84 Turbo-look v. 89 25th Anniversary
05-19-2004, 03:21 PM
#16
Instructor
Thread Starter
They both drive wonderful. The TL body is great, I like chiffon and it has a black interior-my favorite color combo. The brakes are phenomenal as is the steering;the 89 feels like a standard Carrera but for the gearbox, which is very nice (but my old Mazda Protege 5 spd beats any G50 I've ever driven).
Stefang-on Southbound 684 at about 10:30 this am the State Police had the lasers and speed traps (6-7 police vehicles) going between Katonah and Mt. Kisco. This is ironic since I've never seen it done before in that location, and they raised the limit to 65 mph just a few weeks ago....
Stefang-on Southbound 684 at about 10:30 this am the State Police had the lasers and speed traps (6-7 police vehicles) going between Katonah and Mt. Kisco. This is ironic since I've never seen it done before in that location, and they raised the limit to 65 mph just a few weeks ago....
05-19-2004, 03:40 PM
#17
Burning Brakes
Gotta love the higher-revenue tickets for exceeding the 65 mph limit. I gotta figure that petty speed ticketing like that is the worst part of being a policeman. How about putting them in plain cars and monitoring the idiots that weave in and out of traffic, passing on the right, etc, or better yet the tailgating truckers and dump-truck idiots that can't spend the extra 5 mins to cover the truck (ths preventing rocks from flying all over my cars!!). Arrggh.
05-19-2004, 04:10 PM
#18
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Classic911
I think you have already made your mind up....
This comment just gives it away..
"The TL body is great, I like chiffon and it has a black interior-my favorite color combo. The brakes are phenomenal as is the steering;the 89 feels like a standard Carrera".
Not that there is anything wrong with a Standard Carrera...
Also if you decide to put some miles on the car the TL will hold its value much better than the 25th Ann edition. At the end of the day the 89 is not that special...
Any way you look at it you can't go wrong with either.
I think you have already made your mind up....
This comment just gives it away..
"The TL body is great, I like chiffon and it has a black interior-my favorite color combo. The brakes are phenomenal as is the steering;the 89 feels like a standard Carrera".
Not that there is anything wrong with a Standard Carrera...
Also if you decide to put some miles on the car the TL will hold its value much better than the 25th Ann edition. At the end of the day the 89 is not that special...
Any way you look at it you can't go wrong with either.
05-19-2004, 05:03 PM
#20
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by g-50cab
and I'd go with the 89 and the g-50. Turbo Look just doesn't do it for me - sorry - poseur. Pony up for the Turbo. Also - I didn't think the turbo brakes came until later in the life cycle - like 86? Maybe I am wrong.
and I'd go with the 89 and the g-50. Turbo Look just doesn't do it for me - sorry - poseur. Pony up for the Turbo. Also - I didn't think the turbo brakes came until later in the life cycle - like 86? Maybe I am wrong.
To me it'd be a no brainer, take the M491 carrera
05-19-2004, 06:09 PM
#21
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Indeed it sounds like you know which one you want and are just looking for some moral support - so I say go for it, get that TL and don't look back. If money is no issue you might even consider having the 915 rebuilt just for the hell of it. I drove a freshly rebuilt 915 during my search and it was a fine shifting transmission.
Went north on 684 about that time today - they had 2 more pulled over (one gaggle of 3 had surrounded a guy on a bike - wonnder how big that ticket was). Sounds like one of their occasional revenue enhancement sweeps.
Went north on 684 about that time today - they had 2 more pulled over (one gaggle of 3 had surrounded a guy on a bike - wonnder how big that ticket was). Sounds like one of their occasional revenue enhancement sweeps.
05-19-2004, 06:26 PM
#22
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 2,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Koda
Sorry but your way off base, and there is alot you must not know about both the M491 Carrera, and the turbos... The 917 brakes (aka turbo brakes) have been around on the turbo since 78 and the M491 since it's official inception in 84. Also the US turbo up until 86 only had 265hp, (and actually less in 76 and 77)...further the fender size and brakes on the turbo and M491 actually orginated on the original M491 cars (aka RSR and IROC) they also appear on the 3.0RS which homologated the bigger RSR, and SCRS in the early 80's the later of which ran rallies like the Dakar, so to call the M491 a poseur because it has 45hp less than a turbo seems a bit silly to say the least, and if anything the M491 is more a throw back to the original normally apspirated RSR than anything else while the turbo an RSR poseur. Also the M491 Carrera is extremely rare compared to the turbos and going prices are almost the same, plus witht he M491 you have a car that in 1986 was named the best handling car that could be bought in the US. Not to mention the tremendous savings on maintainance over a turbo car.
To me it'd be a no brainer, take the M491 carrera
Sorry but your way off base, and there is alot you must not know about both the M491 Carrera, and the turbos... The 917 brakes (aka turbo brakes) have been around on the turbo since 78 and the M491 since it's official inception in 84. Also the US turbo up until 86 only had 265hp, (and actually less in 76 and 77)...further the fender size and brakes on the turbo and M491 actually orginated on the original M491 cars (aka RSR and IROC) they also appear on the 3.0RS which homologated the bigger RSR, and SCRS in the early 80's the later of which ran rallies like the Dakar, so to call the M491 a poseur because it has 45hp less than a turbo seems a bit silly to say the least, and if anything the M491 is more a throw back to the original normally apspirated RSR than anything else while the turbo an RSR poseur. Also the M491 Carrera is extremely rare compared to the turbos and going prices are almost the same, plus witht he M491 you have a car that in 1986 was named the best handling car that could be bought in the US. Not to mention the tremendous savings on maintainance over a turbo car.
To me it'd be a no brainer, take the M491 carrera
You must mean that the US TL is 65-75hp less and US Turbo rather than 45hp...
US Version Carrera = 207hp (or is it 217hp?)
US Version Turbo = 282hp
ROW Version Carrera = 231hp
ROW Version Turbo = 300hp (I think)
My numbers could be off so please correct them as necessary.
Whatever the case may be, I'd (probably) still go for the TL if those were my two choices...I like the "wide hips" of the turbo body a lot...and the non-HP performance enhancements don't hurt either. Since TL's are rare, you might not want to do it but you could always add a turbo, right?
05-19-2004, 06:32 PM
#23
If I remember correctly:
US Turbo Carrera 1976 - 1977 had 245 hp.
US Turbo 1978 - 1979 had 265 hp.
No US Turbo models from 1980 to 1985.
US Turbo from 1986 to 1989 had 282 hp.
1984 - 1986 3.2 Carrera (US) 200 hp
1987 - 1989 3.2 Carrera (US) 214 hp
(all years are model years and not necessarily actual year of production)
US Turbo Carrera 1976 - 1977 had 245 hp.
US Turbo 1978 - 1979 had 265 hp.
No US Turbo models from 1980 to 1985.
US Turbo from 1986 to 1989 had 282 hp.
1984 - 1986 3.2 Carrera (US) 200 hp
1987 - 1989 3.2 Carrera (US) 214 hp
(all years are model years and not necessarily actual year of production)
05-19-2004, 07:07 PM
#24
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jay, I think your right the 87 Carrera or 84-86 w/upgraded chip were 214 (was thinking 220 for some reason) so the difference is 51hp not 45 between the pre 86 Turbos... still nothing to cry over which was really my point. But the M491 also weighs less so...
87turbo911...yes that would be true for an 1986 or newer turbo, but not the older turbos. My point is why would anyone consider an M491 car a poseur when it only has 31hp less than a 76/77 turbo and 51hp less that the 78/79 turbo...Or do guys with 86+ turbos consider older tubos poseurs too? I don't think so...I just don't think g-50cab has the right knowledge here.
87turbo911...yes that would be true for an 1986 or newer turbo, but not the older turbos. My point is why would anyone consider an M491 car a poseur when it only has 31hp less than a 76/77 turbo and 51hp less that the 78/79 turbo...Or do guys with 86+ turbos consider older tubos poseurs too? I don't think so...I just don't think g-50cab has the right knowledge here.
05-19-2004, 07:19 PM
#25
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 2,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, I agree with you that I don't find the TL to be poseur. I was just identifying that the HP difference of 45hp was a little low (comparing a TL versus Turbo for the same model year only).
If it was a purely cosmetic difference, I MIGHT consider it to be a poseur thing (a la ricers with "mods" such as fake vents and grills) but the differences between a TL and a "regular" carrera are fairly significant.
To my knowledge, the TL doesn't have the "Turbo" script on it. If it did, THAT would be kind of poseur...like the 95-ish Acura Integra I saw bearing a "427 Stingray" badge on it...or the OLD Civic hatchback with the "Civic" reflector replaced with one that said "Viper."
Yes, I really saw them...I didn't make it up! I should start bringing a camera with me everywhere so that I can share in the laughter!
If it was a purely cosmetic difference, I MIGHT consider it to be a poseur thing (a la ricers with "mods" such as fake vents and grills) but the differences between a TL and a "regular" carrera are fairly significant.
To my knowledge, the TL doesn't have the "Turbo" script on it. If it did, THAT would be kind of poseur...like the 95-ish Acura Integra I saw bearing a "427 Stingray" badge on it...or the OLD Civic hatchback with the "Civic" reflector replaced with one that said "Viper."
Yes, I really saw them...I didn't make it up! I should start bringing a camera with me everywhere so that I can share in the laughter!
05-19-2004, 08:22 PM
#26
Drifting
Originally posted by Koda
Sorry but your way off base, and there is alot you must not know about both the M491 Carrera, and the turbos... The 917 brakes (aka turbo brakes) have been around on the turbo since 78 and the M491 since it's official inception in 84. Also the US turbo up until 86 only had 265hp, (and actually less in 76 and 77)...further the fender size and brakes on the turbo and M491 actually orginated on the original M491 cars (aka RSR and IROC) they also appear on the 3.0RS which homologated the bigger RSR, and SCRS in the early 80's the later of which ran rallies like the Dakar, so to call the M491 a poseur because it has 45hp less than a turbo seems a bit silly to say the least, and if anything the M491 is more a throw back to the original normally apspirated RSR than anything else while the turbo an RSR poseur. Also the M491 Carrera is extremely rare compared to the turbos and going prices are almost the same, plus witht he M491 you have a car that in 1986 was named the best handling car that could be bought in the US. Not to mention the tremendous savings on maintainance over a turbo car.
To me it'd be a no brainer, take the M491 carrera
Sorry but your way off base, and there is alot you must not know about both the M491 Carrera, and the turbos... The 917 brakes (aka turbo brakes) have been around on the turbo since 78 and the M491 since it's official inception in 84. Also the US turbo up until 86 only had 265hp, (and actually less in 76 and 77)...further the fender size and brakes on the turbo and M491 actually orginated on the original M491 cars (aka RSR and IROC) they also appear on the 3.0RS which homologated the bigger RSR, and SCRS in the early 80's the later of which ran rallies like the Dakar, so to call the M491 a poseur because it has 45hp less than a turbo seems a bit silly to say the least, and if anything the M491 is more a throw back to the original normally apspirated RSR than anything else while the turbo an RSR poseur. Also the M491 Carrera is extremely rare compared to the turbos and going prices are almost the same, plus witht he M491 you have a car that in 1986 was named the best handling car that could be bought in the US. Not to mention the tremendous savings on maintainance over a turbo car.
To me it'd be a no brainer, take the M491 carrera
#2 Appreciate the history lesson - I agree it's a rare option - stated that.
#3 The car is a Turbo Look - by definition it's attempting to look like something it is not.
#4 I know it's rare - and I know there is a rabid following. I can appreciate it - He asked what people would choose - I gave an opinion (see #1) Not taking a shot against your car. If it works for you then more power to you.
