RE: 993 prices more than 997?
03-07-2011, 07:55 PM
#31
I am going to make a statement that will probably live in infamy. I love the 964's and more so the 993's but if I had my choice I would currently choose to drive a 997-1 (M97 equipped), they are pretty damn good cars for which have proven themselves to me. Having said that, I would prefer a wide-body with all wheel drive (C4S) and Chrono (Sport) package...
Cheers,
Joe
03-07-2011, 09:14 PM
#32
Rennlist Member
03-07-2011, 10:35 PM
#33
Rennlist Member
It is statements like these that raises doubts in people's minds ... especially those who without any working knowledge about the cars engines (like me for example) wondering why they spent north of 100K for a car that may not be that good. That takes some of the joy in their ownership as they constantly feel that their mechanics may not be as rock solid. I don't know how much validity to place on such remarks by mechanics. I am going to enjoy my 997 as long as it runs and not panic now and buy a 993 just for "piece of mind". I love 993s but to say that the NA 997 engine is not durable ...
03-08-2011, 12:05 AM
#34
I own a 1996 993, and a 997.2 GT3. They are so different, BUT, both are such great cars. I love the comment about the sound of the 993 door closing--I have always thought that sound was different than any car I have owned--and better. The 993 at 112K miles still burns not a drop of oil, starts every single time, and with a wash and wax still looks new. I was going to sell it with a GTS cab on the way, but now I am thinking why? At this mileage, it is not a collector, so wouldn't fetch much over 25-30K, despite new Bilsteins, H&S springs, rotors, tires, FabSpeed, ECU, .... Wait, I am starting a whole new thread--better jump to the 993 forum! Gonna see who would keep it and who would sell it.
03-08-2011, 04:04 AM
#35
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, beautiful car (993).
I am halfway to where you are "No H20." As a seemingly innocent bystander, I say that both cars (993 & 997) are absolutely lovely. For heritage, I go with the 993. For modern-day performance, I go with ...the 987.
The 997 is a beautiful coupe, but c'mon, enough already. Let's move the game on.
As to why 993 resale values can be greater than the 997, I stick with the economics of supply and demand. Both 993 and 997 are desirable, but there are far less many copies of the 993. And to explain why the 993 "holds" its value better, it's because the 993 already is at the bottom of its depreciation curve. The 997.2 loses 20-25% of its value the moment it rolls of the dealer lot! ...Cheers, everyone.
I am halfway to where you are "No H20." As a seemingly innocent bystander, I say that both cars (993 & 997) are absolutely lovely. For heritage, I go with the 993. For modern-day performance, I go with ...the 987.
The 997 is a beautiful coupe, but c'mon, enough already. Let's move the game on.As to why 993 resale values can be greater than the 997, I stick with the economics of supply and demand. Both 993 and 997 are desirable, but there are far less many copies of the 993. And to explain why the 993 "holds" its value better, it's because the 993 already is at the bottom of its depreciation curve. The 997.2 loses 20-25% of its value the moment it rolls of the dealer lot! ...Cheers, everyone.
In 2006 I paid over $64K for a brand new, custom ordered Boxster S.
In 2009 I paid over $64K for a lightly used, Rennlist owned, 30,000 mile 1997 993 Turbo.
I LOVE both Porsches. They are night & day. I plan to own both for a long time. Here, in 2011 the Boxster is not worth 1/2 of what I paid. The Turbo could be easily sold for what I paid for it. I'm fine with this.
Some day, I hope to add a 997.2 or GT3 to my garage.
In 2009 I paid over $64K for a lightly used, Rennlist owned, 30,000 mile 1997 993 Turbo.
I LOVE both Porsches. They are night & day. I plan to own both for a long time. Here, in 2011 the Boxster is not worth 1/2 of what I paid. The Turbo could be easily sold for what I paid for it. I'm fine with this.
Some day, I hope to add a 997.2 or GT3 to my garage.
03-08-2011, 08:28 AM
#36
Rennlist Member
03-08-2011, 10:33 AM
#37
Race Director
It is statements like these that raises doubts in people's minds ... especially those who without any working knowledge about the cars engines (like me for example) wondering why they spent north of 100K for a car that may not be that good. That takes some of the joy in their ownership as they constantly feel that their mechanics may not be as rock solid. I don't know how much validity to place on such remarks by mechanics. I am going to enjoy my 997 as long as it runs and not panic now and buy a 993 just for "piece of mind". I love 993s but to say that the NA 997 engine is not durable ...
I don't buy it either. I don't think that 997 motors end up with $8,000 repair bills at 50,000 miles for worn valve guides... Most owners will never put enough miles on their 911 to test it's durability at all. In fact the lack of use is what causes the most problems...
