What is going on with 986 and 996 prices?

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by Ckrikos

Im waiting for 996 turbos to fall into the low to mid $30K range. I have seen some sell on ebay in the high $30's, but most still want mid 40's to low $50's, which is a lot of money for an old mass produced car. Although in my opinion its a steal.

For the engine, definitely a steal. However, I don't think I'd like to drive a pendulus, understeering car that cuts power from the rear at the slightest hint of tail-end slide (ie even more understeer)... with a potential for massively expensive repairs. The first bit of Porsche advice I got from a Porsche collector long long ago:
Don't ever buy a Porsche Turbo engine out of warranty unless you ave a chest full of cash or gold bars.

btw, I recently saw a guy on Rennlist selling his 996 C4S with the RWD mod. Asking low 30k's. Those widebodies are the nicest looking Carreras of all in my opinion. I'm in the distinct minority who didn't care for round VW Bug lights on a water-cooled car. Beautiful on a 964 or 73 RS but a bit too feminine for a big, long, plush Grand Touring.

[986_inquiry]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

btw, I recently saw a guy on Rennlist selling his 996 C4S with the RWD mod. Asking low 30k's. Those widebodies are the nicest looking Carreras of all in my opinion.

what is the advantage of modding a C4S to be RWD? I googled it and everyone basically said don't do it
C4S: RWD Conversion - Rennlist Discussion Forums

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by 986_inquiry

what is the advantage of modding a C4S to be RWD? I googled it and everyone basically said don't do it
C4S: RWD Conversion - Rennlist Discussion Forums

996 AWD cars (C4 and Turbo) poduce more understeer than perhaps any water-cooled Porsche. Any slight bit of the rear stepping out and it cuts power to the rear which then...produces even more understeer than it already has.
Not a car you want to race with.

[southernstar]

Pothole, the 944 may be misunderstood by some, but as a previous owner, not by me. The original 986 was anything but a 'luxury barge' - in fact, the leather interior in my 944 was no more or less luxurious than my 2000 986 (neither using absolutely top-of-the-line materials or assembly). The 986, as a roadster, will obviously have less torsional rigidity than a hardtop, but it was nevertheless quite rigid for the time of its introduction. Curb weight is not much greater in the early 986's than in the 944's: 2601 lbs for the 944 S2 versus 2773 lbs. for my 2000 Boxster 2.7. When one considers that this includes the installation of air bags and the additional weight required for a convertible top, they can hardly be described as 'barges'.

The fastest of the normally aspirated 944's, the 2.7 litre S2 had 163 HP and 150 lb/ft of torque; my car has 217 HP and 192 lb./ft of torque; what is more, due to variable valve timing, the torque and power curves are much flatter in the 986. This, in conjunction with a more slippery shape as permitted by the mid-engine design (and more attention to wind tunnel analysis) makes it easy to see why the 986 is a MUCH faster and more flexible car than even the S2 version of the 944.

Driving enjoyment metrics? Not sure what that means, but the 986 has better braking, lateral acceleration, acceleration and top speed - all in addition to the joys of open air motoring and the incredible exhaust note. Understand that the mid-engine placement in the 986 creates less weight transference forward under braking, improving both balance and reducing dive. It is no mere coincidence that all pure racing cars designed over the last 50 years use mid-engine placement.

What is more, the horizontally opposed flat 6 in the boxster creates a lower center of gravity than the L4 that was used in the 944. A small difference, perhaps, but every little bit adds up in terms of handling and balance.

Yes, my 944 was a good car and a blast to drive - but it was in no way as fun, fast and capable as my 986.

Brad