912. In genera. Discuss.

[pnut_lee]

I din't think it's a stretch to say that equivalent condition '69 cars, 912 and 911, that the 912 would be half price. Maybe that gap is narrowing. Perhaps 60% is more in line with the market these days?

[rdwinelover]

Maybe that gap is narrowing.

.

It's not a maybe, it is factually.

[r-mm]

See you guys proved my point with regards to the shadow of the 911! Find me a single post anywhere complaining about the 100 or so horsepower in a Duetto, Sprint, Giulia... Its taken on faith that these are old cars and will behave as such with all the charms and frustrations that implies. Not to mention that its possible to so a period sympathetic engine hop up on any of the above which preserves value and eeks a couple two three more ponies out.

Im still not sure if 30-40 is the new normal for excellent cars or if its the bleeding edge. Comparable ads are rarely helpful given the degree to which asks are ahead of buys.

[johnvan8]

Whenever a 911 vs 912 discussion pops up, it always, without fail, turns into a HP debate. A 912 was never about HP. It's unfortunate that many 912s were bought ONLY because a 911 could not be afforded and so most 912 buyers fail to see the car as what it truly is: a simpler 911 with a 200 lbs weight reduction in the most crucial area. When you compare a 67 912 (1.6 L, 90 hp) to a 67 911 (non S, 2.0 L, 110 hp) with 200 lbs extra weight in the rear, you can see that the 912 definitely has a balance/nimbleness advantage. That's why they always beat 911s at autoX events. When people say "I won't buy a 912 because a 911 has more power" (again, compared to the same year/vintage), they just don't understand what the 912 is all about. My 67 912 with its meager 90 hp was just more fun to drive than my 85 3.2. I don't know how to explain it but I'm sure those who have had a 912 will understand.

[techweenie]

Originally Posted by johnvan8

Whenever a 911 vs 912 discussion pops up, it always, without fail, turns into a HP debate. A 912 was never about HP. It's unfortunate that many 912s were bought ONLY because a 911 could not be afforded and so most 912 buyers fail to see the car as what it truly is: a simpler 911 with a 200 lbs weight reduction in the most crucial area. When you compare a 67 912 (1.6 L, 90 hp) to a 67 911 (non S, 2.0 L, 110 hp) with 200 lbs extra weight in the rear, you can see that the 912 definitely has a balance/nimbleness advantage. That's why they always beat 911s at autoX events. When people say "I won't buy a 912 because a 911 has more power" (again, compared to the same year/vintage), they just don't understand what the 912 is all about. My 67 912 with its meager 90 hp was just more fun to drive than my 85 3.2. I don't know how to explain it but I'm sure those who have had a 912 will understand.

Although HP is big on my 'fun component' list, there's some truth hiere. ^^^

A bit of history for you young pups: 912s outsold 911s by as much as 2:1 in the first years of the 911 -- and it was partly because "Porsches" had been 4 cylinder cars from day one. The idea of a 6 was weird and over-complex to people attracted by the "giant killer" simplicity of the 4 cylinder cars.

[NYNick]

Originally Posted by techweenie

Although HP is big on my 'fun component' list, there's some truth hiere. ^^^

A bit of history for you young pups: 912s outsold 911s by as much as 2:1 in the first years of the 911 -- and it was partly because "Porsches" had been 4 cylinder cars from day one. The idea of a 6 was weird and over-complex to people attracted by the "giant killer" simplicity of the 4 cylinder cars.

^^^This.

Plus, the 911's were a lot more expensive than the previous 356's. I'm also betting the 912 was a result of a lot of leftover 4 cylinder engines lying about, besides the customer resistance.

And someone mentioned the 911 is what made Porsche famous. I totally disagree. The 356, AND IT'S 4 CYLINDER ENGINE, is what made Porsche famous.

[Milesaway]

Power to weight ratio is what really matters and the 912 wins hands down. I have a few 911's but the 912 is by far my favorite Porsche to drive. I hope no one agrees and prices stay low

[johnvan8]

"Endless power" out of a 2L 110hp motor? Really? Have you ever driven a 912 and 911 (same year) back to back?

