Beautiful 2002 Porsche Boxster S, Rare Tiptronic, Loaded, Serviced on 2040-cars
Plainview, New York, United States
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:3.2L 3179CC H6 GAS DOHC Naturally Aspirated
Body Type:Convertible
Transmission:Automatic
Fuel Type:GAS
Make: Porsche
Model: Boxster
Disability Equipped: No
Trim: Roadster S Convertible 2-Door
Doors: 2
Drivetrain: Rear Wheel Drive
Drive Type: RWD
Number of Doors: 2
Mileage: 83,420
Sub Model: S
Number of Cylinders: 6
Porsche Boxster for Sale
- 1996 porsche boxster (needs new engine)
- 2013 porsche boxster pdk cpo 20 wheels bose nav premium pkg 14 way power seats
- 2dr roadster manual coupe convertible 4-wheel disc brakes a/c abs alloy wheels
- 1999 porsche boxster base convertible 2-door 2.5l(US $9,999.00)
- 2000 porsche boxster tiptronic!! clean carfax!! one owner!! serviced!!(US $14,900.00)
- 1997 porsche boxster base convertible 2-door 2.5l
Auto Services in New York
Youngs` Service Station ★★★★★
Whos Papi Tires ★★★★★
Whitney Imports ★★★★★
Wantagh Mitsubishi ★★★★★
Valley Automotive Service ★★★★★
Universal Imports Of Rochester ★★★★★
Auto blog
Porsche recalls new 911 models over exhaust pipe issues
Thu, 28 Feb 2013Porsche, though the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, announced a voluntary recall on about 2,200 911 Carrera and Carrera 4 models built during the 2012 and 2013 model years. On cars equipped with the standard exhaust system it was found that the tailpipes could separate from the mufflers and become dangerous road debris; models that added the optional sport exhaust system are not included in this recall.
Affected vehicles were built between March and November of last year, but there have been no reports of the problem on any customer-owned vehicles. Porsche first noticed a cracked tailpipe weld on a test vehicle back in May, and since then has found similar problems on other internally owned vehicles, all with more than 25,000 miles on the clock. To fix the problem, dealers will be replacing the mufflers. Scroll down to read the official notice.
A car writer's year in new vehicles [w/video]
Thu, Dec 18 2014Christmas is only a week away. The New Year is just around the corner. As 2014 draws to a close, I'm not the only one taking stock of the year that's we're almost shut of. Depending on who you are or what you do, the end of the year can bring to mind tax bills, school semesters or scheduling dental appointments. For me, for the last eight or nine years, at least a small part of this transitory time is occupied with recalling the cars I've driven over the preceding 12 months. Since I started writing about and reviewing cars in 2006, I've done an uneven job of tracking every vehicle I've been in, each year. Last year I made a resolution to be better about it, and the result is a spreadsheet with model names, dates, notes and some basic facts and figures. Armed with this basic data and a yen for year-end stories, I figured it would be interesting to parse the figures and quantify my year in cars in a way I'd never done before. The results are, well, they're a little bizarre, honestly. And I think they'll affect how I approach this gig in 2015. {C} My tally for the year is 68 cars, as of this writing. Before the calendar flips to 2015 it'll be as high as 73. Let me give you a tiny bit of background about how automotive journalists typically get cars to test. There are basically two pools of vehicles I drive on a regular basis: media fleet vehicles and those available on "first drive" programs. The latter group is pretty self-explanatory. Journalists are gathered in one location (sometimes local, sometimes far-flung) with a new model(s), there's usually a day of driving, then we report back to you with our impressions. Media fleet vehicles are different. These are distributed to publications and individual journalists far and wide, and the test period goes from a few days to a week or more. Whereas first drives almost always result in a piece of review content, fleet loans only sometimes do. Other times they serve to give context about brands, segments, technology and the like, to editors and writers. So, adding up the loans I've had out of the press fleet and things I've driven at events, my tally for the year is 68 cars, as of this writing. Before the calendar flips to 2015, it'll be as high as 73. At one of the buff books like Car and Driver or Motor Trend, reviewers might rotate through five cars a week, or more. I know that number sounds high, but as best I can tell, it's pretty average for the full-time professionals in this business.
What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?
Wed, Jun 24 2015Check these recently released J.D. Power Initial Quality Study (IQS) results. Do they raise any questions in your mind? Premium sports-car maker Porsche sits in first place for the third straight year, so are Porsches really the best-built cars in the U.S. market? Korean brands Kia and Hyundai are second and fourth, so are Korean vehicles suddenly better than their US, European, and Japanese competitors? Are workaday Chevrolets (seventh place) better than premium Buicks (11th), and Buicks better than luxury Cadillacs (21st), even though all are assembled in General Motors plants with the same processes and many shared parts? Are Japanese Acuras (26th) worse than German Volkswagens (24th)? And is "quality" really what it used to be (and what most perceive it to be), a measure of build excellence? Or has it evolved into much more a measure of likeability and ease of use? To properly analyze these widely watched results, we must first understand what IQS actually studies, and what the numerical scores really mean. First, as its name indicates, it's all about "initial" quality, measured by problems reported by new-vehicle owners in their first 90 days of ownership. If something breaks or falls off four months in, it doesn't count here. Second, the scores are problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100. So Power's 2015 IQS industry average of 112 PP100 translates to just 1.12 reported problems per vehicle. Third, no attempt is made to differentiate BIG problems from minor ones. Thus a transmission or engine failure counts the same as a squeaky glove box door, tricky phone pairing, inconsistent voice recognition, or anything else that annoys the owner. Traditionally, a high-quality vehicle is one that is well-bolted together. It doesn't leak, squeak, rattle, shed parts, show gaps between panels, or break down and leave you stranded. By this standard, there are very few poor-quality new vehicles in today's U.S. market. But what "quality" should not mean, is subjective likeability: ease of operation of the radio, climate controls, or seat adjusters, phone pairing, music downloading, sizes of touch pads on an infotainment screen, quickness of system response, or accuracy of voice-recognition. These are ergonomic "human factors" issues, not "quality" problems. Yet these kinds of pleasability issues are now dominating today's JDP "quality" ratings.