Just drove a 911SC for the first time - questions & observations
 

I've been shopping for a daily driver air cooled 911 and have driven a 1989 3.2, 1991 C4 and now a 1982 SC. I drive about 5k miles a year in New England but I bike to work so I don't drive every day. I loved the torque and polish of the 964 but a lot of looking has me thinking they are priced too steeply at any given condition for my ~$20k budget. The 3.2 was the first car I drove and it left me a bit cold - maybe because it was tired maybe because my expectations weren't adjusted correctly as it was the first 911 I drove.

The SC felt fantastic. Felt light, nimble, solid, simple. My main problem with the 3.2 was the the steering felt heavy at speed and it didn't seem to want to turn in. The SC on the other hand felt just perfect at speed and not unreasonably heavy in the parking lot. The 915 was not a sea change from the G50. No offense, but coming from an S2000 which has a bolt-action shifter and just begs to be slammed from gear to gear, both G50 and 915 are a bit more shall we say deliberate in their nature.

A few questions -
- Should the 915 shifter feel limp when in neutral? This one did not return to the center 3/4 position after I pulled it over to the left 1/2 position, it just flops around. Since this part exists: Pelican Parts - Product Information: PEL-SEINESHFT i'm guessing that one must modify the 915 to get such action?
- I know pre 964 A/C is a joke. What do I budget to make it not a joke? Is there a preferred solution? I want to be able to take the wife places in June without apologizing.
-Any words of wisdom before I seriously consider buying an SC, parking it outside and driving it year round? The heat did not seem to be an issue, and it was about 30 today. As I said above, I don't drive every day but do drive in all conditions. I self-wrench (doing a bare metal resto on an Alfa GTV) but I don't want a car that will distract me too much from that project.

Hi welcome to our forum. As you may have seen there is lots of expertise here.

It is hard to say. In the handling department, depending on the state of the suspension and how it is adjusted, you can find vast difference in cars of a given model and year behave.

I have never used a Seine shifter but the 915 transmission is "vague" at best. This and other parts can make it better but it will never be like your Honda.

Looks for some posts by Jim Sims on this topic. His threads and oterhs can help you find the way to better AC.

You can do this but even a new 3.2 is over 20 years old and the weather does not do the exposed parts any favors. That said, many can and do drive them year round.

Sc's are great. The 3.2 has some issues as far as I'm concerned and some of them are valve guide wear. I've heard if this issue and now have seen it firsthand twice from friends that got cars with around 100k on them. Also the dme seems to strand people so have extras on hand. Also weight. They're just not as light and nimble feeling. Especially the newest if the 3.2'a but those do have the better trans. The 964 has nice power and some other issues that I'm just not as familiar with. I love the older 911's.
the a/c will set you back at least 2k to make useable. Just figure on that or more depending. Other than that, they just don't require much attention other than oil and gas. Make sure the car oil temps are under control and its buletproof.

I think any of the cars you mentioned can be awesome or a nightmare.

Condition-Condition-Condition.

History, records, mods, PPI.

Or find a pelican friend and go together.

915 feel a lot better with the gate shifter and all new bushings. A lot better...

My 2 cents.

The SCs are lovely agile cars with the problems of the earlier cars ironed out and without the extra complexity and lard of the later Carreras.
If you're really looking for a pure driving experience and relatively simple DIY maintenance , an SC will serve you very well. I'd buy another over the later cars anyday (that I could get away with it :))

Of course you need to source a loved one , not a beater.

A well set up 915 is a joy that matches the retro driving experience perfectly.

I've an '83 sc and have a seine shifter mod. It simply puts a spring load on both sides...they are only loaded from the factory so do not 'seek center' so well, especially on a 30 year old car. It works well.
Every model has its issues but most of the SC's surviving have been addressed....failing timing chain tensioners (get a car with an upgraded hydraulic tensioner system....most SC's have them now).
Have a proper PPI done with a head stud check and leak down test to tell you where the engine is approximatly...I bought a high miles car with history and excellent maint. I've done 10k miles this last year and its run flawlessly. Mechanic told me we shouldn't look at opening the motor up for another 50k @ 275k miles. So 5 more years at this pace.
I like the car as it has a foot in both camps...modernity and the 60's 70's mechanically.
I've trimmed excess weight down to 2410 (no gas) and it is much more nimble and responsive.
BTW, anything around 200 hp and that weight moves nicely and you can actually use the HP and rpm range without looking at hard jail time.
Whenever I check out ebay for fun it is 911's 1964-83...no latter.

