1978-1989 911SC / Carrera 3.2 vs. 1989-1994 Porsche 964

[PushingMyLuck]

How come the 1989-1994 Porsche 964's are almost NEVER mentioned as a good starter 911 as the other 2 kinds are.

They look almost identical to the SC and Carrera 3.2s. Are they just too modern? What are the main differences (assuming detractors) between the 1978-1989 911SC / Carrera 3.2 vs. 1989-1994 Porsche 964 ?

[Drisump]

IMHO I think a 964 would still be a good entry level 911. But it is quite a bit more more complicated beast. Many have 4wd, all have power steering, ABS and quite a few other modern ( ie. complicated) conveniences that make it less user friendly as a DIY platform than an original 911/ SC/3.2. Cheers

[PushingMyLuck]

Ok, so it's going to be less user friendly, more prone to repairs, and probably cost more, since it's newer.
Good to know, I'll stick with SC/3.2 era.

[zimmer266]

There are some older threads around with similar questions. The vBulletin search is somewhat less effective than google for these threads.

3.2 carrera vs. 964

964 with a fresh motor at 90,000 I drove was pretty badass. On the other hand, current 3.2 driver here, and not interested in changing that out.

[Nick Triesch]

Some people love the 964 but to many, it just looks strange. The front bumpers look huge and boxy. Then came the 993 and Wow! The front and back really are pretty.

[PushingMyLuck]

I was talking to someone about Porsche shopping, and said the 1980s SC/3.2's are about $17-$20k.
The reaction was interesting, as he assumed that was very high since you can get a newer Boxster or 996 for about the same price (low 20s).

How do people justify paying $20k for a car that is from the 1980s when you can get a car from the 2000's for about the same price?
Is it just supply/demand? Or are the older cars actually better? Newer cars bloated and heavier? People just want track cars and are willing to pay more for less "crap" ?

[pegasus9]

The SCs and 3.2s were hand built and are special.

Then came the retired Toyota executives to consult Porsche about cutting costs. Hence the 996/boxster. Mind you the Boxster did save the company, but used ones are bottomed out now.

Sure they are more modern but are they unique? No.

[Reiver]

Originally Posted by PushingMyLuck

I was talking to someone about Porsche shopping, and said the 1980s SC/3.2's are about $17-$20k.
The reaction was interesting, as he assumed that was very high since you can get a newer Boxster or 996 for about the same price (low 20s).

How do people justify paying $20k for a car that is from the 1980s when you can get a car from the 2000's for about the same price?
Is it just supply/demand? Or are the older cars actually better? Newer cars bloated and heavier? People just want track cars and are willing to pay more for less "crap" ?

Air cooled 911's are not about modern...if that's what gets you going buy a Miata...a Boxster is a nice vehicle as is the Cayman...but they are water cooled variants without the proper DNA in my opinion.

[rattlsnak]

i've had a 964 and i actually loved it, but it is quite different than the earlier 3.2/SCs. With the power steering, coil overs and ABS and an AC system that works, it really is a much different car.

[PushingMyLuck]

So, the 1980s cars are actually more expensive than the 1990s and even 2000s era Porsches?

Are the 1980s cars in full blown collectible mode to explain this inverted price curve?
Or are the newer Porsches just universally considered awful?

You will never see this sort of price inversion in the BMW market, for example. 1980s go for $3000. 1990s go for $6000. 2000s go for $8000-$12000. etc.

[Nickshu]

The 964 is a totally different car. When it came out Porsche said it was something like 75% all new under the surface. The 964 is basically a beta-test version of the 993 without the multi-link rear suspension.

The chassis is totally different. Rear torsion bars are gone, went to factory coilovers. Biggest jump is engine displacement to 3.6L and availability of AWD.

Personally if I could buy any air cooled 911 today it would be a 964. They retain enough of the classic 911 look/styling but had much more modern engineering making it more drivable and easier to live with such as Airbags, ABS, more modern suspension, engine management, A/C, power steering, etc. (let's face it, the 911 prior to the 964 was basically early 1960's technology, less a few upgrades over the years).

[Nickshu]

Originally Posted by PushingMyLuck

You will never see this sort of price inversion in the BMW market, for example. 1980s go for $3000. 1990s go for $6000. 2000s go for $8000-$12000. etc.

Have you checked the prices on restored/classic BMW 2002 or a 3.0csi lately???.....big bucks.

[911dean]

Originally Posted by Nickshu

Have you checked the prices on restored/classic BMW 2002 or a 3.0csi lately???.....big bucks.

Or a E30 M3????

Spot on... a torsion bar car is not about modern.

