INPUT WANTED: SC vs Carrera / 3.0 vs 3.2 / 915 vs G50

[A horse with no name]

Originally Posted by Sicklyscott

Another question to ask yourself is what's the REAL Intended use? A couple thousand cruising miles a year won't make a huge difference on repair or reliability issues of a 915 if it's in decent shape to start.

The 3.0 with some exhaust mods is a blast to drive on the streets. I truly never yearn for more power. Track days are another story, but I'd think I'd still be wanting more in a 3.2 (or even 3.6!).

Here you go Scott... More power!

For those who may not have seen this car, Lynn is a fellow Pelican...Now no dissing the guy ay Just appreciate his workman ship. With the Chevy LS7, it is now lighter than with the original Turbo. I say find a Turbo with the motor sacked and then giddy up go it'

One very dependable true 'sleeper' when cruisin the highways and byways eh!

https://youtu.be/NBF5HcXsiI4

https://youtu.be/F6_0n3Xm7kQ

[tumamilhem]

Guys this is all great input and very informative! I'm really enjoying learning from your own experiences especially not having owned a 911 before.

[groovydude]

Not all SCs are ceated equal, so it's not really valid to compare a Carera vs any SC. I believe in '81 the SC HP got a pretty noticeable boost. And the ROW 3.0s have a different my feel altogether from what I've read.

I've driven an '87 next to my '82, and I can't feel more power in the 3.2, if anything the SC feels a tad peppier. And the trannys don't feel that much different to me, but mine has an aftermarket coupler and a short shifter.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned, a 3.2 is perhaps a better choice if you want to modify for more power. There's no chip to replace in a 3.0. Research the Steve Wing chip and you'll see what I mean. Personally, a stock 3.0 ('82, no cat), is plenty enough power for me, but it's s matter of taste.

[gregwils]

This is the best and least biased assessment that I have ever seen, thank you Peter.

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

Here's some info for you that might be helpful...

911sc vs Carrera - Rennlist Discussion Forums

Scroll to post #15. Rennlist seems to be having difficulty this morning; if the link won't work try again later...

[sugarwood]

Originally Posted by rokemester

I like the fact that I can have friends and family who can drive a stick can jump into the driver seat and have some fun. I'm pretty sure they would be more challenged driving a pre G50 tranny.

If you can operate a clutch, you can drive a 915. Period. Sure, it might take a minute to adjust to the heavier pedal and looser throw, but it's just a gearbox, not some arcane medieval abacus contraption that people can't operate without an long apprenticeship and flight training. The internet anti-hype surrounding the 915 borders on ludicrous. I don't have to pause between gears when shifting my 80,000 mile 915 gearbox. I just shift. I can also shift into 1st while rolling to a stop. Unless a pre-G50 tranny is defective or badly in need or service, anyone can drive it.

Originally Posted by tumamilhem

That's really what I need, is to have one of each to try:
3.0/915
3.2/915
3.2/G50

A correctly adjusted and serviced 915 is a perfectly good gearbox. It was in production for the better part of 2 decades. It is not defective. It was not recalled. It was not subject to lemon laws. Contrary to internet folklore, remarkably, it actually does shifts the gears. Go figure! Are you going to be shifting with lighting precision where every 1/10 second counts? No, you are not. If you were, you wouldn't be looking at a 30 year old car in the first place, and you'd be driving a modern car with triple the horsepower and PDK, like the pros. If you get a 915 and it's worn out or needing adjustment, just get that fixed. Reliability of the G50 vs 915? The bottom line is that if either gearbox needs service, you're looking at thousands to get it fixed.

Here is a premise worth considering. Some buyers say they are used to a modern Honda gearbox, and that's why they prefer to find a G50. I'll suggest that the entire point of getting an air cooled 911 (and paying top dollar for the privilege) is to have a vintage "leather goggles" driving experience. No power steering. Suspension firmness opposite of "floaty sofa". Mechanical clutch. No nanny assist or stereo or DVD player or Navigation. An exhaust rumble. Even an oil dipstick! The very point of buying an old 911 is that it's nothing like your modern convenient Honda, and that it's different. In that regard, a 915 gearbox is more authentically vintage than a G50 anyway. The guy that wants a modern gearbox probably would not be happy in a 30 year old car in the first place, and might prefer a 997, right?

In general, there is too much "Road & Track" data specification analysis/paralysis here, and not enough test driving. How large is your search radius? You might want to increase it to 2-3 hours. Once you drive these cars, you will see the differences are trivial for road driving. You say that you have been shopping for a couple of years. Shopping for cars is a fun journey, but to pull the trigger, the first step is to forget about the G50 vs. 915 debate. Comparing weight of an SC and 3.2 is also very academic. For 99% of your driving, the differences are moot. It seems CIS vs. Motronic is the most practical factor that may influence your search parameters.

