fpena944

This is an internet-only problem...

I have yet to have anyone come up to me whether in a public place or a Porsche event and tell me, "Your car is (insert negative comment here)"

Non-car enthusiasts still stare and compliment on a continual basis. Almost everyone believes it is a new car and I've not heard one complaint about its headlights or lack of huge hips. Car enthusiasts still see it as a machine that demands respect.

Whether it increases in value over time or continues to depreciate is irrelevant to me. I bought it at a discount and have had more fun than what my purchase price was so I'm not concerned about it.

bkjwhipple

I want them all..
I do think the 996 will end up as a good car to own in the future.. modern, yet not overly large compared to the newer 911's.. not so many electronics.. mine does not even have PSM!

Capt. Obvious

Do I personally prefer the looks of the 964/993 to the 996? Sure. But, the 996 was the fastest, most powerful, best handling 911 to date (and despite its shortcomings, arguably one of the most reliable overall as well).

If the 996 were the first 911, no one would care about the headlights.

perfectlap

I like the 964 as well. The 993 is like mushy handling Hollywood version of the 911.
I sat in a 964 RS this weekend and its the perfect modern Carrera in traditional dimensions.
With lean,no nonsense interior like a 911 should be.

OTOH the 996 is a good in between balance of modern and old school 911.
The interior is not Audi'esque like the 997/991 and the front end looks nothing like a VW Beetle. The 996.2's exterior is entirely its own. No other car from VW bears any similarity. The 996.2 C4S is probably the most modern and fluid looking Carrera so far. It would have been nice to see a 964 RS styled with a modern set of headlights (like the 981 Cayman) but keeping the high fenders up front and wide rear and minus the silly looking SUV sized wheels.

jasper

I'm not disagreeing - but it depends entirely on what inspires you. Furthermore aesthetics are the most superficial part of the performance car experience.

For many people the lines on a 1960 Cadillac Coupe de Ville or a first generation Camaro, or even a 1932 Ford coupe are more inspiring than any European car on the road.

Do I like the looks of these cars - sure I do. Would I own one? Probably not. Do I enjoy the performance experience when I drive them - not really no.

Case in point: My good friend is holding on to his 3.2 Carrera because it was his first Porsche and because he can afford to keep multiple wheeled machines in his stable. I took it out not so long ago to refamiliarize myself with the air cooled experience (I cut my teeth on air cooled 911s as well). The experience was entirely underwhelming and convinced me that I can't go back.

If all you are concerned about is the image - fill your boots, pay a premium. I won't judge you. In fact - you driving an air cooled Porsche allows me to admire the lines which are admittedly better than the 996 by a fair margin. If you're after a better driving experience though...then the later models are simply better cars.

We all have our priorities. You like to look good, I like to feel good. I won't judge you if you don't judge me.

Imo000

Now you guys know what the 928 owners went through all the years. It was also better in EVERY way than the 911 but the die hard bunch never accepted it and it never bacame what it was planned to be (factort V8 TT). The few of us that has them know how great they are, same as the current 996 owners. The 996 is better in every way than the 993.

Quadcammer

I take numerous issues with the 996. My biggest is the interior. The quality of the materials are deplorable. The slush finish, the cheesy plastic, the snap together assembly, etc. I'd expect better from most Hyundais. Then comes the distinct similarity with the boxster. Now the boxster is a fine vehicle, but to have the entire front clip be almost interchangeable certain limits the appeal of the vastly more expensive 911. The almost completely lack of body curves is another limiting factor.

The engine is simply a disaster. Raby has said the m96 has what, 26, failure modes? D-Chunks, variocam thingies, Imsb, chain pads, cracked heads, etc. Add to that the water pumps, AOS, etc, and you end up with a big bag of MEH.

While the 996 was popular, the 997 went right back to the precedent set by the 993 and earlier (round headlights, fenders flared, boxy interior, etc). To me, this just goes to show you that porsche could release a lot of things, call them a 911, and people would still buy them.

