Buying '80 911sc targa - anything look off in these pics?

[the]

How much "sun exposure" and "in and out" wear and tear does a car that has been driven 1500 miles per year get? Did the owner take the roof off, drive it 5 miles and park it in the sun all day? While having someone rub on the seat bolsters and other wear items for a few hours per day?

I had an SC with over 100,000 miles on it, and it didn't show the wear that this car shows. I also have a 30,000 mile 80s 911, and while 30K is less than 43K, the condition is worlds apart. There are too many wear items that you can see, even in the crappy pictures, that indicate it is not a 43K mile car.

Here's a challenge: Ask him for the documents to support the mileage. My bet will be there is going to be a litany of excuses as to why the car doesn't have ANY documentation which could be used to track the mileage. I.e., original invoices over time that have the dates and mileage written on them. You haven't mentioned docs in this thread, but I can already tell you, they won't be there.

There's a reason for that.

[Danskman]

The seller is not asking a premium price for the car due to 43k miles. If this car had 125k miles on it, and it was $10k seems the price would be fine (pending a good PPI). I would much rather take it for a test drive, and check it out in person, but seems like a decent buy to me. If it was a local car, I'd be tempted too.

[javadog]

I have to jump back in and offer a counterpoint. There is a guy in this town that bought an new targa in 1984. To date, he has put on around 40,000 miles. I see this car a couple times a month.

He has done nothing to the car. He prides himself on how little he has had to spend on the car since he bought it. It's a complete turd. The paint is rough, with no shine. It has quite a few dents. The top is junk. The seats are splitting. You'd look at it and think it has over 200,000 miles on it. But it doesn't. 40,000 miles, and one lousy owner.

So, you never know. You guys give good advice. It's better to verify, verify, verify. But there are always exceptions. Soon, we'll see what is real and what is not.

JR

[the]

Agreed.

You have to do your detective work to determine if the claimed mileage on a 28 year old car is accurate.

But you have to have a starting point, and my starting point on a car that old, with claimed mileage that low, is to be skeptical. To go further, if I hear of a relatively common production car that has been driven less than 1500 miles per year for almost 30 years, I flat out don't believe it, until it can be proven otherwise. That proof consists of a lot of things - physical condition is one. Documents are another.

Funny how so many of these "low mileage," too-old-for-Carfax cars never have a single shred of documents (not a single invoice retained over 30 years) to back the claimed mileage.

[Winter]

Someone mentioned to get pictures of the underside of the car, and I'd think that would be a good idea, especially the underside of the engine and transmission. Of course, these areas can be cleaned up, but you might as well see what it looks like.

There's also got to be a Pelican or two in the area???? Maybe it's time to enlist some help.

I bought my P car ('75 Targa) off of Craig's list for a fraction of the price of yours, but made some mistakes and am dumping quite a bit into it. Of course, it was a bit of an impulse buy, and I had plenty of $$ to put into it given the extremely low initial purchase price. I'd probably do things differently in the future and buy a car with a PPI and extensive documentation by people who know more than me. If neglected these cars can be very expensive and costly to bring up to speed. If properly taken care of, they're wonderful.

Good luck.

---

Tom

[slw911SC]

Well, true enough, you may be right about the original mileage. It's hard to tell without records and a good PPI. But, sometimes, an old low mileage car may give you more difficulty than an old high mileage car that has been regularly maintained, well kept and had all the things done that need doing. So, keep that in mind. Even with low mileage, after 25 years there will be lots that needs doing - seals, lines, fluids, hoses, brakes, tires, etc. etc.

Mine's like that. It has just over 100,000 miles and it's mint because its been maintained that way since day 1 by myself and 3 previous owners.

For instance, I just looked at a (beautiful) factory original metallic gold 72 T Coupe claiming 52,000 original miles - but with no records. I did a PPI and found it had AT LEAST 152,000 miles or more, and a whole list of things wrong with it. It looked great, though.

I know who bought it, he paid too much, and now he's in for at leat 12K worth of work to begin with. Maybe more. Stories like this are legion and verified low mileage cars are very rare. I still believe in verification through books, records, CoA, matching numbers, personal history, past mechanics and owner interviews etc. etc.

If it really is a 43,000 mile car my friend, you've done very well!

Steve.
slw911SC

[Rot 911]

Were those pictures taken with a cell phone? I wouldn't even begin to hazard a guess as to the miles on the car based on those blurry pictures.

[ldortiz]

Doesn't show pride of ownership but the price is tempting. Not the standard exhaust and the interior looks beat to hell for 43k miles. Quick story, yesterday I was at my mechanic's picking up some front hood shocks. There was a beautiful 2000 911 on the rack. I asked him about it and he told me the owner bought it on the internet and when he got it home it was blowing white smoke. The result; a cracked block! Bottom line, get a PPI.

Good Luck,
Leo
86 Coupe

[mkossler]

The PPI will tell all. Low mileage samples do exist, I have one - but you are doing the right thing with the PPI here. BTW, mine had raceware studs installed at around 28K miles. They can break early and they can break late.

That top fits like that either because the clips have worn through the frame from LOTS of usage, or the top vinyl was replaced and clipped poorly. Expect another 500.00-1000.00 to get that right, if the frame is still good.

The B pillar seal looks original, but the front top seal looks like a possible replacement. The Porsche replacement part is actually too big for the SCs, and the targa top front will stick up over the windshield frame forever if this is the case. If you want it to fit right you'll need to contact Dan Petchel for the correct replacement.

[Targa4now]

Originally Posted by slw911SC

That is not a 43,000 mile car. Engine bay, seats, pedals, mats etc. all show age and wear. More like 143,000 miles.

I agree totally.

This is a risky purchase sight unseen!!

[ramonesfreak]

just curious - if the guy thinks the car has such low miles why is he selling it for so cheap? even his original asking price was a bit low.

seems strange that a 911 owner would not know what he has especially given how easy it is to research prices these days. Take a look at what people are asking around the country for SC's with 140K+ miles..... a lot more than $10K for the most part.

is $10K your budget? if you can go higher i think you should be able to find a nice one locally, check your local PCA website "for sale" section...etc. If your in NYC (as your screen name suggests), Cannillo Motorsports seems to get a lot of mid-80's 911's... out on Long Island and his prices always seem reasonable.

My PO bought mine from Sloan...he has a couple SC's with low miles for "almost" reasonable prices. Cant be more than 2 hours from you to go see some

ive personally never dealt with the above but they seem ok and get alot of cars coming through, if your patient and can spend 15K - 20K and youll get the benefit of it being local, might be worth it to skip this car

[911SCinNYC]

You guys are all heros for taking the time to write. Thank you for your time and your opinions. Very wise and helpful.

I had a local mechanic in Harlan, KY, do a PPI, and he got it up on a lift, did compression and did a complete head to toe analysis of the car.

Seeing it up on a lift revealed a totally straight frame. No prior accidents or body work, and he felt the undercarriage represented a low mileage car. He felt the interior was a testament to low mileage, too, despite the fading of the seats, which he thought were from poor maintenance and sun exposure when the top was off.

He took the valve covers off and it revealed head studs that were in perfect condition.

The single troubling thing about the car was the compression. It ranged from 128 to 140. BUT. The car has been on it's ass for the better part of its 28 year life, and as he described it, the cobwebs have set in. He felt that with new plugs, a new fuel filter and a healthy dose of longer distance spirited driving, the carbon build up would wear away, and the little 1 mile jogs the car had occasionally taken which resulted in gas build-up in the cylinders and a lower amount of oil in the cylinders would reverse over time and the compression would increase.

I'm going to verify or refute this assessment with two different NYC-based Porsche specialists.

As it stands now, I've found the proverbial needle in a haystack - a low mileage 911SC that no one wants to buy because it's located like 2 hours from any reasonable airport.

Thanks again, folks. I welcome any responses.

[GothingNC]

Glad to here the PPI went well !!

Here are some photos of a 1980 928 for sale near by with only 35,000 miles.

Left outside for way too long:

[billybek]

It is good to hear that the underside looks good and straight. It isn't the end all be all of mileage indicators, but when all the fasteners and bolt on components look like they are new, it can't have too many miles on it.
Good find although it must need something at that price.
Looking forward to seeing more pictures!