Attempting to buy a 3.2,having second thoughts
12-30-2018, 03:38 AM
#31
Advanced
Thread Starter
I have owned an 84 3.2 Carrera for over 10 years and think it hits an absolute sweet spot in the 911 range. My car needed a lot of work when I got it. I did the work and then some and it's been trouble free for 8 years. I wouldn't hesitate to drive it coast to coast and back. Transmission is a personal choice. If you want to understand where Porsche came from, get a 915. If you want that older feeling and want a view in to where Porsche was going, get a G50. Lastly, if $55k is your budget, you should be able to find a 3.2 that needs nothing. Prices have softened recently.....try the PCA classifieds. It's loaded with cars that need little to no work for $45-60k.
I've read from numerous people that I should check the PCA classifieds. How do I join PCA without first owning a Porsche? I thought you have to own one (supply a VIN) before you can join.
Edit: Just checked and I am able to browse the classifieds without being a PCA member.
12-30-2018, 05:34 AM
#32
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I have a ’85 Coupe for over 20y. Rebuilt about everything because as much I like to drive, I like to tinker in my garage.
My opinion about the 915 and G50 is that you have to drive with 915, with G50 you just press the clutch and move the stick.
This is what I Iike, to drive the car even I’m not very good. But you have to drive them both to know. 911 handle so well that speed seem to creep up, you don’t realise how fast you go. Often the 915 sync rings are shot because of wrong oil and misuse. I don’ want to start an oil debate here, but the very slippery synthetic GL5 oils might not be the best oil for a 915. But transmissions can be easily rebuilt.
I’m an old fart, to me it seem that slowly Porsche has slipped from a sport car to luxury cruisers. 3.2 already have these items what I don’t think belong to a sport car, like sunroof, electric seat etc. But this is what most of us want. Whatever some say you can’t really compensate weight with horsepower. This why I like my 356 more.
My wote? for 3.2 without sunroof!
My opinion about the 915 and G50 is that you have to drive with 915, with G50 you just press the clutch and move the stick.
This is what I Iike, to drive the car even I’m not very good. But you have to drive them both to know. 911 handle so well that speed seem to creep up, you don’t realise how fast you go. Often the 915 sync rings are shot because of wrong oil and misuse. I don’ want to start an oil debate here, but the very slippery synthetic GL5 oils might not be the best oil for a 915. But transmissions can be easily rebuilt.
I’m an old fart, to me it seem that slowly Porsche has slipped from a sport car to luxury cruisers. 3.2 already have these items what I don’t think belong to a sport car, like sunroof, electric seat etc. But this is what most of us want. Whatever some say you can’t really compensate weight with horsepower. This why I like my 356 more.
My wote? for 3.2 without sunroof!
12-30-2018, 10:39 AM
#33
Rennlist Member
I sent you a PM about a car that I think might be good for you but I have not heard back. It is in Houston TX and belongs to a friend. Check your PM
12-30-2018, 03:03 PM
#34
Rennlist Member
Thanks for the info!
I've read from numerous people that I should check the PCA classifieds. How do I join PCA without first owning a Porsche? I thought you have to own one (supply a VIN) before you can join.
Edit: Just checked and I am able to browse the classifieds without being a PCA member.
I've read from numerous people that I should check the PCA classifieds. How do I join PCA without first owning a Porsche? I thought you have to own one (supply a VIN) before you can join.
Edit: Just checked and I am able to browse the classifieds without being a PCA member.
12-30-2018, 03:27 PM
#35
Rennlist Member
You can check my signature to see the cars I've owned. I think I'm in a good position to advise you, and the best advice I can give is to drive a 993 and an '80s Carrera to see which you prefer. The 993 will be quieter and more comfortable, and will be a bit faster, but will also seem heavier and bigger (which it is). I loved my 993 but if I can only have one fun 911 to go for weekend drives in, it would be the the G50 Carrera. And it is.