[Reiver]

Originally Posted by PushingMyLuck

So, the 1980s cars are actually more expensive than the 1990s and even 2000s era Porsches?

Are the 1980s cars in full blown collectible mode to explain this inverted price curve?
Or are the newer Porsches just universally considered awful?

You will never see this sort of price inversion in the BMW market, for example. 1980s go for $3000. 1990s go for $6000. 2000s go for $8000-$12000. etc.

No offense but used Bimmers have always been on the low end of resale...not my observation but a friend in the car business.
Yes, air cooled Porsches will not be made again, ergo the attraction by those that love the marque and its history. Water cooled Porsches will cont. to be made...and will also hold their value I suspect.

[Reiver]

let's face it, the 911 prior to the 964 was basically early 1960's technology, less a few upgrades over the years).

and that is the exact reason they sell for more and are desired by those that love the original marque experience.

[PushingMyLuck]

So, the SC/3.2 price is driven entirely by enthusiast demand? And lower supply.
Almost 3 decades of Porsche all have same price!
It's just hard to grasp that you can get a 1999 911 for less than the version that is 15 years older.

Porsche : 911 911 in Porsche | eBay Motors


I guess the 1980s ones are now considered collectible like 1960s muscle cars.
Totally different market.
Enthusiast buys 1980s cars to work on and restore, and will pay $20k for a good survivor.
Rich guy buys new one for $100k.
So the 10 year old Porsche is the bastard child that has no market?

[911dean]

Originally Posted by PushingMyLuck

So, the SC/3.2 price is driven entirely by enthusiast demand? And lower supply.
Almost 3 decades of Porsche all have same price!
It's just hard to grasp that you can get a 1999 911 for less than the version that is 15 years older.

Porsche : 911 911 in Porsche | eBay Motors


I guess the 1980s ones are now considered collectible like 1960s muscle cars.
Totally different market.
Enthusiast buys 1980s cars to work on and restore, and will pay $20k for a good survivor.
Rich guy buys new one for $100k.
So the 10 year old Porsche is the bastard child that has no market?

Unfortunately Porsche missed the mark on the 996 variant. Take a look at the headlights.

Yes, torsion bar cars are just plain cool and will always be in demand. It's very refreshing to drive a car that requires you to drive it.

Dean

[Nickshu]

Originally Posted by Reiver

and that is the exact reason they sell for more and are desired by those that love the original marque experience.

I agree totally. I just think the point should be made that by the late 70s the 911 had topped out in its development aside from the addition of DME in 84 and the G50 later.

My point is that by the time of the late SCs the technology in the 911 had peaked. Compare even a 1982 928 to an 82 SC. No contest the 928 was way more advanced as we're other cars out there at the time yet the 911 stayed basically the same for almost a decade longer. Mostly because of timeless design, reputation, and the uniqueness of the 911...Porsche was able to milk this up until the late 80s when the steam ran out and they needed something new. Was the 964 not enough of a change? The sales numbers may speak for themselves. Interesting conversation nonetheless.

[pingpong]

first its hard to compare them, i like them all. Owned/driven them all and although the 993 is the best of bunch, personal i prefer the 1987/88 Carrera 3.2 G50 as the most desirable to own and keep handsdown.

[1986 930]

I am not sure that I would call a 964 an entry level car. It is as much to buy and more to fix. The auto heat/AC can be annoyingly expensive to repair although it does actually keep you cool in Texas Summer and will bake you out in winter without having to modify it.

The 89-91 964 cars leak badly from 100-150k miles and have to be re-sealed to fix. Essentially you have to rebuild a perfectly good motor. Mine leaked on the exhaust so it was a matter of fix it or it would set itself on fire. They are great cars but cost as much to service/repair as my 930 does. I bought mine with 67k miles on it and traded it at around 150k miles.

If I were to get another one, it would be a '92-'94. They were more comfortable but the performance was almost the same as a 3.2 Carrera because of the extra weight. They had power assisted clutch and steering so they were a little easier to muscle around town.

A 3.2 Carrera with an AC upgrade kit would be just as comfy to me. From what I have seen the prices of 3.2 Carrera's and the 964's are about the same. I like the look of the older car and repairs/service were cheaper on my '84 Targa.

I think that the '86-'89 Carrera's are the most bullet proof and reliable 911's you can get with the potential to upgrade is why they are holding value.

Comparing to a 996 or Boxter is apples to oranges. I am thinking on a 996 with a Tiptronic for my wife. She has a difficult time with a standard due to an injury to her knees so that might work for her and it is a nicer car to be in.

So I think the 996 is nicer to be in, an older 911/964 is funner to be in.