ivangene

hogwash - those $17k cars are super plain jane lease returns or something and they seem to be setting the "standard"

drive mine (or plenty of other people's) car up along side one and you would be shocked at how much better they look. SO here is the scoop.... we all spent money making them look good and if you buy one for that price, you will either be stuck in a plane jane, or be sinking money in mods to make it look better.

The money spent is not money we get back, BUT when done we love our cars too much to sell them for that price, so we hold out for a "little more" - still a great deal - really!

<rambling> yada yada

RallyJon

The design of <'99 cars requires much more hand work than later cars. Just count the 10,000 black trim screws that hold a 993 together.

993 and earlier = hand fit, adjust, screw in. 996 and later = snap. Perhaps both panels are fitted by hand, but there's a huge difference in the amount of hand work.

RallyJon

Good cars cost more. Recent maintenance and new wear items, records and warranty can, and should, add as much as 20% to the value of a Porsche.

But as a buyer, no one can blame you for trying to convince the seller that all 996s are worth high-teens to low-$20s. In this economy, it might even work.

soverystout

Very true. How else would someone explain the miriad of pictures of the production line in the late 90's with a 993 and a 986 side by side or right next to each other on the same line. The same is true from the 996 and 993 in pics from 1998.

Air cooled engines cost Porsche a great deal of money. And having an air cooled engine and wishing to have 4 valves per cylinder and DOHC was an impossibility do to the heat generated. The profitiability of Porsche was in the crapper at that time as well. It was a question of "do we adapt or cease to exist", hence the 986 and 996.

soverystout

I see a P-car and the Escalade/Hummer as 2 different types of excess.

I look at a Escalade owner and say, "Nice Chrome Tahoe!" I look at a Hummer owner say "what was 8mpg like with $4.00 gas?"
This was ignorant excess.

Buying one of the best handling cars out there for a fraction of it's original MSRP, sustainable excess.

RallyJon

And to this day, their continued existence costs 996 owners a lot of money in depreciation.

arr0gant

Most of the people here are *way* to speculatory and analytical. It's simple supply/demand.

Anyway, If it's a 1 or 2 owner car, has all maintenance records and pass a PPI, get it!! They are some of, if not *thee* best value's on sports cars in the world.

If you have $20k and want an amazing Porsche, buy a 99/00 996!!

arr0gant

Here's some other *amazing* value's for under $20k. Check out this dudes list --->http://blog.cardomain.com/2009/09/15...-cars-for-20k/

htny

I don't know Ed, this seems like mod cost justification, which I think all of us are guilty of. The only cosmetic mods which are truly noticeable to a layman observer are wheels and wings. Maybe amberectomy on very early non-xenon cars. Beyond that we're dealing with the type of minutiae evident only to real cognoscenti.

You can buy a plain jane car and dress it up pretty inexpensively these days. The little things we all obsess over are really not major contributors to curb appeal or "drive up next to" it appeal, and this is definitely reflected in resale prices.

I do agree re: the cost, but I still wonder why four valves really matter for anything but fuel economy or emissions (topics which I have no knowledge of). Porsche had a 12 cylinder DOHC air cooled motor making insane power (1600 gross horsepower estimated) at high rpm in the 917 in 1969 through the mid 70s, and an 8 cylinder DOHC motor in the type 804 in 1962.

I agree with Gant, it's supply, demand and I'm going to say headlight prejudice esp. on the earlier ambered Mk1s.
If you have $20k and want an amazing Porsche, buy a 99/00 996!![/QUOTE]

Let's all remember that there was a period of time, Id say 1988 to 93 or 94, when you could buy a ten year old 911 for 15 to 20K. A financial crisis precipitates the sale of a disproportionately large number of toys. The common wisdom then, especially on the 2.7, was that you might not be able to keep it on the road, but you could get the title cheap. See any similarities?


OT: Gant what happened to the E90?

Best,
Hans

ivangene

no no,
I agree... you can pick up a plane jane and with very little effort enhance it to your liking. But I was pointing out that people that just buy one and drive it till they are "done" and sell it dont have the same level of "heart" poured into the car and therefore are willing to sell it for less money....(the same people that complain about the cost of maintenance) for those of us that spent time making it unique will most likely sell for about the same price due to the fact that the mods dont really increase value, but we are more reluctant to do so and therefore tend to hold onto them a little longer.

the curb appeal changes like wings and skirts (ect) dont change the numbers (in my case its a 99' with 112k miles on it) it is worth what it is worth no matter how shiny it is. I however wont sell it for $16k so if someone wants a $16k car they will have to get one and do the work to make it unique.....(and in the end cost more than I am willing to sell for, but have the experiance of doing it yourself) Its likely I wont get $20k for my car.... but if someone wants theirs to look like it they will spend the $16-18k and THEN sink $5k or more in it to make it the "same" - the good news is THEN it will be worth......$17-19k Ta Da!

<I know - I am rambling.... >

blinkwatt

The ONLY reason I can see that makes sense as to why these generation 911s sink in value.....they are almost identical to other Porsches....Boxsters....

I don't think that any older Gen. 911 shared as much look and parts as the 986/996 has...

arr0gant

That may be

r_liebo

That is a very good point. Buyers now can and do shop newer Boxsters along with 911s, and that really ups the "supply" end of the equation.

Really, it isn't that the 911 is soo cheap now, it's just that it doesn't command the used car premium older models always did.
If you look at prices of used M3s or AMG Mercedes, they don't fare better. The older 911s were really an exception of high resale for German performance cars as opposed to the rule.

chriswaxman

I was in the market for a 911 to use as a regular driver. I knew the 996 was probably best positioned for this type of use, but basically looked at any 911 that wasn't seriously collecable -- 911SC, 964, etc. The 996 is not the only 911 in the price range mentioned by the OP -- There are a lot of 911s with 100k miles that (aren't collectable) that are in that price range.

The 993 seems to be a something of a special case of a fairly recent car for which the whole line is collectable. It was made in limited numbers and is the last, and arguably most developed, of the air-cooled cars.

In my experience a lot of lower priced 911s were lower priced for a reason. Every time I saw a lower priced 996 and did a little research on the car something would turn up on carfax and/or or I didn't get a good feeling from the seller. I think this is true of any car. And there are certainly some bargains out there due to the economy of course.

996s are a tremendous value.

I ended up going with a 996 because, as I mentioned, I planned to use it regularly. If I didn't plan to use it regularly and had some deep affinity for the air cooled cars I'd look for a much older 911, probably something from the 60s or early 70s. The newer air cooled cars have better performance than the 60s & 70s models, but if absolute performance is your criteria the 996 thumps them all.

(Comparing turbos to turbos, non-turbos to non-turbos, etc.)

s-spiff

This really depends on what kind of feel you want out of the car. I have a '99 C2 as a daily driver and have had a 1980 SC in the past as a summer car. In general, the older you go back, the more raw the feeling, the less the a/c works, and the less civilized the car, but the more fun you can have at lower speeds. The 996 does everything well, but its limits are so high compared to most cars (including the older 911's) that unless you're on a track, you won't be able to fully appreciate it's limits. I wouldn't have as much fun at an autocross with my 996 as I would have with my SC, but I'd be way more comfortable getting there and back, and I'd still have as much fun at a regular track.

In terms of maintenance, for little stuff, I think the 996 is actually easier than previous models as well (no valves to adjust). Oil changes are about the same if not easier, and I changed my accessories belt in less than 10 minutes!