I'm acquainted with Tim Holt. I bought my '88 CE from him (in my avatar). He's not a mechanic, but he knows the 911 market very well. He may have misled you slightly about the valve guide "issue". Here's some detail:
A small amount of 84-89 Carreras, back in the 80's and early 90's, suffered from premature valve guide wear. Maybe 5% of the cars did. When it happened, it was almost always before the car reached 50k miles. Unfortunately, over the years this led to the car earning a reputation among the misinformed that all of them suffer from "valve guide wear". Guess what? ALL cars suffer from valve guide wear. Toyotas, Jeeps and Porsches alike. Valve guides are always a wear item on cars, just like pistons, cylinders and bearings. Back in the 80's there were few cars being made that could expect to go much beyond 100k before needing some sort of overhaul (Toyotas being a notable exception). I would say that an average for 3.2 Carreras that didn't suffer from premature valve guide wear would be a bit over 100k. Many, including two that I owned before my newest G50 with 63k, make it well past 120k. Plus, valve guide wear happens very slowly and gradually so that the engine tires out gracefully. You can continue to drive these on lower compression and barely tell a difference. If you wait too long, the valve stems can overheat and you can drop a valve into a cylinder with disastrous results, so if you buy a higher mileage Carrera you should have the compression, and especially the leakdown, monitored on a regular basis.
The 915 vs G50 debate has been going on for a long time. A 915 Carrera with good bushings and a properly adjusted coupler is a little less refined than the stock G50 (which also has a hydraulic clutch instead of the cable-driven clutch of the 915), but still is perfectly fine. The G50 Carrera comes at a premium but I believe it's worth it, because you'll get that money back on resale anyway, so the cost of ownership over your ownership period will be the same regardless of what you pick. Both the shifting and the clutch operation are slightly smoother than the well-setup 915. But beware - many 915s are not well set up, and may have worn bushings are maladjusted couplers, so keep that in mind when test driving one, if you do.
P.S. One more thing - the 87-89 G50 Carrera is spec'd at 10 hp more than the 915 Carrera, due to a slight remap in the Motronic ECU. Not much, but worth mentioning.
I'm acquainted with Tim Holt. I bought my '88 CE from him (in my avatar). He's not a mechanic, but he knows the 911 market very well. He may have misled you slightly about the valve guide "issue". Here's some detail:
A small amount of 84-89 Carreras, back in the 80's and early 90's, suffered from premature valve guide wear. Maybe 5% of the cars did. When it happened, it was almost always before the car reached 50k miles. Unfortunately, over the years this led to the car earning a reputation among the misinformed that all of them suffer from "valve guide wear". Guess what? ALL cars suffer from valve guide wear. Toyotas, Jeeps and Porsches alike. Valve guides are always a wear item on cars, just like pistons, cylinders and bearings. Back in the 80's there were few cars being made that could expect to go much beyond 100k before needing some sort of overhaul (Toyotas being a notable exception). I would say that an average for 3.2 Carreras that didn't suffer from premature valve guide wear would be a bit over 100k. Many, including two that I owned before my newest G50 with 63k, make it well past 120k. Plus, valve guide wear happens very slowly and gradually so that the engine tires out gracefully. You can continue to drive these on lower compression and barely tell a difference. If you wait too long, the valve stems can overheat and you can drop a valve into a cylinder with disastrous results, so if you buy a higher mileage Carrera you should have the compression, and especially the leakdown, monitored on a regular basis.
The 915 vs G50 debate has been going on for a long time. A 915 Carrera with good bushings and a properly adjusted coupler is a little less refined than the stock G50 (which also has a hydraulic clutch instead of the cable-driven clutch of the 915), but still is perfectly fine. The G50 Carrera comes at a premium but I believe it's worth it, because you'll get that money back on resale anyway, so the cost of ownership over your ownership period will be the same regardless of what you pick. Both the shifting and the clutch operation are slightly smoother than the well-setup 915. But beware - many 915s are not well set up, and may have worn bushings are maladjusted couplers, so keep that in mind when test driving one, if you do.
