Learn me Porsche 911 improvements by generation

AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:

Olemiss540 said:

We can probably shortcut much of this, whats your budget and how are you planning to use this 911?

When it happens, budget could be $150k, but let's say $75k just for grins.

4-season daily in MI, occasional track day. I won't make the purchase unless I can afford the usage.

For that use case you probably want a Turbo. $150k I think can get you a 991. $75k is kind of a weird place, you can either have a 996 and probably some money left over or stretch the budget a bit for a 997 (I'd do the latter if at all possible). You can get a GT3 in budget ($150k, not so much $75k) but piling miles on is the one thing that does devalue them, and I don't think either it or you will survive subjecting it to michigan roads. So overall probably not a good idea.

Of course this is at today's prices. Could be a very different story (hint: probably not cheaper) even like six months from now.

996TT is better to look at, 997TT is better to sit in. Sad to say but for a 4 season daily, going 997TT or 997.2C2S. 996 is getting up there in age to daily though is my personal favorite. 

If i found 100k tomorrow, I'm buying a gt4 though. 

I wouldn't daily a GT3.  Go check out the clutch pedal feel on them, extremely heavy.  Although I'd have to say I wouldn't expose any of these to a Michigan winter...

A friend of mine has over 700k miles on his bought new 996TT, daily driving in MA and RI.  No rust to speak of, it has held up really well.  

Sonic said:

A friend of mine has over 700k miles on his bought new 996TT, daily driving in MA and RI.  No rust to speak of, it has held up really well.  

Galvanized steel since the 70s if I remember right. My 987 is a mix of galvy steel and aluminum body panels.

An older C4 with a bit of Baja sprinkled in is a dream winter beater for me up here in NH.

dyintorace said:

Are you coming to the 2024 Challenge (I assume yes)? If so, we can go for a drive.

my name is angrycorvair and i approve of this message.

In reply to Sonic :

T2.  He's a legend on rennlist

 "Failure rates are lower than the IMS issue on the regular 996's. "

Does anyone have a real good guess what is the Failure rate for a 996 non turbo ?

I have heard 10%-20%  , but not sure if thats how many failed or the number is how many failed including how many were fixed "just because" it might fail .

Early Air cooled cars were known for bad timing chains and most were updated to the later style , 

There are still lots of 1980s around that would be nice projects and not too much $$$$$$

But 964s and 993s are pretty high and probably will stay high.

For the IMS in particular my opinion is that anything that's made it this long either has had the bearing replaced or is going to last forever as long as you drive it regularly and maintain it well. The cylinder wall failure issue is a much larger concern. Not sure the exact numbers but it seems like basically everyone I've ever seen autocross or track a 987.1/997.1 with any regularity has had an engine failure or is in the early stages of an impending failure.

Ah, a subject my wallet knows a little too much about...

I know you ruled out the aircooled cars, and I'd just like to add my voice to "definitely not one of those for four season driving".

Having owned a 996 and currently owning a 997.2, both non-turbos, the 997 is a nicer place to be in as the interior on the 996s isn't that great (at least taking into account how much they were when new). Both IMHO do 911 things very well.

I did drive my 996 all four seasons, but keep in mind it was a Carrera 4 and we lived in an area where they don't chuck salt on the roads. My 997 doesn't get out of the garage if there is any danger of salt as it's probably going to be our last daily Porsche, and I want it to last. If we were still living out West, I probably would have looked for a 997.2 C4S instead of the C2S we got as the 996 did extremely well in some atrocious conditions, with the right tires.

With the budget you mentioned and liberated from one of my constraints (had to be an automatic car as her indoors doesn't do manual transmissions), I'd be looking at a 996 or 997 turbo and find the nicest one for the money. Not necessarily the lowest mileage one, just one that's been used and looked after. A lot of the expensive problems on my 996 came to be because it was serviced on schedule and the long service intervals caused issues. Like, expensive issues.

In reply to californiamilleghia :

For the IMS?  I've heard numbers of under 5% thrown around.  For the cylinder wall failure?  Not sure.  I can tell you that I know of 6 people locally who've had catastrophic engine failures in their 996/986/Caymans on track, even with the motorsports AOS, X51 oil pan and updated IMS.  I simply wouldn't track one of those unless I was prepared to deal with it.  A good friend runs Spec boxster and his engine has been fine but he's gone thru 3 transmissions...

Yeah I will say that while these cars are very rust resistant, they are definitely not rust proof. Daily driving year round in a salt state will still ruin them, it just takes a bit longer. The exhaust nuts that I had to Dremel off of my 981 can attest to that. And that car only saw 2-3 new England winters before moving south for the rest of its life. If this is a car you intend to keep forever and are fine with running into the ground and throwing away eventually, go for it. But if you want it to have any resale value it's a 3.5 season driver at most.

In the 75k range I would seriously look at a 997 with a Jake Raby (FSI) engine .He has systematically fixed the failure points and developed a proven reliable and powerful engine .Both the 996 and 997 are great platforms with the 997 being more refined .By way of background I have a 996/ls1 and am seriously thinking about the 997/fsi as a next step .