911SC, 3.2 Carrera, & 964 Opinions!

[AB911]

Hi,
I am in the process of learning more about aircooled porsches that I am interested in. however I am pretty green on Porsche's side so I would like to ask people who have experience with these 3 models.

How do 911SC, 3.2 Carrera and 964 compare to each other? Does 964's power steering make it less enjoyable to drive compared to the other two? How is the AWD on 964? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each model? Which one do you think is the best for first time 911 ownership?

Thanks!!!

[tirwin]

Like with most things, it depends on what you're looking for.

The SC's are the most 'raw' of the 3. The 3.0 motors are great and relatively bullet-proof. They use CIS fuel injection which is an interim step between carbs and fuel injection. These motors tend to be the most expensive to modify, but depends on the year. Earlier big ports are better in one regard. Watch out for dreaded broken headstuds.

3.2's use Motronic fuel injection. '87-'89 with G50 transmission are very popular. Relatively inexpensive to chip and eek out a little more HP.

3.6's are much more refined than earlier cars, but that should be obvious. Only drawback I see is that as the power increases with more displacement the cars got heavier too.

All years have their pros/cons. This question has been asked a squillion times so do some searching on the forum and you will find more info than you can process.

Always get a pre-purchase inspection (PPI) by an independent shop that knows the older aircooled cars. When you narrow down some choices, feel free to solicit feedback and help finding a shop to do the PPI.

Lots of scams going on lately with the recent market run-up so if it looks too good to be true, it is.

Good luck!

[javadog]

CIS is fuel injection, not an interim step between carbs and injection...

The 964 with AWD is not highly regarded.

The cars got faster from one generation to the next, but they also got heavier, so your best bet is to try to drive an example of each and see what you like. It would take me all morning to type what I could tell you about the differences. Better that you should experience them for yourself.

JR

[Tippy]

Originally Posted by javadog

CIS is fuel injection, not an interim step between carbs and injection...
JR

Probably meant electronic

[Tippy]

If I could, I would get an 89 3.2 all day long. The last 911 made with the best DME chip and the G50 trans. 2nd place would be an early, big port SC 3.0. 3rd would be the 964. Too much electronics for me, but the 3.6 is hugely appealing for turbo charging I'd admit. Drop the compression ratio down, throw a turbo on it, and really big hp numbers shouldn't take much effort.

[GH85Carrera]

I have a 85 and love it. The G-50 transmission is a plus for many but a properly adjusted 915 works great and is a lighter.

Bruce Anderson was a guru of 911s for many years. His standard reply is get the newest 911 you can afford. There were improvements every year and sometimes mid-year.

I personally just don't like the looks of the 964. That is just my opinion.

My 85 is a late 85 and has the bigger CV joints and different front struts from the earlier 85s and 84s. The later Carreras had bigger dash vents for the AC.

If you live in an area where AC is an important issue, the 964 has the best AC for sure. The AC can be fixed and made to blow cold but expect to spend a few grand to do that.

The earlier cars like the SC and Carrera are easier to work on yourself if you are a DYI guy.

When I was looking for my car I knew I wanted a Carrera for sure not a SC just to get the DME controlled fuel injection and the bigger clutch and brakes.

As mentioned earlier there are countless threads on the board about it. Just start reading and make up your mind what car you want. Don't be afraid of a 915 transmission. The G-50 is better, but heavier and the 915 is just fine.

[r-mm]

Wow great to see one of these threads again! Does this mean the market is less painful and people actually have time to think about which air cooled 911 they want ??

I drove all three when shopping and came out of it loving all of them and resolved to buy on condition. Ended up with an 87 3.2 and very happy with it. Not a bad option among them in the looks, performance, reliability, value department.

Editorializing that may have nothing to do with your preferences:

If I were going to get an SC I personally would look for an early 78-79 with the bright anodized window and door trim. To me this is a cool combination of the later 3.0 motor with a great 70's chrome trim vibe. A real sweet spot. Otherwise (sorry lots of people) I see nothing but upside to motronic fuel injection over CIS. Also the early cars often came in fantastic color combos. Petrol blue SC with bright trim and cork interior anyone? Yes please.

I drove a 964 C4 and loved it, a lot of people dont and or hate the complex but incredibly sophisticated and genuinely 959 related AWD system. I believe it will come into its own and people will see it for what it is. Unfortunately these cars aren't much of a discount anymore like they used to be, but I would not shy away from them.

Have fun!

[r-mm]

Oh yeah I almost forgot, I have been DIY maintaining my 3.2 for years and it has been a joy, not too expensive, no gotcha parts... EXCEPT THE HVAC. It is nothing but god awful. Well let me revise, the VAC is awful, the H is fine. New England winters, I'm toasty in the cabin after 5 seconds of driving, take that water cooled "normal cars". The ventilation - not even the AC - is just plain stupid. 90% of the year I'm fine, but for instance this weekend in NYC (yes I drive in NYC sometimes) I was in slow traffic, sheet flowing sweat on account of pathetic ventilation. Fire prone fans that are expensive to buy (and fire prone again when replaced). That is a vote for the 964 which has a better HVAC system, albeit one with some "gotcha" parts of its own like the HVAC 'head unit'. Bottom line: HVAC is the one (and only) place an air cooled 911 lacks as a practical sports car.

