gcclubs

I am currently a newbie in that I am looking for but do not own a Porsche. I have a couple of questions

- first is there any good internet sites to go to to look for a Porsche for sale other than ebay?

- I am looking either for a late 80's 911 or the 90 onwards 964. I would like some thoughts on reasons why I might choose one vs the other, ignoring the obvious "one is newer". In the past I have read some posts that imply that the older 911 can be more of a handful to drive. The post never really said why so any input is greatly appreciated on this or other reasons. I am leaning to the 964 at the current time.

- Looking at the pricing of Boxsters vs. 964's (on ebay) it seems that the price of the older Boxsters is near or in some cases less than the 911/964. I realize that there are a number of obvious differences, like water vs air but in the groups mind is there any advantages of one vs the other, like more driving enjoyment, better handling, better value retention etc .

- I realize I am asking the 911 guys a loaded question here but wonder if there is anyone who owns both, and what their thoughts might be?

Thanks for helping a new guy.

JackOlsen

The 964's are a great bargain right now, in that their exterior styling is less popular than the 78-89 cars, and because they have a largely-undeserved reputation for having cylinder-head-gasket problems, dual-mass flywheel problems, and prone-to-failure dual-distributor belts. They're slightly less user-serviceable than the 84-89 cars, but they also have a lot more torque and power than the earlier cars, as well as better air conditioning, brakes, and a more-modern suspension design.

Boxsters handle nicely, and are convertibles, but are also underpowered, and will continue to lose resale value for a while, still.

My .02, at least.

ZCAT3

I agree with Jack - the 964s seem to be the incredible deal right now - many of them are dropping below the 87-89 Carreras in terms of price. The 964 has the larger 3.6 250 HP engine (vs. the 217 HP 3.2 in the 87-89 car), has a coil over suspension (vs. the pre-964 torsion bar setup), have dual airbags (no airbags in the earlier cars); have power assisted steering; and have AC that works. That said, I personally prefer the 87-89 car as it is a more raw and pure feeling car (which is entirely subjective).

So, as everyone will tell you, go drive a couple of each car to see what you prefer and go from there. All of these cars are pretty substanitally discounted right now due to the economy.

Drew_K

The 964 is "better" than the late 80's 911 in all MEASURABLE categories except weight. It's faster, has a more modern suspension, better brakes, better A/C, airbags, etc. Feel is entirely subjective, so you'll have to drive them both and decide for yourself. The 964 is just about the most expensive N/A 911 to maintain, both parts and labor. If you can live with the maintenance, the 964 is a very strong performer. Their prices are also very attractive right now. Just be sure to read up about their weak points.

I wouldn't worry about any 911 being a handful. Put good rubber on it and don't do anything stupid and you'll be fine. Then get yourself to an autocross. My 911 (92 C2) handles wet roads better than any other car I've owned.

Boxster vs 964/911: The Boxster is hands down the more modern car and would make a much better daily driver. The 964 has decent A/C (good for an older 911) but nothing compared to the Boxster. The Boxster also has a much more compliant suspension while still remaining firm. Steering feel is good although not as good as a 911 or 964. Boxsters will continue to depreciate; the 911/964 are pretty much at the bottom of their depreciation curves. Most of the depreciation for them will come from mileage.

The Boxster is the best handling car in the bunch IMO. That's based on driving them as loaner cars and at autocrosses. Never driven one on track though.

The 964 would be the hardest to sell IMO. Long term, the late 80's 911 will be viewed as more desireable than a 964 or Boxster.

Here's my take:

Daily driver: Boxster
Best overall performance: 964
Classic 911 with at least 95% of 964's performance: 87-89 911.

Drew
92 C2

craigg

I have an 1984 911 Carrera Targa - considered by many to be one of the "perfect" Porsches of the mid to late '80s. Air-cooled, great engine and performance, lots of room and very reliable. Last year I bought a used Boxster S.

So far, my Boxster S has exceeded my every expectation. The handling is better, the aircon is way better, the sound system is quite excellent (digital sound and upgraded speakers), and the looks are excellent - if you like a ragtop. I thought the 911 was a very good looking car but the Boxster is the most attractive car I have seen in a long time

It is a little tight for a 6'2 guy but acceptable. For trips, the two trunks, front and back, are amazing - my brother and I got two sets of golf clubs (in smaller travel bags) in there. WOW!

The six speed tranny is well matched to the engine and pick-up is very good. I am not sure why people disparage the Boxster's power. It is actually more than a full second quicker to 60 mph than my old 911 (about 5.4 sec), but didn't seem like it. Deceptive smoothness may be why folks are not complimentary on this. It is no Twin Turbo, but the Power to Weight ratio is very good. Porsches af any kind aren't really good dragsters anyways, and show their stuff in the twisties. This is where the mid-engine is unbeatable.

Top speed is beyond my abilities to reach - I chickened out a bit above 140 mph and it was still climbing fast! Claimed to be 165 or so.

A mid-late 80's 911 is a wonderful car but if you want a modern classic, the Boxster - especially the S - will be hard to beat.

gcclubs

Craigg you mention that the Boxster is a little tight for your 6' 2" frame. Good point. I am 6' 4". I have always understood that the 911 has a fair bit of room. How do you find it compared to your Boxster?

