964 vs. 3.2 again...
Discussion
Hey,
I'm looking for my first air cooled Porsche, I've now driven a C2 manual and, today a 3.2 with a G50 box. And now I'm stuck!
I seem to remember the 964 having a bit more power low down? You have to work the 3.2 over 4k to get something out of it, does this ring true with people who have more experience than me?
I liked the 3.2 today, it was a good example that has been really well maintained. It's just that lack of low down power. Although, once used to the car, this wouldn't be an issue I'm assuming?
Any help would be appreciated, I know this topic has been done before, but I'm still unsure.
Thanks
I'm looking for my first air cooled Porsche, I've now driven a C2 manual and, today a 3.2 with a G50 box. And now I'm stuck!
I seem to remember the 964 having a bit more power low down? You have to work the 3.2 over 4k to get something out of it, does this ring true with people who have more experience than me?
I liked the 3.2 today, it was a good example that has been really well maintained. It's just that lack of low down power. Although, once used to the car, this wouldn't be an issue I'm assuming?
Any help would be appreciated, I know this topic has been done before, but I'm still unsure.
Thanks
ChrisG89 said:
Hey,
I'm looking for my first air cooled Porsche, I've now driven a C2 manual and, today a 3.2 with a G50 box. And now I'm stuck!
I seem to remember the 964 having a bit more power low down? You have to work the 3.2 over 4k to get something out of it, does this ring true with people who have more experience than me?
I liked the 3.2 today, it was a good example that has been really well maintained. It's just that lack of low down power. Although, once used to the car, this wouldn't be an issue I'm assuming?
Any help would be appreciated, I know this topic has been done before, but I'm still unsure.
Thanks
Had both 964 all day. Online community for 964s is vast too I'm looking for my first air cooled Porsche, I've now driven a C2 manual and, today a 3.2 with a G50 box. And now I'm stuck!
I seem to remember the 964 having a bit more power low down? You have to work the 3.2 over 4k to get something out of it, does this ring true with people who have more experience than me?
I liked the 3.2 today, it was a good example that has been really well maintained. It's just that lack of low down power. Although, once used to the car, this wouldn't be an issue I'm assuming?
Any help would be appreciated, I know this topic has been done before, but I'm still unsure.
Thanks
To be honest I think it is probably a waste of time trying to work out which is the best car, they are actually quite different. Just go with what your heart says, you won't be disappointed.
Either way you will love it!
With these cars it is not all about power, it is how it makes you feel, the sensations and all the rest of it. They can both shift when needed to do so, but I would say the 3.2 is more raw, no power steering and all the rest of it. When well set up they are both a joy.
Difficult choice to make, not sure what I would choose in your place, probably come down to colour/looks of what was available at the time.
Either way you will love it!
With these cars it is not all about power, it is how it makes you feel, the sensations and all the rest of it. They can both shift when needed to do so, but I would say the 3.2 is more raw, no power steering and all the rest of it. When well set up they are both a joy.
Difficult choice to make, not sure what I would choose in your place, probably come down to colour/looks of what was available at the time.
supersport said:
To be honest I think it is probably a waste of time trying to work out which is the best car, they are actually quite different. Just go with what your heart says, you won't be disappointed.
Either way you will love it!
With these cars it is not all about power, it is how it makes you feel, the sensations and all the rest of it. They can both shift when needed to do so, but I would say the 3.2 is more raw, no power steering and all the rest of it. When well set up they are both a joy.
Difficult choice to make, not sure what I would choose in your place, probably come down to colour/looks of what was available at the time.
+1 Either way you will love it!
With these cars it is not all about power, it is how it makes you feel, the sensations and all the rest of it. They can both shift when needed to do so, but I would say the 3.2 is more raw, no power steering and all the rest of it. When well set up they are both a joy.
Difficult choice to make, not sure what I would choose in your place, probably come down to colour/looks of what was available at the time.
Which do you prefer the look of?
Which did you enjoy driving the most?
g7jhp said:
supersport said:
To be honest I think it is probably a waste of time trying to work out which is the best car, they are actually quite different. Just go with what your heart says, you won't be disappointed.
Either way you will love it!
With these cars it is not all about power, it is how it makes you feel, the sensations and all the rest of it. They can both shift when needed to do so, but I would say the 3.2 is more raw, no power steering and all the rest of it. When well set up they are both a joy.
Difficult choice to make, not sure what I would choose in your place, probably come down to colour/looks of what was available at the time.
+1 Either way you will love it!
With these cars it is not all about power, it is how it makes you feel, the sensations and all the rest of it. They can both shift when needed to do so, but I would say the 3.2 is more raw, no power steering and all the rest of it. When well set up they are both a joy.
