What do you love most about driving your classic Porsche?

[Deschodt]

Sound, smell, involvement/tactility, but *mostly* the ability to entertain at lower speeds. Modern 911s can do 80mph in 2nd gear and require a racetrack to provide a similar feel.

[wildthing]

It reminds me of my childhood and teenage years, a 69 Beetle, but the 911 is on steroids.

[Rusty Heap]

Seeing all the women flash their booobies at you.








and then I woke up from the dream

[oldE]

I don't know whether I hate you guys for bringing up this subject or myself for selling the old E eight years ago.
I loved the sound of the flat six as it caught. The feel of the 901 as it slipped into first. The cloth Recaro felt like it had been made just for me . On the road I was always amazed at the ability of engineers in the 60s to build a suspension that handled real roads. I loved discovering second gear drifts in hairpin corners would not bite.
I reveled in the reverberation of the exhaust sound as you passed through a tunnel.
It was an honest companion.

Best
Les

[Otter74]

Originally Posted by Geronimo

I watched a neat video from Petrolicious, and it got me to thinking about the question.

What makes driving your classic Porsche special, or any Porsche for that matter?

Mine is in the shop, and our relationship has been a bit temperamental. I am hoping to fall back in love with it soon.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp6opr78BWc for ref.

I love it because it's the car I'd wanted since I was 3 or 4 years old, and even after having owned mine for four years now I *still* stop, smile and do a head-swivel when I see another one go by in the city. I particularly love how visceral it is - the feel of the steering (even the kickback), the suspension, the sound of the engine, the shifter, everything. I love the "old car smell". I even find it pleasant and comfortable to drive for long stints at 70-80mph on the highway, even if my Saab is objectively much more confortable for that.

[Geronimo]

LOL, broken had stud found..... not feeling very good about this darn car. Pretty sure it's cursed.

[Macroni]

everything..... visceral experience that acctivates all my senses......

[Bill Douglas]

I love the fact it's mine.

In my teens I made the mistake of selling my Triumph 650 Bonneville Saint. So I'm not making the same mistake with this gem.

I also get the giggles when I find my 40 year old car is faster and better than a lot of new cars around these days.

[Jeff Higgins]

I get a real feeling of comfort and security when behind the wheel of my '72 hot rod. I know I can drive it with complete confidence anytime, anywhere, from a weeks long cross country road trip to a full day of thrashing it on the race track. It's the most robust, reliable car I have ever owned.

And I love chasing newer Porsches on the race track. It will still keep up with many, and out run some. I find it amusing sometimes just how long it can take the driver of a newer car to come to grips with the fact that they are being hounded by a now 48 model year old car that just isn't going away. How reluctant they are to give a point by, even with the blue flag all but being thrown at their windshields. Once back in the pits, they invariably want to know "what in the hell is that thing?", and I'm more than happy to chat them up. It's a lot of fun - especially when I'm the only air-cooled car at an event. It's happened a few times now...

[NoRush993/951]

I've had these cars 20 - 30 years and never thought of them as antiques until the neighborhood kids have recently been after me to put them in the local car shows. They seem to put a smile on the faces of many for some reason or another and stir up pleasant conversation with chance passersby.

[Laneco]

Driving Butters is a wonderously analog experience. No nanny-guards to save me, no big brother interference in my fun. Just an absolutely pure experience full of tactile driving sensation.

The spyder is almost sensory overload...

angela

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by oldE

I don't know whether I hate you guys for bringing up this subject or myself for selling the old E eight years ago.
I loved the sound of the flat six as it caught. The feel of the 901 as it slipped into first. The cloth Recaro felt like it had been made just for me . On the road I was always amazed at the ability of engineers in the 60s to build a suspension that handled real roads. I loved discovering second gear drifts in hairpin corners would not bite.
I reveled in the reverberation of the exhaust sound as you passed through a tunnel.
It was an honest companion.

Best
Les

About the way I would have stated it. But you know, the further away from 911 ownership the more I appreciate the freedom of having the bothers associated. I'm sure Paul (pwd) would concur.

But, to address the question directly and honestly, what I liked about the Ragamuffin was the Walter Mitty part. I tested the car and I tested myself.

