I had the same dilemma and wanted one I could fix up.....that was until I found a mint '84 with 50k on it. My 915 shifts perfect, but I've never driven a G50 to actually compare them.

Buy the best one you can find/afford, you won't be disappointed.

Group think? Exactly what is going on here regarding dogging out CIS.

SC's run richer. This equates to longer life span of valves. All 911's have strengths and weaknesses. IMO the SC represents the highest bang for the buck. 915 transmissions are thought inferior to g50's as well. Gimme a break. A nice SC is a SWEEET ride.

Good luck. You are over-thinking this in a big way. I daily drive my SC and enjoy it.

First. Find your mechanic.
Second. Look at LOTS of cars.
Third. Get a PPI.

Do all the above before you buy a car.

Larry

Me too, and I agree. And K-basic CIS is simple to work on, adjust, and trouble shoot. No electronics to fail.

I see just as many 'no start', 'rough running' motronic threads on Pelican as I do CIS.

The biggest problem with CIS cars are those that sit for very long periods of time. Those that are driven regularly don't suffer problems nearly as much.

Buy the best SC/3.2 Carrera you can afford and then just worry why everyone is wondering what the silly grin you always have is about.

I ended up with an '86 for a few reasons.

I had decided I wanted a 3.2 Carrera to avoid CIS and ideally I wanted a G50 car. However, at the time the G50 cars were beyond what I really wanted to spend and the '86 I found was in great shape, local and only had 64k on it when I got it. The G50 cars in similar condition were about $8k more than the '86 I found.

Yeah, shifting on the 915 isn't the greatest but that can be improved significantly by making sure the clutch is properly adjusted and adding a Wevo shifter and coupler. Even better, there are people who can rebuild the 915 to feel great. I decided that if the transmission in my car had problems, I'd just follow that route.

911sc vs Carrera - Rennlist Discussion Forums

Scroll to post #15

What he said :)

BMW timing belts and water pumps: that which psychic scar tissue is made from.

I was thinking along those lines too and ended up buying a wonderful 1980 SC Targa. If you find a good deal on a well maintained SC, buy it. They're great cars.
Dave

First, I loved this post #15, the objective logical comparison of costs in that link.
He was addressing exactly what I meant by n00b's in any car forum tending to being steered towards ONE exact model (87-89 3.2) when several others could easily fit the bill.
Like he said, it's not Model T vs. Mustang 5.0.

...while the typical 3.2 car with a G 50 will cost $5,000 - $8,000 more than a comparable condition SC to buy.

Does this still hold true in 2013?
On a general note, how has the SC/3.2 price market fared over the last decade from 2003 to 2013?
Ups, downs? Straight up? How has it done post-2008? Curious if anyone's got a pulse on that price history.

Check collector car blue books...Hagerty etc. on what the market has been doing. I do know that SC's have been noted as a 10% yearly gainer of late by collector car watchers and I'd guess 3.2's are close by.
Post 15 was written by a Porsche shop owner with great experience and is a well respected ind as it comes to nuts/bolts/the real deal.

I have Sports Car Market magazine pocket price guides that go back to '07. In that year, for example, they listed a 911SC coupe, model 1978-1983, in a price range from $13K - 17K. They call it an investment grade C ( cars with some inherent interest), with a two star rating (somewhat overpriced today, perhaps somewhat out of favor).

In 2011 the same car was listed in a price range from $11K - 15K; investment grade C; two star rating.

In the winter/spring edition of 2013 the worm finally turned. The same car was listed in a price range from $16K-19K; investment grade remained a C, BUT the SC went to a four star rating (will outperform the market, perhaps a 10% gain in the next 12 months).

The above info is based on a #2 car (clean car with decent paint & interior that presents well). I could probably fill in some more holes, but sportscarmarket.com can also do it!

Hey Peter,
Just my luck the worm turns the year I get interested. LOL! In your experience, have you seen real life market match that book you're quoting? They were really going for $11k to $15k the last few years? Just recently cranked up to $17k?
In just 2-3 days, I have seen several 911's pop up on CL for right around $17k-$19k. Since these are illiquid cars, I think it's safe to day those asking prices are def. negotiable, especially if the sellers cost basis is low teens.

What you need to appreciate is that there is NO cost basis in the low teens. NONE. Like, ever.

OK - a freak flip here and there but you ain't getting a tight 80's 911 for $14k unless the owner is in crisis mode.

If you want to hold out for that, then more power to you. I mean it. God speed and all that but there is a barrier to entry, and that is cost for a decent car.

There are two ways to look at 911 ownership. One is from simplicity point of view, and the other is from a performance point of view. If you're performance minded, but want to stick to the air-cooled cars, then obviously each generation is an improvement over the last. The 964 got real suspension, power steering, real HVAC, ABS, and AWD options. I mean, each generation is an improvement when you look at simple performance metrics.

However - there is a simplicity to the older cars that a lot of people, myself included, desire. The simplicity has two byproducts - easy to work on (and reliable), and a more visceral driving experience. I purposely elected to go pre-964 because I didn't want to worry about power steering pumps and leaks. I dealt with that plenty on my other cars.

So - for me, the 964 with power steering, ABS, and just more stuff on it - isn't actually a better car when you look at things from a simplicity point of view. Neither is the 993 or anything newer. This is why, in my opinion, the 84-89 3.2 is the perfect 911. I think the 3.0 SC is a fine motor, but the CIS does take more work. The 3.2 is an improvement over the SC, but for me, that improvement doesn't come at the cost of simplicity as it's dirt simple to work on and fix - and seems to be more reliable. I think the G50 is a better transmission, but it doesn't take away from simplicity or the connected feel. There is an improved HVAC system in the later 80s cars, and again, doesn't detract from the connected or simplicity of the car.

I daily drive my car, and I live downtown Denver. So, the improved vent system, G50, oil cooler with a fan were all mandatory. It's my only car while my fiance has an SUV that we use when my car isn't practical.

If you plan on doing a lot of stop and go driving - I'd go 3.2 with a G50 all the way. If this is going to be a weekend/fun car - then the benefits that come with the later 80s cars aren't really serious benefits anymore - just a "nice to have." I would still prefer the 3.2, but I wouldn't turn down an SC if that were my situation. I wouldn't recommend an SC or a 915 car for anyone who drives in traffic or puts a lot of miles on the cars.

If my 911 weren't my only car (we live in a condo with only two parking spots), then I'd probably feel fine getting any 911 pre-964, stripping out what I didn't need, and making it a really light-weight fun drivers car with a loud mutha****in' exhaust. I'd never own a 964 as it's just too much complicated-ness for me.

Thanks pants. I think I get it. The prices are dictated by one thing, buyers. And the SC/3.2 has something many people want: Less. As far as the G50 vs 9145, there is only one way to understand this, and that is to drive both. I just need to wait for some local ads to pop up.

Here's one that went for $12k
Porsche : 911 Targa in Porsche | eBay Motors

yeah im not sure where the "fidle with CIS " keeps coming from .. maybe its just me . but in 8 years i have not touched my CIS even once to fiddle with it .

yeah im not sure where the "fiddle with CIS " keeps coming from .. maybe its just me . but in 8 years i have not touched my CIS even once to fiddle with it .

Are you sure this is a completed sale?

My first drive in a 911 was one with a 915. My first impression (and later other friends had the same impression) was "what a piece of crap"! This is not what I thought a 911 was!

This was in the early 90s and my baseline for comparison for old cars was a 1972 Datsun, so I think that says a lot about how unrefined the 911 (915) driving experience is if that old Datsun felt more advanced than this newer 911. The 915 tranny is a lot of work, and is primitive. Traffic it is a lot more work.


...but on a spirited drive, especially on a race track I find a 915 magic!