Help! Stop me from buying a 911!
 

OK, like many of you older guys, I first fell in love with Porsches as a teenager, and it was a 911. I’ve always wanted a Porsche, which meant a 911. Well now that I’m older and wiser, with some disposable income, I’ve been looking to buy a 2001-2004 Boxster S, and I’m looking to spend around $15-20k. I’ve been reading this forum for 6 months, and know all in the ins and outs of getting a good Boxster.
But then I made a mistake. While on Craigs list, I typed in Porsche instead of Boxster just to see what was out there, and I started to see that for the same $15-20k, I could get a 1980’s 911 like I’ve always wanted. Like the one I found today below:
--------------------------------------------------------
1984 Porsche 911 with 62K Original Mi. $17,000
The car is in perfect mechanical shape. It shifts like butter, drives smooth, and hauls ass.
The dash is in perfect condition, no rips or tears on the seats, no accidents or rust.
The Fuchs were taken off and restored they look brand new, 4 new tires put on.
New Clutch, clutch cable, and a couple of more things.
Comes with the original toolkit, spare.
Original Blaupunkt Radio
Its got original paint, but the clear coat is going on the roof / hood.
------------------------------------------------------
The attached photo is of the car listed above.
So, tell me why the Boxster is the best choice for my first Porsche!

Drive them both. See which you like better.

I'd prefer the 911 personally, more of a driver's car. But the engine in the back and trailing arms to support it are offensive to my engineering sensibilities. So I have a Boxster.

It's perfect for the summer . Seriously, if you were to drive both vehicles back to back, you'd find the 911 felt quite a bit dated and sluggish on the handling as compared to a boxster.

I think one big question to ask is will it be your main/only car?

I do like those 911s. Get it if that's what you dream of getting growing up, although they're not daily driver like boxsters.

I've always been a 911 guy and the eighties Carreras are great cars. A properly adjusted 915 trans will shift smoothly, but not like the cable shifter; there's also the classic air cooled sound. Like others have mentioned, this is not a modern car, but will hold it's value far greater than a Boxster. Only you can drive each and weigh their merits against what you are looking for. I enjoy each for what they are; truly apples to oranges.

Have a PPI done on the 911, as many replacement parts can be quite expensive; also check for worn valve guides. Good news is the 3.2 engines are pretty bullet proof and don't have issues like leaking RMS and an IMS bearing. Also check to see if the tail is factory, as I can see the front spoiler is missing and should always be there as a pair.

I caught a rerun of TopGear last night and they were comparing a 60's Jag XKE, an Aston DB 5 and a 200? 4 door Honda Accord. Except for style, the Honda beat both of the other cars in all performance categories.
Comparing the 986 and the 911 SC, I think you will find similar results... don't even think about throwing a new Honda accord into the mix!

My mechanic called, he said he loves the idea of people buying old Porsches. :D

Porsches 2000-2011 are not as driver oriented as older Porsches but they are also in another stratoshphere of maintenance and reliablity repair costs.
If your Boxster throws a bad IMS you can get a crate motor and be back on the road . If your air-cooled Porsche needs some engine major work....

Also, post 2000 Carreras and Boxsters (maybe a little earlier too) are numb and somewhat disconnected but they also don't rattle and leak under constant use.

I guess it depends if this car is just a Sunday driver or if you actually plan to rack up some mileage.

That's the trouble, people just read numbers nowadays.

Perhaps it's nostalgia, but some of us prefer to feel the rawness of an old car with the lack of computers, 10 airbags, and a fancy screen telling you it's time to do oil change.

I still want my 356 Speedster, wearing my 1960s JLC handwind mechanical watch packing a 1911 commander in .45.

[IMG]http://pics.kuvaton.com/kuvei/****************_the_future.jpg[/IMG]

Nice looking car. The downside is tending to the paint properly could cost half the price of the car. Also, and this is just my opinion, while the 80's 911s are good cars, they're not modern enough to be modern, and not old enough to be classics like the early longhoods. Also, I believe the performance of the early 3.2 would be comparable to a 986 base.

I have a '70s 911 for which I'm building a 3.4. It should be similar performance-wise to my 986S, but even those aren't considered fast anymore. I really don't care though as long as it's not blown off by minivans.

If you were going to keep it for a few years as a weekend car maybe that would work, but if you're going to put this car into daily service be prepared to get your hands dirty.

I love 80s Carreras but... the motor will always be in the wrong place and I like a real A/C unit. An 80s Carrera A/C always works best when it is below 60F outside. It does give you a bit of defog capability on rainy days though.

You are correct, Sir. I had a 1981 and 1982 SC and neither a/c ever worked worth a damn.

It's all about sensory input!

Drive a '66 Lotus Elan at 9/10ths, and you'll be doing all of 92MPH, but starting to see the bright light, hoping your children can cope as orphans, wishing you hadn't peeked under Lovie Broadbottom's dress back in the 5th Grade.

Drive a Boxster at 9/10ths, you'll be doing 135MPH, have time to text your friends, swap CD's, and wonder what you're gonna have for dinner.

As mentioned, it has unfortunately become all about the numbers.

Decades of Video games, slasher movies, bungie jumping and Hustler have dulled our senses. Can you even imagine that the original Frankenstein movie scared people for days back in the '30's?

Classic sports cars had lots of sensory input, but little actual speed.

Modern cars have lots of actual speed... but little sensory input - you have to settle for the number reached by the needle on the Speedo, then go brag to your friends at the Bar that you reached XXX MPH (albeit that you are actually safer than driving half that speed in your father's old Buick).

The classic 911's are simply more visceral, produce waaay more endorphins, even if the Speedo doesn't match a current Boxster.

Drive both, and see which is the more satisfying ride. I sold my wonderful Boxster for a Classic, fearful that I was trading something away. Not so... it was an awakening.

They're older, so may require more maintenance in the beginning to sort it all out. But once done, these are robust cars - the cars Porsche built it's reputation on. They're hand produced, unlike the current assembly-line products ruled over by accountants - the folks who brought you RMS and IMS.

Cheers!

80's 911
Pros - Classic styling. Fun to drive at less than the limit. Super cool.
Cons - 25 yr old car with 25 yr old features. Expensive engine repairs. Hard to find parts. Difficult (dangerous?) to drive at the limit unless you know what you're doing.


2000's Boxster
Pros: Nice styling. Excellent handling. Easy to drive at the limit. Affordable repairs.
Cons: Not a 911. Not a 911. Not a 911. Not a 911.

First of all, a 1984 911 is not an SC, but a Carrera debuting Motronic DME, which is a modern engine management system. Prior 911s utilized CIS injection, which was fine when working properly, but a bit of a pain otherwise. I've owned many examples of the eighties Carreras and never experienced any major repairs. Cost of parts is certainly not overly expensive due to the massive aftermarket following of these great autos. As I mentioned previously, check for worn valve guides, as this is one area of trouble that could show on these engines. I have many friends that have rebuilt their own engines, as they are not overly complicated nor terribly expensive to repair, compared to the M96 (bang and done). These cars are rock-solid and great fun to drive, but not really a daily driver. AC doesn't work great from the factory, but there are numerous aftermarket solutions that don't alter the physical appearance of the car. If you want a modern ride with your latte and iPod, maybe a Carrera isn't for you; however, if you are longing for a true air cooled experience, this is the ticket. Don't bother with the 996 models, Boxsters are more fun to drive.

The 911 is a great car to add to a collection but not to replace a modern porsche. 25 years is a LONG time in the automotive world.

I respect the "raw" driving experience of the older 911s, but couldn't bear being beat around the track by a kid in a new Hyundai. A good compromise if you want the rawness of an old sports car and the performance of a modern sportscar is the lotus elise.

If it is the porsche experience that you want- you first need to decide which experience that is - aircooled classic or watrercooled modern.

By the way- 20 thousand is 996 territory, which is a whole new debate.

996 Carrera too 1999-2001...Just sayingg :cool:

Ignoring which car is "better", You're talking about a 27 year old car with bad paint, it's not likely to be cheap to own. You may end up with a restoration project. IMO a Boxter that is about 20 years newer would be a better choice.

Looking at it as a car age issue is misleading. My 30 year old Mazda is more reliable than my Boxster in general. It's electrical system is dead reliable and simple, it's never had any problems with suspension bushings, coolant tanks, or engine ventilation systems. It doesn't even have a MAF sensor. 14" tires are half the price of 17"s. Cars were better built 30 years ago and last much longer if well cared for. And sports cars were sports cars. They were loud, rough, and a blast to drive at any speed. They weren't easy to drive.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y37...orsetooth3.jpg