993 or 996 - Which to buy?

[roverelf]

Hi All:

OK, I'm struggling with a decision, and I'm looking for advice. Simple or detailed, all is welcome. I have narrowed down my choice to replace my 1983 911 SC. I am considering a 1999 996 with 63k miles and a 1995 993 with 61k. The 996 had a factory engine replacement at 51k (cylinder sleeve?). Price is the same on both. Both are black in color.

Anyway, I am really struggling with the decision on which to buy. The 996 has more stone chips on the sides, but is otherwise very clean. The 993 is very clean as well. My main concerns are long term maintenance costs and overall performance. From all of my reading, it appears that the 996 is more expensive to maintain, but I would like to hear comments from others.

As I said, I welcome any feedback, comments. Tomorrow is D-Day, and I plan to pull the trigger then on one or the other. Many thanks in advance for your comments!

Regards,
John

[Jim Richards]

John, have you driven both? Which is more enjoyable to drive? That's as important as the other criteria. You probably won't see a substantial difference in maintenance costs between the two cars. My 2 cents.

[roverelf]

Thanks Jim. I have driven both, and enjoy them both. That's the problem. Good to hear that there isn't a significant difference in maintenance cost. Thanks for the reply!

John

[Yellowbird RS]

I own a 993 Targa and a 996 GT3 and I prefere the 993 body style.

[layzee]

Of course there are still questions over the 996 engines long-term reliability whereas 993s with huge miles on aren't uncommon.

[cegerer]

The 996 is a better-engineered car. Most prefer the styling of the 993 and being the last of the air-cooled 911's I think it's value will eventually stabilize and then rise, ala the early cars. With the introduction of the 997, I think 996 prices are going to nosedive even quicker than they have been over the past 2 years. And I don't see any reason why they would ever go back up. They're not collectible and they're not particularly significant in the Porsche lineage - other than being the 1st water-cooled version and that's probably not going to draw any collectors down the road ......

So, if resale value down the road is a concern, I'd go 993 for that reason alone.

[Leland Pate]

993...

When I was purchasing mine there was a guy (army reserve officer) there with me. He was trying to trade a '00 996 Targa straight across for a '96 993 C2S (Arena Red... stunning). He went straight across to a four year older car at $65K.

...993

[roverelf]

Thanks all. I appreciate all the feedback!

John

[Rick Lee]

Do you DIY? The 996 looks to me to be a little tough to do any engine work. 993's are no problem at all and probably have a much larger support group for advice and help with DIY maint. Never met any 996 folks who have done anything more than an oil change.

[nostatic]

Originally posted by layzee
Of course there are still questions over the 996 engines long-term reliability whereas 993s with huge miles on aren't uncommon.

really? I don't know of that many high mile 3.6s.

[addictionMS]

When the time came for me to choose, it was between a 993 2S and a 996, I chose the 996 with areo kit, no regrets, love the car,

I think 996s are proving to be tough enough, and the milage is getting up on some, I have not heard of any problems.

you might check on the 996 board to see what the thoughts are there.

Jim

[Ed Bighi]

For me, 993 any day. I could go on forever comparing the two, but let me just list one very important item in many. Dry sump in the 993. If having one does not matter to you, then chances are you don't do the type of driving that requires one. But for me, it is as important as oil in the motor. There are many more items like 8 main bearings and better castings in the 993, but again, I could go on forever. In the end, you have to figure out if you are they type of person that needs needs constant tapping on the back by the vehicle to fool you into thinking that you can drive better than you do, or the type of person that is interested in a car that is built to last a lifetime and challenge you more as a driver in the process. Your choice. Looks-wise, there is no comparison. As for future value, in the UK 996 prices are already starting to dip below 993 level. This is just the beginning. In the end, it's like comparing a used quartz to a used mechanical unit. Or like comparing a flavor of the month Trek bike to a Richard Sachs. I cannot think of better comparisons.

[addictionMS]

Dry sump in the 993. If having one does not matter to you, then chances are you don't do the type of driving that requires one.

I doubt that any driving on the street should/could cause problems for a 996. I have seen and driven 996s on the track and the motor is just fine, dry sumps are nice, but hardly essential for a car to be track capable. I know I have driven mine hard as do many others on this board.