Both passed.

[stealthn]

If you have to ask....

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I Once back in the pits, they invariably want to know "what in the hell is that thing?",.

Reminds me of an autocross I competed in a few years ago. It was a "mirror image" event. There were two identical courses laid out on the parking lot that were mirror images of each other. Both cars ran their respective sides at the same time, then you swapped sides. You ran both sides against the same car and the lowest combined time was the winner.
With my Speedster I ended up in the same group as a guy in a Sunbeam Tiger. I totally blew the guy away before the first turn. Someone came up and said, "What the hell is in that that thing, a V8 ?" I said, "No, that would be him."
I cannot believe the fun I had with this car back when it was just another old Porsche. I beat the hell out of it. Drove to work in the rain with the windshield wiper still scraping the shoe polish ID number off the windshield from the weekend autocross.
Now it's a significant financial asset and I am reticent to do anything to damage it. Sad in a way.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

Now it's a significant financial asset and I am reticent to do anything to damage it. Sad in a way.

Indeed - very sad in a way. From what I gather from them, this is exactly what drove Paul and Zeke out. I, for one, refuse. While my hot rod '72 is nowhere near the "significant financial asset" your 356's represent, it is still worth over ten times what I paid for it. And I still "beat the hell out of it" at every opportunity. The "burdens" of owning these things are only what we allow them to be.

[Rawknees'Turbo]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

. . . The "burdens" of owning these things are only what we allow them to be.

Exactly! The way I see it, these are simply machines meant to be used, and if only looking at it in a garage, and occasionally wiping it with a diaper (a clean one! ), for fear of machine damage if driven, causes an owner sadness or stress, then why own the fookin' thing?!

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

IWhile my hot rod '72 is nowhere near the "significant financial asset" your 356's represent, it is still worth over ten times what I paid for it.

In spite of what I've said, what it is worth in dollars isn't what bothers me. I have insurance. I use dollars because it's hard to ascribe value to memories.
I've been with these cars for over 40 years and have many, many memories. My son took his date to the prom in the Speedster. I raced it and autocrossed the hell out of it.
And that's just the Speedster.
When I was a columnist there I wrote many stories for the 356 Registry of my family's exploits in my '56 coupe.
When my son was 6 or so we took a road trip from Ohio to Oregon. Three people living in a 356 coupe for 3 weeks - insane as I looked back on it. On the way home, in Idaho, we stopped for lunch and gas and when I started the car to leave I heard a "thunk" and the engine started clicking and only ran on 3 cylinders. It took some digging, but I figured out that an exhaust valve had stuck open when it cooled and been hit by a piston.
I took the rockers off of the intake and exhaust valves on #3 cylinder and we drove from Idaho to Ohio in an overloaded 356 coupe on 3 cylinders.
And there was a trip to northern Canada Jerry Keyser and I took in our 356 coupes... So much that only has value in my mind, but is embodied in those cars.

[fanaudical]

I've heard pilots describe getting into their jet fighter as "strapping on the airplane". I feel the same about my 911. I get in, close the bank-vault-sounding door, click in the seat belt, grab the wheel, and it's like the rest of the world falls away and I'm part of the car. Visibility is awesome. Steering feel is tremendous - I swear I can feel gravel at my fingertips. The smell of leather/oil/fuel is comforting. Driving on twisty roads is like going for a long cross-country run, you just find yourself in that zen moment and just function without thinking....

[sc_rufctr]

I love mine because it's a lot of fun to drive and it's simple and therefore nothing much goes wrong with it.

Originally Posted by peteremsley

Don't have mine any more, but it was the smell of burning oil coming in through the vents as it drips from the un-sealable lower valve covers onto the heat exchangers.

From Peter Z on this board.
I've never had a leak, not one drop since reading an implementing this more than 10 years ago.

Something to consider. The following is an excerpt from a copyrighted work written by me on this very subject. Cheers!

A Logical Discussion:
Topic: Rocker/valve cover retaining nut torque for Porsche 911s built between 1965 and 1989.

