Please guys calm down. This is Porsche board not a car make discussion room (look who's talking)=> Yes there are faster cars than a 911 and yes the Ferrari 308s/328s have wilder looks etc. But so what? The only Ferrari owner I know is afraid to drive his 1986 40000 KM 328GTS because something might break down inside the engine. Is this the ideal sportscar ownership??? I think not. As for hyped up japanese pseudo sports cars: Forget them. The performance is important yes, but the japanese cars don't have the heritage and timeless design of the 911s. Performance alone is worth nothing.

Back to the subject: No the 911 engines are not badly built. Drive it hard and maintain it badly and yes it will break down. Maintain it according to all the golden rules and you can have fun and longevity at the same time. Treat a Volvo or a Toyota accordingly and the same result will occur. It's how you USE and MAINTAIN the car that's important if you want to see 200000+ miles.

Thanks for all the responses. So is the consensus that if the previous history is unknown, but all visible inspections including compression etc are ok, the purchase price should account for the possibility for big $$ for potential engine work. What I have gathered is the most important thing is the past history and info from the previous owner(s). Also if all other aspects such as interior and paint are 9 out of 10, does this equate to someone taking care of the vehicle? I know I looking for opinios here and not necessary hard facts.

I was hoping to spark some good conversation by playing Devil's advocate. The truth is folks on this board are expectedly biased tward these great old cars. When you love something like an enthusiast does you look at it with rose colored glasses. It took me and my mechanic 2 years to find my present car. This is a one-owner SC with 70K on the clock. Every car we looked at had rebuilt engines, even the one I bought. This is OK because all the updates were done. I would not expect any car to go 20 years without a rebuild. This is not unreasonable, even with good maintenance. If all cars were treated as well as you all treat your 911s they might all go 200K.
As far as reliability is concerned I suppose they are as reliable as an old car can be. But to ME this is not the proper definition of reliability. I don't think I would take my car on a cross country trip. I am sure something would give out in a few thousand miles. In the past couple years I have replaced the engine cooler (it hemorrhaged on the freeway), starter (it went out slow enough to get me home, and a fuel pump (it exploded gas at the banjo fitting while driving down the road). None of these failures could have been anticipated unless they were replaced before they went out at some time interval - the car now still only has 78K on it. Of course these are MY experiences but I doubt if they are all that unusual. The car is 22 years old and all the failed parts were probably OEM. The next repair is the all-to-often sinchro for first gear. It just started crunching. Bullitproof?

[This message has been edited by RarlyL8 (edited 09-19-2000).]

I just picked up a 911 Germany with 130k (miles) on the clock. I bought the thing sight unseen and expected to take it home and rebuild the motor. Not only did I drive it 7 hours to my base but I kept and keep driving it everyday. I've had no problems other than a leaking T-stat and very, very negligible oil consumption (about a quart every oil change). It's now my daily driver and has stood up to my daily thrashings. Best stinkin car I have ever owned. Call me lucky.

------------------
rj cilurso
87 911 targa