In the end, you have to figure out if you are they type of person that needs needs constant tapping on the back by the vehicle to fool you into thinking that you can drive better than you do, or the type of person that is interested in a car that is built to last a lifetime and challenge you more as a driver in the process. Your choice.

no idea what you are saying here, both cars will challenge you, last a lifetime, I really don't understand the idea that a car should be hard to drive to be sporty, the 996 is a dream to drive hard, as is the classic 911, the 996 simply puts the edge at such a speed that it is harder to reach.

just my thoughts, I race a 911 in the toyo cup series, and drive hard a 996, and an M3, and a 1970 3.2, 1988 Carrera, and a dodge truck for that matter.

my best advice is to flip a coin, 993 for heads and 996 for tails, watch how you react to the result, it will tell you all you need to know......


Jim

[Ed Bighi]

If you feel that the 996 is a fine driver's car, good for you. But since this guy here is asking for opinions, I'll give mine. And having driven both, I don't care for the way the 996 feels at all. Even a highly midified 996 turbo with over 600hp on tap. I could have fallen asleep in that thing. But some people like that kind of isolation. Good for them as well. But don't listen to me. Go and try to find an old issue of EVO magazine where they test a 73 rs, 74rs 3.0, Carrera Club Sport, 964 rs, 993 rs, 993 gt2, 996 turbo, 996 gt2 and 996 gt3 back to back. They drove the piss out of all those cars and guess which three they like best. So I am not alone in my perceptions. Go and argue your points with those guys. But in all honesty, I don't know if I am that crazy for either the 993 or 996. I tend to prefer mofified 930's more since life is too short.

As for durability, it isn't for no reason at all that in all the GT3 race cars and 996 turbos, the engines are all built around the tried and true 964/993 cranckases, whith dry sump as well, instead of the standard normally aspirated 996 cases which are based on the 986 design.

[addictionMS]

refinement is not isolation, necessarily, sometimes it is hard to tell the difference,

as for durabilty, are 996s failing?

I stick with my coin toss as advice....


Jim

[PorscheGuy79]

Even a highly midified 996 turbo with over 600hp on tap. I could have fallen asleep in that thing.

I think to complement this quote perfectly would be a quote from Car and Driver when they were testing the GT3

...those who suggest that the 911 Turbo is a soulless high-speed appliance.

I dont think it could be better put. And I think that the standard 996 isnt that far off. If you feel that you would ever consider putting a car throw its paces and grinding it down to what it truly standards for I think you would find that the 993 might be the right path to follow. But I think that AddictionMS is also very right...

my best advice is to flip a coin, 993 for heads and 996 for tails, watch how you react to the result, it will tell you all you need to know......

Good luck my friend, you desiding between to Porsches, in this case there is no wrong desision.

[rcwaldo]

The 996 does everything better, on paper....stiffer, lighter, more power etc. BUT.... the experience is what should help you decide which is right for you.. The 993 is more durable and is proving to be very reliable. The 996 scares me by the rate of which engines are getting replaced for the very typical rear main seal problem. All is fine if you have a warranty, but look out if you dont.

Another issue is that Porsche advises against R compound tires and track driving as there is an oil starvation problem that has led to many engine failures. Not sure if this is more typical for the 3.4 or the later 3.6 engines?

As a 993 owner, I cant say enough about these cars, but your choice is which car gets your heart beating fast.. Its all about the experience..

Chris Walrod

[K. Roman]

I haven't driven the 996 but I've driven a 993. Even the 993 wasn't as fun as my SC which doesn't have power steering. So, take a step back and save 35,000 and pick up an SC!

[layzee]

Originally posted by nostatic
really? I don't know of that many high mile 3.6s.

Have a look at some of the cars for sale in Germany on http://uk.mobile.de - I have seen some with ~250,000 kilometers.

[DavidI]

I drove a 996 and it was a blast. However, I think it is somewhat of a gentlemen's type of sports car. The power steering, comfortable seats, climate control, lack of engine bark was unappealing to me. I prefer the unrefined edge that my 83SC offers. It suits my personality as I am not "gentlemanly" yet.

Your car is an extension of yourself. I think a little bit of introspection would help you make your decision. You cannot go wrong either way though. They are both beautiful cars.

Good luck, David