I recently had to make the same choice after selling my 74 Targa that I owned for 28 years. I eventually went for the 87 Carrera instead of an SC and paid a few more $$. But, it was important to have the G50 transmission, the hydraulic chain tensioners and the new injection system... Altogether, those things are well worth the money. As was previously mentioned, the handling issues vary from car to car and probably are not indicative of any model that you mentioned.

:D

I just got an SC for my daily driver. I got a chance to try it in the snow here in Denver and it did ok. Looking into a set of snow tires. I sure do love the thing though!

your handling observations are consistent with wider tires (or inflation being off a bit)

C4 has a lot of repair issues but is good in snow - do you need that?

SC has CIS fuel injection - it is susceptible to Et-OH issues and will not make the power of the 3.2L with EFI, esp. if you change out the chip; OTOH it has no brain to worry about

try driving another 3.2L car - an earlier one that is lighter and has a 916 trans. instead of the G-50

keep shopping - you may even be able to return and buy that SC if you want it

Did the 3.2s run wider stock tires than SCs?

What are Et-OH issues?

Good advice on driving another 3.2. I'm a believer in the oft repeated advice to buy on condition more than model. I know I don't want a targa or cab, but besides that I'm looking for a car in good shape. I'm still browsing 964s but the added complexity and potential for expensive upkeep is a big deal. All the 964's I've looked at the owners have told me they've had their A/C head unit replaced, at least one re-sealing, expensive valve adjustments (although i can do that myself) hydraulic accumulator and or ABS problems etc. They are clearly a solid platform and a huge leap forward from the 3.2s but at a cost.

Funny, I'm in the exact same situation as the OP. Learning about the same Carrera and SC for a daily driver, I also bike to work and live in a cold climate. And I've wanted a 911 since I was a kid. Keep us posted on what you end up with!

+1

These are 20-30 year old cars. Don't judge a model by test driving one specimen. In this mix of, I think any will fit your needs fine. Go find the best one you can afford.

I was deciding between the SC and a 3.2 Carrera this past summer. I would have been happy with either, but I ultimately found the '86 that I now have. It had sport seats and a factory short shift kit, both options I liked, as well as a certificate of authenticity. It was in near stock condition, other than a stereo replacement. It was being sold by a Porsche dealer as a consignment, and had a long paper trail of repair and maintenance. It was by far the best one I had seen.

You should drive a number of them to get a feel for what the 911 is all about. My 3.2 is very nimble, thanks to a recent suspension rebuild. Many of these cars will need suspension components replaced, which will dramatically affect the way they handle.

The 915 transmission is fine, as far as I'm concerned. I can tell it needs the bushings replaced, and I have all the parts to do that, but I didn't have expectations going into the purchase that it would shift like anything other than an old Porsche.

Whatever you do, get a pre-purchase inspection done by an independent Porsche mechanic. Unless you're highly experienced, you have no way of truly knowing the condition of the engine without one.

It's been said that these are $20,000 cars, no matter what price you pay initially. I bought mine for $18,000, but soon realized that the suspension was pretty well thrashed and bit the bullet to have it all replaced at a local shop. Bingo...my $20K Porsche. But other than that, I've been able to handle everything else that's needed work and it's been pretty simple, thanks to all of the advice from the Pelicans.

I don't need a car to get around everyday, so I drive mine for errands occasionally, but mostly for fun. Like today, for example. :D

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/g...-16-06_252.jpg

The '84 3.2 I bought drove and handled the same or better than the SC's I looked at. SCs and Carreras were both offered with the same tire choice - either 15" (185/70 front, 215/60 rear) or 16" (205/55 front, 225/50 rear). That said, I suppose you could have driven an SC with the narrower 15" tires, compared to the 16" that was most common on the 3.2s. Or (as mentioned above), the 3.2 might not have been well set up or had low tire pressure.

