3.2 carrera vs. 964
 

Hello Pelicans,

I have been looking for a 911. Mostly considering 3.2 models, but I would not pass up a really nice SC if the price was right and the condition was super. But, for a few dollars more I could buy a 964.

I have not driven a 964. Is it much different than an SC, or a 3.2? Is it worth $5,000 more for a car with the same mileage and condition? 3.2 vs. 1991 964

Take a look at this on ebay 110094362966 which is a 1991 964 with 104,000 miles. The guy wants $23,500. I compare it to a 1989 with 72,000 asking $20,000.

This is a second car for weekend driving and will see about 5,000 miles per year. What is the 5 year depreciation or appreciation outlook?

Thank you for your thoughts...

I don't know 964's that well, and have never driven one so for the most part I cannot answer your questions. But make sure that you are intimately aware of the problems associated with the early 964's I think there is some issues with oil leaks between cylinders and heads or something along those lines.

Rich

Hey ,like Bruce Anderson is always saying ..buy the best condition 911
your budget can afford..
I have driven both early chassis and late as well as 993 and would have to say for the meager additional dollars you would get in the 964 a
far more current vehicle ,technology wise,driver comfort level and more
than likely performance as well ..at least 250 hspr ..
Maybe a little heavier but you get the added safety of air bags and coil
sprung suspension too!
If its your first porsche and you only wish to spend under 20k a good
Carrera 3.2 is definetly the way to go,reliability ,performance and looks, go to a meet and familiarize yourself with the cars and the differences,
maybe get a drive or two, then decide you'll have the biggest school boy grin on your face since puberty !

I have driven everything on your list and only can recommend that you drive a 964 or better a few of them, before you make your decision. The 964 was a big leap forward in technology. Optically very similar looking to the 3.2 Carrera, but completely redone underneath.

That said, the leap forward in technology makes the later cars feel different. To some it is more of a GT "heavier" feel. To others it is a more "modern" feel. It certainly has the power of the 3.2. In a 964 you have working a/c, power steering, abs (?), air bags, fuses that are not from WW2, coil over suspension, bigger brakes etc. that will make it hard to believe that the car backdates to 1964. With the 3.2 Carrera that's not so far fetched at all. ;)

To sum it up: If you are after a more primitive and raw feel, go for the 3.2, if you want a more refined and modern vehicle, go with the 964. I would not pass up the 964 in a dark color over the 3.2 Carrera if I had the choice. I went and took it one step further and got a 993. If you are at all able to stretch it, put them on your shopping list as well ... for 30-35k you can find a nice 993 with 100k miles.

George

You just need to drive a few.

When I was looking for my last (current) 911, I was tempted by the low prices of the 964. I looked at and drove a few of them. I hated the way they felt, drove, and even sounded. The feel is very different from the 89 and earlier cars, IMO. Some like 'em, lots don't (thus the lower prices).

Part of the problem with the 964 is the fact that it's an in-between model. I even was a testimony to that with my above post, where I say you should consider skipping the 964 and stepping it up to the 993. The 993 is not that much more and has many of the 964 flaws worked out and looks better in the eyes of many. The 964 has a similar problem in terms of value than the mid year cars (74-77) and now even the 996, which was followed by a better looking and better performing car ....

I agree with "the". The 964 driving impressions for me were "sluggish", and there was no added power, compared to the modified 81 SC that I had. I had to step it up to a modified 993 to get a bump in power and performance.

I don't think the bottom will fall out on the 964s, but the G-50 cars and the 993 probably will do better in keeping their values. If resale is a thought, a clean G-50 car or a clean 993 will be the ticket.

George

Thanks guys! I sure do appreciate everybody here on the BBS.

There's a low mileage SC down here in JAckson, MS advertised in the classifieds. Want me to look at it for you? I've been looking for an excuse :D

Good Afternoon, I am in a similar situation as Jeffrey. I am looking for my first 911. I am looking to spend around $20K but not more than $25K. I really like the 87-89's but it seems that the supply is low at my price point and the competition is high. Being that this is my first purchase I am having trouble just jumping in.

