996 - crazy bargain or crazy bad idea?

[Driven97]

Ok, I'm seriously considering an early 996. Plenty to choose from under $20k and under 75k miles, in great shape.

I know they'll likely never go up in value, but seems like a hell of a lot of car for the money. Yes, I've read all about the M96, but there's plenty of >100k cars for sale as well, so they can't all be bad. Worth the risk as a DD?

Example: 1999, 64k miles, $18k. That one is half the country away from me, but not an outlier pricing wise.

[m962b]

Im in the same boat with you. I've posted a similar topic before and what I took away from it was two things:

It can be a great DD, but it's not a very Porsche like experience. It is plasticy, muted, and not as visceral as earlier versions nor as refined as newer versions.

And aside from the IMS issue, one poster noted that he wouldn't even wish a 996 on his worst enemy. He said the integrity of the build is shorty at best.

So in review, what I got out of it was that as a car, one with a good bit of performance and comfort, it's a pretty good deal and something to consider. As a Porsche however, it is the worst 911 made so far and prices reflect that sentiment. With that said, some people love their 996s.

So if you are looking to get into the 911 world, and join PCA, etc. this will do the trick, but it's the worst experience you may have with Porsche. But compared to most anything else you can find for $18k.....It's hard to beat.

[Nick Triesch]

While it is true that the 996 has a terrible interior, strange Boxster headlights, horrible Honda like dash, one thing is for sure it is way faster than a 3.2 911 with way more H.P.. It will also out handle any 3.2 car out there. It will out stop any earlier car with it's huge brakes. It is a much better performing 911 than the cars of the past. So how can someone really say it is the worst 911 ever made when it was such a great car? A few months ago at a lot in San Diego there was a near perfect silver 996 with 50,000 for sale at only $20,000. A deal.

[Driven97]

What I like is since they're not particularly desirable, there's no reason to feel bad about racking up miles. Just drive and enjoy. I don't mind wrenching a little here and there.

I love my 3.2, but cringe the few times I drive it through rush hour traffic. Between the gravel haulers dropping rocks & soccer moms in SUVs texting, I think it's best to save the car for weekends and special occasions.

[tdw28210]

I've seen a few early sub $40k turbos - tempting. Never dug too deep, probably ragged out, but that is a TON of performance for under $40k....but those damn Boxster headlights....

[rayng]

That 99 is a bargain. Painted sport seats, painted center console and other dash bits. All for 18k?!! Buy it, drive 30k miles on it, then part out the car and make money. Crazy cheap.

[m962b]

I comment that the 996 is the worst ever made based on the replies to my post on the same topic a while ago.

It is an important car, but the cost saving measures have been a source of issues and while the hp and handling are support to a 3.2, the build quality is not.

I mentioned it before, but my statements were just a summary of the replies I got to my question.

[Nick Triesch]

So....the 996 is a MUCH better performance sports car than say a 3.2 but with sub par build quality. Thats kind of an oxymoron. I say buy it if you like it!

[Tonger]

I think that the best thing to do is to drive the car and decide for yourself. With all due respect, I'd encourage m962b to drive a few as well. I've had a 996 for about a decade and also have a 930 - literally two different ends of the spectrum. From my perspective there is no greater bang for the buck than a 996. More than adequate power, super brakes, and for just a little extra $ - a very responsive suspension (ROW M030). You can daily drive the 996 and not worry that it will overheat or that the AC won't work like the air-cooled cars. The convertible top is an engineering marvel and has a glass back window that stows itself. You can bring it to the track and beat the hell out of it, then take the numbers off and drive it out to dinner with your wife.

The interior is rather plastic and the slide out cupholder looks and is rather fragile. Aside from that, I've had rock-solid reliability and just don't worry about the thing. The RMS seal thing is a minor fix and is honestly much easier to deal with than the premature valve guide wear, cylinder stud replacement, weak 2nd gear synchro, overheating, or unreliable solenoids/fusebox of the 930. The headlights don't make me feel like less of a man and you could argue that the 02+ cars with the turbo lights actually look pretty good. In the mean time, I'll drive the piss out of it and not worry about depreciating it - best of all worlds. When the time comes to do the clutch, I'll do the IMS - no more expensive than all the stuff that wears out so fast on the 930. That said, I would still look for an '02+ car as the 99's have a statistically higher failure rate and you can get one for just a little more dough.

To me, the 996 turbo is an absolute steal. With 930's taking off and 964/993 turbos already out of reach of many enthusiasts, I don't think that you can do better right now. The Metzger engine coupled with modern reliability is a great combination. So much in fact that prices have already started to rise in our neck of the woods...

[CountD]

Originally Posted by m962b

As a Porsche however, it is the worst 911 made so far and prices reflect that sentiment.

And to think they used to say this about my '75 2.7 S...two years ago.

[dporsche74]

Go for it ,996 are awesome cars .. ... it's a modern everyday driver Porsche 911 ..
You will love it hands down..
and if you have basic metric wrenches its very cheap and so easy to fix..
they are fun for sure.. Big

[techweenie]

Never owned one, but had a '98 and an '01 Boxster, which is 2/3 the same car. Really a joy to drive and chassis rigidity is super impressive. Makes the older 911s seem al dente.