[r-mm]

What are the common paths to slightly more power from the 912's 1.6? Is there a high comp P&C set, cam, carb upgrade that is popular?

[christiandk]

Take a look at euro pricing of the 912.....yeah asking aint getting but still.



Porsche 912 Angebote bei mobile.de

[Matt Monson]

What are the common paths to slightly more power from the 912's 1.6? Is there a high comp P&C set, cam, carb upgrade that is popular?

A Shasta 1720cc P&C conversion with a Web cam and without or with Webers.

I owned a 110hp '68 911t before my 912. The 912 feels faster and I wouldn't be surprised if it is. I live out in the country and it is plenty of fun ripping through the turns in 2nd and 3rd gear. I've got other cars for the track.

[r-mm]

Originally Posted by Matt Monson

A Shasta 1720cc P&C conversion with a Web cam and without or with Webers.

I owned a 110hp '68 911t before my 912. The 912 feels faster and I wouldn't be surprised if it is. I live out in the country and it is plenty of fun ripping through the turns in 2nd and 3rd gear. I've got other cars for the track.

$1500 for hi comp overbore P&C set with rings etc? Sounds like a good deal compared to 911 parts. What are the truly frightening (cost wise) parts to have to replace on a 912 motor? From what I gather hairline cracked heads are common and a relatively easy weld-up fix.

[SilberUrS6]

My first Porsche drive was a 912. I really loved that car, the way it felt and smelled - but I did want a car with the snarl and kick of the flat six. But I still think about that 912.

I agree that the collector segment of the market is driving 912 pricing. If it looks longhood, buy it.

[copbait73]

Originally Posted by SilberUrS6

If it looks longhood, buy it.

This observation goes to the core of increased interest.....and add it's old. All the other technical stuff suggesting people finally recognize balance and value are bull.

[TPorsche912]

I can add my $.2 here since I've owned both a 912 and 930 simultaneously. While that's hardly a great comparison, at the same time my very good friend owned a '71 911T that I drove on a regular basis. When I wasn't driving the 930 I much preferred the "feel" of the 912 over the 911. The 911 just felt tail heavy to me and not as balanced as the 912. I guess the H.P. thing didn't mean so much when compared to the 930. Even the T felt low on power in comparison.

Different occasions called for a different car. I have to admit to feeling a bit superior anytime I was out in the 930. You really don't have to drive that car in anger to enjoy it's potential and the impression it makes on folks in the know.
And for steep canyon cruising the 930 won hands down, but for everyday driving and carving the flat twisties, the 912 is wonderfully balanced and can be kept on the revs for lots of fun without dangerous speeds.

What really impressed me about the two cars was when I stared into the engine bays. To imagine that Porsche could stuff so much engine in the same compartment on the 930 was simply amazing. I sold the 930 and kept the 912 based quite a bit on that engine compartment. As I got older I knew that I would much prefer maintaining a cavernous engine compartment as opposed to working on a car with mirrors and special tools at every turn.

I miss the power of the 930, but as has been pointed out here, you can only really enjoy a 930 at the limit. That's what it was built for and that's how it's meant to be driven. Of course it can be a daily driver, but why.
I would have to compare the 911T as being very similar to the 912 although the 912 is better balanced. If you compare the power of the two I just never felt that the 911 gave me enough to make up for the balance and feel of the 912.

As for the original question, of course the 912 is rising in value in an almost linear curve as the 911. I would have to say that the return on investment may be a little higher on the 912 right now, simply because they started lower and have, and continue to rise at almost the same pace. As has been pointed out, I don't think there is a particular 912 buyer, but folks who just want to jump on the rising Porsche values, and that's their entry point.

I will never regret keeping the 912. I may not get the same smile when I fire her up as I did with the rumble of the 930, but I still smile just as much when driving and I don't have to keep my eyes glued to the temp gauge whenever I sit in traffic.