The differences between an SC and my '84 3.2 are minimal. No power seats, and still the lighter 915 transmission. Just more displacement and (arguably) better injection. The Eth-OH Randy mentioned is regarding ethanol-gas blends. The CIS injection is more sensitive to that stuff.

I also installed the Seine kit in my car - in combination with the factory short shift kit and new shift bushings, I'd say my 915 shifts quite well. But nothing like a modern sports car like the S2000.

In sum, I'm very pleased with my 3.2. Mine has 157k miles on it now, top end done (due to valve guides) at 110k, transmission at 145k. A solid car that I drive year around, rain or shine.

The key as others have stated is get the best car you can find. I have a 83SC but it is far from stock. Complete suspension makeover and lowered/corner balanced. Tossed the CIS and went with PMO carburetors then SSI heat exchangers with a M&K 2 in 2 out muffler. Fiberglass front/rear bumpers with a glass ducktail she handles/moves quite nicely :D. The 915 transmission can work quite well if all bushings are in good shape and its adjusted properly but will never feel like a modern box but that's part of the charm of owning an older classic. I love my SC it is " just old enough " to have the raw sports car feel that I like. AC can be brought up to modern spec/performance but it costs some $$$. There are several vendors selling upgraded parts for DIY or you can have a pro do it just depends on your skill set. I went with a huge belly condensor plus one in the rear wheelwell and it works fine. Good luck with your search and get a PPI on ANY Porsche you think of buying, it is money well spent. SmileWavy

If you're looking for performance and limiting your search to US market cars (as you probably should), then I would suggest a 78-79 SC or 84 Carrera. The earlier examples of both series had better performance, IMHO. Later cars were more refined. If you want A/C, I would limit the search to 86 and later Carreras, with their improved ventilation system and factory equipment oil cooler fans.

If you get into a really good A/C system, I think that $2,000 is low, especially when you start making oil cooling upgrades in earlier cars. Although Porsche offered A/C on the 911 from the start, they were never well engineered systems. Or maybe they were well engineered for the moderate summer heat in central Europe.

Personally, I think that A/C is bad for all 911s, bad for the dynamics of the car and bad for the cost of ownership. A RoW Targa with no A/C and the 203 hp late production 930/10 motor is my choice after owning 10 911s and a 930, all made between 1966 and 1983.

I have never owned a 3.2, though I have driven many of them. I do like them a lot and think that for the typical owner the DME system is superior to the CIS. The G-50 weight gain is modest and makes no difference in the dynamics of the car, while being a much better (more reliable, especially!) transmission, IMHO.

Targas are not as pretty as coupes, but as you know from your S2000, a drive in a convertible after dark or early in the morning is the perfect remedy for a hot and humid New England summer day.

Steering on a 3.2 should feel the same as a 3.0. Tire size and choice, rim size and alignment all make a difference. All 911s have sensitive steering.

P.S. I would not drive a pre 1990 911 during a New England winter, even if I was will to let it rust out (which I am not!).

My thoughts exactly. SC's are at least 30 years old now and I really don't think they would hold up to the chemicals used on roads up there.

In the fall of 2011 with my shiny, new-to-me 996 in hand I sold my SC to a long time 914 owner in Washington, D.C. to use as his daily driver. 8 months later in an email exchange he offered the SC back to me as it wasn't working out as he planned. It has been in my garage ever since.

Moral of the story there is I don't know what your commute is like, but these cars may not be the best choice. At least think about a 996. They have great power, terrific heating and cooling, and pretty easy DIY, since you are into that.

So you've driven a 3.2 with a G50 trans. You should at least give 84-86 with a 915 a shot before making your final decision.

I have both a 964 and the SC... both cars are a pleasure to drive. In the SC (915 tranny) I need to shift slow to drive fast, but I find that part of the pleasure of owning such a classic. That small swing to the right and then to the left to engage 3rd (or else you can't find it) is sweet. It is all this little things that makes ownership such a thrill.