[techweenie]

...and I just got a call from a friend who is putting his Seal Gray '03 996 coupe on the market. He wants me to manage the sale. I'll look the car over next week and do some research. I've already warned him that the market prices are pretty low on these cars.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by tdw28210

I've seen a few early sub $40k turbos - tempting. Never dug too deep, probably ragged out, but that is a TON of performance for under $40k....but those damn Boxster headlights....

No 996 turbo has "Boxster headlights". The turbo came out as a 2001 model with the later style headlights. And $40k will buy a good one, I've seen them for $30k or less with high miles or issues.

Also, $18k should buy an excellent early 996, (low miles, pampered, etc.). I paid $10k for a pretty abused one with high miles 7 years ago. It was a great car.

[Driven97]

Oh yeah, 996 turbos have to be far and away the best value in 911s right now. I'd have to sell the 3.2 to get one of those though, and that's not happening.

[medici78]

I remember when 74-77 weren't desirable and look at them now.
I never owned a 996 so I can't speak on the power, etc. I had a 996TT and agree the interior was a joke but it was very liveable and had its unique charms. I recall the first 996 I drove (2k C4) still had a strong traditional 911 feel to it that has become so diluted as to be nearly unrecognizeable in the current 991. Don't get me wrong, I also like the 991 but for different reasons.
While I agree the interior left much to be desired, I don't agree that the build quality was subpar. Don't confuse the, admittedly, cheap feeling interior materials with subpar build quality. These cars were engineered and built to quite exact tolerances. I know several people with higher mileage 996's that have held up as well as any car built that year.
The early 996 still has a much more raw feel, relative to the current 991 models, which may have it's advantage in the long run.
The snobs may scoff, but they have no idea what they are missing out on.

[speeder]

Other than their well known Achilles heels, (IMS), 996s are as tough and bullet-proof as any vehicle ever sold. Absolutely indestructible.

[Matt Monson]

996s don't have "weak" 2nd gear synchros. In fact they have basically the same 2nd gear synchro as the 993, GT3 and 996 Turbo.

The 996 Carrera AND 996 Turbo were both the victims of an assembly screw up at Getrag that eventually cost Porsche a lot of money and cost Getrag the relationship because for years they denied the issue existed.

There are 14 shims varying by .5mm in thickness from one size to the next. It goes under 4th gear. It sets the stack height and the location of 2nd gear relative to the slider. The workers at Getrag were using the same shim in every gearbox, assuming 100% consistency with respect to the width of 3rd,4th and 2nd gears. A risky assumption indeed when we are talking about .5mm combined variance making a difference.

The result was the 2nd gear popout fiasco. Any car that had the issue was fixed under warranty or shortly thereafter. Either it showed up in the early miles or the car was well within spec.

The synchro is not weak. It's actually pretty damn robust. Any car you test drive today 10-15 years later that pops out of 2nd is a car with a worn out 2nd gear synchro from miles or one with fubar'd engagement teeth because the owner drives like an asshat and downshifts while still going to fast or fails to rev match if keeping the speeds up. 2nd gear popout on a car with 75k on it is not the result of the assembly screw up. It is the result of driven hard out away wet. Same gearbox in the 2001-2004 Boxster S.

[Tonger]

Originally Posted by Matt Monson

996s don't have "weak" 2nd gear synchros. In fact they have basically the same 2nd gear synchro as the 993, GT3 and 996 Turbo.

The 996 Carrera AND 996 Turbo were both the victims of an assembly screw up at Getrag that eventually cost Porsche a lot of money and cost Getrag the relationship because for years they denied the issue existed.

There are 14 shims varying by .5mm in thickness from one size to the next. It goes under 4th gear. It sets the stack height and the location of 2nd gear relative to the slider. The workers at Getrag were using the same shim in every gearbox, assuming 100% consistency with respect to the width of 3rd,4th and 2nd gears. A risky assumption indeed when we are talking about .5mm combined variance making a difference.

The result was the 2nd gear popout fiasco. Any car that had the issue was fixed under warranty or shortly thereafter. Either it showed up in the early miles or the car was well within spec.

The synchro is not weak. It's actually pretty damn robust. Any car you test drive today 10-15 years later that pops out of 2nd is a car with a worn out 2nd gear synchro from miles or one with fubar'd engagement teeth because the owner drives like an asshat and downshifts while still going to fast or fails to rev match if keeping the speeds up. 2nd gear popout on a car with 75k on it is not the result of the assembly screw up. It is the result of driven hard out away wet. Same gearbox in the 2001-2004 Boxster S.

MM - if you read it again you'll see that I was referring to the fragile 2nd gear synchro in my 930 and not the 996. The 996 has a nice bronze 2nd gear synchro that works really well. We are totally in agreement...

[Matt Monson]

Originally Posted by Tonger

MM - if you read it again you'll see that I was referring to the fragile 2nd gear synchro in my 930 and not the 996. The 996 has a nice bronze 2nd gear synchro that works really well. We are totally in agreement...

Sorry, I totally missed the transition to the fact you were making comparisons.

Regardless, I will let the post stand because I see the 2nd gear popout issue get almost as much Henny Penny as the IMS. Good for a later reader coming along wondering about 996s who does a search to get good information versus the sky is falling stuff posted all over RL and 6speed.