Bushbaby

Hi All
The G-series search has identified two candidates - a 1976 3.0 Carrera and 1989 Carrera 3.2. The 3.0 is fresh from a full restoration and the 3.2 a low mileage survivor. Advice on here has been to buy the oldest possible car to get the most authentic 911 experience. The car will do DD duties fairly regularly. Opinions on which one to choose and why?
Thanks so much!

theiceman

Well the Carrera 3.0 was never released in North America so would be considered a grey market car if that matters to you. It is essentially an SC but may or may not have the 5 speed transmission that came with the SC. It is kinda of a very small production car and is a niche car. I belive it has CIS also , but maybe not, may want to check on that . If it has CIS then it was built for stricter emissions and wont have the power of the previous engine.

If you are looking for a daily driver i would just get the 3.2 . Reliable powerful , lots out there for support and parts, but that's just me, im sure others will have other opinions.

Keith Guidus

3.2 is bullet proof

Bushbaby

Thanks for the responses - the Euro carrera 3.0 is (according to road tests) as quick as the later 3.2 by virtue of being really lightweight. In fact it shades the earlier MFI 2.7 despite being CIS equipped. Despite this it seems to be somewhat of a diamond in the rough waiting to be discovered. The 3.2 is legendary for what it is - a really solid and characterful car that should go forever if looked after. The virtues of the 3.2 are common cause within the Porsche community and hence it is the "safe" choice. The 3.0 is more of a gamble yet could be more rewarding...hopefully there is someone on here who has (or has had) both 😀

Keith Guidus

Buy what you like! We tell friends looking for motorcycles the same thing.

Bill Verburg

I've owned my '76 Carrera 3.0 for 46yrs

When new it was one of the quickest cars and a ball to drive right up there w./ 2.7 carrera and 911S but w/ more torque around, but time marches on

They are great cars but how it's been cared for is a significant factor

originally 29999 cc, cis, and the same bbasi design as later SCs but,
point type ignition
2.7 crank
most would have had a 915/44 5 speed, mg case trans
Bilstein Sport shocks
desirable options were
7 & 8 x15 Fuchs
205/50 & 225/50 x15 tires w/ a recalibrated 180mph speedo
lsd
sport seats
leather was std, tinted glass not

theiceman

Bill did that have the SC aluminum engine case ?? i would imagine so but was just wondering.

rstarga

I'ld go for the 3.2 if it is to be DD. The 76 was a good car but the 89 is a more developed car.
Drive them and see which you like best.

Bill Verburg

yep, first n/a use of what later became the standard SC => 997GT3 case

'74 Carrera 3.0 RS also had an aluminum case as did that gen of RSR but that version lacked the wider 86mm head stud spacing used until the 964s 90mm spacing came along

2.7s used 83mm stud spacing

500

Both cars sound potentially great. The 3.2 is probably the better DD choice due to being a little more modern and the DME and conventional fuel injection are more straightforward to live with (my semi-educated opinion only). Condition would be the primary factor if I were in your shoes. At the outset, these are the pros and cons I would be considering:

Carrera 3.0 pros:

• More rare/collectible
• Lighter
• Assuming restoration is very high quality, that would be a plus

Carrera 3.0 cons:

• CIS may be more demanding for maintenance/tuning
• IF quality of restoration is less than spectacular, you want to get a very detailed examination to make sure issues are not covered up, particularly in the body

3.2 pros:

• Well understood car with a lot of diy knowledge base and parts availability
• Car is original, and if the condition is truly "good" that has long term value that a restored car does not match
• G50 transmission, generally considered desirable

3.2 cons:

• I'm assuming will not feel quite as nimble due to weight
• The G50 transmission is also a possible con if it is not in great shape, as they are considerably more expensive to rebuild than the 915 (which itself is not cheap)

There are many more things than that, but those would be the main points I would be pondering.

But again, condition would rule: "recently restored" and "low mileage survivor" can be applied to a wide range of cars from truly spectacular to sort-of-nice driver quality (everybody defines terms like "mint condition" etc. differently).

Bushbaby

Hi All - just to close the question - I today pulled the trigger on the 3.2. Long story short the 3.2 met the use case better than the 3.0. Thanks everyone for sharing opinions.

theiceman

before i clicked on the link i was saying to myself .. he's going for the 3.2

good choice.

Freddie Two Bs

Well done! enjoy in good health. I think you made the right choice. I love middies but for DD, I'd take a 3.2.

500

Sounds like you made a carefully considered decision. Congratulations! Please post pics when you get it!

Bushbaby