I fondly remember my experiences driving a long hood car but I also remember a friend,s 1967 S which already had a rusted out front subframe in 1973.
The newer cars are easier to own and drive daily. I really don,t completely understand the major appreciation of basic early cars like say a 1969 T
I don,t even feel the 993 is an old car when I drive it ,just a damn good car generally.

I plan to drive the piss out of mine and it won't bother me to take it past 150,000 miles. I'm not saving it for the next guy.

Then buy a well-maintained one that is already over 100k so you don't eat the depreciation.

Or perhaps buy a well maintained one with 100k.Drive it very little and watch it change from high mileage to average mileage as it ages.
Years ago I bought a MB , 18 months old with 45000-50,000 mi. for my wife and used as a second car. I got a deep,deep discount because of the high miles. When I sold it 4 or 5 yrs later it had 75000 on it and was deemed average mileage.
I think I paid 21k and sold it for 20k. Depreciated $1-2k for 4-5 yrs use.
An average I 1/2 yr car would have had 15 on it and would have been about $30K,4 yrs later it would drop to say $23 .Depreciation $7or 8.
I,ve done the same thing buying a big outboard motor from a daily rental place in the Keys.
When purchased new about $13k. (2007 model yr)
I paid $4 because it was 2 1/2 yrs old with 1000 hrs.
Sold last year with 1100 hrs for $5.5
My period of ownership in both examples changed a vehicle from below average to average.
Both examples were in excellent condition and still had some warranty remaining when I bought them.

Back to a 993. I bought mine with 100k 5 yrs ago now have 111k.

A friend bought and sold high mileage 911,s in the early 70,s . ( As little as $600 and never more than $4k) If he couldn,t make any money by flipping them he would part them out. Places like Pelican didn,t exist and used parts were valuable as new dealer was the only other option.. I watched a Pcar dealer charge over $400 for a battery in 1973 Ha Ha
BUT What we considered high miles was a 67 with 75 k or a 69 with 50k . I would kill for one of those " high" mileage cars today.
But they were also pretty tired in some ways that the 993 doesn,t seem to show.
Early cars were rustbuckets, later aren,t, early cars usually had cheap vinyl interiors,
mild steel exhaust not stainless. Carbs needing frequent attention ,plugs which often fouled and most were magnesium engines that started to burn some oil as they approach 100K.
hard starting in cold weather and useless heaters.

Hoping the 993 starts to appreciate , bigtime . Expecting it really . If mid year cars(2.7) , the accepted low point are rising I expect the 993 is/should too.
Just waiting .

I already own one - for some reason I don't really ever think about depreciation. I keep cars for a long time. I believe people over think cars like these and never really enjoy them. I had a neighbor who had a showroom condition Pontiac GTO and it never saw sunlight. No joke! Now there are some good reasons to preserve certain cars but will you ever really enjoy it?

Of the dozen Porsches I,ve owned since about 1973. The only new one I bought , was a 1986 944 turbo. (I wanted to buy a used 930 but my ex felt we should buy a new car with warranty if spending that much.). Traded the 951 for a used 1986 911 cab (theft recovery )
The rest were all used 911,s of all generations.
The 993 I have now is probably the best of the bunch and I bought it for less than 1/2 of what that 951 cost.
I did briefly consider a new 993 in 1995 but passed and kept the 3.2 Carrera I had then ,several more years.

Any more opinions on where 993 values are going.?

I think about equal to a typical long hood.
3x a midyear 2.7 car(not a ROW MFI).
2x an SC and
1.5 x a 3.2 (915)
1.25x a g50 3.2 or 964
Anyone else?????

The '95 993 was a $100k car in Canada (according to someone I know that bought his new) but only $60k in the US.

Something like that as I recall. But remember the Cdn $ was worth around $.70 US in those days. And 1995 was after GST. too I think so a currency and tax diff out the door.
I sold a 1966 Mustang convert I had around 2001/2. I couldn,t get $16 Cdn here and sold it on Ebay for $16 US which translated to about $23 Cdn.

I also sold a 1986 3.2 Carrera Cab with sport seats, lsd,new top and about 50,000 mi. I think I sold it around $28 Cdn. in 1997. Which was probably about 19-20 US.
It would be worth more than that today even with the dollar at par.
Both these sales are why I,m wondering how long I should keep the 993.
Being retired now I,m watching my assets a little more carefully

A 993 is not an 18 month old mercedes.