After you decide on '78-'89 or just '84-'89, shopping for your car is not like ticking off a "build sheet" for a new $150k car you are ordering from the factory. You are limited by real world constraints of what is available and crosses your path, even if you plan to budget $1000 for each car you jump on a plane to visit. Make it your goal to physically view 5 cars soon. With that, you will get a better sense of what is out there, because when the right car comes around, you are not going to have time to dilly dally and think about it. It will be sold from right under you. You need to get to a place where you know the market, the basic range of condition of cars out there, and be ready with a stack of cash.

As many others have already said, the last word in this discussion is to buy your SC or 3.2 in the right condition and history, from the right owner, within your search radius, at a price you're comfortable with.

[PabloX]

I think the real answer is, it doesn't matter. As usual, buy the best one you can afford. If you have a choice between a clapped out G50 car and a pristine SC, I'd recommend the SC.

915s aren't the greatest, admittedly, but if they're set up well they feel just fine and can be reliable.

When I was shopping, really nice 915 Carreras were in the low 20s and the premium for a similar G50 car was about 25%. For the price difference, I decided I could have the 915 fully rebuilt with every improvement available (Wevo, etc).

On the other hand, if you have the money, sure, go for a G50.

[hoss4659]

I was on the horns of the same dilemma a couple of years ago. The decider for me was the DME vs. a CIS car. The DME won hands down. I went for a later Carrera with the G50 and hydraulic clutch as icing on the cake. Now upgrading the AFM DME to Sal C's MAF system with much improved throttle response. Not wild about the impact bumpers but have always liked the classic 911 form. Had not had a 911 for 30 years but getting in and starting it up was much like slipping on a pair of comfortable old shoes.

[rgoodrich]

I have had an 81 SC for five years. It took this long to de-bug, new trans etc. it was featured on the 2012 Porsche calendar. It has passed on to my son, but I'm storing it while he completes his electronics training for the Army's drones. So I'm getting seat time in a well sorted SC for a while. In 2014 I lucked onto a beautiful slate blue metallic 84 Carrera. I bought it through my mechanic of4 years, not asking for a PPI, because he is such a great wrench turner. Drove it through a few tanks, and it burned through a quart of oil every 200-250 miles. I paid full retail, and was very disappointed that he sold me a car (and got a commission) with at least a bad top end. I loved the car for the 14 months until the engine fried a couple of plugs, and is no longer running.before it went down, I greatly enjoyed it. I have no favorite choice(when they're both running)
Each has a distinct set of advantages. The big one is that SC motors don't break. The Carrera needs a full engine rebuild at less than 150000 miles. This is a big deal, and is the reason I haven't been able to enjoy it for over a year, as complete top quality engine build with "while you're in there" is way out of my league. I have a damaged hand and a bad back, so no way I'm doing the work myself.the point of this story is:
ALWAYS get a PPI from a mechanic that has no previous exposure to the car. ALWAYs

[monkeyodeath]

I got a 3.2 because I do all the work on my car and Motronic is similar to a lot of other EFI systems I've worked on.

I got a 915 because a) I saw a lot more of them, and b) I didn't feel like laying out the extra cash for a G50 car. I don't mind how the 915 shifts and I like that I can rebuild it in my garage when the time comes.

I got a post-85 because I live in Southern California and wanted a better starting point for upgrading the AC (bigger vents).

So those were my reasons. Yours may be different, and the right car for you might be different. Like in that link that Peter posted, stuff like reliability and repair costs between all of them are pretty much a wash.

The golden rule is to get the best-condition, best-running car you can afford, or that you happen to find. Buying a basketcase that's always in the shop sucks way more than getting an SC and thinking later on, "hmm, I wish I could chip this car for a little power bump." At least you're still having fun.

Plus, if you get a car in good condition, they're easier to flip if you change your mind. My first 911 was an '86 cab. 8 months after buying it, I started to realize I wasn't a huge fan of the ragtop. I found a coupe that I liked, bought it, and sold the cabrio for more than I paid for it within 2 weeks. There are still plenty of these cars out there.

[wayner]

I was just at my mechanics shop and he showed me a G50 apart on the bench.

They are getting old AND expensive/complicated
YIKES! I'd buy the 915 if I was concerned about repair costs.

I'd be interested to hear from transmission repair experts. Maybe call one and ask for a repair estimate.

[tumamilhem]

Originally Posted by wayner

I was just at my mechanics shop and he showed me a G50 apart on the bench.