So, my question after all that information, is if you had say $20K what would you buy?

Thanks!

If 20's your budget I'd buy the nicest 16k SC I could find and stash 4 for the inevitable repairs, upgrades, etc that you'll need/want in the first year or two.

If 25, same thing 20 for the nicest Carrera and 5K in reserve.

Don't discount the 84-86 Carrera's with 915 tranny's. They're the bargain of the lot IMHO. The inevitable clutch will be cheaper and a really nice one can be had for 15-17K.

I have driven both.
I would have to agree with aigel's comments. Drive both, my feelings were they felt very different especially over bumpy roads. I took the path of the 3.2 but thats me. Go with the one that makes you the happiest, or like another has said go for the 993.....

I just wanted to point out that the later suspension, while feeling softer, performs better - all other things being equal. Especially the 993s rear suspension combined with a sport suspension package is a huge improvement over any torsion bar setup.

George

I have owned and loved both...I currently own a 964.

After decades of driving pre-89 911's I was interested in driving a more refined vehicle with the classic body style. 993's do nothing for me.

The summers here are humid and having an a/c that works was a welcome benifit as well.

Whatever your choice you'll be delighted.

Re: 3.2 carrera vs. 964
 

Is a 1989 3.2 coupe with 50,000 miles worth $5000 less than a 1990 964 coupe with 50,000 miles where both are in similar condition? No, the '89 probably is worth as much, if not more than the 964 (based on reasons outlined above).

Is a 1984 3.2 coupe with 50,000 miles worth $5000 less than a 1994 964 with 50,000 with both being in similar condition? You bet. The difference might be $10,000 or more.

So, it really depends on what you are comparing.

The later 964's (1993-1994) had all the bugs of the early 964's worked out at the factory. So, they are very solid cars with zero major issues. Also, many early cars have been updated with fresh Dual Mass Flywheels and have had leaking motors updated, so you may find an early 964 that's had all the work done as an exceptional car.

Good Luck,

Jay
90 964, 84 3.2

964 vs 3.2
 

Hi Jeff,
in my opimion, the 3.2 is more "real" . In this, you get the real Porschefeeling. The 964 is more comfortable, near to modern cars. Nobody can give you the right answer, because everybody has it´s own favorit. You have to drive it and make your decision.

But, the most important is, d ónt spent your last dollar. You need a reserve for maintenance or some repairs.

Best wishes and good luck
Tom

this is very true. the 993 handled the rough roads much better. And at my level it was more stable. The torsion bars made at the time for a more intense drive or rough roads with twistys.

SCs may be the best value right now. A good one can be had in the low teens. Next step up would be a 3.2, and then I'd jump to a 993.

During my search for my first 911, I drove three 964s, one 993 and four 3.2 (85, 86, and 88). (I also drove a a 74 w/ a 3.0 transplant)

Here are my findings:

The 993 (95 no varioram) nicest ride of the bunch, loved the looks, but I could find only one in my price range (at the very top). Hard to compare when you have a sample of one.

The 964s, saw a ratted out 93 cab, oil leaks, paint gone, interior bad shape, another 90 C2 that leaked oil nice and overpriced, and a third 89 C4 good price with oil leaks, and needed some suspension work, this owner gave me the name of his mechanic, who I called and I asked about the leaks and suspension work and he said about $5.5 should cover it!

As for the 3.2s the 85 and two 86s were in great shape, no oil leaks, but had the 915 trans that just made it impossible for me to embrace. Well the 88 w/ the G50 was it, right price, right look, and smooth shifting.

Now 8 months later, after spending a lot of time behind the wheel, under the hood and under the car I know I made the right choice for me. The 993 is a great car, much nicer than the the 964 and the 3.2, but its going to cost more, insurance more, maintenance more, parts more etc.

