3.2 Carrera V 964

[Biscuit761]

After reading what a few people are saying about 964's I am starting to wonder if an early C2 might be a better long term bet than a 3.2 Carrera.

One thing I am unsure of though, will the fact that the engine is 3.6 litres against 3.2 mean more fuel is guzzeled, I know that petrol is the cheapest bit about 911 ownership but I wll probably do 15,000 miles a year as it will be the only car.

Get 27mpg average from my Classic Impreza turbo.

Bill

(I really want a 911 but can name loads of practical reasons not to have one)

[Butzi]

There are many many reasons why you shouldn't buy one, but you only need one reason why you should. Buy with you heart and not just your head. As they say, it's like children, you'll never understand until you've had one.

[James s]

I got around 20 out of mine - though it was chipped / remapped so this could have worsened things.

You do need to drive both quite a bit if you can - the cusp you are on is one of the biggest in developmental terms. For me 15,000 a year would mean 964 due to power steering, better heater, and overall a more modern feel.

However 3-4k a year and a love of the older style could take someone down the early route.

I've driven both they are both great but they are different.

T answer directly the consumption between the two is so far down the list of differences it doen't matter

[verysideways]

Only car, 15k miles a year? 964....

Just as a point to note, i followed a bunch of mates to Wales a couple of years ago in my 993 C4S - they were all trailering cars to the track day, i was driving mine, so we did 65mph for 120 miles.

I got 37mpg!!!ok, so i normally get about 22mpg, but still

VS

[verysideways]

p.s. can i just say, you only live once, remember that.

[leosayer]

Having either as you're only car might spoil the fun a bit as certain 'characteristics' could become annoyances after a while eg

Wind & road noise
Hard suspension (even as stock)
Poor ventilation / air con (if it has ac)
oil consumption (you could be topping up every couple of weeks on that mileage)
Lack of practicality (see other thread)

BTW, I regularly get 22mpg out of my 964 on 95 ron unleaded.

[domster]

I doubt there's any difference between 3.2 and 3.6 in terms of fuel consumption. The C2 had a more efficient twin sparkplug system and more advanced engine management. And it had more aerodynamic bodywork (those smooth bumpers weren't just for show!).

What you'll get with either of them over the Scooby is quality you can feel when you 'thunk' the doors. And the interior isn't nasty 1990s japanese plastic, but something a German Fred Dibnah dreamt up when they were assembling V2 rockets in the Fatherland.

[kevinday]

Only car then I recommend 964 (in agreement with others). Weekend car then maybe the 3.2 as it is more 'pure'. I am looking at a 3.2 for a fun car, maybe later this year.