As much as I am absolutely disgusted with the horrible valve guides in the 993, your figures are suspect. Firstly, if one simply needs valve guides, it would most likley not run $8k...its the while you're in theres that people can't resist that tend to add up. Hell, a guy in I believe CT will do them for $3500 or so, and is well respected (dan at Exotech I believe).
Furthermore, only rare examples needed valve guides that early in their life. Many don't need them until its time for a rebuild anyway.
The nice thing though is that valve guides tend to wear slowly, cause no real running issues aside from some oil consumption, and are well understood by mechanics (also easily seen in a PPI).
The IMS issues withe M97 are 1) quickly catastrophic at a far higher cost than $8k, 2) not able to be seen on a PPI, 3) gives basically zero warning. Now again, in terms of how widespread these issues are, who knows, but this is a major problem for those people that experience it.
Definitely, those doors are basically the only ones that close like a bank vault, regardless of how often that term is overused.
03-08-2011, 10:50 AM
#38
Nordschleife Master
Which is better is not the point. 993 production numbers are very low compared to 996's which are high but then you have the 997s which are almost double that of the previous model.
Supply and demand
Supply and demand
03-09-2011, 11:27 AM
#40
Rennlist Member
Your last statement is so contradictory that its ironic. You say that most owners don't drive enough to test durability, and yet low mileage cars are the ones that pop most frequently.
As much as I am absolutely disgusted with the horrible valve guides in the 993, your figures are suspect. Firstly, if one simply needs valve guides, it would most likley not run $8k...its the while you're in theres that people can't resist that tend to add up. Hell, a guy in I believe CT will do them for $3500 or so, and is well respected (dan at Exotech I believe).
Furthermore, only rare examples needed valve guides that early in their life. Many don't need them until its time for a rebuild anyway.
The nice thing though is that valve guides tend to wear slowly, cause no real running issues aside from some oil consumption, and are well understood by mechanics (also easily seen in a PPI).
The IMS issues withe M97 are 1) quickly catastrophic at a far higher cost than $8k, 2) not able to be seen on a PPI, 3) gives basically zero warning. Now again, in terms of how widespread these issues are, who knows, but this is a major problem for those people that experience it.
As much as I am absolutely disgusted with the horrible valve guides in the 993, your figures are suspect. Firstly, if one simply needs valve guides, it would most likley not run $8k...its the while you're in theres that people can't resist that tend to add up. Hell, a guy in I believe CT will do them for $3500 or so, and is well respected (dan at Exotech I believe).
Furthermore, only rare examples needed valve guides that early in their life. Many don't need them until its time for a rebuild anyway.
The nice thing though is that valve guides tend to wear slowly, cause no real running issues aside from some oil consumption, and are well understood by mechanics (also easily seen in a PPI).
The IMS issues withe M97 are 1) quickly catastrophic at a far higher cost than $8k, 2) not able to be seen on a PPI, 3) gives basically zero warning. Now again, in terms of how widespread these issues are, who knows, but this is a major problem for those people that experience it.
I still don't buy the durability argument of the 993, 964 or earlier 911s. Are they tough cars? Absolutely. Are they any more durable than a 1990 Honda Accord? I don't think so.
As for the valve guides I received two quotes when my first 964 needed them $10,000 from the dealer and $8,800 from a respected independent. Lots of labour involved to remove the engine, dismantle heads, cryo them, push out guides etc...etc... Sounded ludicrous to me but that's what they told me.
The first car had only 70,000 km on it. My current car has 104,000 and leak down is very good so that's nice to know;-)
03-09-2011, 01:47 PM
#41
Drifting
That seems very high for valve guide repair.
Not all 993's suffer from this, and not all 05-08 997's suffer from IMS issues.
My 96 has 48K and no issues and records indicate never had an issue with valve guides.
Not all 993's suffer from this, and not all 05-08 997's suffer from IMS issues.
My 96 has 48K and no issues and records indicate never had an issue with valve guides.
03-09-2011, 04:56 PM
#42
I'm a lucky man as I own both a 1996 993 C2S and a 2008 997 C2S. The former is a track car and has just under 30,000 miles, the latter is a Sunday driver with just over 6,000 miles. They both have their virtues.
My two cents and forgive me if I repeat or echo comments already made: the 993 is smaller (almost dimunitive sitting next to the 997), far prettier, more etheral and better built. The doors make that "ting" sound when you close 'em- something no 997 will ever do. It's a far more "etheral" car; harder to drive fast but more satisfying when you do. It has been bulletproof but admiitedly the miles are low. I used to drive it to the track; track it all weekend with my wife driving too (A/C on, of course- it's 95 outside) clean it up and go to dinner, then drive eight hours home the next day. No issues.
The 997 is much "nicer" and of course more advanced. It's far more comfortable, it's faster, it ultimately handles better too.
