perfectlap

That newest Porsche you can afford line should come with a caveat as far as these particular engines are concerned. The quality of the mileage is more important than the year of the car. I would rather have a car that was driven frequently, weekly basis but still not high miles with an extra three years on the clock over a newer car with very little mileage that mostly came from once a month driving. The important thing to keep in mind is "milestone" upgrades for a particular year. A 2001 is not necessarily better than a 2000. But a 2000 is definintely better than a 1999 as far as big engine changes. Similary a 2010 is not better than a 2009 but a 2009 is definitely better than 2008 (no more IMS). Which brings up the other point, which IMS upgrade options do you have for the years you are considering. Some years are pricier to upgrade than others. Some pre-2009 may not have upgrade at all but that issue seems to be rarer the closer you get to 2009.

Mark Dreyer

What track was that? I barely can make it to 130 on the back straight at Sebring, and I come through turn 16 as fast as just about anyone in the GT3 crowd. And I have a 3.2L S. The only track I've gotten over 140 on is Daytona in the oval portion of the course. I do have a monster wing which could be slowing me some, but even before I put that on I wasn't anywhere near 140 at Sebring.

Actually at Roebling, I can carry enough pace through T10 to make about 135 on the front straight.

FinPat

1) In 3.2L M96 the IMS fix is substantially easier than in 2.7L/3.4L M97. In case you decide 3.2L 987 I would recommend IMS replacement.

2) 3.2 987 has shorter final ratio which compensates a bit the difference when comparing to 3.4L. (Yes, I know you were pondering 07 2.7 vs 05 32.)

3) The only other real difference between 05 and 07 is TPMS