Classic or modern?
Discussion
I have a 911 itch that is still not scratched and am in a position to consider one (wife permitting). I love the shape of the older pre-993 cars, and given that they are pretty much the same price as more modern stuff, I wonder how they would hold up as daily drivers?
I know that modern cars are much easier to live with and are faster, but my last daily driver was a Land Rover Defender so modernity, ergonomics and comfort are not essential for me.
I think this one looks spectacular, but how practical as a dd?
https://en.comparis.ch/carfinder/marktplatz/detail...
I know that modern cars are much easier to live with and are faster, but my last daily driver was a Land Rover Defender so modernity, ergonomics and comfort are not essential for me.
I think this one looks spectacular, but how practical as a dd?
https://en.comparis.ch/carfinder/marktplatz/detail...
You'll love that car if its good one. I covered 5000 miles over Summer of 2013 and really enjoyed it. Agricultural in some ways but a very precise car if set up well. Thoroughly recommend they're addictive. Buy the best example you can find. Mine was one of the best in the UK for sale at the time i.e. a good 30% more expensive than the rest of the 3.2 for sale but repaid me buying the best one available. Brilliant cars still relatively undervalued the 3.2 Carrera as not many what I'd describe as good condition cars with the salty rads we have in UK. Most hiding story or two. I'd have another one 
I have a 1989 3.2. FPSH, 30K miles in properly good condition but not perfect.
As a daily it would be hard work in traffic and they are noisy and not really comfortable, but for a 10-20 mile commute on good roads they are fantastic. Thing is, the steering at parking speeds is properly heavy, I mean two hands on wheel using your shoulders to move the wheel heavy so I would not use it in heavy traffic.
The real issue for me would be corrosion. If you are prepared to pay the costs to keep it in fine fettle on wet salty roads (lots of inspections, maintenance, sealing) then go for it. They dont have wheel arch liners to protect from stone chips and inevitably will rust.
I spent £3k 4 years ago to repair a small blister under the screen rubber that turned out to need a dash out and welding repair, and 3 years before that, a section of paint on the front wing. Graham Green did the work and said my car is in really good condition but they can be a money pit.
100k and I might be tempted to sell
As a daily it would be hard work in traffic and they are noisy and not really comfortable, but for a 10-20 mile commute on good roads they are fantastic. Thing is, the steering at parking speeds is properly heavy, I mean two hands on wheel using your shoulders to move the wheel heavy so I would not use it in heavy traffic.
The real issue for me would be corrosion. If you are prepared to pay the costs to keep it in fine fettle on wet salty roads (lots of inspections, maintenance, sealing) then go for it. They dont have wheel arch liners to protect from stone chips and inevitably will rust.
I spent £3k 4 years ago to repair a small blister under the screen rubber that turned out to need a dash out and welding repair, and 3 years before that, a section of paint on the front wing. Graham Green did the work and said my car is in really good condition but they can be a money pit.
100k and I might be tempted to sell
Although you say you prefer pre-993, and I understand where you are coming from if we are talking 'classic 911 shape', but the 993 is a better classic proposition if you want to use it in all weathers.
Why? As the boys say above - rust. The 3.2 and earlier had little if any underbody protection, the 964 started to introduce this, but still suffers sill and rear-arch areas.
The 993 has very good underbody protection, with only one weak-spot on the rear chassis rail, which is easily sorted and protected for the future. (they *can* rust around the screen apertures, so watch out for that)
It has all of the charm and involvement of the earlier cars, and although the interior is broadly the same, some of the componentry and especially air-con are significantly improved. You can easily fit HID lights into the OEM housings for a very reasonable cost, which mean you can actually drive safely in the dark.
There is deep knowledge out there on every aspect of the 993 suspension setup, which is critical to all of the classic 911s, so you can lean on other's experiences, and a decent amount of aftermarket parts that are as good if not better than OEM.
They also don't need the engine rebuilds that the earlier versions seem to need - and hydraulic tappets means simpler servicing.
You may hate the shape, so I've wasted my time
but hey..
Why? As the boys say above - rust. The 3.2 and earlier had little if any underbody protection, the 964 started to introduce this, but still suffers sill and rear-arch areas.
The 993 has very good underbody protection, with only one weak-spot on the rear chassis rail, which is easily sorted and protected for the future. (they *can* rust around the screen apertures, so watch out for that)
It has all of the charm and involvement of the earlier cars, and although the interior is broadly the same, some of the componentry and especially air-con are significantly improved. You can easily fit HID lights into the OEM housings for a very reasonable cost, which mean you can actually drive safely in the dark.
There is deep knowledge out there on every aspect of the 993 suspension setup, which is critical to all of the classic 911s, so you can lean on other's experiences, and a decent amount of aftermarket parts that are as good if not better than OEM.
They also don't need the engine rebuilds that the earlier versions seem to need - and hydraulic tappets means simpler servicing.
You may hate the shape, so I've wasted my time
but hey..Edited by Orangecurry on Wednesday 16th June 11:03
n12maser said:
worth mentioning on the 993s that like the older cars, scuttle rust both front and back can also be a proper b#tch!! Assuming you ever wash your car or drive it in the rain...although it can be mitigated against by drying off those areas under the rubber each time
...or by following TSB9501 and fill the channel with a silicone/whatever sealant. And then it doesn't rust.Gary C said:
Orangecurry said:
...or by following TSB9501 and fill the channel with a silicone/whatever sealant. And then it doesn't rust.
Does Bostik 6050 exist ?Can't find any.
In 2010 (eta) Dow Corning 791 to be specific.
Edited by Orangecurry on Wednesday 16th June 21:56
Orangecurry said:
Gary C said:
Orangecurry said:
...or by following TSB9501 and fill the channel with a silicone/whatever sealant. And then it doesn't rust.
Does Bostik 6050 exist ?Can't find any.
In 2011.
The last 3.2's came with 964 screen rubbers and they dont quite overlap properly in the lower corners of the screen (which is where mine rusted) it would seem like an idea to fill behind the rubber to stop ingress, but equally I don't want to seal moisture in.
The restorer pointed out quite a few 964 bits on my 3.2 including the plastic fuel filler surround. I must have been on the line at the same time as the 964's and one of the last off the line.
Thread hijack
I don't know if the layout of the 3.2 and 964 are the same as the 993, but this is what I did in 2010.
https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/596329-rust-...
DC 791 is still available, but many 'experts' told me it was wrong.
Frankly my dear, I couldn't give a damn, as the car is protected.
ps I updated the thread with photos last year - posts 33 and 34
I don't know if the layout of the 3.2 and 964 are the same as the 993, but this is what I did in 2010.
https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/596329-rust-...
DC 791 is still available, but many 'experts' told me it was wrong.
Frankly my dear, I couldn't give a damn, as the car is protected.
ps I updated the thread with photos last year - posts 33 and 34
Edited by Orangecurry on Wednesday 16th June 22:03
Orangecurry said:
Thread hijack
I don't know if the layout of the 3.2 and 964 are the same as the 993, but this is what I did in 2010.
https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/596329-rust-...
DC 791 is still available, but many 'experts' told me it was wrong.
Frankly my dear, I couldn't give a damn, as the car is protected.
ps I updated the thread with photos last year - posts 33 and 34
Ah, I think I saw your 'discussion' on Rennlist I don't know if the layout of the 3.2 and 964 are the same as the 993, but this is what I did in 2010.
https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/596329-rust-...
DC 791 is still available, but many 'experts' told me it was wrong.
Frankly my dear, I couldn't give a damn, as the car is protected.
ps I updated the thread with photos last year - posts 33 and 34
Edited by Orangecurry on Wednesday 16th June 22:03
A 3.2/964 is an old fasioned rubber mounted screen (think Mk2 Ford Escort style) and not bonded.
Unless you travelling to work on some decent roads I can’t see the point. Sitting in traffic for an hour each morning, I would rather be in something odeon with air con and good sounds.
But if you have a journey on open roads then why not.
As others have said thought, rust is going to be the thing. But I know of several people who just get sorted and have used a 356, 2.7 RS and a 993 RS as dailies.
But if you have a journey on open roads then why not.
As others have said thought, rust is going to be the thing. But I know of several people who just get sorted and have used a 356, 2.7 RS and a 993 RS as dailies.
supersport said:
As others have said thought, rust is going to be the thing. But I know of several people who just get sorted and have used a 356, 2.7 RS and a 993 RS as dailies.
Have they had the full preservation treatments, the one where they drill little holes and spray everything with wax ?Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff