The 60 grand 3.2 carrera
The 60 grand 3.2 carrera
Author
Discussion

LaurasOtherHalf

Original Poster:

21,429 posts

226 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
These boys have form, & my word it looks lovely, but £60k eek

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/4160994.htm


991ted

88 posts

170 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
LaurasOtherHalf said:
These boys have form, & my word it looks lovely, but £60k eek

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/4160994.htm

stunning

Porkupine

1,722 posts

195 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
What does impact bumper and pre impact bumper etc mean?

anonymous-user

84 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
At that price you wouldn't drive it. A collector car stunning but sad too.

iguana

7,356 posts

290 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
Porkupine said:
What does impact bumper and pre impact bumper etc mean?
Impact as shown above, pre impact= pre 74 also called long bonnet here-



http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3637193.htm

mez3

356 posts

249 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
Look's nice, at 60k it's a steal!

anonymous-user

84 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
iguana said:
Impact as shown above, pre impact= pre 74 also called long bonnet here-



http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3637193.htm
You can't beat the original - lovely lines.

marky911

4,434 posts

249 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
60K!!

Nice looking, amazingly clean car but, it still doesn't really jump out at me.

Surely you'd have to be completely mad on 3.2s to pay that.

Makes your SC look like a right steal Craig!!

smileymikey

1,446 posts

256 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
I'm just going to take the lap top into the bathroom for some errr "me time"....however if you are going to change the number plate, please just buy a normal 1973 or 1974 plate from auto trader for 200 notes rather than one of those dodgy semi personal plates, that usually start as Baz or Daz. That way it fits in with the retro theme.

OlberJ

14,101 posts

263 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
That's stunning. It follows that they are due to be the next big thing as the pre-74's get rarer and rarer.

3.2 Club Sport for me though cloud9

graemel

7,229 posts

247 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Good spot. Should all be matt black which I think would look better.

highway

2,732 posts

290 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
I've seen that car. It is a thing of beauty. Sam, the guy who does the paint, painted the PU on my 993 earlier this year and did a top notch job. Finish like glass. Similarly Precision did my last service including plugs and a load of other bits. Highly recommended. Best Indy I've used.

LaurasOtherHalf

Original Poster:

21,429 posts

226 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
They explain all that in the advert.

marky911 said:
60k!!

Makes your SC look like a right steal Craig!!
Built by the same people wink


billybob69 said:
At that price you wouldn't drive it. A collector car stunning but sad too.
but plenty of people buy 60 grand cars every day without any hope of retaining their value biggrin

Crimp a Length!

5,697 posts

253 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
Oh dear oh dear.
Lovely but that has to be up there with the biggest rip off i've ever seen, sorry.
Anybody who buys a mass produced IB for 60k has serious money or mental issues.

Also not even authentic.
Wrong badges/mirrors never had any chrome on a 3.2.
Way too low.
No i'd be in a proper classic like a pre impact at that money.

Edited by Crimp a Length! on Monday 20th August 22:11

mollytherocker

14,467 posts

239 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
£60k is almost without president. I know where there is a beauty for £25k!!

The personalised bits and the chrome was a mistake too.

MTR

porkyspecialist

203 posts

262 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
Not even close to an original RHD 85 car, so why the price tag?
Now if you could get them to put in writing the depreciation free bks then I'll sign up today!

PS, the rear end just looks wrong, red lenses with chrome strips & no dangly fogs, quite nice to see a 3.2 with no rear wiper though.

mollytherocker

14,467 posts

239 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
olly22n said:
I think it looks fantastic.

Original it may not be, but all the touches tie in well together. If it were to find its way into my garage tomorrow, I am not sure I would change a thing.
I agree it looks fantastic. Just not £60k fantastic...

MTR

graemel

7,229 posts

247 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
It does look very nice and they do look good without the rear tail. We all like different things and personally I would not have gone with the back date chrome look. I think they made a brave move using an early 3.2 as a base and I guess from their blurb a rusty one. I can see where the money has been spent. Is it a lot of money for a brand new old school 911. I don't think so. I'd rather stick 60K into something along the lines of this than a 100K into a 991. I reckon it will sell for what they want. Need to raise the rear ride height a little though as the stance is wrong.

ClassicCarMad

385 posts

203 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
No sorry.
Not a real classic yet (in terms of that money) so won't & doesn't command £60k.

Chancers.

3.2's in nearly concours condition can be had for 20k quite easy, and will also be in the correct format/spec, not made to look like something they are obviously not.

Err Indoors

909 posts

217 months

Monday 20th August 2012
quotequote all
LaurasOtherHalf said:
These boys have form, & my word it looks lovely, but £60k eek

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/4160994.htm

bandit

Sorry WTF are they thinking about.