Amber Gramps

gentlemen,

everyone has a porsche for a different reason. all I know is that my boss drives a 997 to work a couple times a week and worships my 911. he begs to swap cars on the fridays I drive mine to work. his take home exceeds $70,000 per month. he could have any porsche. he could have any car. he remembers back in the day when he got his first 911. when it was new and perty like mine. his new one doesn't give him that. he gets the tight tranny and hood ornament that is about it.

I don't want a porsche for the same reasons as him, or you, or my brother-in-law, or my sister-in-law, or the kid around the corner. I don't care if the 964 is a better car. I don't give a flyin'flip if it is.

in fact, for you guys that need a porsche just to be a man, I hope it is a better car, you're gonna need it.

douglas,

'88 911 cab ven blue met

Jay H

I think the depreciation rate is about the same now on average condition, higher mileage 3.2's and 964's. Neither one is plummenting, but they aren't gaining much.

Lower mileage, concours condition cars are in a different league. My 964 is holding it's own on value, maybe gaining just a bit. Very nice, low mileage 3.2's are up quite a bit in the last few years. It's not uncommon to see a very nice, ultra low mileage 3.2 bring in the upper $20's to lower $30's. Even exceptional 915 equipped 3.2's are well over $20k as of late. There is high demand for any low mileage, exceptionally nice 911's regardless if it's a 915 equipped 3.2 or an 'ugly duckling' 964.

The late 3.2's have been worth more than early (1989 to 1991) 964 for a while now if you compare apples to apples (same condition, same mileage).

The 964 electronics are typical Porsche. Quite robust and most 964's are very trouble free when it comes to electronics. Of course, they are more complex cars as compared to the 3.2's and earlier cars, so just the nature of having more wiring, circuits, relays, etc. will give you a few more issues over time. However, they are pretty solid cars electronically (and mechanically for that matter).

Doug, if your boss nets $70k a month, he should just go buy himself an '88 cabrio in Venitian Blue instead of bugging you to borrow your car!! I know if I was in his shoes, I'd be doing that...

Best,

Jay
90 964, 84 3.2

gunlover05

Doug, I have to ask - what does your boss do for a living? ....Surgeon? Partner in a high-end Law firm? Just curious what kind of job makes $70K/month...might want to have a re-think on a career.

theiceman

go ask them on the 964 forum.

Sorry if this sounds blunt and I do appologize but this usually turns into along us vs them discusion that can use up bandwidth , so if your questions are about 964s they probably have more info on those cars in the 964 forum.

g-50cab

my 964 was faster - but it was also more prone to little issues popping up. There are like 80 motors more on the 964 than the 3.2... something like that anyway. Personally - I like my Porsche with out the electronic nanny.

That said - the 3.6 is worth it alone. More torque than you know what to do with - probably faster from 60-120 than most cars from 0-60. easier to get to lose your license speeds too - if you want raw, unbridled fast, high revving sportscar - get a 3.2 (or even better a 3.4 if you need a sportscar with AC = comfort and fast enough to suck the speed limit signs off the road - then probably the 964 is the car for you.

ked

this Sat, I enjoyed a 60 mi jaunt across hill and dale - roads worthy of the Mille Miglia (Southern style)... accompanied by a new RS (GT3) and an old "RS" (clone, '72T w/ 3.2 DME, SC brakes, no SR or AC). my 115K '87 Coupe is very slightly modified (-75lbs, no cat, 7&8s), and the ac works adequetely well even down yonder in the summers (duracool, park in the shade, pray, not my daily commuter). skill levels nearly equivalent, esp considering we were NOT exploring limits (that's what tracks are for), just blowing out the carbon (sorry, Al, & the GT3 was still undergoing break-in) on empty winding roads, on a cool AM w/ friends... I felt reborn...

anyway, the difference in "real world fun / smiles/mi" among these 3 911s spread over 35 yrs was negligible, and perhaps surprisingly, the perf differential seemed nearly so in this limited regime. obviously, the RS could easily walk (run? rocket?) away from us at any point via motor, susp &/or braking, but it HAD to apply these considerable advantages to do so. driver reported it was a relaxed effort (while maybe 7/10ths peak for me). the clone's weight advantage (300 lbs?) over me was clear - he had quicker low-rpm tip-in response & accelerated to redline sooner (I compensated via intimate knowledge of every sq in of blind curves, sweepers, risers & drops, having driven & cycled the area for 30 yrs). we stopped for a fine Cajun lunch within seconds of one another, no disappointments all around, flush w/ the joy of driving. if the local 964 Roadster had joined us, I'm pretty confident he would have felt the same. when considering 911s (all years & types, from swb to GT3), every one can deliver - the issue is: what is it you're ordering?

{Iceman, considering how much bandwidth we've "wasted" on 928s lately, I can't complain about 964 comparos}

Amber Gramps

(first off...my boss owns a nice little packaging company. or should I say he owns half of it. we are the half way house for millions of dollars of corrugated boxes, poly bags, bubble, stretch wrap, tape, and foam. 99% of my customers see me in my chevy astro, and would never guess I have six kids, four cars, 40+ koi fish, a reef tank, spend an average of $400 per week at home depot, and vote republican.)

like I said before, we all have a porsche for a different reason. I have yet to read a post that expresses some one having one for the same reason as me. are the 964's a better car? I would hope so, or where is the value in the name porsche. it's called evolution, some times it works and some times it does'nt. usually cars get better. at this point in time anyone that has an old porsche as a daily driver should be shot, and anyone that keeps one out doors should be shot then hunged. it was designed and built to be driven on fridays, saturdays, and sundays only. thank god you don't have to have the same oppinion.

why is it that this post just keeps going but a guy in glendale can't get a reply on a PPI?

douglas

'88 911 cab ven blue met

why don't we ask

ked

"it was designed and built to be driven on fridays, saturdays, and sundays only."
sorry, no... the weekends were for racing, the rest of the week was for getting to/from work, to pay for the weekends. the guy needing a ppi should post on pelican - seems many of the members live in glendale.