If I had to sell one it would be the 997. But if I had to drive to California tomorrow it would also be the 997.
And ironically, despite it's greater size and weight the 997 has no spare tire. The 993 does. I think Porsche could have done a lot better in that respect.
I've thought a number of times about selling the 993 (I lust for an Interseries Cayman). But I don't think I ever will.
My two cents and forgive me if I repeat or echo comments already made: the 993 is smaller (almost dimunitive sitting next to the 997), far prettier, more etheral and better built. The doors make that "ting" sound when you close 'em- something no 997 will ever do. It's a far more "etheral" car; harder to drive fast but more satisfying when you do. It has been bulletproof but admiitedly the miles are low. I used to drive it to the track; track it all weekend with my wife driving too (A/C on, of course- it's 95 outside) clean it up and go to dinner, then drive eight hours home the next day. No issues.
The 997 is much "nicer" and of course more advanced. It's far more comfortable, it's faster, it ultimately handles better too.
If I had to sell one it would be the 997. But if I had to drive to California tomorrow it would also be the 997.
And ironically, despite it's greater size and weight the 997 has no spare tire. The 993 does. I think Porsche could have done a lot better in that respect.
I've thought a number of times about selling the 993 (I lust for an Interseries Cayman). But I don't think I ever will.
03-10-2011, 12:55 AM
#43
Three Wheelin'
I agree, but there's obviously got to be a reason for the higher demand for 993s that keeps their prices fairly respectable relative to newer 911s. Its not just the look. 997s look pretty darn awesome too. Its not just production numbers. My 928's selling price was a perfect example of that. Much less produced than the 993, decent build quality too, but a much lower resale value in percentage terms relative to its original purchase price. So perhaps its the 993's durability/build quality enhanced by low relative production numbers?
03-10-2011, 01:08 AM
#44
Nordschleife Master
Sorry Dan, this is a winner for the most misinformed response ...
Quadcammer, thank you for providing a more informed reply
Quadcammer, thank you for providing a more informed reply
You have to remember, however, that the 993 was always going to be the last air cooled 911 to Zuffenhausen. It was a gap filler, between the old 901/911 and 964 and the water boxers. As the gap filler, not that much engineering went into them, in truth. The engines were no more developed than the 964s. Many of the body engineering issues were half baked because it was a transitional model. Believe it or not, the 996 and the 997 are a better engineered and manufactured automobile. Porsche knew that the 993 would be the end of the air cooled engines even before they started selling them in 1995. They knew because of noise and environmental factors that were closing in on them that were impossible to reach with an air and oil cooled engine. Power production was severely limited. It came down to physics, and the impossibility of dissipating heat in those engines. They, in turn, put little thought and time into the bodies. The reason is very simple as to why the 993 has endured--it's the last air cooled "911" and many were simply sunshine cars. With lower miles on them their used prices command a higher price. However, that's a real distraction. There are many hidden expenses in those cars that an uninformed buyer will discover. Valve guides are short lived, and some things like duel distributors are problematic. Let's not even discuss what you have to resort to if the check strap on your door fails. (Note: It entails welding).
Just remember, no matter how sexy the curvaceous lines of the 993 are, you are still talking about up to a 16 year old car, with aging electrical systems, and plastic components that will be problematic to maintain--more so than a car that was produced in greater numbers, like the 996 or 997. Recall, the 997 has become the most popular "911" that Porsche has ever produced. Zuffenhausen was only just learning about just in time manufacturing when they undertook the 993 project. They have it perfected in the 997. That translates to reliability and less headaches downstream.
Simply do the math on a 993. Divide the purchase price by the number of miles you have driven it and you will be shocked to find how much more you have paid to drive a mile in a 993, compared to a 997.
Dan
Just remember, no matter how sexy the curvaceous lines of the 993 are, you are still talking about up to a 16 year old car, with aging electrical systems, and plastic components that will be problematic to maintain--more so than a car that was produced in greater numbers, like the 996 or 997. Recall, the 997 has become the most popular "911" that Porsche has ever produced. Zuffenhausen was only just learning about just in time manufacturing when they undertook the 993 project. They have it perfected in the 997. That translates to reliability and less headaches downstream.
Simply do the math on a 993. Divide the purchase price by the number of miles you have driven it and you will be shocked to find how much more you have paid to drive a mile in a 993, compared to a 997.
Dan
Nonsense.
1. Not much engineering went into them huh? Have you had a look at the 964 rear suspension compared to the 993 suspension? Furthermore, there wasn't much more engineering to do. It had the same basic bits and bobs as the 60s cars. How many ways must you re-engineer a engine carrier for example when its worked for 30 years? That's like saying a 997 has little if any further engineering than a 996.
2. Talk to me about this body engineering issues...like what? If all you have is the door check straps, this is a hugely weak argument.
