Yet another: First timer buying advice for a 911 (SC or 3.2?)
 

Today, I got the idea of buying a Porsche 911.

Timeless styling.
Something that I would enjoy spending money to repair, since I plan to keep it a long time.
A weekend driver that is DIY friendly. Something I can tinker with as I learn more about cars. Are 911's DIY's well documented like BMWs?
Plus, there are 3 local "exotic" indy mechanic shops in my local area, so that base is also covered for "heavy duty" work.

Some extra power on tap is nice, but I drive like a middle aged adult, and don't need the finer points of performance.
Most any "sporty" car is plenty fast enough for me.

I'd rather pay more up front for a killer specimen (lots of service already done, garage kept, PCA type enthusiast owner, etc)
This is ALWAYS a better deal, in the long run.
The last car I got had $8000 of work done in 3 years, and the seller recouped almost none of it. Great deal for me!
So, maintenance history and buying from a properly funded enthusiast owner carries huge points for me (compared to only looking at 1987-89 3.2's)

If I bought a well-sorted $20k used Porsche, I would still set aside another $10k for repairs in the first 2 years.
But, I still don't want a mechanical nightmare. In fact, if 911's are repair nightmares, tell me now, and I'll gladly just stick to my BMW.

Before getting sucked into the nuts and bolts differences in the various models,
can anyone share some high level insight into owning a 911, in general?

This would be a 3rd car, and not a DD, but I do hear they are a fun car to drive, and seems to have a rep as a “bulletproof” car that is somewhat DIY friendly...

Any major caveats?
More or less reliable than people think?
Major limitations of the car?

Is there a good "Before you buy your first 911" link somewhere?

Pelican Parts: 911 FAQ Version 2.2

Ok, based on this article, there are some concrete reasons to go with the 1984+ 3.2 Carerra over the 911SC.

• His answer to this question was simply "if you can afford it, get one with Motronic Fuel Injection" (those'd be the ones built in 84 and after).
• The 1984 and later cars used oil-fed tensioners which solved the problem.
• 911SC exploding rubber clutch

So, I've done some quick reading on "starter Porsches". The best bet in terms of cost/value/reliability seem to be:
1) 911 SC (1978-1983)
2) 911 3.2 Carerra (1984-1989) 1987+ has the G50 transmission

How come the 1989-1994 Porsche 964's are almost NEVER mentioned?
They look almost identical to the SC and Carrera 3.2s.
What are the main differences?

It seems like the preferred advice for the first timer is to look for a 1987-1989 Carerra 3.2 with the G50.

But, is there some "forum groupthink" that clusters around this very specific model and dismisses other perfectly decent options?
I don't need the "idealized" 911 package combination. Just a good one. Or at least, not the nightmare one.
3.0L vs. 3.2L? *I doubt I'll even notice a performance difference.
915 vs. G50? * If the 915 gearbox feels fine to ME, then it's ok to buy? *I doubt I'll be heel-toe shifting like a racecar driver.

For example, would it be a mistake to pass up a killer example of a 1984-1986 911?
Also, is it a mistake to dismiss the 911SC entirely?
If I find a killer specimen of a 911 SC, would it be silly to pass it up?
Or do I just not want to go there yet, as a first timer?
Is it best to avoid a car that is a full decade older than the 88-89 ?

Also, it seems like the 911 SC's are significantly cheaper than the 3.2's
I have seen decent looking SC's in the $10k range, but not the case with 3.2's.

Browsing fun begins.
It's funny to see posts here from 2004 with people buying 911's for $13k.
I guess these cars have appreciated over the last decade.

Now, it seems most sell on Ebay from $17k to $25k
porsche 911 in eBay Motors | eBay

It looks like this was a good deal? $18k for a enthusiast owner 911 with a bunch of recent service done. That is the type of car I like to buy:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-cars-sale/610700-1987-porsche-911-carrera-3-2-coupe-g50-incredible-condition-18-900-a.html

I am going to keep reading these forums for more advice.

There are books you can buy. Go to Amazon and use "Used Porsche" as search parameters. I bought a book by Peter Zimmerman and one by Randy Leffingwell. Both books were useful in helping make my decision. And what the books said have been borne out by experience. Buy and read those books. Then, come back and focus in on the questions the books didn't answer. That's where these guys really do have it all.

And yes, a good 3.2 is going to run you in the mid-upper 20s. A good driver-quality car can be had for a bit less.

The SCs and 3.2 cars can both be very reliable, having owned both I'd pick the one in the best condition with a nice maintenance history. That doesn't mean you can't have a surprise big bill if something breaks, it'll happen with any 30 year old car.

The trick now is going to be finding one...

