Is a 75s really this bad....
 

I have been looking for a decent 911 weekend driver for about three weeks, would love a 70-73 model but havent found anything in my budget yet.

I have come across several 75 and 76 911s that look great, sound great, ride great, and fall right into what I want to spend. However, when doing some research I read all about the 74-77 pre SC models and how horrible they can be and expensive to fix, but are they this bad........(SEE LINK)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFybEn-hSiw


After watching this I am totally confused, this guy basically says stay away from all 75's.

I would like to know what you guys think, especially those that own a 1975 911s

A 75 that has been taken care of and has the Carrera tensioner update, thermal reactors removed, possibly updated fan and with service records could be an excellent buy.

They can be great cars, ask me how I know!
A lot depends on what has been done to the car. By now, most have had improvements made to address the problems with the mag case--something you should be sure of when shopping. If possible (where you live) remove the dreaded thermal reactors and keep the engine cool with an external cooler. There really is no reason why a mid year car cannot be as long lived as anyother, just do your homework on the preventative/corrective work done.
One other thing--these cars have such a "bad rep" that outstanding examples can often be picked up at very decent prices. Know what you want, what you're looking for, and do your homework.
Other middies, chime in now!

Welcome!

Every model series 911 have had their own shortcomings. The 2.7 models too, for reasons you have seen. But as with all the others, there are good and bad eggs. Most important to have a non biased, professional PPI done.

Thanks for the replies,

Since never owning a 911 I could only go on what I read and find on the INTERNET, and that one reference on "youtube" wasn't very assuring. Thanks for helping the new guy out, hopefully I'll have a 911 by Christmas, but not going to rush into anything either.

Rmally,

Pick up a used copy of Porsche 911 Buyer's Guide by Randy Leffingwell. It's a crash course (sorry for the poor choice of words) in the different models, changes, shortcomings, and improvements to our beloved marque.

Happy shopping!

No - it needs more than that.

It needs to have new case studs PROPERLY installed of the correct kind.

some will need to be align bored!

etc.

A Canadian or PNW car is likely much safer to buy.

For most people they are risky things to buy. If cheap enuff an unknown one is a good buy....

Just b/c the motor was rebuilt does NOT mean it was done right. I've owned two 2.7L motors. The nicest one had the guy before me pay an unscrupulous shop (WW AutoWerk in Eugene Oregon, owned by Bruce Watson) completely rebuild, update and strengthen the motor. That plus other work totalled about $70,oo and I have the receipts from the PO before me. 2 later owners after me, I am told that the shop badly screwed up the engine work. YET, I had the RECEIPTS from the PO. He got screwed and everybody after him was harmed as well.

So be sure the shop is a top notch, honest one.

I agree with Ossiblue and all the other posts above, with exceptions. But you have to be SURE. Or be able to calculate the risks inherent if you aren't.

Another thought... You can buy the '74-'75, and drive it: 1) forever... 2) til you get tired of it and need more power... 3) til it pukes on you and you need to rebuild/replace it.

I bet you could get a daily driver engine (2.7, 2.2 w/carbs, 3.2) for 3k-5k. You could get a REAL good engine, even a 3.6 or something tricky for 8k-12k...

I wouldn't buy the car on the video if it was a 75, 80 or 86...not the finest example of a 911 from any year. So instead of stating that fact, "the expert" rants and raves about it being a '75 making you believe that is why the car is in a sad state of repair/condition. It's a typical attitude, as an owner of a mid year, you get used to it.

There are really nice mid years out there, if you find one don't get scared off.

Mine has been on the road for 33 years, has had 2 owners (I'm one of them), has complete maintenance/original purchase/log book documentation/has given me no more problems then you should expect from a 33 yr old/165,000 mile vehicle and above all is still a blast to drive.

It's a Porsche 911, awesome cars no matter the year, just find a nice one and go for a drive.

I drove a 75 911S as a daily driver for two years and the car never missed a beat. Lots of power, light weight and that awesome 911 sound... drool.

I think the biggest problem with the mid-year cars is the constant repetition of the usual internet horror stories from people who've never even owned a 74-77 911. Consider this: sure the cars had some failings when new but the newest one is currently 31 years old and if it's still motoring on in as-delivered configuration from the factory, that's one heck of a good car! Every other one has been rebuilt, upgraded with the necessary bits and pieces and generally sorted out in the past 30+ years by caring past owners that have either suffered from a breakdown or were scared enough to do the preventative maintenance to avoid the breakdown in the first place.

It's time to give the mid-years the respect they deserve. Do you think the folks over at the Ford Model T forum regurgitate the same old b.s. about avoiding the 1908 model because the wooden brake linings commonly caught fire at the race track? Of course I'm making that up but seriously, time does heal all wounds, including those inflicted on the mid-year 911 on the production line.

Get a PPI and enjoy the car.

Am I ranter or raver? - don't think they'd let me into a rave...

