By on October 6, 2011

Sorry to bring you here under false pretenses, but TTAC can’t actually afford the kind of “spy photographs” that are so perfectly posed they almost seem like manufacturer-released press shots. Happily, Autocar can, and has given the internet the first camo-free photography of the new baby Carrera GT-look Boxster S. So go ahead, surf on over, but then be sure to scurry back here to discuss the new look. We don’t have to pay Brenda Priddy to do that, do we?

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

16 Comments on “What’s Wrong With This Picture: New Boxster, Unboxed Edition...”

  • avatar

    What’s wrong:

    1) The classic Porsche color combination is silver and red, not silver and fuchsia.
    2) It looks like a pimped (although conservatively pimped) Toyota MR2 Spyder.


    -Taking the rocker panel cover up over the air intake will save on repair costs.
    -The turbo flat-4 is theoretically pretty sweet.

    Question: Weight?

  • avatar

    Looks a bit like a stretched Audi TT, IMHO, particularly in the rear.

  • avatar

    You best be careful, because Brenda Priddy is bonafide internet tough guy. When her crew snapped some pics of the new Impreza a few months ago, the pics went from to NASIOC in about 5 minutes.

    The photographer saw the posts and immediately notified Brenda of this and she jumped online and started chest thumping about how she could have NASIOC shut down and she could sue them for copyright infringement and get her lawyers on the case immediately.

    It was pretty hilarious actually.

    Here are her exact words:

    OK, the hate mail and screaming is about to begin, but by posting or hot-linking or whatever you want to call it – as long as our copyrighted images are visible on this site – it is a VERY serious copyright violation. So serious in fact that this site could be shut down very quickly. That isn’t my wish and/or plan – but it is what would happen if I contacted my lawyer or the agency that handles my copyright violations.

    Please understand that this is my sole business and my livelihood, as it is for my photographers. Yes, we got paid by Autoblog, Edmunds and more – but selling to magazines, websites AND BLOGS is our business. We sell to many blogs and by people posting / hot-linking to our images – it takes away from potential sales. Trust me, folks, this is a hard way to make a living and by using the images in the way that have been used on this site – it would be categorized as theft. I attempt to promote the sites that buy our images by posting links (only) on Facebook, twitter, etc. – and it would be great if you too posted links – but not the images or hot-links.

    I need the images removed from this site and, if you enjoy seeing our spy photos – I hope that you’ll respect my request (as well as the law). Thank you.

    Brenda Priddy & Company
    (AKA) Automedia / Carparazzi / Scoopy / Hans Lehmann Photo-Syndicate

    She eventually backs down a bit, but it is fun to see people who make their living on the internet get mad and threaten to sue the internet.

    ON TOPIC: It is a Porsche with the typical Porsche sports car design language that hasn’t changed in decades really. It is a bit more radical than I thought it would be, but I don’t think it would offend any typical Porsche buyer. Not especially considering there are more Porsche buyers lining up for rebadged VW SUVs than there are Porsche sports cars these days.

    • 0 avatar

      Brenda has always been gracious to me and she seems like a nice person. She makes her living providing a service that many car enthusiasts use. She’s entitled to protect her intellectual property. Actually, courts have demanded some due diligence by IP owners, so she may feel compelled to send out such cease and desist letters.

      Considering how so many powerful owners of IP use cease and desist letters that have no real basis in law just so they can intimidate others and expand IP rights beyond the letter of the law, I can see why some might think that Brenda can be “tough”, but in her case, she’s actually defending real, not imaginary, property rights.

      Still, it’s a real question to me whether hot-linking to an image is really copyright infringement. Images and text are treated differently when it comes to web publishing and browsing. When I put copyrighted text on my web site I’m indeed reproducing copyrighted material. When I put a photo up on a web site, I’m not really publishing that photo, I’m just putting code on the page that tells the reader’s browser to go fetch an image from somewhere.

      As for our esteemed ed Ed’s use of one of Brenda’s photos above. It’s only a partial photo and is used to illustrate comment about Ms. Priddy and her work. I’d say that meets the standards in the copyright statutes for fair use.

