what is an 'early' 3.4 996?

[richthebike]

ferrisbueller said:

gixermark said:

Why has this thread got into a 6 figure pissing context?

Great thread, but let’s keep to the early 996 ‘sweet’ ? Spot.......

I'm pretty sure it hasn't? It's a debate about comparisons and trying to understand the relative merits of the 996 vs 986 and whatever else. I don't think I'm alone it trying to find a route through this maze.

I was quite enjoying your efforts to unpick cmoose's well developed and consistent description of why he likes what he likes.

He is of course right, and represents a lot of my own feelings, but it was a good effort.
The question here isn't about cash.

The question for me is other people. If there was nobody else around to see, what would you have?

That's my acid test, and it's what brings me back to the 996. I realised that with most choices I was looking at this year, I was probably more drawn to people knowing I had one, or turning up somewhere in it.

I kept the 996 because it's relatively inexpensive to get it exactly how I want it, and it ticks ever so many boxes as a drivers car, given the circumstances that surround me.

The other driveway space is probably going to a caterham, based on the same logic.

I'm sure there are other cars that would do similar, but I don't have time or inclination to try them all.

Edit: there are some times where being seen turning up in something is still important i.e. work, but the criteria are different, and hence I persist with my range rover, despite its many flaws. It does that job very well.

Edited by richthebike on Friday 25th May 06:24

[stone]

Not a for sale post!!

Can anyone give an indication ballpark what this may be worth?

Service history is good but got some gaps where it was personal car of an independent garage owner for four years. Covered little mileage during this time and lots replaced such as rads and MO30 fitted.

For insurance is it worth going for an agreed value?

|https://thumbsnap.com/yhNoZgZS[/url][url]

|https://thumbsnap.com/zeBdwJrq[/url]

[ferrisbueller]

richthebike said:

ferrisbueller said:

gixermark said:

Why has this thread got into a 6 figure pissing context?

Great thread, but let’s keep to the early 996 ‘sweet’ ? Spot.......

I'm pretty sure it hasn't? It's a debate about comparisons and trying to understand the relative merits of the 996 vs 986 and whatever else. I don't think I'm alone it trying to find a route through this maze.

I was quite enjoying your efforts to unpick cmoose's well developed and consistent description of why he likes what he likes.

He is of course right, and represents a lot of my own feelings, but it was a good effort.
The question here isn't about cash.

The question for me is other people. If there was nobody else around to see, what would you have?

That's my acid test, and it's what brings me back to the 996. I realised that with most choices I was looking at this year, I was probably more drawn to people knowing I had one, or turning up somewhere in it.

I kept the 996 because it's relatively inexpensive to get it exactly how I want it, and it ticks ever so many boxes as a drivers car, given the circumstances that surround me.

The other driveway space is probably going to a caterham, based on the same logic.

I'm sure there are other cars that would do similar, but I don't have time or inclination to try them all.

Edit: there are some times where being seen turning up in something is still important i.e. work, but the criteria are different, and hence I persist with my range rover, despite its many flaws. It does that job very well.

Edited by richthebike on Friday 25th May 06:24

Personally I find it difficult, if not impossible, to take the value consideration (and therefore to an extent cash) out of the equation. It ends up being a fundamental component of the thought process. IMO, it works like this: Is a 986 the best car you can buy for £5k? On many levels I think you could put up a strong argument. Is it the best car £100k can buy? Only if you factor in a value for money type argument.

I would be of the opinion that an E90 330i is a better car than an E46 M3 as an ownership proposition. Much of that judgement is based on value. It does 85% of what the M3 does but at a fraction of the running costs (Ironically, as the E46s now firm up, I could reverse that position as it becomes much more cost neutral if not ultimately reversed). Take the costs out of the equation (as we may soon be able to in this specific example) and I'll have the M3. Where moose go to last night was going from the Boxster, or indeed 996, being a great value car to it being absolutely the best car. That's a leap and one worth considering. If it were universally true we'd be reconsidering things, rapidly, and the implications would be significant.

