abe

I am considering 1600/2002 BMW. I prefer older 1974 to avoid CA smog testing. I have a 68 280sl..girly car, but when you go 65 you think you are going 100. I then bought my 83SC.....I love it more and more as a true sports car. Soooo, will I be disappointed with a 1600/2002 BMW....I like the square looks with lots of windows and I know its not the performance of a Porsche so I need advice. Any suggestions appreciated from Porsche owners. Also, if you are in California and you think skip the pre 1974 because the 19... has a catalytic converter and its a great BMW....I am all ears.
thanks\
abe

earlyapex

Are you going to sell you SC and buy an early BMW. I can't follow your line of thinking.

WPOZZZ

1973 and below will get you the beautiful round tail light 02! They are not fast, but a joy to drive. The pedals will seem familiar as the come up from the floor.

abe

...and I was wondering from Porsche people of the 1600/2002 series which one would get. Also, this would be a weekend driver and no tracking. I know they don't come close to the 83SC performance...but I would like a 4 seater in case I went out with another couple, or wife and kid.
I also like the 320s...but then I would have to deal with CA smog laws and frankly I don't know enough about them to consider one over another.

abe

Amber Gramps

When I was in high school some of the really hot chicks had the 2002. What a blast it would be to have. do it. I'm sure Pelican has what it takes to keep it on the road.

butzip

Abe,

I suggest you ctc my good friend Matt Mcginn @ www.Sports-Car-Restoration.com in Plainville, CT.
860 621-2002 (Nice phone # eh?) His daily driver is a 1984 M491 911/RSR and he happens to be a 'THE' 2002 Guru. There is nothing he doesn't know about 02's.

Brgds, Peter

WPOZZZ

Look for a 2002tii, or if you can find one, a 2002 turbo.

vtrich

Abe,
I've owned several 2002s and as mentioned, I think the '73 and earlier are preferable,..no air pumps and much cleaner with round tail lights and traditional bumpers. They are very entertaining to drive,..and the interaction between the shifter, gearbox and clutch is really exceptional. If you're into it, the aftermarket is teaming with goodies. Personally, although the tii is a great driver, the mechanical injection pump can be really expensive and with a couple of side-draft webers the non-tii can be more fun.

AND,...like your SC, they are pretty simple if you're into the DIY thingy.

GOOD LUCK,
Rich

earlyapex

Abe,

I've always loved the look of the 2002. Classic in every way. My neighbor has one and I can recognise its distinctive engine and exhaust note when he fires it up. Not as sweet as an air cooled Porsche, but sweet nonetheless.

abe

abe

GG Allin

Here's a Turbo but seems a bit pricy. I wonder what the reserve is.

jwasbury

i owned a 1974 for a couple of months...put it up for sale very shortly after buying (and discovering some rust that had been carefully disguised). it was sweet looking (inka orange color), but i decided that i was not prepared to make the commitment to bring it up to par. it ran and drove decently, had a weber carb, newer shocks. i'll always have a fondness for the look, but after having driven one, i'm not sure i'd buy another. 2002 turbo might be interesting, or an M series motor transplant.

racer

RUST! These cars love to rust out. Rear suspension points first it seems.. then trunks.. If you find a solid one (I guess they are like 914s in this case) don't worry about the motor.. just get a solid one. They are 30+ years old. I imagine some parts are hard to find or NLA. Be handy. I wouldn't expect (anticipate) 100% reliable use. Electrical gremlins are likely. Not sure how easy/hard the mechanical maintenance is. Friends of mine in HS had BMWs.. I like 2002s (vs the 1600s) but like I said, condition trumps motor, imho.