They are getting old AND expensive/complicated
YIKES! I'd buy the 915 if I was concerned about repair costs.

I'd be interested to hear from transmission repair experts. Maybe call one and ask for a repair estimate.

Yeah. The G50 is much more expensive to rebuild if needed. The flipside is it's not likely needed a rebuild and not as fragile as the 915 if maintained.

[tumamilhem]

Originally Posted by monkeyodeath

I got a 3.2 because I do all the work on my car and Motronic is similar to a lot of other EFI systems I've worked on.

I got a 915 because a) I saw a lot more of them, and b) I didn't feel like laying out the extra cash for a G50 car. I don't mind how the 915 shifts and I like that I can rebuild it in my garage when the time comes.

I got a post-85 because I live in Southern California and wanted a better starting point for upgrading the AC (bigger vents).

So those were my reasons. Yours may be different, and the right car for you might be different. Like in that link that Peter posted, stuff like reliability and repair costs between all of them are pretty much a wash.

The golden rule is to get the best-condition, best-running car you can afford, or that you happen to find. Buying a basketcase that's always in the shop sucks way more than getting an SC and thinking later on, "hmm, I wish I could chip this car for a little power bump." At least you're still having fun.

Plus, if you get a car in good condition, they're easier to flip if you change your mind. My first 911 was an '86 cab. 8 months after buying it, I started to realize I wasn't a huge fan of the ragtop. I found a coupe that I liked, bought it, and sold the cabrio for more than I paid for it within 2 weeks. There are still plenty of these cars out there.

Yeah we're on the same page. Most don't even really consider this a factor because the air conditioning is so lacklustre to begin with. But in areas like ours, especially Florida where it's a lot more humid, every little bit makes a big difference.

[Brokentoy]

I have had both 915 and g50 3.2 carreras.
I thought I had to have the G50, and after driving both found I like the 915 once the shifter bushing is addressed.
Do not pass on a nice car if it has one or the other, just not enough difference either way.

[universeman]

SCs also respond to SSIs better (?) than Carreras and therefore can give you a cheap-ish boost to offset the no-chip-ability of the 3.0. Agree with everyone here - find the nicest one you can afford and go crazy. They aren't getting cheaper, don't waste too much time.

I was talking to Jeff at Partsheaven and he said the biggest problem he's having right now is that the old 911s are not coming in anymore -- meaning he's not getting any more donor cars (or as many donor cars as he used to get.) That's a sign the market is still tightening...so you would be wise to make a decision and go boldly forward with it. There are plenty of people who love 915s and G50s, plenty who love SC and Carreras, etc.

[sugarwood]

Originally Posted by rgoodrich

The big one is that SC motors don't break.
The Carrera needs a full engine rebuild at less than 150000 miles.

This is the first time I've read this.
Any truth anywhere in this statement?

[groovydude]

Originally Posted by sugarwood

This is the first time I've read this.
Any truth anywhere in this statement?

I've read that the motronuc runs richer overall than the CIS which can fry your valves over time. Maybe the longer stoke adds to the fragility too, but I do think it's accepted that the 3.0 is a bit more bulletproof.

[Macroni]

Originally Posted by sugarwood

This is the first time I've read this.
Any truth anywhere in this statement?

No....

[craigerz]

To address the last several posts,
1) a richer mixture will cool valves a bit better as more vapor coming in the chamber will in essence have a slight cooling effect on the intake, but mainly a richer mixture will run cooler, thus keeping the valve temps down especially on the exhaust..
2) as far as the 150,000 mile idea, the S/C I own was well cared for, driven regularly, yet was very tired at 150,000 miles. Both have had stud issues, valve guide issues, but the biggest difference I can see is that the S/C uses a 10mm connecting rod bolt, the Carerra in the 3.2 uses a 9mm connecting rod bolt. My guess is Porsche thought the extra stroke on the 3.2 would give more torque, which it does, and would keep people from revving them as hard. Upon rebuild most go to Raceware bolts on the 3.2 and that problem is solved...

[tdw28210]

tuma..for your reference...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/907344-1988-g50-shifter-alignment.html

[eolson]

With 911 prices as they are, it seems like if you find a decent deal, you'll get your money back out of anything you aren't happy with. The point being, if you find a car with a 915 that's properly adjusted, and decide after a few months that you don't like it, you'll at least break even and be able to go buy something with a G50.

That said, if you've never owned either one, you'll never really know the true difference until you do. If you're at all on the fence and the tranny is the biggest obstacle, it looks like you should focus on '87-'89 Carreras and just get the most evolved G-body model you can. You know the reputation for the transmission, and it's not like it's going to be WORSE than a 915.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk