sniffers.

Let me put it this way: I will always prefer a Ferrari BB to a Testarossa, a 308 GTB to a 328, a Countach LP400 to the later cars with wings and flares, an Esprit S1 to the turbo Giugiaros and Peter Stevens cars.

But then again I prefer a 996.1 to a 993. Go figure... 

Each to his own. The 987 looks a bit fat to my eyes and its headlights look softer and a bit... cross-eyed (some say they resemble the Carrera GT clusters, but I don't see it. They are round at the top and square at the bottom and their design always bothered me, as did the side intakes). And the interior ambiance has a bit of Cayenne chintz about it. Does it really drive better than a sympathetically upgraded 986 S? Maybe it depends on whether you prefer variable ratio steering.

I'm not a fan of the 981's chiselled front treatment, or the idea of 1st gen EPAS, but the I like the rest of that car.

I really quite like the 718 (982), I don't mind the 4 pot engine (people who think this means it's "not a real Porsche" really don't understand the brand), though I do prefer the rear spoiler of the 981. The only thing I would change on the 718, except the noise and the gearing maybe, is the sharp creases on the front fenders: They should be smooth like they were on on 9x6 and 9x7 cars. When you look down the bonnet from the driver's seat, it should be like looking down a lady's cleavage.

So, the 986. With the extended leather option, the cockpit reminds me of a Cessna 152, dated to the point of timelessness now (and the 987 infotainment is just as obsolete and less easily upgradable... ). OK, the door pocket lids and centre console plastics are scratchy, but this can be remedied with the help of a good upholsterer, or even some spray paint and a coat of lacquer. I love the fried egg lights too. The whole thing looks purer than a 987 and has a clear connection to the 1993 concept car, which had retro pastiche elements from the 550 and 718 RSK cars, and the first iteration of those swoopy headlights (they were well received in 1993. I don't remember anyone moaning in 1996 either. The hate only started in 1998 when the 996 came out, but I think that car looks fantastic and I would much prefer a rear wheel drive manual 996.1 coupe to a 987. Except if it's a Cayman S, maybe).

I can clearly see how the 987 evolved from the 986 (just like the 997 evolved more successfully from the 996), but without the 986 link, it is hard to see the essence of the 1993 concept in the 987.

31 minutes ago, RalphyBMW said:

Excellent, thanks

Next daft question; did you find any instructions on how to do it properly?

A pdf on the Function First website. And examples of other people doing it on YouTube. 

19 minutes ago, RalphyBMW said:

How much was the shifter alignment tool? Do you have a part no?

I’m planning to swap to a 9x7 shifter, looks like this would make it easier to get it right first time?

The shifter adjusting bridge was £2.29 from the OPC. Well worth getting in touch with them directly  as Design911 and other sellers on ebay will try to flog it to you for much more!

It is part no. 996.424.395.03, but I think you will need a different but similar green plastic part for a 9x7.

https://ibb.co/nwg9tym

With the cables now properly aligned, the shift accuracy and fluidity is back! Gears engage positively and correctly, every time. It's amazing how much difference the cable tension adjustment being off by a couple of threads can make. Using the shifter alignment tool, all my problems have been sorted. Removing the centre console and putting it back again was a much speedier affair second time round, even though this time I opted to also remove the cubby hole unit under the radio. Re-installing the console I took care to get an extra half a milimetre of clearance between the handbrake and the console plastic in front of it, a small but all-important difference. Pretty pleased with my work.

Some more opinions on the shift-right kit: the gear change now feels very good, but there is still a tiny bit of play in the gear lever. I have traced this to play inside the fore and aft bearings of the upgrade kit. Nothing I can't live with, definitely better that the old nylon bushes, but a bit disappointing when Function First even go to trouble to include shim tape in the kit to eliminate play between the bearing cylinders and the surrounding plastic frame they slot into.

I am now very happy with the car, it is in perfect working order.

My test drive was very satisfying,  despite the weekend traffic and the grime (I was constantly spurting washer fluid on the windscreen) and since I had the roof down I can also confirm that the Thermatouch insulated smart gloves I bought on impulse at the gas station were an excellent purchase and great for driving. 

Collected the shifter alignment tool and rear bootlid gas struts from the very friendly Nottingham OPC. You'd think they wouldn't have the time of day for a humble old Boxster, but the customer service is excellent! Gas struts now installed (15 minutes of faffing with a flathead screw driver in the cold and dark, would have taken half the time in the day time). Saturday morning looks dry so that's when I plan to adjust my gearshift cables. Which means there will be a spirited test drive in the afternoon. 🙂

20 minutes ago, edc said:

When you say bell crank yoke are you referring to the oblong holed white nylon block that sits to the side? Some aftermarket kits provide a shim for that part.

Yep, that's the one. The Function First kit I installed replaces that part with one made of metal.