One other note on A/C: I didn't catch where you are located, but I have found that A/C is less necessary in my 911SC than it is in other cars I've owned. Not having a huge chunk of hot iron in front of the car or hot radiators seems to make a difference in the air that flows in and around you.

I live in Los Angeles, near the beach, so the climate is mild. I do work downtown though and have done many trips to the valley (hot). With my cloth Recaros, the only time I wished I had A/C was when I drove to Riverside in July (no matter how you dice it, 105* heat is hot) or once when I went to the valley in my suit/tie. Otherwise it usually been a non-factor.

Good point about cloth seats. I have factory cloth seats (pinstripe velour!) in my Targa. Very few US market cars came with cloth seats.

You really don't buy them for the A/C... none of these work really well until the A/C units of the 964 and 993... at least in mho of course...

You can't go wrong with a well sorted SC. Take your time and learn as much as you can before you buy. As others have stated, by now, many surviving SC's have had their problems addressed. You just need to know what to look for, tensioners, updated A/C, etc. Good luck. Al

Good thread topic for a recent experience I had.

I drove my cousins late 70s SC up to this house for the holidays (it was down in my area getting some work done). It was the first time I drove it, and really the first time I drove an SC.

Compared to my 84 3.2 Carrera Coupe I was really surprised at the difference in throttle response and acceleration. My 3.2 feels noticeably quicker.

I don't know if there is a difference that I'm not accounting for... my 3.2 has an Auto Authority chip etc, but I was surprised at the difference.

The SC drove great - though it seemed like you really had to let it build speed and be efficient with braking and not scrub too much speed. Granted I wasn't pushing the car and I was driving it on public roads... but like I said, I didn't expect that noticeable of a comparison between the two in responsiveness.

Handling wise and everything else though the SC was the same old good feeling. :)



BTW his car is in much better original condition compared to mine - here are the cars together at Thanksgiving.
http://i430.photobucket.com/albums/q...5842E8AEEC.jpg

Thanks everyone - great responses.

I live in New England and do drive year round but do not commute by car and often go 7 days without driving. If its truly nasty I can just not drive or we can take the S2000 (on Blizzaks). I plan on using the 911 how I use my current daily - which means I do need the A/C from time to time. When you need it you need it and I'd hate to not take the 911 to a summer party because we'd be sweaty when we got there. I just found a great A/C FAQ on Pelican Parts and agree with their basic principal that there is no reason, besides the long refrigerant lines, that a 911 can't have the same a/c as any other car of the era.

I'm sold on the idea that the shifter isn't a honda's and do like the idea of adapting my driving to the car and learning its quirks... but for me the 911 is such a great car because of its usability. Space for luggage, airy greenhouse, sensible ride height, reliable electronics and motor - and I see acceptable HVAC as an extension of that. I just need to factor it into the purchase price. Tacking $2k onto a clean SC's price does often bring it up to 964 territory, but that's not an apples to apples comparison because I do think the SC will cost less to run.

I understand the need for a PPI - I passed on a beautiful C4 because the leakdown came in in the 20's-30's and the owner didn't take my offer which allowed for a top end reseal.

One SC I'm looking at had a full motor + partial trans rebuild from a good shop along with having many other wear parts replaced. The only thing that gives me pause is that it had a respray for which the owner has a $1400 receipt for. I suppose its possible that this was an acceptable driver quality job, but its probably pushing it, especially for metallic paint. The car is for sale in a part of the country where labor is cheaper than New England, but it does sound like a low figure.

I have owned a 1984 and 1987 Carrera. The 84 was new...it never shifted nearly as well as the G50 trans, not even close. So the 87-89 Carreras were my focus when I started looking two years ago. Worn suspension parts and tires can hugely affect handling and driving feel. Good luck with your search.

For me, those 70's colors like your cousin's car are one of the main attractions of the SC (and to a lesser extent, the 3.2). It is quite hard to find a 964 in anything but black, white or red.

how about finding an SC with a 3.2 in it...I have one, also has the sienne shifter installed...get the light and nimble sc with a more powerful engine...

Yes. Love my SC with the 3.2SS.

I own an '84 Carrera (for almost nine years now) that's been lightened down to 2500 pounds (and it's a Cab - GASP!). Over the years I had the suspension rebuilt and lightly modded a bit - with stiffer components all around - and I have a somewhat track oriented alignment. My car feels VERY light and nimble.

I agree that many (most) of the stock Carreras I've driven feel a bit heavier, less nimble, and a bit more insulated from the driving experience. My guess on that is the suspension setup (for the heavier, more numb steering feel) and the sound insulation in the car. My car has most of the insulation removed, but the other Carreras I've driven have ALL of theirs still in place and it amazes me how much that stuff insulates the sound of the car from the driver.

Drive a few Carreras - don't be afraid of those that are lightly modded with suspension and weight removal - and you may be surprised to find a real, old school gem.

I put $2K into the A/C on my SC and it gets me through AZ summers with no oil temp issues with the 28 row brass oil cooler.

Anyone here on Long Island or have a PPI shop they can recommend?

I love my '78 SC (RoW). And once I get it back together, it will be a daily driver again. But not during the winter/salted road months.

On the SC's there are no fender liners so road dirt and moisture will build up behind the rear fenders where the rocker panels terminate. (kidney bowl area) and on the top of the front bumper shock mounts. And since I'm spending way too much time fixing rust in those spots (and the associated while-I'm-in-there projects) I will not allow road salt to be applied to my handy-work.

Plan on an A/C upgrade. Budget can vary based on how much of the original system you want to keep, if any. I went with a Griffiths set up and am happy with the results. Griffiths

I drove a friend's 3.2/915 and found it to be very similar to my 3.0/915.

As others have suggested, get a good PPI, buy the best you can afford and plan for repair/replacement of many 30+ year old parts.

One thing rarely mentioned is the superior A/C vent system of the 87/89 cars. My stock, but 'tuned' A/C is good to 90* & OK to100*, but I think that is pretty rare. Even though one person got the A/C to work for $2K, do some further checking, that sounds low.

Despite having a G50 car, I think the 964 is superior in many aspects and it looks 'vintage' to most non P-car enthusiasts. BTW, Porsche didn't keep torsion bars for 40 years because they are superior, but because they couldn't afford to update the suspension until the 964. (I'm rushing for my flame suit.) Check the Renn 964 board.

I have no purist or other problems with the 964. I love everything about it except the high price of entry and higher price of upkeep.

Point taken on the G50 improved A/C - worth considering. I'm actually driving an 88 tonight and will report back (but not on the A/C, as its 30 degrees here).

If you get a Targa you have the option to take the top off.
That's cool.

Another note about Long Island cars.
South Shore cars may have water damage from the storm.

Check out the North Shore.
You might be able to find a car that has always been garaged and not driven in the winter.

I found one that was not driven in the winter and was garaged but my 1980 SC Targa has 200,000 + miles.
The owner took great care of it and updated the AC.
Since I just bought the car I have not used the AC and the car is garaged till Spring.

Only change on the AC from the SC and 84-85 Carreras to the 1986-1989 Carreras is placement of the vents. As for the SC-Carrera argument, that has been going on for years. To me they are both great cars. Hell, even the middies are fine cars. I would worry less about getting an SC or a Carrera and concentrate more on getting the best car you can find for the money you are going to spend.

I lightened my '86 up considerably including ditching the entire AC system. I like the access I'm afforded in the engine compartment. Along with the backdating, all you see back there now is intake and engine.

As for AC in the summer? I went out and bought a Boxster. :D

these are interesting threads - what I get out of it is:

Each person here really likes their car

buying the right car is better than buying a specific year car - a good car in any year is a good car, and a turd...is a turd

and lastly - It's not a life long decision...if you change your mind or your taste changes in a year or 2,3, or 20 - change years or modify your car to fit your new/changing needs

964 = no classic Fuchs, therefore not superior.

A bit tongue in cheek there, but to me the Fuchs look is part of classic 911 ownership. I didn't even look at 964s for this and other reasons.

I can sign off on this sentiment. I do love fuchs and also love that wheel selection requires no brainpower. Only deciding if you polish the petals or not.

While 964 bumpers are a brilliant evolution of the impact bumpers they are not for someone who parks in the real world like me.