I agree with the stmt. above, BUT you have to be SURE. Otherwise get an SC. Besides the much more reliable engine, they are fully rust-proofed with Thyssen steel, a high end galvanized steel.

Only you can evaluate the risk premium that should be applied. If you happen to own a line boring machine, then the risk premium is quite small... If not, then it is greater and the car MUST be priced cheaper to make up for that. If you happen to get a no-issues car for a low price, you are in luck.

And, yes, you can certainly put another motor in it when the old one dies. That costs $$ tho.

Do not be misled by people whose mid-year ox has been gored - they will surely fight to the [engine] death to defend their cars...

BTW - the '74 is the king of the mid-years -- if you can find one that is cheap b/c of the other, worse years you are in great luck.

My second 76 with a 2.7 had 165K miles on it with I think (1) engine rebuild. My first needed a rebuild with 65K on the clock. That engine (now rebuilt - properly) is in my 914-6. So yes, if you like the narrow bodied cars, the mid-years can be a great value. Like the others above have said, there are certain things that need to be done to the engine & documented.

Not sure if the 75 had a galvinized body, 76 & 77's did.

all were partly galv. to different degrees - a really late '77 might be fully galv.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=343381&highlight=galvan izing

Nah me neither :)

Agree with you for the most part; I would just add exercise caution no matter what year you are considering.

Get a PPI, ping the BBS for info and read everything out there to lower that risk level.

That's right - Although I think my first 76 missed the galvinizing step. It was a very expensive piece of swiss cheese - but a great learning experience. At least that's what I keep telling myself.

I think I'd like a narrow body with a 3.2 next...

it all depends on the condition of what you buy. i know where a $2500 77s is now, but needs work. on the other hand, my 77s has been a good car. i have had it for about 5 years. only running repairs ( to keep it on the road) have been the main fuel line, the CD/coil went bad, put in and MSD unit and an internal T-stat. i just drove to nashville, 600 miles each way. its been a good car. i have been driving it daily because my truck needs tires. the parts are not more than the SC's, maybe some are harder to find. mine now has 108k and runs fine.
the cheaper you go, the more probblems the car has, but that is the case with ANY year. another thing about the mid years, CIS. i like it. good gas mileage and very reliable. but it is somewhat complicated and you need Fuel gages to really do the work yourself.
i look at it this way, i got a GREAT car for $7500, if/when the motor dies, i will look for a 3.0.
the one on the left.

i thought the 77 was the first year for galvinized and the last year for the lighter bodies, so they may be a little more desirable, plus, didnt porsche use dilivar studs in the 77 so that motor may be better than the earlier ones?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1228246057.jpg

My '77 has 191,000, rebuilt at 145,000. I'm guessing the reactors we removed a long time ago. My compression is between 180 and 185 on all cylinders.

As far as the galvanized body & chasse, I am under the understanding that only
77's are the year of the mid-years for galvanization.

I've been driving this car for more than two years and NEVER had any problems.
I've continued to update it over the years and it's a blast to drive and everyone asks about it.

One thing... Very nice narrow body mid-years are becoming increasingly difficult to find because they were either butchered with rear flairs or never taken care of.

Get a PPI done!! And look for rust. This will be your best bet.

Maybe even have an experienced Porsche friend look at it from an owner’s eye.

Just my 2 cents

This conversation seems to come up about once a weak around here..There are only 2 ans.
! - Have ALL the eng . up dates been done ???? (spendy)
2 - Do you have the $$$$$ AND KNOW HOW TO do them ( this is not a " if" question ask me how I know ).
An other words price wise you can go up side dwn in a big hurry

I had a 74 that I robbed the engine out of for a 914-6 I had years back. the engine had 74,000 miles on it. I tore it down for inspection and put new bearings and rod bolts,rings etc while I was in there and that was it. It ran great before and after and to my knowledge is still out there bieng enjoyed. I had bought case savers but did not put them in as none of the studs were close to pulling and decided to take the chance as I do all my own work anyhow. the engine never did have thermal reactors as it was a 74 so this may have been the reason for a good running engine I don't know but someone had also put the 11 blade fan in and the carrera tensioners before I owned it. just check for rust and if all else fails drop a 3.0 in it and drive it with no worries.

I did my research way back when and made the (correct) decision to avoid mid year cars and buy an SC instead. No regrets, none at all.

I do however find myself drawn to the narrow body nowadays, if only to stand out from the crowd. I'm a liteweight freak too, and the early cars were lighter after all. I've driven one or two mid years and have come away impressed each time.

I'd really like a stripped out 1977 (galvanized) with a 3.0 or 3.2. That would be a neat car and puhlenty fast. I've been looking though, and good narrow body cars are not easy to find, and not usually all that much cheaper than an SC or even a 3.2.

I wonder what kind of numbers were made in 1977 compared to the later years ?

Even I would bristle at the thought of buying a mid year when I could have a (better in every way) later model for the same money.

Take heed of the advice here. There are good mid years out there, but they won't fall in to your lap. Unless you are itching for a narrow car, then stick to the later models.

My $0.02