A guy was talking on another thread about a '96 for $37K with low miles. I've been negotiating with a guy for a '95 that has about 40K miles and might take as little as $34K for the car. I guess the real question is, all things being equal (mileage, condition, color combo)....how much more is a '96 really worth over a '95? I've read that the performance is slightly better, but what about any improvements in gas mileage, reduced maintenance, responsiveness? Is varioram (and anything else that may have changed that year) worth $1K, 2K, 3K???

 

I think at this point...what the differences are **worth** is largely a matter of what the marketplace looks like at any given time. I've had several people offer me $35K+ for my 85,000 mile '95....I doubt these were rennlisters, of course, but you see my point.

That said, I personally wouldn't place any greater value on a '96-'98 993 at this point, particularly because of the check-engine light debacle that seems to be occuring on some OBDII cars.

sean

 

Search, baby, search.

Hard to quantify something that some can feel a clear difference, while others cannot. It's like asking how much more guards red is worth over polar silver.

In the 95 vs 96 dilemma, there are other factors, too, such as the ease of chipping, third brake light baskethandle, CEL issue, etc. These are just as difficult to put a monetary value on.

 

All things are never "equal." Drive all versions & buy the 993, of whatever year, that best meets your criteria, including price. If all things could be equal, the newer 993 will always be worth more, because, it's ... newer. I find the mid range torque improvement from varioram significant. Gas mileage shouldn't be a factor. My level of enjoyment rises with gas consumption.

There are a number of differences between the MY'95 & MY'96+. Some good, some bad & some don't matter. IMO, a $3k price difference is less important than getting what you want at this price point. Indeed, if that $3k is a stretch, ownership costs may be a stretch.

Generally when this question is asked (often), those w/MY '95 will post their preference for that year. It's nice that we all love our cars.

 

Mark, Guards Red is worth alot more than polar silver. Who you kiddin'?

 

Heeeeyyyyy, that's not what this board told me!

I want my money back.

 

Point taken Mark. I'm not a "basket" kind of guy but that's a small issue. I don't know what a CEL issue is though. Will need to do a search to figure that one out.

 

Good luck! Before I bought mine, I spent literally hours reading the posts on the CEL issue. Made me want to get a 95 instead, until I read of the issues the 95s were having. Decided on a 96 and have been very happy with it. No CEL issues to deal with.... yet.

 

Sooooooo, what you're saying kkim is that you read about alot of '95 issues? Hmmmmmmmm.......
Nothing is ever perfect, even brand-new cars. What are the top three issues for either year then? Time to test all that well spent study time!

 

95s- alignment issues, lower hp, alarm funnies, steering rack needs to be beefed up for larger wheels, basket handle, wiring harness, etc.

I read in the PCA archives that it was advised to stay away from the 95s. That, however, was one tech advisor's opinion on the matter, but it was enough to steer me from them.

Just seemed they had the usual first year teething problems that happen in many other makes and models. To avoid these in my "dream" car, I made the decision to look at 96 and up cars. Yes, the later cars aren't perfect, but I was willing to take the gamble.

96s- CEL, wiring harness on some cars, uh.... uh.... anyone have others?

good luck in your search. Hope you get the car you are looking for.

 

The 95 is much easier to chip than the 96 on.

At this point, these cars are now 8-9 years old. IMHO, it is much more important to find a well cared for car with a clear paper trail of proactive/preventative maintenance instead of focusing on the year exclusively.

Other things to think about are the mods/options the car has. It should probably have a "new" suspension as the original will most likely be shot. Things like litronics, LSD, leather, white faced gauges, aluminum, sport seats, 18" wheels, etc are something that only you can place a value on. Also, why settle for color combo. Get exactly what you want.

Good luck.

 

96+:

Biggest advantage - Varioram gives as much as 40 additional lb-ft of torque at certain rev ranges, although only a 12 peak hp difference.

Biggest disadvantage - OBD-II, which will trigger CEL light on carbon buildup issue that some 993's suffer from. 95's are just as susceptible to the exact same buildup issue, but OBD-I does not recognize it.

As others have mentioned, 95's also have some minor first-year issues that are usually easy to fix.

I wouldn't worry about the wiring harness issue, it's a factory recall and therefore free to get fixed.

As far the value one way or the other, it's pretty much up to the individual. The price difference in general seems minor given identical models.

Interestingly, I have noticed the price difference between S and non-S models growing as time goes on.

Good luck,

 

Alignment issues-huh? Never heard of this problem with a '95, let alone a '96-'98. Maybe I missed the threads on it. All 993's require a kinematic toe adustment for proper alignment.

Lower hp - yep, but this can be solved to a large degree with a $500 engine chip.

alarm funnies - do you mean the drive block? In that case, I thought any car that had drive block could have issues, not just '95's.

Steering rack needs to be beefed up - costs, oh, $35 and 20 minutes of your time.

basket handle - can be taken off. Also, quite a few late model build '95's have the window mounted third brake light.

wiring harness - replaced free of charge by the dealer, if your car actually needs it.

Some people have never had CEL issues with their non-95 cars. Others deal with their CEL issues by paying money to have it turned off, having their secondary air injectors cleaned or by taping up the light.

As always, YMMV.

 

Alignment: '95-spec alignment supposedly results in more rapid rear-tire wear. The "fix" is simply to align it to '96+ spec if you choose.

Horsepower/torque: The difference is only at low to mid rpm, where the Varioram does provide more torque -- to me, it's definitely noticeable, but not dramatic. However, the original road tests show that in standing-start acceleration, the '95s are at least as quick as the '96+ cars (the quickest times I've seen were for '95s). Steve W says his dyno shows that there is virtually no difference in hp between stock '95 and '96+ cars (correct me if I'm wrong, Steve).

Wiring Harness: I think most '96 cars were subject to the recall. As mentioned, this is free if it needs to be done.

One more thing about '95s: Production for the US '95 model year spanned more than 1.5 years -- January '94 though July '95. There were no '94 models in the US because the gov't allows a car built in January of year "X" to be called an "X+1" model. So, some '95s are well over a full year older than others.

 

Among the numerous changes from MY95 to MY96+ was a revised rear suspension including different parts. It was not just new alignment specs.

PCA Tech Post