[Ronnie's.930]

Originally Posted by TPorsche912

I miss the power of the 930, but as has been pointed out here, you can only really enjoy a 930 at the limit.

Complete and utter nonsense!

[Ronnie's.930]

Originally Posted by copbait73

This observation goes to the core of increased interest.....and add it's old. All the other technical stuff suggesting people finally recognize balance and value are bull.

Agreed 100% - the whole balance and value jibber jabber is remarkably silly.

[johnvan8]

Originally Posted by pmax

Who said anything about the same year ?

The 912 is priced similar to the SC/3.2's so they are comparable for someone looking for the best air cooled driving experience for the buck.

Are you seriously implying that a 3.2 shopper would consider a 912 just because the price was similar? Really? Sorry but I have to disagree. If I were shopping for a 3.2 , I’m obviously looking for a certain level of performance/power; I may consider an SC or perhaps even a midyear because they are somewhat similar in looks and feel, but I would NEVER consider a 912 just because it is priced similarly. It just doesn’t make sense to me. . Let’s say you were looking to spend $35k on a 84 911. WHY ON EARTH would you even consider a 69 912? Just because it’s priced the same? This tells me you just want to buy a 911-looking thingy for X dollars and don’t care how it drives; might as well go buy one of those 911 V8 conversions and then you’ll be a lot closer to that “endless power” you seem to be looking for…

[TPorsche912]

Originally Posted by Ronnie's.930

Complete and utter nonsense!

My bad and I deserve to be called out on it. I certainly could have worded that better.

What I was trying to point out is the difference between a 912, 911, and 930, in my experience. You can certainly enjoy driving any of the three at different levels. I also enjoy driving my wifes FX35 Sport. In every day driving, stop and go, around town, leisurely driving I just don't find any of them better than the other. They are all capable of putting a smile on my face whenever I get a chance to open them up a bit and any vintage car will always be an attraction on the streets. Maybe after 50 yrs of owning everything under the sun with wheels, my "enjoy" button is a little harder to press. If I had to pick my favorite Porsche under those conditions it would probably be my 928S back in the 80's.

The giant, and I mean GIANT difference, is driving a 930 at it's limit. Maybe it's the turbo lag, maybe the brakes, maybe it's the absolute attention you have to give the car. Whatever it is, it is the full enjoyment of the car, and in my humble opinion that's why you own a 930. I certainly don't want to step on the toes of any 911 owners. They are great cars and I'm sure there are many as capable as a 930. But they are certainly different beasts and until you've driven both hard it's difficult to understand just how much difference there is. Once again, only my opinions being expressed.

I never had the need to change my shorts after driving a 911 at full tilt. While I owned the 930 I could have been Hanes best customer. A 930 is always itching to bite you. I can't even imagine what it must have been like to try to tame one back in '76 on 205/225 tires. Now that's a scary thought.

[ficke]

IPorsche912, I agree with you, I have a 930 and on boost is where it shines and is in its element and that can not happen legally in city driving, maybe for a fraction of a moment once in a long while. The suspension does not even start to work or the car feels right till you get over 75MPH, so idling around town is a game of testing my patience and ability to resist temptation, admittedly I am not good at that. So I do 90% of my city driven in my 68 911 and that has issues with temptation also. So I am actively looking for a 912 to balance the fleet out with and flog in the city.
I like how 912's feel, lite and balanced, you can do stupid stuff and not get bit as easily in them and they are real casual. Rice burners do not feel as threatened by them as they are by the Turbo, so you get less of the stupid drivers around you stuff.
I also grew up when many believed the four cylinder Porsche engine was considered a true Porsche engine and the 911 6 was looked at by the Porschfile, like many do water cooled today, as not a true Porsche engine.
Porsche's were considered the little cars that could, they were the giant killers. Doing more with less and the 912 really sums up that early Porsche greatness, lite and simple refined to the point it does more than the sum of its parts.