[AB911]

Thanks for all of your feedback. Since I want to do the work on the car myself it is better to go with a car that is mechanically simpler which I believe turns out to be SC, and they are relatively inexpensive. I really don't care about mods because I am pretty sure I won't try to do mods on the car except some cosmetic touches that I think will make it look better. If i finally decide what car I want, I will definitely get a PPI. Thanks!

[r-mm]

To be clear I wouldn't say the SC is mechanically simpler than the 3.2. CIS is... a bit confusing. I've owned non Porsche CIS vehicles and can't say I loved tinkering with it. Motronic is not flawless but trouble shooting is a bit easier and there are tons of generic parts. You can replace the majority of the motronic sensors for a few hundred bucks and they're good for a long time. Besides that the two cars are more alike than they are different.

SC is a fantastic car and you're right, they do tend to be slightly less expensive.

Check out the tobacco car just posted to classifieds - with offers for a 944 trade (!?)

[tirwin]

Originally Posted by Tippy

Probably meant electronic

Yep.

[tirwin]

Originally Posted by r-mm

To be clear I wouldn't say the SC is mechanically simpler than the 3.2. CIS is... a bit confusing. I've owned non Porsche CIS vehicles and can't say I loved tinkering with it. Motronic is not flawless but trouble shooting is a bit easier and there are tons of generic parts. You can replace the majority of the motronic sensors for a few hundred bucks and they're good for a long time. Besides that the two cars are more alike than they are different.

I would agree with that. The CIS system is not bad. It just seems like there were some engineering decisions at the end were made for passing emissions requirements. Those things make sense when you consider the era these cars were made. I've had a lot of fun getting my '83 back to the way it was intended to run. Learned a heck of a lot thanks to this forum. Some people enjoy that kind of thing, others don't.

[Bill Verburg]

CIS is modulated by handling fuel and vacuum it is basically a mechanically regulated system and is not particularly precise.

Motronic is electronically regulated and is far more precise

of the 2 I prefer Motronic by far

transmissions, 915 when everything is right is fine, G50 is just a better trans and far easier to live w/. The main negative of g50 is that it is a bit heavier. Of the 2 I prefer g50.

SC has a 3 liter CIS motor 180hp in US trim 204hp in Row trim
3.2 has 3.2 liter Motronicmotor 207hp or 217hp depending on year in US trim and 217 or 231 hp in RoW trim
964 has 3.6 liter Motronic 250hp in all versions

weight depend a lot on options but 3.2 is ~200#+/- heavier than SC and 964 ~200#+/- heavier than 3.2, all can be lightened considerably

964 has much better suspension and brakes

[monkeyodeath]

I got a 3.2 because I had a bit of prior experience working with Motronic cars. Got an '86 because of the better vents and lower seat position. My experience with earlier forms of EFI is that they can sometimes require significantly more work to troubleshoot and fix, whereas by the time of Motronic things were pretty straightforward.

Didn't really feel like the G50 was worth the premium it's fetching these days. The 915 is quirky, but once you adjust it and learn to shift it, it has a nice old-school feel and isn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be, especially when driven in anger.

The 964 was beyond my budget and didn't seem as easy or affordable to work on.

But the biggest factor was that the '86 I found was the cleanest, best-maintained car I could find in my budget. I imagine this should be the most important factor.

One thing that you need to consider is that the newer cars, especially the 964 and 993, were much more modern-feeling vehicles, with major suspension, power, HVAC, and interior design upgrades.

That wasn't really what I was looking for -- I wanted an old-school 911 with all the sounds, idiosyncrasies, and funkiness of an old car. I kind of dig the odd transmission, questionable interior layout, and hilariously convoluted HVAC controls.

But I can also see how those things might bug the hell out of someone. Really, it comes down to what kind of 911 experience you're looking for. The SC and 3.2 cars are fairly similar, but I'd definitely try the 964 first to see if maybe it's more up your alley.

[AB911]

Originally Posted by monkeyodeath

I got a 3.2 because I had a bit of prior experience working with Motronic cars. Got an '86 because of the better vents and lower seat position. My experience with earlier forms of EFI is that they can sometimes require significantly more work to troubleshoot and fix, whereas by the time of Motronic things were pretty straightforward.

Didn't really feel like the G50 was worth the premium it's fetching these days. The 915 is quirky, but once you adjust it and learn to shift it, it has a nice old-school feel and isn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be, especially when driven in anger.

The 964 was beyond my budget and didn't seem as easy or affordable to work on.

But the biggest factor was that the '86 I found was the cleanest, best-maintained car I could find in my budget. I imagine this should be the most important factor.