Anyone else out there have thoughts on room in the 964? I recall one post from someone dropping the seat height in a 964. Do they tend to have to little head room for tall guys?

mj964

You're asking the right questions, and have already figured out that everyone has an opinion. I think the depreciation advice running through the thread is spot on. The '80's Carreras probably won't get cheaper and are considered highly desirable. I drove a couple when I was shopping and loved them, particularly with the later gearboxes. They feel faster than they are. Still relatively easy to work on, too. Great cars all around, with the least financial risk of your three finalists.

The 964 is much more modern mechanically, but has some well-documented glitches. Still, these cars are now old enough that many have had the issues sorted out. They've certainly become more affordable in the past couple years (ouch) so there's no reason to buy one that's leaking oil at the cylinders heads or hasn't had its DMF upgraded. I like the more aero look, but others are less kind. In the end, I bought a 964 for the extra HP, the coils, and the airbags. I still think of that blue-gray over cashmere '88 coupe, though.

Boxters are going to depreciate for a while, but are going to be the best daily drivers as others have pointed out. I don't think they're DIY friendly, but you might ask the guys over on the Boxster board what they think.

Good luck and let us know what you decide.

Mike
'91 C4
Boston

86NOH2O

In 86' the factory lowered the front seats 20 millimeters, how much is that? That might help being your 6'4". I'm 6'2" and the Carrera's head room is great. Aren't Boxters 217 hp? Same as the 87-89 Carrera's. You can chip an 84-86 and get the same. I haven't as it's plenty fast stock. When I watch driving events the boxters spin more than any other Porsche at the tracks. I think it handles so well people get over confident in their "racing" skills. 911 guys just seem to know better. You didn't say if it would be a weekend or daily driver? Also if you have small kids the 911 has a great "factory" child seats. I believe the 964 just has a shelf in the rear, no seats. Lastly, I cannot fit two golf bags in my 911! Unless the tops down......

adsc4s

I personally bought a 1990 C2 Cab with all the problems sorted out. It is a wonderfully torquey motor with a lot of pull. The a/c works fine but its a cab! IMHO, I liked the more modern look of the 964 bumpers while maintaining the "classic" 911 shape.

There is a huge difference in feel between the 964 and the older 911's. However, it's not all about how many horses or lbs of torque, etc. An early Carrera will feel more raw than a later one which will feel more raw that a 964 which will feel more raw than a 993 which will feel more raw than a 996 or 986. Car manufacturers are getting so good at letting us go faster with less stress (and input).

Buy what you want based on your personal preferences. Can't go wrong with any.

Drew_K

The 964 coupes have rear seats. I'm not sure about the targas or cabs.

Craigg, when people criticize the Boxster's power, they're typically referring to the non "S" version. I do agree that the Boxsters are sneaky quick since the power is fairly linear.

Mark in Baltimore

I miss the raw edge of my 85 Carrera. I don't miss the fussiness of the 915 tranny or the fragility of the synchros one bit. I should have bought a later G50. If you go the 911 route as opposed to a 964, get an 87-89 one or learn to get really good at double-clutching. At EVERY stop.

The 911 Carrera is not an evil handling car. I was surprised at how benign and communicative it was on the track. Keep your foot on the gas and it sticks. Ease your foot off and the back end starts to come around. Lift your foot QUICKLY off of the gas in a honking corner and the car willl want to rotate quickly, too. The throttle's like switch.

Good luck! These cars are so much freakin' fun!

craigg

Although I am 6'2, I have short legs which makes the headroom issue for me more noticible. My 911 is a Targa, without which I could not fit very well. The Boxster is better in some ways because it has power seats that go every way you can imagine.

My 911 is a pre power seat model but fits well in other ways. It does have back seats but these are vestigal since my youngest son turned 12 - no way any semi-normal sized adult will be able to sit back there. I don't miss the back seat when in the Boxster. I also have a number of other cars for hauling people (minivan, Maxima and a small SUV)

86NOH20, the Boxster S is 250 hp from 3.2 liter, and the newer non S is 217 from a 2.7 (the 2003 S is 257) but it is the torque that comes through nicely - a little more than the 911, I think.

Listen, if you get a mid 80's 911, you will get the best deal going - and a great car to boot. A used Boxster - 99 or newer or a 2000 S - is also a good thing. The Boxsters are in the depreciation curve right now, whereas, as mentioned earlier, the older 911s are about as low as they'll go, I think.

You will love any Porsche you get, I suspect.

Jaxon

I've owned a Boxster and driven quite a few 911's. Over 40. The Boxster is a great Roadster and convertable. The 911 cab is a legendary race car and a great convertable. The ealier you go in the 911 the rougher they get...in a good way...from my perspective. I like the '84's-'89's.

Suggest you drive both quite a bit before deciding. It helps in determining what you are looking for in your Porsche. I didn't do enough of this prior to my Boxster purchase.

I don't own either at this time so I can be considered unbiased. I do own a 951 but you didn't ask about that one!

J-McDonald

On the roominess issue - I'm 6'2" (220 lbs.) and fit into my '91 C2 cab with headroom to spare. When I test drove a Boxster, I found myself slouching to be able to look out the windshield.

One point that hasn't been mentioned is build quality - 3.2 Carreras and 964s have much higher build quality (both material and workmanship) than Boxster - drive both and you'll see.