This "poor man's 911" thing really irritates me.

It's just another Clarksonism that people who haven't driven a Boxster, or have so little appreciation of what actually constitutes a great handling car/great chassis, spout in order to appear mildly controversial.

Also shows a real lack of knowledge about cars in general.

For a start, the Boxster is mid-engined where the 911 is not. It's a pretty big fuckin difference that changes the whole characteristic of a vehicle.

Second, so what if it's cheaper than a 911. Are Porsche not allowed to introduce models into their range that are priced lower than a basic 911? Forgive me if I'm being obtuse, but I always though POrsche were in the business of making money, and from my last look out on the roads, they seem to have sold quite a lot of Boxsters. Maybe we should all write to comlpain that they're earning too much money at the expense of 911 brand image and customer financial perception.

Thirdly, so what? I would love to own a Boxster this time next year, and hopefully I will. If someone stops me and says "Ooh, I see you bought a Boxster because you couldn't afford a 911", my answer will be, "Yes. That's EXACTLY why I bought one you cretin. I actually can't afford a 911, but Porsche currently make a superb car that I can afford - should I deny myself one, and buy a Mk3 Toyota MR2 instead so that it doesn't interfere with your misguided perception of vehicle ownership?"



............. aaaaaaaaah, that's better