      • 0 avatar

        If you read into the rest of the thread, you can see where she simmers down a bit. Nick (The Godfather) one of the admins there presents a similar argument about copyright infringement and doesn’t really buy her argument either, but removes the pictures as a professional courtesy.

        There’s a lot of gray areas here and I don’t think anybody is ever really going to have a reasonable solution. Same goes for media embargoes set by manufacturers, but I’m off topic enough already.

  • avatar
    Rod Panhard

    Porsches have always been about engineering wrapped up in a design that’s simple and beautiful. The design of this seems too fussy, too busy.

  • avatar

    I like the look. But I liked the MR2 as well. And the CGT.

    I’m not a big fan of roadsters with windshields so steeply raked you either lean your forehead against the windshield frame, or feel like you’re riding under a half canopy. Even the current one feels unnecessarily enclosed compared to the recent gold standard in that regard, the S2000 (I’m just a few inches too tall for the Miata). It’s hard from these pictures to tell how the Box will be.

    With the 2.9 being traded for some complexo4, it’s almost tempting to purchase one of the last outgoing non S ones. No turbos, no DI, manual tranny under light load, 17 inchers with narrow rubber, minimal electronics, maintainable by mechanics outside the bankrupt, coastal bailout queen states -> a recent vintage Porsche that one might actually be able to afford growing old with. The new ones, with all their fancifications, all strike me as more appealing to lease and swap.

  • avatar

    What’s wrong?

    There’s a man driving it.

  • avatar

    Any way we can find out where that was snapped? I have the sinking feeling it was Red Rocks park in Colorado – which means I missed another opportunity to scoop a “big” site by sending you guys pics first :p

    • 0 avatar

      Good guess about Red Rocks — I’m gonna say Garden of the Gods in Colorado Springs. The entance to the Pikes Peak Highway is what, maybe 20 minutes drive from there? Every once in awhile you catch some prototypes doing high altitude testing on that road which runs all the way to top – more than 14,000 ft.

      And for what its worth, the guy driving this thing looks to be a short and small framed person, unless they’ve REALLY opened the interior. I’m 6’3″ and I’ll never own a Boxster, simply because the windsheild header rail is far to low.

  • avatar

    Alaways best to see these cars in the flesh. In photos it looks to be an im provement over the old boring car with cheapo interior.
    The real question is going to be performance variants. The boxter was supposedly held back from the good motors etc so as not to crib 911 sales. With the 911/991 going bigger and further upscale can the boxter not now develop into a fuller performace range. Something like a boxter cayman gt3.

    Basicaly all these cars are useless for much more than a pose, unless they are trackable.

  • avatar

    I understand that the 4-cyl turbo makes sense, but I don’t think 4-cylinder boxers sound good at all. That’s my greatest concern about this car.

  • avatar

    There is a little story related to the replacement of the 2.9 with a turbo flat four. Over on, a British owner of a Cayman R thinks he has tracked down why UK 3.4 engined cars have a flat spot in response that Euro cars don’t have, despite harmonized emissions standards. Chasing through country specific Porsche websites, he uncovered the fact that Euro 3.4s put out a few more grams of CO2 per mile than the UK 3.4s, just enough to put the cars in a different road tax bracket. Of course, Porsche had just stonewalled him – perfectly normal, happens with all of ’em, etc. The four should buy them some breathing room on aggregate efficiency and emissions standards but I doubt that particular guy will be back for seconds.

  • avatar
    Robert Schwartz

    It looks like a Porsche to me. Of course, to me they all look the same. Yawn.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • theflyersfan: If this car isn’t off of the lot already, I’ll bet it will be soon. Lots of good parts and...
  • SCE to AUX: “EVs Are Becoming More Expensive, Not Less” So what? No mfr can keep up with demand, whether...
  • pmirp1: Will Branden DEMAND that electric car manufacturers bring down price of electric vehicles, produce more, and...
  • Jeff S: @ToolGuy–EBFlex has so much hatred for Ford that had to comment. He can’t help himself.
  • Syke: Everything was gross horsepower back then. More honest measurements of engine power didn’t come on line...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber