classic911

I am looking at 2 P-cars-an '84 Turbo-look and an '89 25th Anniversary. Both cars (coupes) are approximately the same mileage (about 40K)and about the same price (approx. $26.5K);both have records, etc and are in very good - excellent condition. I love the look of the turbo plus the brakes/suspension;the '89 has the benefit of a few more horses and the G-50.

Would like the board's opinion as to which they would chose and why.

PS-What year did the carrera get the radiator type oil cooler with fan?

Thanks all!

mamoroso

I'd go for the 84 Turbo Look. What color is it? You can get those horses by swapping the chip.... The only thing the Carrera has is the G-50. If you can live with the 915 tranny for me this is a no brainer...

M491!!!! Remember this was the code for the 73 2.7 RS....

classic911

I have an 82SC now so I'm 915 "trained". The color is chiffon white over black leather; my sc is chiffon white over brown/tan. I do like the chiffon white exterior.

Thanks!

Jay H

Both cars are gorgeous cars. I'd take the '84 Turbo look just for the widebody and Turbo suspension, brakes, etc and I do like the 915. If both are in very similar condition, you can't loose with either car though.

I would assume the Turbo look might be a bit heavier and it has less claimed power (on paper at least), but I bet you'd notice very little difference in performance between the two cars other than the higher performance brakes and suspension on the Turbo look.

You're lucky to have two cars that are similar in condition to compare and choose between!

Jay
90 964

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.

classic911

I think it had the turbo brakes from the start of production. I hear what your saying about being a poseur, but the truth is I spend 98% of my time in the NYC metro area-I feel that the SC doesn't get enough of a workout due to the crowded roads-a turbo where I live is like putting a race horse on a dog track. Guy up the street from me has a Lamborghini Gallardo, saw him in the local parking lot, complemented him on it and he said he can't truly enjoy it on the local roads for the reasons set forth above. I already have enough points on my license, thank you.

The brakes are important to me, to avoid those soccer mom driving SUVs that swing into the left lane while they are on their cellphones. Last weekend I had a Nissan Altima come into the left lane on I 684, I was doing about 75, he was doing about 55, I stood on the brake pedal and just missed rear-ending him. I gave him the lights, and he gave me the finger. Enough said.

yelcab1

Turbo look, not a poseur. I had an 84 cab , while my brother had the 85 turbo look at the same time. I drove both cars back to back, and the turbo steering was more precise, the suspension was more taut, the brakes were absolutely the best. Oh, it looks good to.

He moved overseas 6 years ago, sold it pristine condition for $22K. I should have bought it, but i did not like black.

Larry Harris

I have an 85 M491 in black with the red interior. It is not a poser, it came from the factory just as it sits. The weren't that many made. I love the car, although the milage is creeping up on me (114,000). The car had a recent compression and came back with at least 170 on all cylinders.
Regards

Crimson Nape Racing

I sold my 84 mainly because of the 915 tranny. It is not strong enough for the 3.2. The widebody, while georgous, adds a boatload of weight and drag - I could easily smoke the turbo-looks on the track. But then again, if you're just cruising on the street... I guess it all comes down to what you're going to do with it. If you are going to do DE's, I would get the 89.... wait, the 84 has better brakes.... oh heck, get either one and don't look back!

AZ911

How is the 915 not strong enough for the 3.2?

g-50cab

I said - just for me - If I personally have the flares and the tail - I will have the HP and the intercooler to back it up. I know there weren't that many - I know many that target these cars - to me - if I am going to have a turbo look - it will also have the turbo performance.

Shoot - I have turbo rubber on my non-turbo carerra...

Diamond Blue

The 89 Anniversary would be my choice. There were not many of these made. Even though they were only a cosmetic package. There were only 60 satin black cars made with the rest being silver. G-50 is easier to drive in traffic as well (IMO).

TC_SJ

You can get the 1987 turbo look with G50 and 214HP, the TL is 100lbs heavier then non TL, just like carry a little kit in the back, but the car drive / handle / feel and look better.

I also like the limitted # of car were imported to US market

Not just because I owned one, the fact is I have tried both car and decide to go with the TL

I bought the car in early 2000 "1 onwer 33K miles / $31K " with all service records and passed PPI. Don't realy know how much she worth now

Good Luck on hunting

stefang

I really like TLs, but is the car worth the premium? That, only you can decide - to me it probably wouldn't be. The handling - add the turbo tie rods and you're there. The brakes - so what. They'll give you better fade resistance on the track, but won't reduce the stopping distance in the soccer mom avoidance maneuver - the tires are the limiting factor there - altough you could argue that you could stuff more rubber under the turbo body, but you have more inertia to slow down...

I assume you've driven both? No gut feel as to which one tugs the heart strings harder? I'd forget about objective reasons - they're both nice, go with the one you want (and then cruise over to South Salem and give me a ride )

2002M3Drew

I vote emphatically for the Turbo Look. Chiffon White was a great color, and the Turbo Look cars are rare. It is definitely not a poseur...just as a Carrera 4S isn't a poseur. It is a factory option, and a highly sought after one that fetches the kind of money you are quoting. With 40K miles, I don't think you can go wrong. The '89 Coupe, however, I would never pay $26K for. Not that it isn;t worth that now, but a few more miles and the value will drop quickly. The TL is market-insulated...even really high mileage examples fetch over $20K.

Here's my take on the G50 versus the 915...the G50 is definitely superior in operation to the 915 tranny. Neverthless, the G50 tranny is still far inferior to most modern trannies out there today. Case in point...my 1992 Miata's tranny makes a G50 feel like, well, a 915. The later cars are also missing something...they just aren't as visceral IMO as the earlier cars. I had driven an '88 that by all rights I should have bought on the spot, but instead I opted for an '83 SC with fewer miles. It just appealed to my senses more...it's farther out of the ordinary.

That TL will always be the star of the show, and the coupe will always be another really great 911, and upon closer inspection, one with the preferred transmission. Neither a bad choice, but I'd go with the star.