How does a modded 951 compare to a 996?
11-30-2005, 01:33 PM
#61
Monkeys Removed by Request
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Originally Posted by Oddjob
For perspective, an 88TS or 89T window sticker was $44-47k, which was more than an
88-89 3.2 911 Carrera at the time. The difference in the current price of a
16 to 19 year old 944T versus a 1-6 year old 996 has more to do with
depreciation and inflation, than with economy of design. And my guess is that in 1989, a guy with a chipped 86 944T and some koni sport yellows, looked at the 89T on the showroom floor and thought that new car was not worth $20k more than his 3-4 year old car.
Im sure someone can check the inflation and exchange rates over the past 20 years, but my guess is that the current 997 base price is probably close in today's dollar, to a 944 Turbo (S) in 1989.
But even so, my arguable impression is that in 1989, a 944 Turbo sat on a higher rung
of the performance car ladder than a 996/7 does today. Very few cars sold in
the US were able to run with a 944 Turbo in ‘89, and of the handful that
might be capable, two were other Porsches, the 911 Turbo, and the 928S4.
Today, I don’t see that Porsche has maintained as much performance
separation/superiority between its cars and the competition.
I dont disagree that other cars can be bought today and upgraded to match or surpass the performance of any porsche, whether its an MR2, RX7, Supra, Corvette, Viper, 300/350ZX, etc. And often it can be done for cheaper. Yes, a 944T is realitively cheap for the performance, but in reality $10-14k for a 16 year old car with 75-100k miles is not that cheap to purchase, and they are not cheap to maintain. You pay for the Porsche name on the hood badge regardless of
if you buy a $400k C-GT from a dealer, or buy $200 worth of maintenance parts for
the 19 year old car. But what you get is some exclusivity and the history of the name - and I will also argue that a Porsche will turn more heads (in most crowds) than a Toyota, Mazda, or Nissan.
Sorry for dragging off-topic.
88-89 3.2 911 Carrera at the time. The difference in the current price of a
16 to 19 year old 944T versus a 1-6 year old 996 has more to do with
depreciation and inflation, than with economy of design. And my guess is that in 1989, a guy with a chipped 86 944T and some koni sport yellows, looked at the 89T on the showroom floor and thought that new car was not worth $20k more than his 3-4 year old car.
Im sure someone can check the inflation and exchange rates over the past 20 years, but my guess is that the current 997 base price is probably close in today's dollar, to a 944 Turbo (S) in 1989.
But even so, my arguable impression is that in 1989, a 944 Turbo sat on a higher rung
of the performance car ladder than a 996/7 does today. Very few cars sold in
the US were able to run with a 944 Turbo in ‘89, and of the handful that
might be capable, two were other Porsches, the 911 Turbo, and the 928S4.
Today, I don’t see that Porsche has maintained as much performance
separation/superiority between its cars and the competition.
I dont disagree that other cars can be bought today and upgraded to match or surpass the performance of any porsche, whether its an MR2, RX7, Supra, Corvette, Viper, 300/350ZX, etc. And often it can be done for cheaper. Yes, a 944T is realitively cheap for the performance, but in reality $10-14k for a 16 year old car with 75-100k miles is not that cheap to purchase, and they are not cheap to maintain. You pay for the Porsche name on the hood badge regardless of
if you buy a $400k C-GT from a dealer, or buy $200 worth of maintenance parts for
the 19 year old car. But what you get is some exclusivity and the history of the name - and I will also argue that a Porsche will turn more heads (in most crowds) than a Toyota, Mazda, or Nissan.
Sorry for dragging off-topic.
