rfoxdvm

Hello everybody... sorry in advance for the long story.

I am a lifelong German car enthusiast, and have been lucky to have owned many great cars over the years... to name a few: VW Golfs, Jetta, Audi A4, S4, BMW M Coupe, and currently a Porsche Cayman 2.9. I also have had a few sporty Japanese cars, most notably a Mazda Miata (2007). I am also lucky enough to have a great daily driver (VW Golf TDI) so the Cayman is just for recreation.

I raced formula cars with the SCCA for a brief stint, done many track days with car clubs, and autocrosses way back. I'm not the fastest but I know driving dynamics.

I used to get off on driving fast on the street, but age along with parenthood has really diluted that interest. I'm not planning on getting back into track days or racing any time soon. Out of all the cars I've had, I can remember a few great things about each - every car had strengths and weaknesses. But, for me, the most driving fun on a daily basis was the Miata. I've come to realize that simplicity is often synonymous with fun.

Don't get me wrong, the Cayman is an absolutely wonderful car. As the magazines suggest, the handling balance is superb. The problem for me is that to challenge the driver, one would need to be driving at speeds beyond reasonable on public roads. In other words, when the Miata was fun at 60 or 70 mph, the Cayman feels planted, and would need to be at 90 mph to require complex driver input. Before anybody suggests I go and buy another Miata, let me just say that a Mazda is not nearly as nice a place to be as a Porsche.

For reasons I have NOT listed above, I am considering buying / restoring a 964 C2 or a 911 3.2. Probably an '87 vs. a '92. Based on the information I provided above, which would you suggest? What are the differences in performance, driver input, handling dynamics, fun? Other suggestions entirely? I know these are broad questions but, trust me, I have tried to search out answers for a while. I have not had the opportunity to drive either platform and probably will not before making a purchase.

I am drawn to the 964 for appearance and some features, and there is a definite emotional connection with that car from that time period in my life. I am a little dissuaded by the listed weight of the 964 C2 - 3000 lbs. seems heavy for such a simple sports car. The 911 3.2 is maybe 300 lbs. lighter. I'm not sure where all that weight is coming from, but, in my experience, lighter is just more fun.

So, thanks to anybody who read the above, and special thanks to anybody who is willing to offer replies.

Rob

ivangene

this is simple....drive each one, the answer will come to you

I really like the 964 C2 and it is on my bucket list - I would have taken it had I not found the 86' I am loving the 86 though. If I get to choose next time I will end up in the 67' range...for the reasons stated above, simple/light. For now I am keeping the 86' with NO PLANS to sell her. Its a good balance of years and the 915 is a wonderful experience, ask Amar

ofishbein

I don't think you'll get a consensus - there are too many variables people either like or don't like. You say you liike the looks of the 964, but many people think the bumpers look heavy and clunky. It does weigh more, but the engine is also larger so you get more power to move it. I understand the driving experience is also different because of the power steering. These are little things that are personal preferences. I went for a 3.2 because I wanted the last of a series so most of the bugs would be worked out.

If you go for a 964, I would just suggest making sure the three main problem points have been addressed - distrubutor belt/vent, RMS seal, and flywheel. Not really a big deal since all years of 911s have their idiosyncratic issues. Either way you go, you'll have a blast.

blake

I'd recommend looking at 3.2s (84-89 Carreras) and 3.0s (78-83SCs). I have spent excessive time in both cars, and quite frankly find my 964 to be "soft" after driving them. I know what you mean about a spirited car at 60-70mph, and think those could provide the best options. Of course, the biggest problem is that they are 20+ years in age - and that might be an issue.

One other note - test drive SEVERAL cars each model. I have driven Carreras that feel completely different from each other. If I had driven one over the other, I could have walked away completely with a bad feeling. It really comes down to set-up and maintenance. Wityh 20+ years on these cars, it can be a stark contrast!

Good luck.
-Blake

jackb911

Unless having really good air conditioning is an issue, the 3.2 Carrera would be my choice.

I've had 2 964's, both RS Americas. Fabulous cars but heavier and a bit less involving to drive than the 3.2's. Same with a 993 but even more so.

Routine maintenance is easier on the 3.2's. A valve adjustment on a 964 is a fairly major process because the cat + 2 bulky muffler exhaust is in the way.

The 3.6 in the 964 is a lovely, torquey engine, though. Both cars have their strong points but your post indicates that you are looking for a more raw, visceral driving experience. Having owned 21 Porsches of almost every genre in the past 39 years, my humble opinion is that the 3.2 Carreras were the last of the 'old school', quirky (in a good way) 911's before Porsche started marketing them toward a somewhat less hardcore buyer.

Every generation/iteration of Porsche seems to have had some sort of built-in "issue". 3.2 Carreras have theirs as well: valve guides that sometimes wear out prematurely and exhaust side head studs that sometimes break. If you buy a high mileage one, make sure these areas have been addressed as neither fix is cheap. A PPI that includes checking for broken head studs is a good idea.