The 964 was a new model but looks like its predecessor, it has many innovations but doesn't leverage it like the 993. It going to have the same costs as the 993, plus have a lot of bugs (the 964 is a new model and the early ones 89, 90 and 91 had issues). So why settle for a 964 when a 993 is superior.

The 3.2 w/ G50, you get the final iteration of the original 911 with all of its rawness, simplicity and style but w/ a smooth shifting transmission. Great DIY car, parts cheap and car is very reliable. With its lighter weight and a couple of simple modifications (cat bypass, sw chip) the car really screams. Insurance is cheap (insured as a classic auto, very cheap), maintenance (especially w/ DIY) is very reasonable, and the 3.2 G50s are on the other side of the depreciation curve.

Porsche never put out a bad 911, but some are sweeter than others. I recommend the 911 that meets your criteria (which may be vastly different than mine) and then find the nicest and most reasonably priced one out there. Good luck

I had an '84 Carrera and a '92 964. The 964 was a much better car in many respects: faster, better suspension, better braking, better air conditioning, more stable...the list goes on and on. It will not have the same raw feel of a torsion bar car, but the feel was still incredible once dialed in right. 1992 and newer are the best years.

I have to disagree somewhat with the post above. The 993 is not superior, just different. I happen to really like the looks of the 964, with its classic lines. To each his own. :)

Marco,

Thank you for your thoughts. Looks like you went through the same strange trip I went on, only you got to drive a few more cars. I drove an 87, 86 and an 85. I bought the 1985.

I almost bought a 1989 with 72,000 miles for 19k. It was a great deal, but I would have had to eat ramon noodles and peanut butter sandwiches.

The owner of this 85 Carrera with 99k miles advertised in the local paper for $16,500. The car was kept immaculate inside and out, and has a monster stereo system. The motor sounded right and the transmission shifted perfectly through the gears up and down, but the car pulled hard to the left and steering shuddered after 50 miles per hour. I made a big deal out of the oil puddle under the car and the dry rotted tires, then took it for a PPI. When the owner saw the $5,700 repair estimate, the price got negotiable. He talked himself down to 13k and I waited a week to make a counter offer of 12k. Other people called about the car and he had to disclose the PPI information and couldn't move the car. Then he called me back and accepted my offer.

I was going to do the brake job myself and save a bunch of money, but I could not stand to wait until my schedule afforded me the time to shop for tools and do my first ever brake job. I ordered tires from tire rack and had them drop shipped to the shop and got the brakes done at the same time. I picked the car up Friday and all I can say is WOW!! It does not drive like the same car. The car made one drop of oil Friday night and nothing Saturday up till tonight. The previous owner put about 15k miles on the car since 1999 and I suspect the majority of those miles were when he first bought it. I have 15k into it, plus $500 more in parts coming from Pelican to fix the oil leaks.

When I see what you can buy for 15k, I feel really good about my purchase. As far as depreciation, I think 3.2 Carreras' have reached their lowest point of depreciation, unless they are abused and not properly maintained. I am certain that I could drive this car 5,000 miles per year and never lose money, except what I pay in maintenance. If the owner had put the money into maintaining this cars mechanical needs, he could have easily gotten 18,xxx or more. I almost bought a 1986, just like it with 47k miles for $21,000. Somebody else beat me to it.

Thank you all for your thoughts and encouragement. I was able to know exactly what to look for and had a realistic idea what I could afford to buy. If you are reading this and you are looking for your first 911, do yourself a favor; don't buy any car without a PPI. $200 spent finding out exactly what I was getting save me $4,500. I might have even just taken a pass on the car from the way it drove with a seized brake caliper, bald tires and badly aligned. My trusted mechanic shop let me know that the engine and transmission were in top shape. I had the compression and leakdown test done.

Here are my pics.

http://www.mpix.com/Customer/ViewAlbum.aspx?a=1177982&c=1qat1t5tcpiqupfgnfly