2004, good car?

[gerard vaglio]

Because I own a 79sc a friend of mine is asking me how reliable a 2004 Porsche 911 will be. ( Like these two cars have anything in common.)

I don’t know anything about the 2004, do they have any significant problems to be aware of? I hate to say this but my friend does not seem to care about body style, heritage or purity, I think he just wants to drive a “Porsche”.

He’s a great guy, just not a car guy.

Any info on 2004s would be greatly appreciated.

[450knotOffice]

You'll get more info here then you can possibly read:

http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=60

[aigel]

The later water cooled models certainly were better than the first couple of years. I have had people ask me the same question and I tell them to stay away from the 2001 or earlier waterpumpers...

Make sure he does not overpay. The 2004 is still the 996 and not the most popular car on the market. It should be relatively cheap.

Cheers, George

[450knotOffice]

996's are shaping up to be the steal of the Porsche world right now. Incredible performance for 1/2 of what they cost when they were new.

Obviously the newer the better, all things being equal, but one does not need to fear the earlier models. Mine is a 2000 and it's a creampuff in perfect condition. It was actually in better shape than any of the newer ones I looked at, to be honest, which is why I ended up buying it.

Follow the link to the Rennlist forum. It'll answer any question you and your friend might ponder.

[dd74]

George - any idea what "relatively cheap" is? Say for a 996 between 50,000 and 100,000 miles. I see a lot of them down here in car lots, but haven't felt too compelled to price them.

[aigel]

I agree that the rennlisters will have the better expertise for your question. To dertermine price, I'd look at asking prices at autotrader etc. and subtract 10k. If you get it for that, then go for it. The 996 is a bit scary in that it seems to loose value very quickly.

George

[450knotOffice]

Forgive me for answering your question, dd74 (I know you asked George), but a 50,000 mile 996, depending on whether it's a 3.4 or the later 3.6 will run you about 32K to 40K. The 3.6's seem to get about 8K more for a number of reasons. They look a little better, they have 320 vs. 300 HP (at the expense of weight however so their power to weight ratios are basically similar) and they have the more reliable engines.

Have you ever driven one, dd? If not, you should....and you should drive it as it was meant to be driven...hard. These cars really come alive when they are driven hard and will put a huge smile on you face.

[dd74]

Hey, Scott! No, I've never driven a 996, but if I see one at Willow Springs next time I go, I may ask for a ride and a drive.

To be honest, they're still a little rich $$$ for what I think they're worth, even when used. Maybe 5 yrs. from now, I'll give a serious look.

But I've heard of very little problems with the 996s. Actually, this thread is the first I've heard that the early water pumpers had problems.

[aigel]

Well, the earlier ones had issues with their rear main seal. Some of them required replacement engines, because the crank was not concentric with the case, resulting in any seal leaking. Also, I think the earlier ones had pretty cheesy interiors in terms of materials etc.

That's all just hear say, some of it from 996 owners in my club. I have never shopped for a 996, as I do not care for their looks and am happy without coolant in a rear engine vehicle.

George