Difficult choice to make, not sure what I would choose in your place, probably come down to colour/looks of what was available at the time.
Which do you prefer the look of?
Which did you enjoy driving the most?
3.2C for back road blast and 964 C2 for cross continental jolly. They're very different but performance wise neck and neck with virtually exactly the same power to weight ratio.
Few pics to help you make your mind up re which is the better looker. I drive both an 1989 Carrera and 1990 964 C2 every sunny day through the Summer and cannot believe these cars were built within a year of each other as they are so chalk and cheese. I can understand why Porschefiles back in 1989-90 absolutely hated the 964 at its introduction. Both wonderful in different ways.
Few pics to help you choose which car is prettier.
BobToc said:
Sorry to hijack, but my partner hates my G50 3.2 and would like something a little bit more refined (especially the gear change). Does the 964 or 993 offer a big step up?
Yes both are far more refined and sophisticated than the 3.2C but not necessarily the better for it if like the OP you're looking for a weekend car. To answer the OP's original question the 3.2C makes its power above 4000 rpm and its engine is a peach when in this sweet spot.
I've never found the steering or brakes an issue on the 3.2C. Yes they have weight but work beautifully. The 964 has better brakes and PAS but feels like a GT in comparison to the 3.2C. I also trust the handling on the 3.2C more as the 964 out of the box is a bit soft on its suspension but in contrast its ride is magic carpet in comparison to the 3.2C. Both of my cars are completely stock and both cars could do with being 150-200 kgs lighter if you wanted to do hill climbs or track days but for road use both fine out of the box.
Neither would see which way a 987 Boxster went which is what the OP also has.
I've just realised I haven't updated my garage! Boxster and S3 have gone. The 911 will be replacing a 987.2 Cayman S.
Would price come into for you? For example, the 3.2 I drove is up for £35k, it's a good example, not concours, but all the rust has been sorted and the car was mechanically sound. It also came with one the meatiest history folders I've seen. Most 964 now seem to be £40k. Which is annoying as I've wanted one for a while but needed to sort other things out before changing cars.
I'm edging towards the 964 if I'm honest, it's still a lot more raw than what I'm used to, but still is quite refined compared to the 3.2. I will be using the car for long journeys at times and just running about. Going for a B road blast isn't what I'd be doing the most in the car. If it was, I think the 3.2 would be the ticket!
Would price come into for you? For example, the 3.2 I drove is up for £35k, it's a good example, not concours, but all the rust has been sorted and the car was mechanically sound. It also came with one the meatiest history folders I've seen. Most 964 now seem to be £40k. Which is annoying as I've wanted one for a while but needed to sort other things out before changing cars.
I'm edging towards the 964 if I'm honest, it's still a lot more raw than what I'm used to, but still is quite refined compared to the 3.2. I will be using the car for long journeys at times and just running about. Going for a B road blast isn't what I'd be doing the most in the car. If it was, I think the 3.2 would be the ticket!
Both cars can be used for long journeys, the tombstone sports seats in 3.2/964 are very comfortable and the engines are nice just cruising along or dropping down a gear.
3.2 will feel rawer and has a more classic look, but the 964 has some mod cons ABS and PAS and still retains the classic shape (with plastic bumpers). You can't lose with either, but the one which feels right for you.
I've had 2 x 3.2's and a 993, I much prefer the 3.2's and 964.
3.2 will feel rawer and has a more classic look, but the 964 has some mod cons ABS and PAS and still retains the classic shape (with plastic bumpers). You can't lose with either, but the one which feels right for you.
I've had 2 x 3.2's and a 993, I much prefer the 3.2's and 964.
I have had both 3.2 & 964 (both nice conditioned Targas) and the 964 was my favourite by a good distance.
964 has the 'stronger' more torquey motor and the build quality is right up there - like driving a little block of granite around (even in Targa form!)
Looks will come into it and again my preference was 964 with the deeper more purposeful looking front and rear PU.
I only sold mine to realise some cash for bricks and mortar but already miss it.
Whichever you choose, you will not be disappointed if you get a good one.
964 has the 'stronger' more torquey motor and the build quality is right up there - like driving a little block of granite around (even in Targa form!)
Looks will come into it and again my preference was 964 with the deeper more purposeful looking front and rear PU.
I only sold mine to realise some cash for bricks and mortar but already miss it.
Whichever you choose, you will not be disappointed if you get a good one.
Edited by Steve Devaney on Wednesday 6th May 11:32
Gassing Station | Porsche Classics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff