997 NA or 996 Turbo?

[Optical TDI]

I've been researching various 911s from 1980s air cooled to early 997s up to $40,000. I haven't considered a turbo very seriously, but there are many 996s that are $35-40k now.

I'm narrowing my search to a 996 turbo or a early 997. Looking for opinions and expertise suggestions on which way to go. Obviously very different cars. I do currently run in HPDE groups about 4-5 times per year and will use the 911 for that too.

Thanks.

[89911]

Having just bought and run 507 horsepower M5, I do believe that there is a limit to how much horsepower you need. And this is a normally aspirated car. I think a proper, high powered car like the 997 is more then enough. I think in most cases the turbo buys you more status more then anything.

[2Utes]

Having been fortunate enough to drive stock 997 Carrera and Carrera S on the track at Porsche Sport Driving Experience, I would say the stock 997 has more in it than most drivers have skill to handle. I also think the 997 models look better than the 996 models, with more defined body sculpting. The standard advice is usually to buy the newest Porsche that you are willing to afford. They generally have resolved many of the older engineering issues (not to say new issues don't exist).
I have a 02 C4S that is a blast to drive, but really cannot be put anywhere near its limits on public roads near civilization.

[petevb]

Originally Posted by Optical TDI

I'm narrowing my search to a 996 turbo or a early 997. Looking for opinions and expertise suggestions on which way to go. Obviously very different cars. I do currently run in HPDE groups about 4-5 times per year and will use the 911 for that too.

Some questions you need to ask yourself:
Is this also a daily driver?
How capable a driver are you?
Will you modify the car?
Is this a long term "keeper" car, or will you swap after a few years?

In stock form a rear wheel drive 997 will be perhaps more involving to drive, especially at the track.

Unlike a turbo, however, the street 997 gearbox, motor and suspension are not designed for motorsports use. With a turbo (or GT3) there is a clear upgrade path to get track worthy bits- more camber, rebuilt gearboxes (steel synchros, different ratios, etc), etc. The "street" 997s were simply not designed with this adjust-ability or abuse in mind, and it's not supported for track use in the same way, so with enough track use/ focus the answer is inevitably to swap to a GT3 rather than "stretch" the street package.

Of course the 996 turbo in stock form is far from my favorite car, and is sometimes accused of being to isolating (boring) to drive despite the speed. It was really designed to blast from city to city on the autobahn in any weather- in this situation a noisy, "exciting" car is not what you want for hours on end. In the US at legal speeds, however, this roll doesn't really exist.

On the other hand the turbo does have the components designed for motorsports use, and thus it's a car that could grow with you and be maintained forever. For a "keeper" car a turbo can be lightened and converted to 2WD, making it (with other tweaks) into a GT-2+ (never accused of being boring). If you go with a track focus it will be as quick or quicker than anything you'll likely be capable of using, but of course you're moving some ways away from a daily driver at that point.

Just a few things to consider in your decision- horses for courses and all that.

[m110]

You never mentioned your past experience with 911s and what you like about them--that'll help hone down your expectations for these two really different cars. Some other thoughts;
996 turbo regular maintenance will be more costly, appearance, there is potentially a good 5 years of road time between these two models, if you go 997 you might want to seek out one with a 91A engine rather than a M96 (99-08).

[MT930]

turbo

[450knotOffice]

Drive both and then decide. Personally, I like the 996 Turbo over any NA 997, but you are not me (or anyone else on this board).

[Zef]

Go with the 996 if you can endure the Japs look.

[plain fan]

Good advice so far from the users on what to consider for track versus daily use. I keep moving up in 12 year increments: 66 912, 78 911, 90 C2. I've also driven a 01 996 TT and NA 996 but have yet to drive the 997. I really recommend driving both and going from there. The turbo does feel entirely different from a NA car but ultimately you need to make the decision based on your needs and desires. I know the 996 GT3 is currently a bit higher than your price range but it ultimately could be the best decision for you. I have a very good friend that has recommended the 996 GT3 above all other forms of "modern" 911 variants if you want the best mix of track use and daily driver.

[Optical TDI]

Thanks for all the input. To answer a few questions...

Would be a daily driver? Ideally, yes it would. I do have a 1987 Jeep Wrangler to drive in the snow and my wife's Odyssey for the family outings (3 and 6 yr olds). Currently I'm driving a 2007 RX8 as my DD, which I do drive in light snow with snow tires of course.

How capable a driver are you? I have about 12 track days under my belt. Mostly through NASA. I run at level 2 in NASA or intermediate with SCCA. I've driven the following cars at Mid-Ohio: 2006 Audi A3, 2007 VW GTI, and the RX8. I'll never go back to FWD, that's for sure. Other autos I've owned: 280Z, 3 RX7s (one was a tubo), and a modified WRX. I still have a lot to learn at the track, but I'm very comfortable now compared to the first 2-3 track days.

Will you modify the car? Most definitely. I do all work myself with the exception of motor and tranny rebuilds.

Is this a long term "keeper" car, or will you swap after a few years? Hard to say, but I have a bad habit of wanting a new car about every 2 years.

You never mentioned your past experience with 911s and what you like about them. I have very little driving experience with 911s. A friend let me borrow his 1987 911 cabriolet for a weekend, so that's the most I've driven one, which was probably only about 150 miles. No track experience with one. I grew up with one in the family. Grandpa bought a 1973 911E new and he sold it in 1990 with only 17k on the odometer. I was only 18 in 1990, so it was not in the cards for me to buy it. I've admired 911s my entire life and have always wanted one.

Now, here's another option: I could keep the RX8 as my DD and buy an older 911 such as an SC for $12k. There are even some 3.2s at $15 or under with high mileage of course.

So, here's were I'm at now. 1) sell the RX8 and buy a NA 996 for $25k (and $ in reserve for things that may break), a Turbo 996 for $35k, or a 997 for $38k. 2) keep the RX8 and buy a $12-15k air cooled, which would be great too. However that would be 4 cars and only a 3 car garage.

Decisions, decisions...

[signature65]

I personally cant stand the look and interior of the 996. So even a turbo 996 would not be an option to me. Im on the 997 path right now. Some of the reports say the 997 "S" is as fast if not faster than the 996 turbo. Check the stats though, Im not positive.

[beepbeep]

Turbo.

N/A means "power Not Available"

[speeder]

Originally Posted by signature65

Some of the reports say the 997 "S" is as fast if not faster than the 996 turbo. Check the stats though, Im not positive.

First I've heard of that...

996 turbos are very easily, (and inexpensively by Porsche standards), modified to 5-600 HP. And boost is fun, there is no way around this. In a street sports car that occasionally does a track day, fun is the name of the game in my world.

As for the looks, it's extremely subjective. I happen to think that 996s look great w/ the turbo treatment, ie. full aero/wide body/lowered/etc. Very slippery look and very slippery in reality. I'll probably get burned at the stake for this, but here goes:

What kills me is how many people here harp on the ugliness of 996s and simultaneously praise (or say nothing) about incredibly ugly early cars that people post pictures of. Like every 911SC is beautiful or something when IMO they can look like excrement w/o the exact right color/wheels/stance/mods/etc... I'm impossibly particular w/ aesthetics and 90% of the older cars I see pictured (or for sale) look like junk to me. One man's prize is truly another man's poison, I guess...

[450knotOffice]

+1 Dennis.

[Rrrockhound]

Originally Posted by speeder

I'll probably get burned at the stake for this, but here goes:

What kills me is how many people here harp on the ugliness of 996s and simultaneously praise (or say nothing) about incredibly ugly early cars that people post pictures of....

Yeah, you'll get burned at the stake...

I'm with you, tho. The ugliness (not) of the 996 is way overstated. I don't get the people who say the 996 is ugly and the 997 looks great. They're not that different. It's like calling the 911SC ugly but saying the 3.2 Carrera is a beauty.

[450knotOffice]

I've read many comments about the "slab sides" of the 996. Interesting comments coming from people who revere the "pure" look of the most slab sided 911's ever built - the '65 to '77 models. Take a close look at the early cars guys. They define slab sided.

[Steve W]

They both make more than capable DE cars. You should decide upon what factors are more important to you as a dd/street car.

The turbo has the more powerful and robust GT1 block motor while the 997 has the 'inferior' M97 engine. However, coming from a 997, you really notice how dated the 996 styling is.

[80-911SC]

first -- how does this qualify as TECH

second -- if it is , its in the wrong forum

third -- see above

[450knotOffice]

Lighten up 80-911SC. It's all in fun anyway.

[81turboporsche]

993 tt forget the rest , my neighbor has one with 500hp and his been to the realm of 185 in connecticut god knows where but that is a timeless design and isnt seen as frequently as the 996 and 997 variants , better drive train more involved feeling and not the plasticky interior ,but i still love those cars dont get me wrong