Quadcammer

The 928 is the biggest piece of **** on planet earth. Those guys have multiple shortblocks sitting in their garage for when their crappy oiling system and TBF cause engine failure. Combine that with the ugliest styling to come out of stuttgart in easily a century, the proliferation of the slushbox automatic, underpowered motors, and relentless quality issues, and you have a car that should (and does) sell for less than a used pair of boxer shorts in the secondhand marketplace.

Finally, the 996 is better than the 993 in performance. Assembly quality? Even stevie wonder would disagree with that.

Marc Gelefsky

Yeah, It's true. wherever I drive my car, woman scream in horror, parents hide their children. Dogs urinate on it. Often I am asked to park behind the dumpster. Parts fall off of it as I coast to a stop after the engine failure of that week.

sucks.

roadsession

Exactly. The 996 was a stellar commercial success.
So was the 997.
And so is the 991.

The 911 is an iconic BRAND that people will always buy - regardless of what it looks like. I mean the purists said no one would buy a fried egg headlamp 911. It became the best selling 911 then.

jumper5836

The base interior in newer models really has much better looking material that's progress but if you have full leather in your 996 there is no real big visual difference other then the boxy lines in the 997. The newer models still have cheap plastic aluminum components that wear off and look horrible while the 996 plastic parts don't.

The m97 is no better in the engine aspect compared to the m96. They may have fiddled with the IMS but it still has many points of failure and the IMS does still goes on them.
I however do like the 997 C2 body. It is just wide enough to not look to wide and I think the widebody 996 looks just as good if not better because of the rear bumpers air slots.

jumper5836

I agree. One day there will be a 964 in my stable. It is modern enough to be used as a DD and everything feels right in it while it does feel old school and raw the gearbox feels perfect and modern. It's as old school as I'd ever want to go back.

ZX9RCAM

You too, huh?

Imo000

I strongly suggest you educate yourself a little more before making arrogant statements like these. The 928 engines when compared to the 911, are very robust. Nearly bulletproof under normal use. The Trust Bearing Faliure is not an engine design issue but a drive shaft issue. The crank oiling issue only shows up on extreme racing conditions (with R compound tires). The anutomatics are a shame but the 5-speeds (like mine) are a superrior machines. Had one for almost 15 years and with the supercharger it will suprise any near stock 996TT on the street. I peraonaly love the body shape. Look back to '77 and see how modern it looked, and still does, compared to any of the other super cars. The 928 had a huge potential but it was never developed by Porsche because of owners with 911 fog on their minds.

pfbz

I love them anyway, but all 911's are 'disaster' cars by any unemotional standard.

Every single generation had significant issues both mechanically and with public perception in comparison to whatever beloved 911 it replaced.

On air-cooled cars, the list goes on and on. Just a few examples include broken head studs, soft valves and valve guides, exploding airboxes, crappy chain tensioners, unstoppable oil leaks, dis-functional air conditioning, sloppy shifting, early failure on gearbox syncros, significant cosmetic and structural rust issues, terrible starters, failing ignition switches and ground cables, sagging door hinges, finicky fuel injection, unreliable oil level gauges, failing electric windows, etc. etc. etc. Many of these problems are quite expensive to address.

Despite a small minority of folks on this forum who constantly feed the gloom and doom mentality, the 996 is a much more reliable car with lower cost of ownership than any 911 before it, all while providing higher performance levels and comfort. I wonder how these 996 G&D'ers would have coped with rust issues in long-noses, the problem set of early 911 SC's or the 993's notorious valve issues.

If there was a fundamental fault of the 996, it is that it was too good. It broke the 'enthusiast car' paradigm and became a car for anybody with a medium to fat checkbook. Too easy to drive, too reasonably priced, too reliable, too comfortable, and too many made. All resulting in too many sold to non-enthusiast owners just looking for a sporty status car (as evidenced by the huge number of tiptronic cab's)

As long as 996's are viewed as enthusiast cars along with all other 911's, they are fantastic. Easily the best Porsche you can get for under $30K if you aren't looking for a garage queen.