I have driven a 915 that was rebuilt and shifted EXTREMELY well, but the 915 transmissions in most of the 911s that I test drove were in horrible shape needing a rebuild.

The G50 is a very strong transmission getting put in front of much larger engines and turbos and run on racecars that run slicks. Porsche replaced the 915 with the G50 because the 915 wasn't as robust as they wanted behind the more powerful 3.2L engine. The main weak point of the G50 is the clutch fork bearing which is usually replaced by bushings. If not repaired correctly, it can cause the ears to break off of the transmission.

The 915 is a weaker transmission than the G50.

A 915 is fine for either a 3.0 or a 3.2. It will last forever, if you take care of it. The issue people have with the gearboxes isn't the torque capacity, it's worn synchromesh. In that respect, neither one of them will last in the hands of an idiot. The Borg Warner synchros used in the G50 gearboxes will wear prematurely if they are shifted too fast, especially when cold. I've seen damage in as little as 10,000 miles. As far as I'm concerned, the later design promotes faster shifting, "because you can". It doesn't mean it's a good idea.

My point was, you shouldn't automatically assume that a G50 is in any better shape than a 915, just because it's a so-called "better" design.

And, the G50 gearbox is heavier. As is the 3.2 engine, and just about every change Porsche made to the cars, year by year. That's why I like the early ones...

JR

Some food for though, others will disagree:

I love 80's 911s, but I hate dealing with CA smog. My next 911 will be relatively new, or pre-75, or it will be in another state. Just food for thought.

I like my 915.

I don't freak out over "low mileage" cars. I'd rather have a high-mileage, well-serviced car than a car that's been parked and ignored for most of its life.

Or because you want better performance than the stock configuration. SmileWavy

In that price range, you really should look long and hard at 964s. I know I certainly would. I had a 72 with a 3.2 and it was a blast. But early hot rods can be tricky for road use. Have to get really specific on the setup to fit the driver's needs and wants. A tight 964 shouldn't be too hard to find, imho. You get 3.6 power, somewhat modern amenities, and there's tons of tweaking that can be done.

This ^^^^ The newer the 911, the heavier. You can't beat a well sorted SC or even a mid year narrow body car. Of course the long hood models should not be left out. With a budget of up to 30K, a long hood is not out of the question.

If you buy an SC or middie, you should have plenty of money left over for repairs. Don't get buried in a car. The absolutely needed repairs discovered by a PPI should be at least split over the sales price. Don't fall for anything that needs motor work.

What they say about 911s being 20K cars one way or another is true, but the numbers may have shifted.

I have a friend who bought an SC Targa for 6K that needed an interior. The rest was good to excellent with the paint being fair to good. 88K miles and solid. He will spend about 4K on a complete interior with over a grand going into the dash alone. If the car had only serious damage to the seats, he would have gotten off for considerably less than 2K for full leather. However, the purchase price may have been higher.

So, know what things cost. A good car with some interior work is a good deal. Paint work not so much and engine work will throw you upside down in a hurry.

My personal opinion: if I'm going to drive a heavier 911 like a G50 Carrera, I'll go for the 964 with PB, PS and decent A/C (knowing that a 993 is out of $ range). Otherwise, I want the oldest I can find in the best condition I can find. YMMV.

A wildcard: a 993 Targa. Rare but with a coupe roof line. You'll want a 993 that has been upgraded and documented. See details about 993s elsewhere.

30k will put you in a 6-speed Cayman S with 50k miles or a 5-speed Cayman with 30k miles.

25k will put you in a Cayman with 70k miles

Just sayin'

Yes, the 915 is certainly a weaker box. Which was the reason the 930 box existed in the early 70's; the 915 couldn't be made to last for a 24 hour race with a 600+HP turbo RSR bolted on it and driven at full chat for that long.

The G50 is surely a better, more modern, stronger (and heavier) box - and 915's in good shape do drive very nicely. And impart a period charm...

Many folks run a 3.6 or a 930 with a 915, myself included. Service life doesn't even seem to be much of an issue, with some care. I don't think a stock 3.2 makes too much power for a 915, nowhere close.

Rather, I think that the 915 was a dinosoar by the mid-70's, it was just obviously badly overdue for replacement by the 80's - the 924 and 944's (which, with the 928, were supposed to have replaced the 911 by then) got transaxles with modern gates/synchros/shift lever ergonomics beginning 11 years earlier.

Once the 911 was no longer slated for retirement, it needed an update - yuppies were probably complaining loudly :) - and the future obviously held bigger, more powerful engines, homologation for production-based classes meant the road cars needed something capable of scaling to racing outputs.

I can't help but enjoy the "art" of driving a 915. I saw somebody post years ago that if mere mortals were supposed to drive 911's, they'd all have G50's. (Or something to that effect.)

As others have said, you might want to reconsider your 'no 996' position. The 03-04 models have the turbo headlights. They are a lot of car of car for the money.

If thats a no go, I would get a mid 80s carrera.

I vastly prefer the 915 3.2 Carreras to the G50 cars. I was working at the dealer when the 1987 models arrived and I thought that they just absolutely ruined the car. And that was before I even knew how much they weighed and that they pushed the engine further rearward.

It was a case of diluting the experience for average drivers. And it worked, to this day there are many who believe that the G50 Carreras represent the pinacle of that series. The G50 is a lot stronger and will handle more power, but it's irrelevant in the 3.2 Carrera. The latest 915 was good for 400 hp all day long, exactly double the output of a 3.2 Carrera.