05-19-2004, 09:51 PM
#27
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
As much as I like the turbo-look 911's, I would still get the '89 with the G-50. I think the $26.5 price tag is really high for both car, esp. the '84. I am a believe of the old school of thought, you buy the newest Porsche you can afford. On the other hand, as long as both cars check out OK, you can't go to wrong either way. Best wishes - Jay Gratton
05-20-2004, 01:03 AM
#28
Rennlist Member
Lighten up TL owners. Like he said, Jeremy is just giving his opinion, which is shared by many others, e.g., Jim Schrager (Sports Car Market Magazine)
"Although the cars are somewhat rare, they are not destined to be on anyone's collector car top 10 list in the foreseeable future. Generally, everyone who wants a car that looks like a Turbo also wants the thrill of a Turbo engine to go with it."
The "Turbo-look" Carreras are heavier than the standard 3.2 Carreras, slower, and have a harsher ride. They look great with their bulging fenders, are cheaper than a Turbo to buy and less costly to maintain, but collectors want the real thing.
...
The factory "Turbo-look" cars were a response to the elimination of the 911 Turbo from the US market between 1980 and 1985.
...
Having a Turbo-look Carrera is a bit like having a 356 Speedster replica. The first question everyone asks is, "Is it the real thing?" It's no fun to admit it isn't."
from "Keith Martin on Collecting Porsche," page 65.
What color is the 89 Carrera? Chiffon white is one of the classiest of all time colors, in my opinion.
Why don't you lowball both sellers and see what happens?
"Although the cars are somewhat rare, they are not destined to be on anyone's collector car top 10 list in the foreseeable future. Generally, everyone who wants a car that looks like a Turbo also wants the thrill of a Turbo engine to go with it."
The "Turbo-look" Carreras are heavier than the standard 3.2 Carreras, slower, and have a harsher ride. They look great with their bulging fenders, are cheaper than a Turbo to buy and less costly to maintain, but collectors want the real thing.
...
The factory "Turbo-look" cars were a response to the elimination of the 911 Turbo from the US market between 1980 and 1985.
...
Having a Turbo-look Carrera is a bit like having a 356 Speedster replica. The first question everyone asks is, "Is it the real thing?" It's no fun to admit it isn't."
from "Keith Martin on Collecting Porsche," page 65.
What color is the 89 Carrera? Chiffon white is one of the classiest of all time colors, in my opinion.
Why don't you lowball both sellers and see what happens?
05-20-2004, 08:33 AM
#29
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I'll add a vote for the TL. I had an '84. MAN I miss that car... 
FWIW...I've also owned an '88 (non TL). Loved them both, but the TL felt a little more raw to me. The 915 was never a problem to drive (my car had around 75k on it).
Like it's been said, you can't go wrong with either. I just feel the factory special optioned TL will have more for you in the long run.
FWIW...I've also owned an '88 (non TL). Loved them both, but the TL felt a little more raw to me. The 915 was never a problem to drive (my car had around 75k on it).
Like it's been said, you can't go wrong with either. I just feel the factory special optioned TL will have more for you in the long run.
05-20-2004, 11:23 AM
#30
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jay Gratton has a good point when he says 5yrs is a big difference and the TLs will not be collectible cars.
Between the 2 i'd still go for the TL....
But I'd find a non 25th anniversary 87-89 Carrera for less than $20k and upgrade the suspension if you really want a stiffer set up.
That way you will save $7k that you use to upgrade anything u want. But this is going off topic....
Regards Jeremy's statement:
I think he stated his opinion and there is nothing wrong with that...I think he was saying it also with tongue in cheeks as he himself mentioned it he's got Turbo rubber under his flares without the Turbo power... So I say lighten up...
Between the 2 i'd still go for the TL....
But I'd find a non 25th anniversary 87-89 Carrera for less than $20k and upgrade the suspension if you really want a stiffer set up.
That way you will save $7k that you use to upgrade anything u want. But this is going off topic....
Regards Jeremy's statement:
I think he stated his opinion and there is nothing wrong with that...I think he was saying it also with tongue in cheeks as he himself mentioned it he's got Turbo rubber under his flares without the Turbo power... So I say lighten up...