MR2 Owners Club Forum banner

1 - 20 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
581 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm thinking of selling my 91 NA and getting a used 911, something I've always wanted, but never really got serious about...until now. :smile: I'm thinking either an SC, 3.2 or C2, depending on price, mileage, condition, etc.

I'm just scratching the surface on this and am looking for input from all sides. I bounced the thought off my wife, and she told me to go for it. :smile: The mechanic her family has used for years used to race Porsches, and he owns "a few" - he keeps four or five of them inside his shop, so I'll definitely pick his brain (and maybe his inventory :p ).

Anyway, just looking for input anyone has to offer. Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,388 Posts
check out some part prices ;)

the ~3 litre 911's still carry a pretty damn high price.. i LOVE 911's, but couldnt possibly afford one right now : /
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,044 Posts
anything 996 and newer is watercooled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
I had a 72T 2.4l with an 2.7 l RS conversion 168 RWHP.
Definately a unique car to drive, two hands is a must.
Great organization, events, clubs meets, track days,
In the good old days the only real Porsches were air cooled.
If you ski.. they are a slomon ski...they do not want to go it a straight line.
It was maxed out at 168.
My MR2 is just not even close at 325.
It's a tough call..
A 911 is something every real car nut must own..
But for how long..
And at what cost...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,077 Posts
my dad has an 81 911 sc 3.0
i love that car, it handels so great and has decent power, i would deff get a 78 or newer though, a lot of problems were fixed after 78.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
581 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Thanks for all the input. Yes, in additional to the many great things about the 911, many of the caveats of ownership have been pointed out to me. Those warnings have probably kept me from pulling the trigger for so long. But recently, the thought of owning and driving one has occupied me more than in the past. There are many practical reasons not to do it, but I'll only have regrets if I never go for it.

As far as shopping, I'm merely in the exploratory stages. I'm going to take my time. I still need to do a lot of research, and I'll probably look at listing every day, arrive at a model/price/mileage/condition combination that's both realistic and in my comfort zone, and then just try to find it. Of course, the temptation to spend more, or settle for a higher mileage of lesser condition vehicle just to get in always exists. We'll see how it goes.
 

·
Round n round we go
Joined
·
3,030 Posts
Older 911s are not really for speed any more. They are just fun classic cars that you drive around in. You could make them faster put it costs a lot of money. A 325hp 3.0-3.2 Flat-6 will cost you $7-10K just for the motor.

I sold a 3.0L motor that ran on 4 cylinders for $3K six months ago.

I have owned:

'70 targa 3.0L
'73 targa 2.4L
'78 SC coupe

My mr2 is faster that any of them. Put it will never have prestige and classic car value of the porsches.

The best advice I can give is get the cleanest and newest cars you can afford. They are not like MR2 where you can redo a whole car for a couple of grand. I personally like the 964s. They are not that high in demand, look new, and have fairly modern powertrain.

Get "Excellence" magazine. They have great buying guides for all model porsches.

My current project involves a '70 911 and 500hp V8 motor. :smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,077 Posts
mow said:
Get "Excellence" magazine. They have great buying guides for all model porsches.
yes Excellence is a very good mag to get and use, so is panorama, not as good IMO but very helpfull. :)
also speend the money to get a real good one, it will be much much much X100 in the long run :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
581 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
So I've eliminated the 964 ('89/90-94) from consideration. Apparently the pre-93 versions had problems with faulty dual-mass flywheels, failing distributor units, and cylinder-head leakage - not a gamble I'm willing to take. And the later model-years are getting beyond what I'm planning to pay.

I'm also leaning away from the SC (78-83). I've been told (more than once) that the Motronic fuel injection available in the 3.2 liter Carrera (84-89) is far superirior to the system in previous models, and if I can afford it, I should get it.

So, as of now, the 3.2 liter Carrera is my goal. I likely won't get a Cabriolet - I'm not a big convertible fan. We shall see...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
The 911 is one of my all time favorite cars, but I have to say, it wasn't what I expected the first time I drove one. The car I drove was a late 70's Carrera and, I don't know if it's the same with a lot of the 70s-80's Carreras, but the clutch was extremely heavy. Driving a car like this in everyday traffic would be brutal!

The other thing I noticed, and maybe this is just a personal preference, but I didn't feel the interior was sculpted in a driver friendly way as much as the SW20/21 MR2. The ergonomics of it just felt strange to me, and the gear shift in particular, felt too low to the floorboard and too far to the right for my personal liking.

Otherwise, I thought it was a really cool car but definetly something that requires precision driving and a lot of skill.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,906 Posts
I know its not the most popular but I've always been partial to the 928's.

I'd look at those and the 911's.

Go ahead and get one, its ok to try out different cars. Have fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
617 Posts
I'd reccomend you get the best 84-89 Carrera you can find for the amount you are willing to spend. These are generally acknowldeged to be some of the best driving 911's of any era. They are significantly improved over the earlier SC's and retain more classic styling and reliability than the later 964s. The transmission is a large improvement as well (this series uses the G50 tranny which is much smoother and stronger than the previous 915 tranny).


Good luck in your hunt! You should be able to find something worth buying for around $20k.
 

·
Round n round we go
Joined
·
3,030 Posts
I don't think all the 3.2s used the G50. The earlier cars still used the 915 tranny. I think they switched to a G50 in around '87.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,479 Posts
Anyone know whats so bad about a 74 and 75's? I think thats the year they changed to the new body style. I know it's before they went to galvenized (sp?) steel so they will be a bit more rusty... but I wouldn't want to own one thats after 75 because of smog reasons. Everything from the newer ones up to 88 will still swap over to the older ones too correct?

Well someday I'll find one. I want to make a rotary 911.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
581 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Rory said:
I'd reccomend you get the best 84-89 Carrera you can find for the amount you are willing to spend...
Yep, my goal is definitely the 3.2 Carrera. I'm looking for something in great condition w/relatively low miles, and I've resolved that I'll likely get into a bidding war to get it. I still look @ SC listings, though, just in case I come across a real gem. But the 3.2 is my preference.

mow said:
I don't think all the 3.2s used the G50. The earlier cars still used the 915 tranny. I think they switched to a G50 in around '87.
That's right, 84-86 had the 915, and 87-89 had the G50.

Deuces Wild said:
Anyone know whats so bad about a 74 and 75's?...
This is from an FAQ I saw. It refers to the 2.7 liter engines used in 73-77:

"It's a tragic story. Porsche increased the displacement of the
2.4 without providing enough cooling and, to add insult to injury,
the US models had thermal reactors (except for 1974) that got
REALLY hot. The result is, among other things, head studs that
pulled out of the crank case (due to thermal expansion of the
cylinders) and destroyed valve trains. All of this resulted in an
average engine life of about 50,000 miles..." :mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,479 Posts
SenorDos said:
This is from an FAQ I saw. It refers to the 2.7 liter engines used in 73-77:

"It's a tragic story. Porsche increased the displacement of the
2.4 without providing enough cooling and, to add insult to injury,
the US models had thermal reactors (except for 1974) that got
REALLY hot. The result is, among other things, head studs that
pulled out of the crank case (due to thermal expansion of the
cylinders) and destroyed valve trains. All of this resulted in an
average engine life of about 50,000 miles..." :mad:
Well thats good for me since I would be dumping the Uber $$ porsche engine anyway. Maybe I'll find a nice hardtop with a blown engine someday.
 
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
Top