3. How, pray tell is a 996 a better engineered and manufactured vehicle. The fact that you bring up JIT makes me laugh as it has no impact on the actual build quality of the vehicle. It might make for a more efficient production line, but who cares when you are talking about the build quality. I certainly don't care if my door panels were sitting at the factory for 3 weeks or whether they just got there from a supplier when they were bolted into the car. What I do care about is that the 993 interior is screwed together, whereas the 996+ are snapped together.
4. Power production was severely limited. 282bhp out of a 2v sohc engine is severely limited? What do you call 296bhp out of DOHC 4v engine with variable valve timing. Wow, a whole 14bhp out of much better flowing heads, better valve timing operations, and much more efficient cooling. Talk about severely limited. 320bhp by the end of the production run? Wow, talk about steps forward.
5. Lets talk about those hidden expenses...you can list them at any time. Yes, the valve guides are total crap....what else you got? The door check straps? Welding? Oh my god. If you aren't a concours person, you can have this problem adequately repaired for less than $300 by a good bodyshop.
6. Furthermore, valve guides are easy to identify with a PPI, and are not an instant failure problem. They slowly get worse and make themselves known with ever increasing oil consumption. Dual distributors? https://rennlist.com/forums/964-foru...r-rebuild.html A whopping $125 for a rebuild on that unit. Do they regularly fail? You tell me?
When your IMS is getting ready to grenade your M96/7, you get no warning and need to replace the entire motor. Gee, I wonder what I'd want.
The bottom line is that you may have owned 911s since 1965, but your knowledge seems to be fading or you are simply overlooking the 997s issues.
All these cars are well built and well engineered, but there is zero doubt in my mind which one was built to a higher standard.
1. Not much engineering went into them huh? Have you had a look at the 964 rear suspension compared to the 993 suspension? Furthermore, there wasn't much more engineering to do. It had the same basic bits and bobs as the 60s cars. How many ways must you re-engineer a engine carrier for example when its worked for 30 years? That's like saying a 997 has little if any further engineering than a 996.
2. Talk to me about this body engineering issues...like what? If all you have is the door check straps, this is a hugely weak argument.
3. How, pray tell is a 996 a better engineered and manufactured vehicle. The fact that you bring up JIT makes me laugh as it has no impact on the actual build quality of the vehicle. It might make for a more efficient production line, but who cares when you are talking about the build quality. I certainly don't care if my door panels were sitting at the factory for 3 weeks or whether they just got there from a supplier when they were bolted into the car. What I do care about is that the 993 interior is screwed together, whereas the 996+ are snapped together.
4. Power production was severely limited. 282bhp out of a 2v sohc engine is severely limited? What do you call 296bhp out of DOHC 4v engine with variable valve timing. Wow, a whole 14bhp out of much better flowing heads, better valve timing operations, and much more efficient cooling. Talk about severely limited. 320bhp by the end of the production run? Wow, talk about steps forward.
5. Lets talk about those hidden expenses...you can list them at any time. Yes, the valve guides are total crap....what else you got? The door check straps? Welding? Oh my god. If you aren't a concours person, you can have this problem adequately repaired for less than $300 by a good bodyshop.
6. Furthermore, valve guides are easy to identify with a PPI, and are not an instant failure problem. They slowly get worse and make themselves known with ever increasing oil consumption. Dual distributors? https://rennlist.com/forums/964-foru...r-rebuild.html A whopping $125 for a rebuild on that unit. Do they regularly fail? You tell me?
When your IMS is getting ready to grenade your M96/7, you get no warning and need to replace the entire motor. Gee, I wonder what I'd want.
The bottom line is that you may have owned 911s since 1965, but your knowledge seems to be fading or you are simply overlooking the 997s issues.
All these cars are well built and well engineered, but there is zero doubt in my mind which one was built to a higher standard.
03-10-2011, 01:09 AM
#45
Three Wheelin'
It is statements like these that raises doubts in people's minds ... especially those who without any working knowledge about the cars engines (like me for example) wondering why they spent north of 100K for a car that may not be that good. That takes some of the joy in their ownership as they constantly feel that their mechanics may not be as rock solid. I don't know how much validity to place on such remarks by mechanics. I am going to enjoy my 997 as long as it runs and not panic now and buy a 993 just for "piece of mind". I love 993s but to say that the NA 997 engine is not durable ...
I just wanted something a bit more rare since its only a weekend toy. As for repairs, I knew I had an SAI issue caused by valve guide wear but I was still only burning oil within specs published by Porsche. I easily could have gotten away with having the SAI system flushed for about a grand and probably would have had no issues again for some time. I made a decision to have the whole top end done along with a number of other maintenance items, but again not necessary. The car only gets driven about 5,000 a year at most.