P.S. One more thing - the 87-89 G50 Carrera is spec'd at 10 hp more than the 915 Carrera, due to a slight remap in the Motronic ECU. Not much, but worth mentioning.
12-31-2018, 12:33 AM
#36
You can check my signature to see the cars I've owned. I think I'm in a good position to advise you, and the best advice I can give is to drive a 993 and an '80s Carrera to see which you prefer. The 993 will be quieter and more comfortable, and will be a bit faster, but will also seem heavier and bigger (which it is). I loved my 993 but if I can only have one fun 911 to go for weekend drives in, it would be the the G50 Carrera. And it is.
I'm acquainted with Tim Holt. I bought my '88 CE from him (in my avatar). He's not a mechanic, but he knows the 911 market very well. He may have misled you slightly about the valve guide "issue". Here's some detail:
A small amount of 84-89 Carreras, back in the 80's and early 90's, suffered from premature valve guide wear. Maybe 5% of the cars did. When it happened, it was almost always before the car reached 50k miles. Unfortunately, over the years this led to the car earning a reputation among the misinformed that all of them suffer from "valve guide wear". Guess what? ALL cars suffer from valve guide wear. Toyotas, Jeeps and Porsches alike. Valve guides are always a wear item on cars, just like pistons, cylinders and bearings. Back in the 80's there were few cars being made that could expect to go much beyond 100k before needing some sort of overhaul (Toyotas being a notable exception). I would say that an average for 3.2 Carreras that didn't suffer from premature valve guide wear would be a bit over 100k. Many, including two that I owned before my newest G50 with 63k, make it well past 120k. Plus, valve guide wear happens very slowly and gradually so that the engine tires out gracefully. You can continue to drive these on lower compression and barely tell a difference. If you wait too long, the valve stems can overheat and you can drop a valve into a cylinder with disastrous results, so if you buy a higher mileage Carrera you should have the compression, and especially the leakdown, monitored on a regular basis.
The 915 vs G50 debate has been going on for a long time. A 915 Carrera with good bushings and a properly adjusted coupler is a little less refined than the stock G50 (which also has a hydraulic clutch instead of the cable-driven clutch of the 915), but still is perfectly fine. The G50 Carrera comes at a premium but I believe it's worth it, because you'll get that money back on resale anyway, so the cost of ownership over your ownership period will be the same regardless of what you pick. Both the shifting and the clutch operation are slightly smoother than the well-setup 915. But beware - many 915s are not well set up, and may have worn bushings are maladjusted couplers, so keep that in mind when test driving one, if you do.
P.S. One more thing - the 87-89 G50 Carrera is spec'd at 10 hp more than the 915 Carrera, due to a slight remap in the Motronic ECU. Not much, but worth mentioning.
I'm acquainted with Tim Holt. I bought my '88 CE from him (in my avatar). He's not a mechanic, but he knows the 911 market very well. He may have misled you slightly about the valve guide "issue". Here's some detail:
A small amount of 84-89 Carreras, back in the 80's and early 90's, suffered from premature valve guide wear. Maybe 5% of the cars did. When it happened, it was almost always before the car reached 50k miles. Unfortunately, over the years this led to the car earning a reputation among the misinformed that all of them suffer from "valve guide wear". Guess what? ALL cars suffer from valve guide wear. Toyotas, Jeeps and Porsches alike. Valve guides are always a wear item on cars, just like pistons, cylinders and bearings. Back in the 80's there were few cars being made that could expect to go much beyond 100k before needing some sort of overhaul (Toyotas being a notable exception). I would say that an average for 3.2 Carreras that didn't suffer from premature valve guide wear would be a bit over 100k. Many, including two that I owned before my newest G50 with 63k, make it well past 120k. Plus, valve guide wear happens very slowly and gradually so that the engine tires out gracefully. You can continue to drive these on lower compression and barely tell a difference. If you wait too long, the valve stems can overheat and you can drop a valve into a cylinder with disastrous results, so if you buy a higher mileage Carrera you should have the compression, and especially the leakdown, monitored on a regular basis.
The 915 vs G50 debate has been going on for a long time. A 915 Carrera with good bushings and a properly adjusted coupler is a little less refined than the stock G50 (which also has a hydraulic clutch instead of the cable-driven clutch of the 915), but still is perfectly fine. The G50 Carrera comes at a premium but I believe it's worth it, because you'll get that money back on resale anyway, so the cost of ownership over your ownership period will be the same regardless of what you pick. Both the shifting and the clutch operation are slightly smoother than the well-setup 915. But beware - many 915s are not well set up, and may have worn bushings are maladjusted couplers, so keep that in mind when test driving one, if you do.
P.S. One more thing - the 87-89 G50 Carrera is spec'd at 10 hp more than the 915 Carrera, due to a slight remap in the Motronic ECU. Not much, but worth mentioning.
after I rebuilt my 915 changed syncros 2 gears and put a Rennshift shifter, and coupling. Its a whole different world. I need a spring loaded center. Thats what really bothered me with the 915 before that needing syncros and no spring loaded center it felt like a semi automatic 4spd in the karmann ghia .
i personally like a mechanical feel. I had an 06 997 that I could shift while on the phone and half asleep
Its a matter of personal preference
01-03-2019, 02:49 PM
#37
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I am happy with my 915, which is rebuilt and I also have a WEVO shifter and coupler and all the bushings are new, so it is working well. It is a functional and nice to use. I have driven a good G50, and it is an objectively better transmission, but not by a large margin versus a 915 in good condition. Personally, I would put transmission as secondary filter in my search and concentrate on overall condition of the car. To me, any SC or 3.2 Carrera in good condition is a very solid choice. I would much rather have a really nice and well-sorted SC versus a tired and frayed G50.
Two other point to ponder in the 915 versus G50 debate:
1) A 915 is expensive to properly rebuild, but a G50 is even more, by quite a bit. So, if you are looking at a G50, really assess if the transmission is good as-is.
2) The 1973 2.7 RS is considered one of the most (if not THE) most desirable 911s ever, and no one complains about the 915 in that car! It is only because the Carreras were the series that saw the change that people agonize over it!
Condition, condition, condition...
Two other point to ponder in the 915 versus G50 debate:
1) A 915 is expensive to properly rebuild, but a G50 is even more, by quite a bit. So, if you are looking at a G50, really assess if the transmission is good as-is.
2) The 1973 2.7 RS is considered one of the most (if not THE) most desirable 911s ever, and no one complains about the 915 in that car! It is only because the Carreras were the series that saw the change that people agonize over it!
Condition, condition, condition...
01-03-2019, 10:59 PM
#38
Three Wheelin'
I am happy with my 915, which is rebuilt and I also have a WEVO shifter and coupler and all the bushings are new, so it is working well. It is a functional and nice to use. I have driven a good G50, and it is an objectively better transmission, but not by a large margin versus a 915 in good condition. Personally, I would put transmission as secondary filter in my search and concentrate on overall condition of the car. To me, any SC or 3.2 Carrera in good condition is a very solid choice. I would much rather have a really nice and well-sorted SC versus a tired and frayed G50.
Two other point to ponder in the 915 versus G50 debate:
1) A 915 is expensive to properly rebuild, but a G50 is even more, by quite a bit. So, if you are looking at a G50, really assess if the transmission is good as-is.
2) The 1973 2.7 RS is considered one of the most (if not THE) most desirable 911s ever, and no one complains about the 915 in that car! It is only because the Carreras were the series that saw the change that people agonize over it!
Condition, condition, condition...
Two other point to ponder in the 915 versus G50 debate:
1) A 915 is expensive to properly rebuild, but a G50 is even more, by quite a bit. So, if you are looking at a G50, really assess if the transmission is good as-is.
2) The 1973 2.7 RS is considered one of the most (if not THE) most desirable 911s ever, and no one complains about the 915 in that car! It is only because the Carreras were the series that saw the change that people agonize over it!
Condition, condition, condition...
Regarding Carrera 3.2L, I personally prefer a properly set up 915 over the G50. But go with a G50 if you plan on really upgrading the power but that is a whole other conversation.
01-03-2019, 11:16 PM
#39
I am happy with my 915, which is rebuilt and I also have a WEVO shifter and coupler and all the bushings are new, so it is working well. It is a functional and nice to use. I have driven a good G50, and it is an objectively better transmission, but not by a large margin versus a 915 in good condition. Personally, I would put transmission as secondary filter in my search and concentrate on overall condition of the car. To me, any SC or 3.2 Carrera in good condition is a very solid choice. I would much rather have a really nice and well-sorted SC versus a tired and frayed G50.
Two other point to ponder in the 915 versus G50 debate:
1) A 915 is expensive to properly rebuild, but a G50 is even more, by quite a bit. So, if you are looking at a G50, really assess if the transmission is good as-is.
2) The 1973 2.7 RS is considered one of the most (if not THE) most desirable 911s ever, and no one complains about the 915 in that car! It is only because the Carreras were the series that saw the change that people agonize over it!
Condition, condition, condition...
Two other point to ponder in the 915 versus G50 debate:
1) A 915 is expensive to properly rebuild, but a G50 is even more, by quite a bit. So, if you are looking at a G50, really assess if the transmission is good as-is.
2) The 1973 2.7 RS is considered one of the most (if not THE) most desirable 911s ever, and no one complains about the 915 in that car! It is only because the Carreras were the series that saw the change that people agonize over it!
Condition, condition, condition...
Your 915 is set up right all wevo. I did really like their gate shift kit.
I had the stock 915 shifter with short throw did not like the non spring loaded center
01-21-2019, 04:36 PM
#40
Advanced
Thread Starter
Reviving this thread! I've settled on a 3.2 and don't really care much for the 915 vs the G50. To be honest I'm actually leaning towards the 915. Is there any differences in the 1984-1986 MYs for the 3.2? Wondering if I should pick a late model 915 vs an early model and vice versa with the G50.
01-21-2019, 04:58 PM
#41
Rennlist Member
Reviving this thread! I've settled on a 3.2 and don't really care much for the 915 vs the G50. To be honest I'm actually leaning towards the 915. Is there any differences in the 1984-1986 MYs for the 3.2? Wondering if I should pick a late model 915 vs an early model and vice versa with the G50.
01-22-2019, 11:27 AM
#42
Advanced
Thread Starter
I will keep that in mind. Is there any difference in parts between the US spec and ROW spec 3.2s? There is a 1985 ROW 3.2 for sale on the rennlist classifieds that fits my price range. Would finding parts for the ROW be just as easy/hard as finding parts for the US spec? As far as I know, the ROW are just tuned to be a little bit faster?
01-22-2019, 12:38 PM
#43
Rennlist Member
The only parts differences will be in the engine and/or transmission, but RoW are just as available as the US parts AFAIK. The RoW cars had 9.8:1 compression ratio instead of the US-spec 9.5:1, and the ignition and fuel maps are a little different, resulting in 231 bhp for RoW as compared to 207 bhp for US 84-86 and 217 bhp for 87-89. The US cars have catalytic converters which most of the RoW cars didn't, so that's another difference. RoW cars have side repeaters, US cars have an extra light box in the front bumpers on each side. RoW cars have amber rear turn signal lenses, US cars have all red lenses. I can't think of anything else.
01-24-2019, 06:59 PM
#45
Rennlist Member
You should pick the car that's in the best condition and lowest mileage that you can find in your price range, and don't pay too much attention to the year (except for 87-89 G50 vs. 84-86 915). Transmission aside, there are only subtle differences between 85-89. The sizes of torsion bars and anti-sway bars went up a couple times in that range, but that's probably the biggest of the differences. However, '84 carried over the dash, steering wheel and seats from the 78-83 SC.