It was a collector car from the start -- and the vast majority of owners are not putting mileage on them like used mercedes.

You can buy a high mileage car cheaper, but the "average" mileage of 993s are not going to "catch up" anytime soon -- maybe a decade or more.

I'm with you about buying a car to drive -- not as a showpiece. Which is why I suggested starting with a higher mileage car. Putting 25k on a 100k 993 is not going to put a huge dent in its value. Putting 25k on a 75k car probably will.

Will 993s start appreciating on par with earlier models? Maybe.

Maybe not a MB or a 993 but I recall looking at a high mileage 1986 951 which had been leased by some salesman and had about 60000 mi on it when only a year old. If parked it would become average in about 10 more years as you said. It had a similar deep discount attached but not enough IMHO. A one or two year old 993 if you found one would suffer the same because it,s being compared to a new one.

And about catching up My 95 993 has about +/- 5.000 per year. A similar 993 with 75k has about +/- 4000 per year . They are both low mileage cars by most definitions now since an average family car probably goes about 12000 per year. If driven in an average manner as a daily driver a southern US car which is driven year round should have about 250,000 mi by now, approaching 20 yrs old.
When looking at a used 911, miles have never been as important as condition except when the car is only a few years old.

You are still trying to apply passenger/daily driver car rules of thumb to cars that don't follow the same ownership and usage patterns.

The "average" car may get driven 12.5k per year, but that doesn't make a 17 year old 993 with 120k a "low miles" car.

The median mileage on a 993 is probably in the 75k-80k range. That means the "average" cars got driven less than 5k miles per year through their entire ownership.

Mileage always matters to some extent. Less so on long hoods that are either projects, or have already been thoroughly reconditioned, if not fully restored. Mileage is generally unverifiable on those cars. But if you had a verified, unrestored, original, good condition long hood with ~60-75k -- that mileage would matter a LOT.

But back to 993s. Mileage matters significantly on these cars. On cars of similar condition, the difference between 60k miles and 120k is $10k or more -- adding +30-40% to the selling price.

smart money is chasing the 964 right now.
wait and see.

Agree I used to see them mid teens (even low teens for a Tip.)last year but no longer.

There is one local for $17k with 130k kms. Silver/gray interior.

Canada does usually lag behind the States some.
I saw a longhood targa advertised in Toronto 6 months ago I thought that was a good deal in the teens .Which it was, but that was before I realized they (pre 73)were climbing so fast.

Great insights. Is the 993 reputation for top end work (~$5k) at 80k warranted? Assuming typical examples are around that mileage, maybe better to look for one that's had this work done.

Also, is there much significant difference 993 vs 964? I'm looking at these two models and am on the fence.

Biggest difference between 964 and 993 is the 993 rides slightly more comfy and quiet and that valve adjustments are a thing of the past with the latter car. I've got Eibach springs and Bilstein HD shocks and struts on my 993 and it still rides very nice compared to the older models. Exhaust system was revised. 1996 adds Varioram.

I think the 964 looks much nicer with the classic front fenders and rear quarters. The 993 looks nice but a bit portly from certain angles.

The early 964 up to 91 I think had some head gasket leakage issues(actually no gasket was used) most of them have probably been rebuilt by now.
Almost all 911 engines have had valve guide issue concerns back to the 2.7 at least.. I,ve never owned one that suffered from excessive valve guide wear. Worn ones burn oil thru the guides.
My 993 with 111000 mi. doesn,t burn or leak more than a quart between changes. My last 3.2 was supposed to be prone to premature guide failure and no problems either but I sold it at around 60,000 mi so who knows there,
The 96 up 993 has a different injection/ ignition system called OBD2 and the check engine light will come on and may fail smog if the top end is burning any oil. The earlier 3.6 engine is running OBD1 which doesn,t trip the CEL if it,s using oil. I don,t remember when OBD1 started so I think but don,t know for sure that all the 964,s are OBD1.

The sensitivity of OBD2 partly explains the prevelance of top end repairs in 96 up cars( most but not all 993s as the 993 came out in late 94 and the change was for MY 1996

I like the looks of the 993 but some don,t mechanically they are very similar.

Bill Verburg used to have a several page discussion of the differences on Pelican in the 964/993 section if it,s still there.

How about the prices on the '97 Turbo S? Would love to trade my '76 Carrera 2.7 for one of those, especially in the gun metal grey.

Thanks guys. I think the $5-10k premium for the 993 over the 964 is a bit steep given the similarity. Is it worth it?