911 SC Tranny and other misc. SC questions
11-11-2002, 01:00 PM
#1
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
911 SC Tranny and other misc. SC questions
I've done a search on the 911sc's and read just about all that was listed on the threads and sites referenced. Seems like the tranny's were a real problem with the sc's. Is the criticism overdone?
Also, would it be accurate to assume that a well maintained '79 with 70,000 miles be due for a top end rebuild @100K?
Lastly, one of the threads implies the sc's were slow. Which begs the question, compared to what? Do owners of the sc's consider these models slow? Please compare with other 911's.
Thanks
Also, would it be accurate to assume that a well maintained '79 with 70,000 miles be due for a top end rebuild @100K?
Lastly, one of the threads implies the sc's were slow. Which begs the question, compared to what? Do owners of the sc's consider these models slow? Please compare with other 911's.
Thanks
11-11-2002, 01:32 PM
#2
Technical Specialist
Rennlist
Lifetime Member
Rennlist
Lifetime Member
Here's my two cents - the 915 transmission, regardless of what model through 1986 it was installed in, works pretty well. They get notchy as they get older, the linkage isn't "snick-snick" gear to gear, and they do get rebuilt, it seems in the 100K-200K range. So I would say any criticism related to the SC and tranmission is overdone.
Top end rebuild is more likely to be due to broken head studs rather than valve wear. Who can say if/when that happens? Some SC's have legendary mileage without being taken apart, others need work.
Speed is relative. Look at how the G-stock SC's in PCA Club Racing results <a href="http://www.pca.org/pca/clubrace/2002_results/index.htm" target="_blank">here</a> compare to others. I'd suggest driving skill is more a factor than SC performance.
Top end rebuild is more likely to be due to broken head studs rather than valve wear. Who can say if/when that happens? Some SC's have legendary mileage without being taken apart, others need work.
Speed is relative. Look at how the G-stock SC's in PCA Club Racing results <a href="http://www.pca.org/pca/clubrace/2002_results/index.htm" target="_blank">here</a> compare to others. I'd suggest driving skill is more a factor than SC performance.
11-12-2002, 04:04 PM
#4
Advanced
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Olney, MD
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are SCs slow? As Bill says, it's all realtive.
Twenty-two years ago (when my SC was new), among cars that could be driven on a daily basis, the SCs were certainly near the top of the food chain at 0-60 in 6.5 sec and a top speed of 135 or so. In the world of automotive performance, however, 22 years is a long time. In a recent Car & Driver road test, the VW Golf GTI V-6 (at 2700 lb and 180 hp just like the typical SC) posted virtually identical acceleration and top speed. I don't even want to think about the comparison with the Subaru WRX. The last time I was on the track at a DE with Porsche 993s & 996s, BMW M-3s, and even the recent 300 hp Camaro Z-28s, my SC was somewhat comparable through the turns but seemed decidedly "slow" between the turns where horsepower and torque are the deciding factors.
That GTI may be just as fast, the WRX even faster, and the air conditioning probably works great in both but, I wouldn't trade my SC for either of them.
Twenty-two years ago (when my SC was new), among cars that could be driven on a daily basis, the SCs were certainly near the top of the food chain at 0-60 in 6.5 sec and a top speed of 135 or so. In the world of automotive performance, however, 22 years is a long time. In a recent Car & Driver road test, the VW Golf GTI V-6 (at 2700 lb and 180 hp just like the typical SC) posted virtually identical acceleration and top speed. I don't even want to think about the comparison with the Subaru WRX. The last time I was on the track at a DE with Porsche 993s & 996s, BMW M-3s, and even the recent 300 hp Camaro Z-28s, my SC was somewhat comparable through the turns but seemed decidedly "slow" between the turns where horsepower and torque are the deciding factors.
That GTI may be just as fast, the WRX even faster, and the air conditioning probably works great in both but, I wouldn't trade my SC for either of them.
11-13-2002, 08:26 AM
#6
Track Day
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jaxon,
The SC has some very strong points and some not so strong, but for a ~20 year old car they are generally very dependable..... if you find a good example. That same logic would hold true for any old car you go after. My '79 has 105K miles, burns little oil(drips some), and has never been apart. One tranny syncro is a little weak, but not to the point of diminishing my driving pleasure. My point is, these are now older cars that absolutely will require some attention from time to time. But, generally they are awesome machines that were well built and are a blast to drive. Best luck on your decision. I don't think you'll be sorry if you choose to go this direction.
Mark
The SC has some very strong points and some not so strong, but for a ~20 year old car they are generally very dependable..... if you find a good example. That same logic would hold true for any old car you go after. My '79 has 105K miles, burns little oil(drips some), and has never been apart. One tranny syncro is a little weak, but not to the point of diminishing my driving pleasure. My point is, these are now older cars that absolutely will require some attention from time to time. But, generally they are awesome machines that were well built and are a blast to drive. Best luck on your decision. I don't think you'll be sorry if you choose to go this direction.
Mark
11-13-2002, 10:44 AM
#7
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice car Mark!
Thanks for the input. Seems like my tastes in Porsche's change with the season. Guess I'm pretty fickle. My wife has also alot to do with it. That's good, I'll blame her!
In any event the sc's are among my favorites. I like the classic look, and you're right about speed. There will always be something faster. I'm certain I'd enjoy an sc, or most 911's from '78-'98.
Hope to own one as nice as yours someday soon.
Jaxon
'87 951
'99 Boxster
Thanks for the input. Seems like my tastes in Porsche's change with the season. Guess I'm pretty fickle. My wife has also alot to do with it. That's good, I'll blame her!
In any event the sc's are among my favorites. I like the classic look, and you're right about speed. There will always be something faster. I'm certain I'd enjoy an sc, or most 911's from '78-'98.
Hope to own one as nice as yours someday soon.
Jaxon
'87 951
'99 Boxster
Trending Topics
11-14-2002, 11:22 PM
#8
Track Day
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Manassas, VA
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Jaxon,
I have a 80SC (white/tan, coupe w/sunroof, 115k miles) if you are interested. I am selling because I also have an 87 and my wife is not too thrilled with me having two of these cars (even though I told her she could have one). Let me know. I'm in NoVA.
I have a 80SC (white/tan, coupe w/sunroof, 115k miles) if you are interested. I am selling because I also have an 87 and my wife is not too thrilled with me having two of these cars (even though I told her she could have one). Let me know. I'm in NoVA.