Rocker covers evolved through four generations; (1) aluminium upper and lower (6-nut type) used from 1965-67, (2) magnesium upper and lower (11-nut type) used well into the ‘70s, (3) aluminium upper and lower (11-nut type) used on most ‘77s, early Turbo Carreras and early SCs, and (4) aluminium upper covers with heavily reinforced lower aluminium covers often called Turbo covers.

Gaskets also evolved; originally made of cork, then graphite composition, then a version with a silicon bead (lower) as well as ultra-thin, firm, self-sealing gaskets that ranged in colour from green to almost blue. Hardware, always 8mm, stayed the same with one exception – very early 2.0 911s were frequently seen with non-locking upper cover nuts used in combination with wavy-type lock washers.

That’s the history. It is fact that the early cork gaskets could squeeze out from between the early covers and cam housings, especially under a heavy hand tightening the nuts. As a side note, my shop used cork gaskets (lowers were available for both 6-nut and 11-nut covers) to help seal up leaks caused by warped magnesium covers. Those covers were never “torqued,” just tightened by feel and using the visible gasket edge as an aid.

Along came lean burn engines, thermal reactors and excessive heat, which, in a way, was responsible for the development of the superior gaskets that we have today.

All the while, a plate (used through about mid-’83) on the bottom of the engine, usually referred to as an oil screen cover or a sump plate, saw fewer gasket changes; from thin paper to graphite, then to an improved even thinner graphite. No change to the torque spec for its 6mm (quantity 8) nuts was made – that held at 10Nm (7 lb/ft). Think about that for a moment; tiny 6mm nuts, each used with a wavy lock washer, tightened to 7 lb/ft.

Back to a set of rocker covers, sealed with graphite upper and lower gaskets. Those gaskets were quite firm, and about 1/3 the thickness of cork versions, it made sense that more torque could be applied. Certainly the hardware was up to the task, after all, it was identical to the crankcase perimeter hardware and the chain case to crank case hardware – 8mm Nylok nuts and aluminum sealing washers. Specified torque for that hardware? 25Nm (18 lb/ft).

The period through which gasket technology changed was interesting for my shop. Many of my customers bought new cars, and some opted to have us perform the required 1,000 mile service, rather than have it done at the dealer by an unknown (yes, Porsche pre-approved this and all warranties remained intact). We noticed, while doing those jobs, how tight the factory-installed rocker cover nuts were, and realized it was due to the new gaskets, and eventually better lower covers. We re-checked the Spec books (by this time we were servicing SCs), and decided that the “All bolts (fasteners) on crankcase and camshaft housing, M8 = 25Nm” had to take precedence over the note about a “cover, M8 = 8Nm” which co-incidentally appeared in the torque spec list with the camshaft bolt/nut spec. So, we used 18 lb/ft on a large number of cars, new and old with the latest gaskets, discovered that dis-assembly at the next scheduled service was perfectly normal, and made that spec routine for all except the cars that used cork gaskets.

We have now reached the point where the latest version sump gasket became identical to the chain case, crank case gasket. To review, the torque for the 6mm sump plate nuts is 10Nm, the torque for the 8mm chain case nuts is 25 Nm. The rocker cover gaskets that have been available for many years are thin, firm, and self-sealing. Rocker cover hardware is 8mm. Why would one consider 6 lb/ft – ONE LESS than the considerably smaller 6mm sump plate nuts, reasonable and appropriate for that 8mm hardware?

One must conclude that the 6 lb/ft spec; (1) was a typo (M8 instead of M6) that turned into a monster, (2) was a correct spec, but for original rocker covers using cork gaskets, or (3) was that it referred to the [3] 6mm bolts that secured the “cover” at the end of the camshaft inside the chain case, and two mistakes were made – one a typo and one in translation.

My personal belief is that #3 above is correct because; (1) the reference to a “cover” with “M8” hardware appears with the torque spec for the bolt/nut on the camshaft, and (2) that “cover” is called a “chain case cover” in later Porsche repair manuals, is noted to have, and is secured with 6mm hardware, and recommended torque is 8-10Nm (6-7 lb/ft). FYI: Later factory technical spec lists do a far more thorough job elsewhere as well. Not only did they finally correctly define “cover,” they itemize the specs for M8 hardware on the crankcase, M8 hardware on the cam housings, M8 hardware on the chain case, and included a spec not seen before – “Valve cover to camshaft housing.”
Logic.

With regard to this thread, 30Nm (about 22 lb/ft) is a bit high, but the OP's instincts are correct. The primary problem with the higher torque is that a chance exists where the aluminium sealing washers will collapse into the stud threads, making cover removal at the next adjustment interval extremely difficult.
__________________
Keep the Shiny Side UP!
Pete Z.

Regarding torque specs, I'll say this one more time, with a couple of qualifiers. For 911s built through the '89 3.2 litre Carerra, that use 11-hole, aluminium lower covers, and use-once super-thin greenish blue gaskets, or green gaskets with a silicone bead, the torque spec for the 8mm Nylok nuts, used with proper German aluminium sealing washers, is 18 lb/ft.

It has nothing to do with heat cycles, or anything else. My shop buttoned up thousands of 911s using 18 lb/ft, many we didn't see until the next 15K service was due (many of our customers would have the in-between service done at an oil change only facility, or they would do it themselves). NONE had to return for follow-up tightening, NONE leaked, NONE had stripped hardware, NONE had hard-to-remove covers/washers, ALL were assembled using new gaskets, new washers, and new Nylok nuts.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Indeed - very sad in a way. From what I gather from them, this is exactly what drove Paul and Zeke out. I, for one, refuse. While my hot rod '72 is nowhere near the "significant financial asset" your 356's represent, it is still worth over ten times what I paid for it. And I still "beat the hell out of it" at every opportunity. The "burdens" of owning these things are only what we allow them to be.

I sold the '71 S "Ragamuffin" because I owed taxes. I paid 5K for it in '04 not running, but I brought it to life w/o much work. Then the real work began and it was a rolling restoration until the final stages getting it ready for the '05 Treffen. I wasn't sad at all when the buyer jumped in at TRE Motorsports and drove off as I watched. He immediately flipped it to another Californian and he in turn flipped it to the homeland where it would have needed a full restoration to meet the TUV standards. It was no where near worthy as shipped. But it was a good track rat.

I went a couple years before the itch struck partially scratched by an '88 Carrera listed here for $12,900. I got it for a tad less and began the "bumper" project ultimately calling the car a 'Carrera R'. I sold that after my wife got rear ended with the custom bumpers on and was injured. Had the impact bumpers been in place that might have turned out differently. I sold the bumpers to a Pelican and sold the car fitted up with the original bumpers to a German fellow who exported it. Again, that car needed a full engine rebuild to meet the TUV. That would have been about 2012.

I made money on the Ragamuffin but my take was 18K and it came up 6 months later on a German list for sale at 44K EU. No further history on the '88 but I broke even.

So neither one was sold because of what you say. I did sell a '77 Targa with an Andial motor for 6K in '96 because it needed a lot from paint on down (except the motor). I did not know about Pelican, if indeed they existed, or I might have been tempted to keep it. I was so involved with work and kart racing that the Targa was mostly worked on by indy shops. It was a money pit AFAIWC.

To complete the list sans 914's owned, I bought and sold within 2 years a '60 356 B. Never really got on with that car. My wife loved it but it had to go in my mind. Bought and sold at the same figure 13K circa year 2000. To placate the wife I bought a '00 Boxster in '02 coming off lease. She has that car today. I don't drive it much but if you have an open mind, that's a hell of a little roadster. It has cost us hardly anything to own spare the A/C rebuild which failed within 2 years (Thanks Callas) And a new top that cost me a grand installed.

I don't dare sell another car out from under her.

To the topic: the Box at almost 20 years old is not yet a classic and likely will never be as long as they are manufactured. But of all the cars including the 914's, the best driving cars were the 914 race car (SC front end, rear springs with small anti-roll bar on 7" wheels) and the Box. But there isn't much distance between any of them in terms of fun factor. The Carrera drove heavy like the Boxster, maybe 'felt' heavier. The 356 was a rollerskate always moving around with any wind or grooves in the roadway. Felt like it would swap ends if you looked too hard to the left or right.