What other people think, and specifically buying things for yourself because of the thoughts of others and what they may be, isn't IMO going to lead to a happy conclusion. Personally, I'd like to think I things for me that I want for me. To your point, the landscape of our roads would look entirely different if people bought cars purely on merit with no consideration for perception (or value) but how could you ever separate those thoughts now they are such an, albeit cleverly and superficial, embedded part of the process.

Buying something like a 996 isn't, in most cases, going to be based on driving one for an extended period or owning one. Reading threads like these and PPBB's, listening to Jethro Bovingdon, Chris Harris et al and whatever else is part of it. Hearing real world experience from actual owners who have lived with cars for extended periods is massively useful.

Which kind of brings me full circle back to why the 996 enters considerations at present, which is the shift in the value considerations. Paying big upkeep bills on a depreciating asset? Not for me thanks. Those bills being levied on a non-depreciating asset and you have may attention. Bills offset by increasing values? OK, now I'm interested on a different level (And absolutely where the entry cost is a fraction of what it would be to achieve such feats on a higher capital investment). It is a personal shortcoming that I can't take value out of consideration. I doubt it would change with a lottery win.

[ferrisbueller]

linky

97 R
996 C2 Manual
153k miles

£9750

[griffter]

I’m not sure where the vs debate is (or whether it’s still going). But I’ve owned and lived with Elise 111S, Boxster Spyder (987) and now have 996.1 C4. Each does their reputation proud, but for me the 996 is the most rewarding most of the time.

The Elise was great to drive but only really did it’s thing on track or a clear B road.
The Spyder was fantastic to drive and look at, particularly on a busier track or wider B road (with overtaking opportunities). The engine management spoiled it on occasion though.
The 996 is great in all situations and has a busy, tactile feel to it which I like. It may give something away in delicacy and responsiveness to the other two but it’s still very involving, capable and full of character. The fact that it sits between the Elise and Spyder in price is also relevant.

[ferrisbueller]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You absolutely did. Comparisons; Subjectively/objectively etc. There's no shot in there. I've no skin in the game. It would suit me just fine if a 12k car (or a £5k one) were the definitive best car in the world. That would be bargainous.

If you're going to make big statements then questions will be raised. If asking someone to put such statements into context is a sucky attitude, then guilty as charged.

[griffter]

CB 987 said:

I am not due to view until after the bank holiday, I can only assume the advert has expired?

Apparently he had a lot of interest, mostly lengthy e-mail enquiries with lots of questions, which he answered and never heard from again! I was one of the very few who picked the phone up. I thought it would have sold very quickly, no one else has viewed it which surprised me.

Agreed, all the signs are good, I just need to be as sure as I can be that there aren't any hidden bills lurking.

I have been wondering about whether I should hold out for a higher miler with a chunk of recent expenditure. Will have a better idea once I have gone through the service history.

Cheers.

I hope you get to view it. It’s the spec everyone wants, it’s a nice colour combo and it seems to have good provenance. It will need expenditure (they all do) but I wouldn’t let that put you off (because they all do).

I think you could buy that, spend £5k on it (depending on your priorities that might be viewed as unexceptional) and still have bought well.

Personally I don’t buy the higher mileage with bills argument. I’d rather have lower mileage with bills! You have to assess the car in front of you on its merits, decide how much more you’re prepared to put into it and on what and then make a decision. I’ve tended to buy lower mileage cars because they tend to present better and IMHO better justify the expenditure.

Any good luck, let us know how it turns out.

[ferrisbueller]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I repeated what you wrote. I made a statement about the NSX's merits you refuse to accept - fair enough.

You've made some big statements which are going to lead to discussion. Part of that is being asked to substantiate elements of them. No point getting spikey when someone asks you to explain or clarify. Keep it subjective and that's one level - shift that and it's different.

This started as a discussion about relative merits and pros and cons. As a potential buyer I find that helpful.

[ferrisbueller]

griffter said:

I’m not sure where the vs debate is (or whether it’s still going). But I’ve owned and lived with Elise 111S, Boxster Spyder (987) and now have 996.1 C4. Each does their reputation proud, but for me the 996 is the most rewarding most of the time.