One thing that you need to consider is that the newer cars, especially the 964 and 993, were much more modern-feeling vehicles, with major suspension, power, HVAC, and interior design upgrades.

That wasn't really what I was looking for -- I wanted an old-school 911 with all the sounds, idiosyncrasies, and funkiness of an old car. I kind of dig the odd transmission, questionable interior layout, and hilariously convoluted HVAC controls.

But I can also see how those things might bug the hell out of someone. Really, it comes down to what kind of 911 experience you're looking for. The SC and 3.2 cars are fairly similar, but I'd definitely try the 964 first to see if maybe it's more up your alley.

Just by looking at 964 you can tell its more modern and has less vintage feel to it but yeah i have never driven any of them so i guess i should go first drive them and who knows I might not even like 911s when I drive one hahaha but I think it's kinda impossible for me not to like 911s. I love the look and the history of the car at least to this moment.

[G450X]

One thing I will add is that early SC's ('78-'79 U.S. spec or ROW through '83) were really quick - Car & Driver recorded 5.5 in the 0-60 dash on a '78, and it was a Targa (I think they are slightly heavier than a coupe). An engine rebuild with a few modifications (Max Moritz or high compression P&C's, 964 cams, SSI's & free flow exhaust) yields a even quicker SC.

SC's are generally more reasonably priced and if a few items are addressed (rubber centered clutch, pressure tension timing chain tensioners added, exhaust head studs replaced being the big 3) and they have seen reasonable care, they seem to run a very long time with minimal upkeep.

The later Carrera series is arguably better in most respects, but they tend to fetch higher prices so their value is commensurate with their price.

The 964 has really jumped in value recently so much (Singer influence?) that I tend to discount them as a bit overpriced, but they are a bit more modern then the old pre '89 series.

I purchased a high mile (160k) '82 SC five years ago and besides a few normal repairs for an old car (I rebuilt two brake calipers, replaced the steering bearing & ignition switch) it has been very reliable (and normal maintenance of course). That car fires quicker than my two much newer BMW's.

If I had a decent budget, I'd probably go for a late model G50 equipped pre '90 first, then an '85/'86 Carrera or a '78/'79 SC (or ROW model), and the 964 last mainly due to their higher prices. I've read that you don't want a 964 C4 if you are on a budget.

On a tight budget, I'd pick an early SC first then a later SC or an early Carrera.

[Josh D]

Originally Posted by G450X

One thing I will add is that early SC's ('78-'79 U.S. spec or ROW through '83) were really quick - Car & Driver recorded 5.5 in the 0-60 dash on a '78, and it was a Targa (I think they are slightly heavier than a coupe). An engine rebuild with a few modifications (Max Moritz or high compression P&C's, 964 cams, SSI's & free flow exhaust) yields a even quicker SC.

Just adding early heat exchangers (doesn't have to be SSI's, but those are nice), 2 in muffler, setting ignition timing to 30-32* @ 6K, running premium gas, and adjusting the CIS a little richer to the early or ROW big port 3.0 CIS and it will be noticeably quicker. Gains similar to what motronic guys get with a chip. It won't pass emissions in a state that does visual inspection though.

[AB911]

Yeah I guess with my budget I should go for a SC, I like the earlier ones since they have chrome trim around the windows but I really don't care. I don't think i will mod the engine since I live in CA and I have to deal with smog every 2 years. I just want a stock one, I am not gonna take it to a track or something, I just wanna take it to canyons and maybe a couple of rallyes/Road trip and I believe the stock engine setting is sufficient to do that.

[cjannelli]

I've owned a 731/2 T, 83sC, 89 targa and currently a 87 coupe. The SC was nice. The 915 trans were tight though a little quirky. Learn how to double clutch. The 731/2 T was the most nimble. The most enjoyable definitely my 87 coupe. The G50 is really nice. Though they gained weight, the Carreras are great! I believe Bruce Anderson always advised the newest and "best" car was the one to go after. The 964 never appealed to me.
My .02$ worth
Chris

[RedCoupe]

I'm an eleven year 964 owner, but I've driven an SC and have thousands of miles experience driving a 3.2 Carrera (had temporary custody of a 1986 for a few months) so I can add a few comments. If you driven any one of these cars and then immediately jump into anothe one (I have!) the similarities are unmistakable. They are all great cars, and I would be totally happy with a nice example of either an SC, 3.2, or 964. There were good improvements in suspension, braking, and the electrical system in the 964. The power steering is great, and the additional torque of the 3.6 is really noticeable when you're driving on twisty mountain roads. But, the 964 is always going to be more difficult and expensive to maintain. The 3.6 has the ability to leak oil from EVERYWHERE, and many of these cars have had total engine overhauls way before they were needed simply to correct the leaking. The Dual Mass Flywheel is expensive and doesn't last forever, and there is the well known issue of leaking cylinder to head joints on early 964s that can cost thousands to correct. IMO a nice SC or 3.2 would be much simpler and cheaper to maintain and still very fun to drive.