Jay H

Looks like you're working under "Stealth Mode" at work. Good policy.

Very true that we don't have to have the same opinion. My 964 won't come out unless the weather is perfect and my '84 911 sees daily driving duties quite a bit if it's not raining too much. I slog the '84 to all kinds of stuff that I would never, ever dream of taking my 964 to. So, each one of these cars has a different purpose to each one of us.

The one huge advantage that these 911's (well most Porsche's have) is that you can drive a 911 to the grocery store and pick up the week's worth of food on Thursday night, then take that same car with zero modifications, beat the living daylights out of it on the track, drive it home, then take it to work on Monday morning in rush hour traffic. Try that with most high buck Ferrari's and it ain't gonna happen with the Ferrari.

It looks like the Glendale CA guy got some very nice suggestions. Rennlist to the rescue again. Now I'm guilty of once again keeping this post going...

Best to all,

Jay

Daniel Dudley

The guy who sold me his 951 bought a 964 soon afterwards. I believe he was looking for throttle response. I also think he wanted high speed punch on the track, and a car with reputation for being a little less tail happy than a pre 89. And while a 964 may seem complicated compared to a 911, after looking under the hood of a 951 it may not seem so daunting. They are a step up the scale, no question, and I got my SC because the PO was sharing the track with cars that left him on the straights and probably elsewhere. Unless you are in that kind of a yardstick environment, ascessing performance is pretty subjective.

IMO it is often more fun to drive a slow car fast, unless of course you are getting your a$$ handed to you. OTOH, when I was at Skippy School, doing drifts in a formula dodge lap after lap, that was as near to automotive heaven as I have gotten in over 20 years. Looking at that car, it probably had as much speed and handling as some of the cars Jimmy Clarke was driving in formula 1 in the sixties. At that point it is about you and the car. My SC has that feeling-which I find very remarkable in a streetable car that is very close to stock. Eventually I may find that I would like a do it all car with AC, at which point I will probably wind up with a Boxter or Caymen. Maybe a 993 or 964 will tempt me, but when I think RS I think 911 more than 997.

I was at LRP raceway last year with a nice Fiat spyder when a guy in a Lotus Elise drove up and stopped to ask me about the car. Was it mine ? He said, "I used to have one of those, they are great cars." This is a guy in an Elise. With AC.

So ask yourself if an Elise is a superior car to a Fiat. Of course it is. So what is the real question ?

Mike Murphy

No, it's not superior to other 911s, just superior to most other cars. The big criticism about the 964 is that some drivers don't like the way the it handles, especially with the 4-wheel-drive. Others enjoy the larger engine, better AC, and other creature comforts that the 3.2s don't have, but the 993s do. I would definitely buy a 964 if it were my only car, but if I could have my pick of 3 911s, I'd skip over the 964 and 3.2 and have a long hood, a 993 and a 997.

ked

"So what is the real question ?"
what does "superior" mean? ?

Porsche911fan

When I say superior I mean better engineering, craftsmanship, durability etc. It will be my first 911, which would be the better choice? I will be taking some long distance journeys with the car so I'm thinking 964 but at the same time the 3.2 is oh so nice...

Edward

Late top this party, but yes, "superior" depends on the parameters you've set. Reliability is largely dependent on maintenance; desirability is highly subjective; and performance is what You want in a car.

Personally, I think a well-sorted 964 offers *the* best bang-for-buck 911 experience out there for the simple reason that the market has "pooh-poohed" it as a bastard stepchild. And it is often maligned for maladies that have long since been addressed. If you can see yourself in a 964, then find a good one and love it!

Edward

Edgy01

One thing we have to come to grips with concerning Porsches is that the company continues to engineer and build new cars. (Unlike the British). As a result, each evolution of the "911" adds some favorable elements while taking away others. Another factor that we have to own up to is wear and tear. As our favorite early 911s accrue mileage they just don't perform as well as they did, unless we really stay up on the suspension maintenance (and engine/tranny of course). Even electrics need periodic maintenance because copper wire starts to become embrittled, and there is metal fatigue going on inside all that insulation.

The 964 is better for some things like being newer in the materiel department. But it gave up some of the viseral elements that early 911 drivers enjoyed. This happened, too, with the 993, and then the 996 and now the 997. I absolutely enjoyed my 1981 car because it worked so well and leaked hardly ever. But I also wised up and realized that it would soon be a ticking time bomb when it came to tracing electrical problems (brought on by aging electrical wire) and troubleshooting air leaks due to rotting air and gasoline hoses.

There's a reason they say to "buy the newest one you can afford." But you have to own up to the fact that civilization moves on. Engineering doesn't get stagnant. It isn't allowed to (unless it's British).

Enjoy what you have, but just know that each version of the 911 gives and takes a little. What you get in modern features and reliability you probably give up in materiel quality. Everything is getting lighter, thinner, and less durable than the forebears. Just consider yourself fortunate to be able to be in any Porsche 911 at all, and not in some Honda Civic.