Hope this helps. Regarding a Cayman, in the unlikely event that I ever sell my '87 Carrera, a Cayman is what I would replace it with.

blake

Interesting post Jack. I was debating listing the '93 and '94 RSAmerica because it was basically a factory 964 "Stripper" and lacked power steering. I think it is the most raw of the normally-aspirated 964s (US Cups excluded). They should be on his list to test drive, though most are now selling in the $40K+ range and have spent significant time on the track. The '92 US Cup (really an RS) and the '93/94 RSA are both on my bucket list.

Glad to see you have owned two!

-Blake

g-50cab

Easy answer = The 964 will do 120 really easy - and you feel like you are doing 90. The 3.2 while just as quick at 120 you feel like you are about to punch through the atmosphere.

For a complete, in your face involved driving experience, it's tough to beat the 3.2 Carreras. Well, the earlier you go - the more involved you need to be. My 1974 is probably about as raw, involved as I need to get. You need to drive plenty of cars - from the lighter earlier cars to the 3.2 Carreras. One will speak to you.

I've gone from a 964 - > to a 1987 3.2 (then 3.4) Carrera - > 1974 Lightweight widebody...

ked

"I've come to realize that simplicity is often synonymous with fun."
"...to challenge the driver, one would need to be driving at speeds beyond reasonable on public roads."
& I'd add that old saw...
"it's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow."

that's how I ended up (after learning to drive via a Dauphine, a '62 Sedan de Ville, a '65 Mustang, & a 356B) with a series of BMWs, Alfas & Porsches. the further back in time you go, the simpler the machine & more fun the operation. of course, that does not mean cheaper. so now, my oldest fun car is a '65 SC, the all-around "best" is the '87 Carrera (which I endorse vs the 964 for "pure driving") & the newest is the '91 318iS. obviously, I'm thinking of getting another 105 series Alfa...

you are on the right path to the past. don't fear the past - embrace it (but mount new rubber).
drive lots of 'em, examine each nominee on its own merits (get a model expert's help), be patient, & enjoy the process.

Busta Rib

If you can put up with the quirkyness, get the 3.2. It will be a more involving driving experience, and it is simpler and lighter than the 964, easier to maintain. It will feel more nimble and faster than it is really traveling.

If the 3.2 feels too raw and difficult to live with, get a 964 C2, dump the power steering, and lighten it up by removing some stuff and you can have a driving experience that is close, but with more modern amenities/comfort.

I went from a '94 C4 to an '80 SC. With less power, the SC feels just as sporty, quick, and more involving and nimble than the C4. Granted I went from AWD to RWD, but I've owned M3s before too, so that wasn't a factor. 964s are heavy cars, even the C2s. I think a lot of what made the Miata fun is the light weight and the same formula can be applied to the early 911s. The C4 weighed a little over 3300 lbs and I think 964 C2s weigh in around 3000-3100 lbs. My SC is probably around 2700 lbs wet. That is a huge difference and it translates into noticeably different driving dynamics between the two.

Good luck with your search. Once you drive both, I suspect one will speak to you more than the other.

vracer

I just travelled that road. I know a fair number of Pcar people. The mechanics who had already paid for their yachts said to get the 3.2. Those who were still making payments suggested the 3.6. Actually I was warned that the 964 would probably be more trouble prone, but basically I was told to get the best car I could find. Since I wanted a Targa, I limited my serch to '86-'93 (the '86 is basically the same as the '87-'89 w.o. the G50) with a slight preference toward the 964. My tag line tells what I ended up with, and I'm a very happy camper. Enjoy the search, it is truly a lot of fun.

yumyum1667

I am biased but I am a fairly new 88 3.2 owner. This car is pushing 25 years on and still feels tight. It is one of those "I can't wait until the weekend" to drive cars. It is lighweight and when you wind it up it is still fairily fast by todays standards. It is a keeper.

I get stopped from time to time from folks asking about the history of it which is pretty cool.

My favorite part is when I have a mechanical issue (currently needs some AC work) me and a buddy can actually WORK on it with a manual and the right tools. My 2011 DD needs a software update when it has an issue.

I say just flip a coin. the 3.2 vs a 964 us moot because both are great.

rfoxdvm

Thank you for all the thoughtful replies already. I put the same post in the 964 forum, and, while trying not to be antagonistic, I'll say that the replies here seem to be more in sync with where I'm headed with this project. I'm not in need of a daily driver or even a GT car. I will try to drive a few examples but I think I may end up with the 3.2 after all.

And, thanks, ked, for the old adage "it's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow." I had heard that years ago but it had slipped my mind.

Rob

racer

Do you want ABS and Airbags? if no, then fire up an SC or a 3.2 Carrera! Lots of raw driving fun with decidely lower street limits than the new stuff, especially if you run crappy tires on it

However, do heed the "don't lift in a corner" mantra because unlike the Cayman, the 911 will swap ends if provoked. That said, I thought my SC gave much more (longer) warning of spinning than my boxster or 914 ever did.

Makmov

It's just lying, waiting to rip your head off.

A turbo just wants to kill you.

WPOZZZ

I've had a 3.2 Carrera, a couple of 930s and a 964 turbo. I still have a 930, and a 911sc. The 964 turbo felt too refined to me as it was easy to drive. The 930 and the Carrera were way more rewarding to drive as it challenged me constantly. You have to focus while driving those cars or it'll turn around and bite you in your ***.