964 vs. 3.2...who has driven both?
07-03-2006, 07:07 PM
#1
Racer
Thread Starter
964 vs. 3.2...who has driven both?
Ok pardon my enthusiasm..but I wanted to get an idea of what porsche guys think of the evolution from the 3.2 to the 964. I was lucky to have owned a 93 RSA which I lost to flood damage down south....I've since been reunited with a 3.2 which I'm growing even more fond of. I think I'm obsessed not so much with the car itself but with the evolution of the 911 which I think is fascinating. So here are my thoughts....what are yours?
964--
quieter
smoother tranny
feels heavier??
perhaps harder to bring the tail out?
better ventilation
in terms of power...feels the same as my 3.2 euro compared to a 93 rsa....interested to hear your opinions here...obviously the 964 had more power but was it necessarily much faster??
frumpy bumpers...(imho), nice cup wheels, teardrop mirrors ok
overall nice modernization of a classic design
3.2--
louder
915 tranny vs. G50...umm well you know
feels a little lighter/sharper?? 3.2 has euro stock bilstein suspension...my rsa was subsequently lowered on H and R springs and corner balanced (see pics) because I felt the M030 suspension was too soft and lifted!!
perhaps easier to bring the tail out!
crappy ventilation
i like the old bumpers, fuchs are the best, old mirrors somewhat dated
still feels as quick?? 3.2 has 231bhp
overall feels more raw...THE classic 911
964--
quieter
smoother tranny
feels heavier??
perhaps harder to bring the tail out?
better ventilation
in terms of power...feels the same as my 3.2 euro compared to a 93 rsa....interested to hear your opinions here...obviously the 964 had more power but was it necessarily much faster??
frumpy bumpers...(imho), nice cup wheels, teardrop mirrors ok
overall nice modernization of a classic design
3.2--
louder
915 tranny vs. G50...umm well you know
feels a little lighter/sharper?? 3.2 has euro stock bilstein suspension...my rsa was subsequently lowered on H and R springs and corner balanced (see pics) because I felt the M030 suspension was too soft and lifted!!
perhaps easier to bring the tail out!
crappy ventilation
i like the old bumpers, fuchs are the best, old mirrors somewhat dated
still feels as quick?? 3.2 has 231bhp
overall feels more raw...THE classic 911
07-03-2006, 08:02 PM
#2
Instructor
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Woodstock, GA
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well....lets put it this way....My brother owned the 87 I have now.....he also owned 2 RSAs.....they got sold....he kept this one until I begged bad enough.....I much prefer the 87 to the RSA...although....if I had a 964 I would backdate it....and have the best of both worlds....Nothing wrong with either car...it just shows what evolution will do to a species
07-03-2006, 09:09 PM
#3
id rather have the newer rsa just because i think theres more mod potential to gain bigger power and i like the suspension better. the power is the biggest reason i want to sell my car. imo though id rather have a 930 then both
07-03-2006, 09:15 PM
#4
Race Car
I've driven both on a track. There's a lot to like about a Carrera -- but a 964 is faster. More power. Better brakes. Better aero. Better suspension. None of the improvements are night-and-day, and a 964 is heavier, but the sum of the changes favors the 964.
If yours feels differently, I'd get the 964 checked out. You might have a broken distributor belt.
If yours feels differently, I'd get the 964 checked out. You might have a broken distributor belt.
07-03-2006, 09:29 PM
#5
Racer
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by JackOlsen
I've driven both on a track. There's a lot to like about a Carrera -- but a 964 is faster. More power. Better brakes. Better aero. Better suspension. None of the improvements are night-and-day, and a 964 is heavier, but the sum of the changes favors the 964.
If yours feels differently, I'd get the 964 checked out. You might have a broken distributor belt.
If yours feels differently, I'd get the 964 checked out. You might have a broken distributor belt.
07-04-2006, 05:14 PM
#6
I have a 1990 964 C2 and a 1984 3.2 Carrera. Both are coupes and remain mostly stock.
I agree with most of svb's list above in the first post. The 964 is definitely faster in every aspect, however, I'm comparing US specification cars and not a Euro 3.2 with a RSA 964 as svb is.
The 964 can get almost boring on freeways drives since it's got more of a modern car feel to it. The 3.2 is never boring. It's always letting you know what's going on. At full tilt, the 964 is pretty fun just due to the higher limits and increased power.
If I want to dawdle around town, drive at 7/10ths, or drive an hour an a half on the freeway for something or other, I'll take the 3.2. If I really wanted to hustle around some back roads at illegal speeds, I'd choose the 964.
The 964 is much easier to prep for concours too. No bumper bellows, not as easy to clean Fuchs, etc, etc, all help...!
Just my $.02.
Jay
90 964
84 3.2
I agree with most of svb's list above in the first post. The 964 is definitely faster in every aspect, however, I'm comparing US specification cars and not a Euro 3.2 with a RSA 964 as svb is.
The 964 can get almost boring on freeways drives since it's got more of a modern car feel to it. The 3.2 is never boring. It's always letting you know what's going on. At full tilt, the 964 is pretty fun just due to the higher limits and increased power.
If I want to dawdle around town, drive at 7/10ths, or drive an hour an a half on the freeway for something or other, I'll take the 3.2. If I really wanted to hustle around some back roads at illegal speeds, I'd choose the 964.
The 964 is much easier to prep for concours too. No bumper bellows, not as easy to clean Fuchs, etc, etc, all help...!
Just my $.02.
Jay
90 964
84 3.2
07-05-2006, 01:48 AM
#7
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this subject has probably been discussed numerous times on this forum, but I never get tired of reading everyone's preference toward a specific model year. I'm trying to decide on my first 911 and every piece of information from experienced owners is helpful.
Trending Topics
07-05-2006, 09:01 AM
#8
Drifting
For me the 964 (I had a 1990 C2 Targa) was much easier to drive fast - it was probably as fast from 60-120 as it was from 0-60. Because of the better aero - it was very difficult to keep under 100, even though the wind noise was much worse than my cabriolet.
The AC was nice - but not that different than the 3.2 carrera.
Driving it - the 964 feels a little heavier - more fast cruiser. The 3.2 is much more like a go cart. Torque on the 3.6 is a nice benefit - It really pulls hard.
As far as maintenance - the 964 did (before I rebuilt the engine due to valve guides) cost me around twice as much to maintain, although because the 3.2 is less electronic intensive, I have tended to do most of my own work.
Anyway - both great cars - the plus on the 964 us that it comes stock with the g-50 - the 3.6 engine and coil overs and better aero (with the full width belly pan) - it's easy to loose weight when you start stripping out stuff.
The AC was nice - but not that different than the 3.2 carrera.
Driving it - the 964 feels a little heavier - more fast cruiser. The 3.2 is much more like a go cart. Torque on the 3.6 is a nice benefit - It really pulls hard.
As far as maintenance - the 964 did (before I rebuilt the engine due to valve guides) cost me around twice as much to maintain, although because the 3.2 is less electronic intensive, I have tended to do most of my own work.
Anyway - both great cars - the plus on the 964 us that it comes stock with the g-50 - the 3.6 engine and coil overs and better aero (with the full width belly pan) - it's easy to loose weight when you start stripping out stuff.
