Are there scammers on PCA?

[Roberthoangt]

Hi, so I was looking through PCA for my first aircooled and found this https://www.pca.org/classified-ad/334770. Now i'm new to aircooled porsches but weren't SCs produced from 78 to 83?

[juanbenae]

the add clearly states the car is a 76S which is confirmed by the photos of it's narrow body. you are correct in that the SC run was from 78-83, at which time the wider rear "SC flares" became standard.


add seems legit

[darrin]

what makes you think the seller's a scammer?

[Cajundaddy]

There are scammers everywhere, this just doesn't look like one of them.

[Roberthoangt]

Not sure why i cant see the photos of the car on my desktop but in the pictures the seller provided he posted up 911sc pictures

[juanbenae]

more likely that was a deck lid from an SC that never had the emblem removed.

what part don't you get that it's a narrow body car precluding it from being an SC? it also has the smaller rubber bumperettes of the middie era cars.

[darrin]

Robert -- looks like you're new to this forum and are likely not yet familiar with our nomenclature. As Juanbene indicated, the photos you posted are of a "narrow body" car -- specifically a car lacking rear fender flares, which were standard on all 911sc (and later) model cars. Since all 911sc model cars have rear fender flares and the car you posted does not, it is not a 911sc (even though it appears to have inherited a 911sc rear deck and spoiler at some point). IMO, the midyear 911s (1974-1977) are less desirable than the 911sc and later models, as their 2.7l magnesium-block engine has heat-related issues that were largely resolved with the 3.0 aluminum block engines used in the 911sc. So, while the PCA post for this car could still be a scam, it does appear to accurately portray a 1976 911s . . .

[dwelle]

and perhaps a euro one at that. small bumperettes in the US were in '74 only...

[specialtyoneinc]

Looks like a 76 to me. Why don't you give the owner a call and feel him out? Other than allot of dreamers on pricing, PCA classifieds has always been pretty legit source. That being said always dot your i's and cross your t's when buying any car online.

[Matt Monson]

It’s also had the engine fan updated. But otherwise looks like a kiddie to me. The engine number is correct for one.

Ask for more pictures. But I see nothing amiss.

[nathanbs]

SC’s almost never had a wing either unless a dealer installed the big black urethane wing also seen on 76-77 Carrera 3.0’s . Looks like an aftermarket large grille whale tail with a 911 SC badge. Two wrongs definitely dont make a right lol

[JMS935]

That is the funkiest looking passenger mirror I’ve ever seen. Wtf. It sticks out so far, and it looks like it’s too low to even be able to use effectively.

[Matt Monson]

Originally Posted by JMS935

That is the funkiest looking passenger mirror I’ve ever seen. Wtf. It sticks out so far, and it looks like it’s too low to even be able to use effectively.

I’ve got the same one on my 75. It’s a crappy aftermarket thing that was popular 30 years ago when people were attempting to make old cars look more modern. I don’t get it. And no, it doesn’t work well.

[Roberthoangt]

Originally Posted by darrin

Robert -- looks like you're new to this forum and are likely not yet familiar with our nomenclature. As Juanbene indicated, the photos you posted are of a "narrow body" car -- specifically a car lacking rear fender flares, which were standard on all 911sc (and later) model cars. Since all 911sc model cars have rear fender flares and the car you posted does not, it is not a 911sc (even though it appears to have inherited a 911sc rear deck and spoiler at some point). IMO, the midyear 911s (1974-1977) are less desirable than the 911sc and later models, as their 2.7l magnesium-block engine has heat-related issues that were largely resolved with the 3.0 aluminum block engines used in the 911sc. So, while the PCA post for this car could still be a scam, it does appear to accurately portray a 1976 911s . . .

Thank you darrin for being so welcoming. I did a little reading on the 2.7 and people are saying to rebuild them with time certs or case savers. Which one would be better assuming current owner hasn't already done so.

@JMS those will most certainly have to go if I buy this car lol.

[darrin]

Robert -- no worries, we've all been in your position at one point -- my advice here would be to get a PPI (pre-purchase inspection) performed by an air-cooled Porsche- knowledgable shop that hasn't previously serviced the car. They should be able to assess whether the head studs are currently in good shape (or whether any have already pulled out of the case and require timecert/case savers -- since my aluminum block hasn't had any such issues, I'm not familiar with his particular issue) -- If I was in your position, I'd be looking for a car that doesn't need much work up front -- an engine rebuild to address these issues could quickly become a 5 figure endeavor . . .