The 964 and 993 are also fantastic cars but a bit pricier to purchase and maintain. I own a 993 now but really miss the simplicity of my old SC.

If you're coming from BMW ownership, here's one great bonus: The 911's cooling system is dead reliable. Compared to the BMWs I've owned, my 33-year-old 911 (a dry weather daily driver) is more durable, more reliable, and more fun.

I guess you can get the best of both worlds and get a 3.2-Powered SC like mine. I do think though that if you can afford the G50 models you will be just a touch ahead. Just remember the common wisdom that a nice SC is way better than a clapped out Carrera 3.2.

No coolant changes , blown head gaskets or timing belt replacements. :)

i owned a SC and the carrera's 3.2 hands down are a better engine due to the motronic engine management. the rest of the car is she same. The 964 and 993 are totally different cars, look the same but suspension and engine/trans. very different.
from sc to carrera to 964 to 993, they are all evolutionary advancements. some good things some not. get the best one you can afford

I had the exact same dilemma before I bought my '87 3.2. Was looking basically for a solid $15-$20k car regardless of year. The only thing that concerned me on the SC is the CIS injection. Normally it works great and is very reliable but a Porsche race shop I consulted with said they can be finicky to make right and fewer people these days really know how to work on them (the CIS system). Being a "self" mechanic, I opted for the simpler Motronic cars. Stumbled into a beauty '87 G50 and never looked back. Paid $17.5k one year ago for a great, solid car. The G50 is very nice to shift too... drive both and decide which you can live with. It may lack the "character" of the early 3.2's but hey, shifting is a no brainer in it.

Pound for pound, I don't think you can go wrong with any SC, 3.2, or 964 if it is well-maintained and sorted. The key differentiators fall along the spectrum of comfort/livability. The older the car, the less creature comforts you will have. If you don't mind a less-refined suspension, mediocre HVAC system, and finicky transmission (915), the SC could be the perfect car for you. It gives the most raw driving experience and feels most connected to the road without filters of the group you are considering, IMO. The 3.2 just improves on everything over the SC, but gets slightly softer. And the 964 is the best balance of old-school 911 and modern comforts (AC, ride, power amenities, etc).

Given that this is your first 911, I would recommend a 964. It is still an amazing bargain and only going up in value. You still get old-school 911 look and feel and greater livability/comfort. Best thing you can do is go out and drive each model and you will quickly hone in on the one that is right for you.

With some minor changes, the chassis and running gear is quite basically the same from 1964-1989. Evolutionary refinements in interior, engine, and transaxle are the primary changes, along with increased weight. The 964 I had felt like a much more major change to Porsche 911 tradition than between any of the other 911 models I had. Agree with Motronic over CIS. But... using that logic though, don't overlook a 964 C2 with improved Motronic as well as larger engine, dual plug, and IMHO, a better suspension. It depends on what you want!!!

oooooooh slippery slope. 991 so far is the best

I am a newb to 911 cars. I had an SC and LOVED it, but the CIS was a huge challenge to get to run right, AC and Hvac were really weak but they worked. If tons of mini projects on a car don't bother you then you will have a true drivers car. I think a well sorted 74-77 is a great buy too.

If you get a car with CIS, consider switching to carbs.

I don't think these cylinders are meant to be re-sleeved. Also, valves are never hand ground.

Guessing the sales person got a little windy and misinterpreted (edit - probably without evil intent) information but these are the things some reading and questions here can help equip you with well founded questions.

I think there are enough votes to avoid the CIS, and stick with 3.2 from 1984+, as per that link above. I will need to try the G50 vs. 915 shifting and see if it matters to me. Thanks for the advice so far.

While there is some validity to the CIS system, it would be foolish to pass up a good SC. It would be foolish to pass up a good Carrera with a 915. Any good 1978-89 911 will put smile on your face and is worth owning.

I personally wanted a 915 car and ended up buying a '84 Carrera. I've never had a car I liked more. If I had to do it again, I'd like a 78-79 SC with no options.

Dean

sure, a SC with carbs or EFI would be great, 915 with a fresh rebuild would be great. for your first car with 100k miles on it, 3.2/g50 unmolested would be the benchmark. Unless your a real good 911 mechanic with some leftover cash

I searched with an open mind (SC/3.2/G50/915/964) and am glad I ended up with a 3.2. It happens to be a G50, think a 915 would have been a-okay. Glad I don't have to fiddle with CIS and can chip my car if I want to, etc. 964s are stunning cars, I drove several, but there is more that can go wrong with them. Not talking about AWD, am talking about ABS, HVAC head units, etc. Wouldn't rule them out. Doesn't hurt that 3.2's are looking like sterling stores of value right now. Have fun, drive tons of cars.

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!