Jacks911

This question is taken from a Thread about Turbo "Look" Targa's posted by Dak911 (Daniel). I have my opinion and wonder about others so I have started this new title thread. Might be interesting to hear from some G-50 owners as well?

IMHO - the issue of similar pricing of the late 911's & the 964's is from the overblown "issues" of the early 964's and the lack of Common Sense (but that may not apply to buying a Porsche anyway) in buyers. Why would anyone - looking at it in a practical way - pay the same price for an '89 911 when a 2 year newer 964 gets you - More power, better suspension & ABS brakes, lower CD & a popup spoiler, Air Bag safety for driver & Passenger, improved Heat & A/C, Gauges, electrical wiring, and More.... ????

Recent articles in Excellence talk about the "Sweet Spot" in the used 911 Market. I think this is fabricated buy Porsche Brokers (as quoted in that article) looking to inflate the pricing on the more available 3.2 cars and a lack of knowledge of the true superiority of the 964.

But you know I am biased - and I never liked the look of accordion baffles & Rubber Bus bumpers!

garrett376

Shhhhhhh!!!!

Don't let everyone know that 964's are better until I get myself one for racing...!!! You're going to push up the prices!!!!

964's are truly the sleeper of a deal in the 911 Market. I think the electronics scare off most would-be purchasers of 964's.

Those who actually know, realize there are so many superior things about the 964. But, to each his (or her) own.

Bill Gregory

I believe the market over values the 3.2L Carrera's, especially with the G-50, as the 'last' of the original 911 design. The 964, otoh, has more traditional depreciation. While the 3.2L Carrera with G-50 is a fine Porsche, many, including Bruce Anderson, acknowledge the advancements in the 964 over previous 911's.

DavidI

I think even without the early 964 issues prices would be close. Most people buying a 15 year-old 911 are probably buying for the driving thrill rather than the quality of the heater, air-bags and array of warning lights - a less 'cossetted', more raw, driving experience has an appeal if the car is not necessarily everyday A to B transport.

delhi

the 3.2 carreras are easier to take care apparently. the 964 is straddled in between arguably two sensatioanl 911 models. Onthe older classic end you have the 3.2s and on the later/newer end you have the 993s. If you have siblings, you'd understand. hahahahaha.

Ian J

I think it is along the lines that the 3.2 has now achieved "modern classic" status and has a suitable classic feel to it whilst the 964, although technically far superior, is still viewed just as an old Porsche i.e. it drops into the cracks btween "Classic Status" and "Status Symbol"

Randall G.

Personally, having owned both, I've never understood the fascination with the 3.2L Carrera. If the 964 never existed, I might still have my 3.2L. But, the 964 is a considerably better performer (including much improved straight-line acceleration), more comfortable, safer, newer, and is the best looking 911 ever (IMHO). It never occurred to me that the 964 might be less desirable than earlier 911s, until I read Bruce Anderson suggesting that in Excellence. Actually, it's possible Bruce Anderson started the whole 964 is the red-headed stepchild thing (some people don't know anything about 911s, other than what Bruce has written), but I couldn't say for certain.

Oh, and with all due respect to 87-89 Carrera owners, I thought the recent "Sweet Spot" article in Excellence was a joke.

joey bagadonuts

To be honest, I preferred the look of the 74-89 911 when I was shopping for my car a few years ago. In comparison, the 964 seemed somewhat heavy with a higher sill line and chunky bumpers. After test driving an SC, 3.2, Boxster, Z3 and 964, though, I realized that the 964 was easily the best bang for your buck and zeroed in on finding a good one.

In no time, I grew to love the lines of my car and now regard the 74-89's as an okay looking 911. While it does have similar lines to the original, I now think the changes carried out in the '74 model really gave it a dated look, very seventies. And while a 15-30 year old car is obviously going to look dated, I guess I have a problem with driving one that looks very seventies. It's just a matter of taste, I guess.

garrett376

As my wife says, those cars are very "miami vice"!!!

joey bagadonuts

That's hilarious. Your wife has a good eye and great taste!

dove

I was in Notts at the weekend and looked through there local autotrader and found a 964 for wait for it......................£8,500!!! This was a LHD complete running undamaged car with current tax and mot!,can you believe that.
Paul

joey bagadonuts

When are you picking her up, Paul?

BGLeduc

To my eye (as someone else once posted), the best looking 911 would be one with a 964 front and a 993 back.

Once the headlights went oval and tipped back, and the fenders lowered into the hood, the quintessential 911-ness started to slip away. Not that I am in the market, but the 997 finally reverses the styling trend begun with the 993.

Note: IMHO, AFAIC, YMMV......993 and 996 owners, NO OFFENSE INTENDED!

BGL

dove

Tempting at £8.5K Joey,but I'm still hoping that some things can come together for me and I can bag a 993
Paul

imcarthur

I didn't consider 964s in my recent purchase (being delivered this week) because:

1. Self repair is easier on the SC & 3.2 - less electrical, no ABS etc
2. The much talked about 'difficulties' of early 964s
3. Style. Just something about the SC/3.2 . . .

Ian