Javadog is correct, as usual, about user error being the problem with any transmission. I've seen Toyota PU trucks with eff'ed-up manual gearboxes. A lot of them. The 915 was a great shifting box if not damaged and with a properly adjusted shifter w/o worn parts. The last 915 shifters, in '85 and '86, were shortened 10% from factory and shifted exceptionally well. But older ones were fine if tight. I never liked the factory short-shift, it sacrificed all feel for a shorter throw. The '85/'86 regular shifter was a perfect compromise.

An '86 ROW car was the pinacle of the Carrera series.

You just have to look at em, drive them, etc. and see what appeals to you.

Having owned over a dozen, from early cars, to SCs to 915 Carreras and G50 Carreras, my current choice (actually, my last 3) have all been G50 Carreras. My current is an '88.

They are all good cars, but IMO the 87-89 are the best of the big bumper cars (the 78-89 range), at least for the use I do, which is pretty much daily.

I never had a problem with the 915 trans, other than blowing one up by running too much hp/torque through it.

The biggest difference, IMO, is that the G50 has an automatically adjusting hydraulic clutch setup. There's on adjustment or maintenance on it, other than occasionally bleeding the slave cylinder (every few years).

The 915 is the exact opposite. It has a bunch of things that go out of adjustment, wear out, etc. The cable, a bunch of springs, countersprings, etc. All need to be in tip top shape, AND kept in proper adjustment.

The G50 cars weigh a little more, but IMO that is more often than not overstated. I could tell no difference in weight from my 85, to my 87s or 88.

In a perfect world, though, I'd have a nicely set up, unmodified MFI 72 or 73, and drive that sucker every day. Unfortunately, I've been priced out of that market, probably forever.

The price of all the 89 and earlier 911s have really gone through the roof in the last year. It's weird. I've never seen 911 prices jump like this in the 25 years I've been buying, selling and owning Porsches.

I bought my perfect condition '88 for $16K a few years ago. It looks like it's a 25K car now. It doesn't look like you can get an under 90K, original, no stories G50 car for less than mid/low 20s anymore (or, at least, it would be a lot harder than it was even a year ago).

And the prices of early cars (pre-74), wow. I just can't believe the asking price on so many that I see advertised these days, for just "ordinary" stuff (halfazzed modified '70 T, etc.) It seems like asking prices (it's hard to verify actual selling) have pretty much doubled in the last 2-3 years.

Well, they ran two cars in one 24 hr race. One threw a rod through the case, the other finished second. Not bad. And remember, they were putting out almost twice the torque the 915 was designed for...

The 924 got a gearbox with VW-style cone synchromesh, largely beacuse that's what VW wanted. It was originally supposed to be their car...

The 944 borrowed a gearbox from Audi. Not their best one, either...

The 928 got B-W synchros 2 years before the 911, largely because they quit developing the 911 at all, thinking they'd kill it off. When Schutz decreed otherwise, they took a little while to get back up to speed. The 928 just had a head start.

All of which is irrelevant, as he needs to drive all of these cars to see which ones he likes. Which transmission it has doesn't matter much.

JR

Single family car. Dad bought new and gave to son in 2010. It's black and tan, too!
Maybe get for a touch under 20k, do a few personal tweaks and drive the snot out of it.

Cars for Sale: 1993 Porsche 911 Carrera in Tucson, AZ 85704: Coupe Details - 322485679 - AutoTrader.com


Uh, wait a sec...

Cars for Sale: 2007 Porsche Cayman in Albuquerque, NM 87114: Coupe Details - 321283795 - AutoTrader.com

That would be a great car if it checks out.

Since this is a subjective thread, I can say I much prefer the look of the 964 over the accordion style bumpers, always have and I've owed a few.

The other thing with the 964 is that you can take it on long trips without your passenger getting assaulted by heat and noise.

If I was in the market I would seriously consider the car in Don's link.

Have fun in your search! Not a bad conundrum to have :cool:

All valid points. Except maybe the "looks" comment. :)

However, the a/c in the 964 is essentially the same as G50 cars. On the other hand you can hang meat on a hot summer's day in my 996, and darn close to that in my (former) 993.

And if you want a relaxed cruiser, again, the 993 or 996 is a much better choice. One reason for that is the 6 speed transmission, versus 5 speed.

I guess I am saying that of the air cooled models, the 964 would not be a top 3 pick for me.

I put a lot of thought into what 911 to buy before I took the plunge, and drove mid-years, SCs, 3.2 carreras and 964s before making a decision.

In my case, I wanted a DD that I could do 25-30k/yr in, and drive in the snow. That made the 964 c4 a no-brainer. Comfortable, quiet, good AC, power brakes & steering... it is an easy car to drive (although it's rue about the g50 having a stiffer clutch than a 915) but is still VERY rewarding. Tons of fun in the snow too.

If I was buying a car for occasional use, a 915 3.2 would have been my choice... I think it is almost the best, most useable "driver" 911 that maintains the mechanical purity. A *good* 915 is a great feeling MACHINE to use, and I think it better suits the car's personality.

If, however, you want something a bit more refined and modern feeling, a 964 c2 is a wonderful car. I wouldn't take on the added complexity of a c4 unless you had a need for it.

I'm in the "915 is just fine" camp. I tracked the crap out of my '79 until 3rd gear finally gave up. I would look at anything from '78 to '89 with a roughly equal eye - pick the one that is best maintained. The difference between feel and hp those years isn't significant imho.

A Caymen for $25K? hmm..

Hmm is right!

That means they're well on the way to the $15-$18K range, where they'll become interesting.

Why hasn't anyone mentioned the 930? Powerful looking and performing, practically bulletproof after '83, and they sound wonderful.