The Elise was great to drive but only really did it’s thing on track or a clear B road.
The Spyder was fantastic to drive and look at, particularly on a busier track or wider B road (with overtaking opportunities). The engine management spoiled it on occasion though.
The 996 is great in all situations and has a busy, tactile feel to it which I like. It may give something away in delicacy and responsiveness to the other two but it’s still very involving, capable and full of character. The fact that it sits between the Elise and Spyder in price is also relevant.

I think it's ongoing (?!)

I find those references helpful as there is common ground I can relate to. Every trip in an Elise is special but the majority are heavily compromised and maybe only 10% of time spent is in its element. Love it but it feels like a relationship based mainly on its terms. I'd have another but only in a multicar stable.

[ferrisbueller]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I'd prefer if you stayed as I've just about got a handle on your level of bias, but while you're away look up the words "subjectively" and "objectively".

[EGTE]

ferrisbueller said:

richthebike said:

ferrisbueller said:

gixermark said:

Why has this thread got into a 6 figure pissing context?

Great thread, but let’s keep to the early 996 ‘sweet’ ? Spot.......

I'm pretty sure it hasn't? It's a debate about comparisons and trying to understand the relative merits of the 996 vs 986 and whatever else. I don't think I'm alone it trying to find a route through this maze.

I was quite enjoying your efforts to unpick cmoose's well developed and consistent description of why he likes what he likes.

He is of course right, and represents a lot of my own feelings, but it was a good effort.
The question here isn't about cash.

The question for me is other people. If there was nobody else around to see, what would you have?

That's my acid test, and it's what brings me back to the 996. I realised that with most choices I was looking at this year, I was probably more drawn to people knowing I had one, or turning up somewhere in it.

I kept the 996 because it's relatively inexpensive to get it exactly how I want it, and it ticks ever so many boxes as a drivers car, given the circumstances that surround me.

The other driveway space is probably going to a caterham, based on the same logic.

I'm sure there are other cars that would do similar, but I don't have time or inclination to try them all.

Edit: there are some times where being seen turning up in something is still important i.e. work, but the criteria are different, and hence I persist with my range rover, despite its many flaws. It does that job very well.

Edited by richthebike on Friday 25th May 06:24

Personally I find it difficult, if not impossible, to take the value consideration (and therefore to an extent cash) out of the equation. It ends up being a fundamental component of the thought process. IMO, it works like this: Is a 986 the best car you can buy for £5k? On many levels I think you could put up a strong argument. Is it the best car £100k can buy? Only if you factor in a value for money type argument.

I would be of the opinion that an E90 330i is a better car than an E46 M3 as an ownership proposition. Much of that judgement is based on value. It does 85% of what the M3 does but at a fraction of the running costs (Ironically, as the E46s now firm up, I could reverse that position as it becomes much more cost neutral if not ultimately reversed). Take the costs out of the equation (as we may soon be able to in this specific example) and I'll have the M3. Where moose go to last night was going from the Boxster, or indeed 996, being a great value car to it being absolutely the best car. That's a leap and one worth considering. If it were universally true we'd be reconsidering things, rapidly, and the implications would be significant.

What other people think, and specifically buying things for yourself because of the thoughts of others and what they may be, isn't IMO going to lead to a happy conclusion. Personally, I'd like to think I things for me that I want for me. To your point, the landscape of our roads would look entirely different if people bought cars purely on merit with no consideration for perception (or value) but how could you ever separate those thoughts now they are such an, albeit cleverly and superficial, embedded part of the process.

Buying something like a 996 isn't, in most cases, going to be based on driving one for an extended period or owning one. Reading threads like these and PPBB's, listening to Jethro Bovingdon, Chris Harris et al and whatever else is part of it. Hearing real world experience from actual owners who have lived with cars for extended periods is massively useful.

