Eyal 951

Well, I have a freind who is looking at a 1975 911 S with 80 sum thousand miles, looks to be beautiful shape in photos. As I am a watercooler guy, I don't know much about the car, so I told him to post... well, for some reason, he's shy about it and asked me to do it, so here I am. What kind of issues are to be expected for this year, is it a good year, reliable car? how is performnace, and what can be expected in terms of maintainence, and things breaking? at 9900 dollars, thats a very good price for a very nice low mileage S isn't it?
~Eyal

JackOlsen

74-77 911's can be a good bargain, or a real nightmare. I believe that a California-delivery 911 would have had thermal reactors on it (although hopefully someone who knows more than me will confirm that). This is not good, in that the heat they generated would slowly damage the magnesium engine case. Headstuds would pull out. The 75S is an S model only in name, compared to the more-famous pre-74 S models. It is not a collectible like the pre-impact-bumper S cars.

That said, if the engine has been properly updated, with an external cooler added, the car could be a reliable driver. 10K strikes me as high for the price, although not ridiculously high -- but I don't know a whole lot about 74-77 values.

DGaunt

1975 was not galvenized and as stated by Jack, 2.7s can be a joy or a traqgedy. at 80K the normal 2.7 would have already had a top end some time ago, and be about ready for a bottom end.

Again I back Jack up on the external oil cooler thing. Thermal reactors literally cooked the engine, frying the heads and contributing to pulling heat studs out of the brittle mag case. Many were removed by owners early in the car's life (like after the first early valve job). So, it comes down to service records, and what was done by whom and when to the engine. 10K feels a bit high unless it's pristine and the engine is in VG condition.

MikeQuig

With a little looking, you could likely find a nice 78-83 SC for the same money. 3.0 liter reliability and nice SC flares for a nicer look. The bodies of 911's were NOT galvanized until 1976 so the PPI may reveal rust issues. 2.7's are great if properly rebuilt but insist on records to back that up.

Mike Quigley
Euro SC
F Class

r911

'75 was partly galvanixed & did have thermal reactors. You need to know what is on it now and what has been done to strengthen the engine internally. Do a search on Pelican.
If you can't be certain all the issues were fixed, then pass - unless the price $500 (not a typo - the engine fixes are spendy). I had a perfect '75 for about 8 years. PO did everything. Good Luck.

GrantG

1975 is probably the least valuable 911 model year of any. That can be a blessing or a curse depending on what's been done to the car to overcome its original shortcomings as mentioned. My preference would be to go with a pre-74 (lighter, prettier and usually faster) or am SC or later (more rust-resistant, faster, etc.). However, a 75 could be a bargain if it's been well modified/maintained (and rust-free)...

JCP911S

$6-9K for a quality bottom up engine rebuild... $3-4K for a top end engine rebuild....$2-3K for a gearbox overhaul. $600 for alt or starter. Odds and ends start at $200 and go up rapidly from there. For $10K you want a 98% car.

Edward

Great thread, and timely! Having read extensively about the 74-77 issues, I went with the 74 only after researching the prices of pre-74s!!! I agree with the lighter and prettier, but they are considerably more $$, given similar conditions. Having said that, that's precisely why I had been looking for some time for the 74 (smog exempt for CA) with the 3.0 and thus started the thread on that subject. Only after asking here, (thanks, all) that I learned that the expensive measures to address the 2.7's weaknesses are acceptable IF the PO had already absorbed those costs. ...or at least that's what I'm hoping for

Edward

onewhippedpuppy

For that kind of money, if it doesn't have a documented quality rebuild, regardless of how nice the car is, run. The biggest benefit of the 74-77 cars is the cost, you can find a very nice one for $7500 with a rebuild, etc. Not that they are at all bad cars, and there are many accounts of rebuilt 2.7s going well over 100,000 miles. Thermal reactors are engine killers, and $9900 is SC or 911T money. At least in a T, you'd still have rust to worry about, but the values seem to be increasing, and the engines are near bulletproof.

Jase007

FWIW:

My '76 Targa's 2.7L was rebuilt by PO around 50K miles. Has 164K on it now and runs great. Doesn't smoke ... much or burn oil...much. Does some light DE and driving clinics, etc... Also, if it gets wrecked or you ball it up on the track ... what are you out? <$10K .... works for me.

Jason

onewhippedpuppy

74-77 cars like Jason's are the ones to look for, let the PO spend the $$$$, and you have a great car.

Eyal 951

hey thanks guys, sorry i didn't respond to this thread earlier though i did follow it. based on the advice here, we, or rather he, decided to avoid this 911. though its was a very nice looking car there was no information on it. A lady was selling it, since her husband had just passed away, and it was his dream car that he purchased a couple years prior.
I am looking for a second car as well, unfortunatly not another porsche, i need reliable and cheap parts... still needs to be fun, so I'm looking at S13 type 240 SX's decent car i geuss.
~Eyal

exc911ence

Cheap parts? Stay away from the 240SX! My wife had one and the parts were more expensive for that car than the 924S that she's driving now. Nice car otherwise... sold it when the HICAS 4 wheel steering went on the fritz.

As for the 75 911S, I had one and I loved it! It had had a $14K engine rebuild/upgrade a number of years ago and I scored the car for $13K Canadian! The mid-year cars are greatly underrated and therefore greatly underpriced. I'd take a second look at that car and take it to a Porsche mechanic for a pre-purchase inspection.