Which kind of brings me full circle back to why the 996 enters considerations at present, which is the shift in the value considerations. Paying big upkeep bills on a depreciating asset? Not for me thanks. Those bills being levied on a non-depreciating asset and you have may attention. Bills offset by increasing values? OK, now I'm interested on a different level (And absolutely where the entry cost is a fraction of what it would be to achieve such feats on a higher capital investment). It is a personal shortcoming that I can't take value out of consideration. I doubt it would change with a lottery win.

So basically you just want an investment car, is that it?

[ferrisbueller]

EGTE said:

So basically you just want an investment car, is that it?

No. I guess I want the best I can get for the least net outlay if that makes sense.

Yup, cake and eat it etc. Not sure how realistic that is.

[EGTE]

Well then cmoose is right: 986 at 5K is unbeatable smiles/£.

If it dies (not as likely as forums would make out), replace for £5K.

[ferrisbueller]

EGTE said:

Well then cmoose is right: 986 at 5K is unbeatable smiles/£.

Good

EGTE said:

If it dies (not as likely as forums would make out), replace for £5K.

Ah...that's the scenario I want to avoid.

[edc]

There's always a risk a car will die. I'm on 986 number 2 and between them they have 195k. I killed the first one, it didn't kill itself 😂 The other thing is, depending on your value pendulum, a £5k car is chump change to some and you may feel like you can drive it harder and maybe take more liberties because if it all goes wrong you don't lose a big chunk of cash in the grand scheme of things. There are too many soft psychological factors at play that we will all have the same decision making process.

[edh]

Risk/reward ratio for a ~5-7k Boxster S is pretty good I think. Buy from an enthusiast who will likely have addressed the weak points. They are bargains.

It's a tremendously competent, well designed car, a glorious engine (more induction noise than a 996), and handles superbly. (assumes all suspension components are in good order). If you want it to feel even more connected and "sporting", fit some bucket seats - it makes a huge difference.

The 996 (3.4 C2 cable..) is somehow a bit more mature and subtle a car, even though it shares so much with the 986. It's not "shouty" so takes a while to appreciate. You won't like it if you prefer japanese-style light control weights. I prefer the steering on my 944 though, shame it has a dull i4 motor..

As for the 153k mile car you posted - it doesn't seem to fit your risk appetite and you suggest you have a bigger budget. Objectively, it will have a worn interior and will rattle and squeak. Subjectively, that will make you wish you'd bought a fresher one every time you drove it. Last summer we did a back to back test of two 3.4 C2's, mine with 60k and another with 130k (and a Hartech rebuild). There was no contest if you had to choose between the two (subjectively that is )

I drove a 360 once - at Oulton. Hated it as it was very unpredictable on corner entry. (Maybe the geo was out but it wasn't confidence inspiring at all). Nice when parked though.

[EGTE]

ferrisbueller said:

EGTE said:

Well then cmoose is right: 986 at 5K is unbeatable smiles/£.

Good

EGTE said:

If it dies (not as likely as forums would make out), replace for £5K.

Ah...that's the scenario I want to avoid.

That scenario really isn't that likely. Any dodgy IMS will have failed years ago.Use Millers Nanodrive 10W-50, fit a low-temp thermostat, drive gently until warm, then drive it 'briskly'. Service regularly, drive often. Will be fine 99 times out of 100.

[ATM]

edh said:

I drove a 360 once - at Oulton. Hated it as it was very unpredictable on corner entry. (Maybe the geo was out but it wasn't confidence inspiring at all). Nice when parked though.

I've driven 2 different 360. One was a lhd manual at a track experience day [Thruxton] and the clutch was super heavy, the gear change / shift shockingly bad and the driving position made me feel like I was sitting sideways. I also drove my first 986 on that same track experience day and then went and bought one. I couldn't afford a 360 then and I can't now.

The next 360 was a rhd spider f1. The gear change was still shocking until I found the sport button then it was good. But the roof on a spider looks like it was designed by some 5 year olds.

[Chris Stott]

Err... why are we comparing 360's to 996's and 986's?

360's prices are more comparable to a 996GT3 or a 997.1GT3... and for me, there's no decision to be made there if you're interested in driving.

[ATM]

I'm just talking cars. I can do it all day. Every day.