The ironic thing is I hardly ever see 964s. 930s are dime-a-dozen as old exotics go. I usually see 993s, and 996s above all else. The 996 sold like wildfire, which is probably why Porsche depreciation rates are bad.

 

The 964 years (early '90s) were bad years for Porsche. I believe the company nearly lost its shirt and then called in some consultants from Toyota or some other Japanese manufacturer for production help. This was also the time of the NSX, 300ZX twin turbo, RX-7, Supra twin turbo, LT1 Vette, etc., and Porsche was peddling 236 h.p. Carerras for a lot more scratch. I, personally, think the S2000 has made older 911s (the '80s Carrera through, at least, the 964) irrelevant. With our cars, you get a pure sports car with better performance and far better ownership costs. I've driven an '87 911 and was underwhelmed. The S2000 is much more fun to me. I'm sure the 964 is an improvement over the '87, but I just can't see a compelling reason to buy one over an S2000. My $.02 worth. Oh, and I would take a nice, 986 any day over a 964 (for similar $$$) if I had to have a P car.

 

I previously owned a 1990 C4 Targa and while being somewhat fun, it was a pig to maintain. I had to re-seal the left side cam housing twice (expensive). The oil cooler fan was problematic and the clutch/DMF cost me $4.5K to replace. While 964's look great, they are maintenance intensive and not for the faint of heart with their impending age. Cowl shake was horrible on my car owing to the targa top (I will never own another targa for numerous reasons). If I were to own another 911 it would probably be an 87' - 89' G50 equipped Carrera or a nice 78' - 83' SC. These cars were more to the original 911 design being light, nimble and not overladen with "luxury" options. The 3.0L, 3.2L have proven to be far more stout than the later 3.6's as well. 964's can be had cheap, be cautious as they can pluck you dry in short order however.

 

bjohnston. I'm not buying one over an s2000 this would be a second car to my 01' s2k. As far as the early 911's being made "irrelevent" by the s2000........never Infact there are 964rs owners who would have a different opinion.

 

964s are junk. Owners that rave about them simply cannot afford a 993. The '93 RSA was all marketing with no go fast parts over the C2. I don't know why these stripped down models command a premium considering they stickered for less than a C2 when new.

The '94 Turbo 3.6 on the other hand...

 

964 was pretty well know for electrical problems too

Another vote for 78-89 range, those are the true 911 in my opinion. Dexy sexy, classic, sounded great, built like tanks. Find a good one and keep it forever.

 

Thanks for the factual data......and opinions.

 

Heard they drive like supras with one turbo

 

I like the looks of the 993 best, especially the 993 GT2. My mom's boyfriend had one, we swapped cars a few times for weekends.

However I hated how that thing drove. For a $140,000 car, it drove like crap. Not refined at all.

The 996 is a HUGE improvement in driving feel and refinement. Better interior, better pedal and shifter feel, better turn-in response.

Haven't driven a 997 yet, nor have I driven a 964. But I have driven a 930, 924, 944, 968, 928, 914, 356A, and several Boxters. The older the model, the more it reminds me of an old VW.

 

Back in 1981, I was driving a 1979 VW Rabbit. I had a chance to sit in a Porsche for the first time, a 924. The first thing I noticed about the controls is that it looked like my Rabbit. It left me wondering what all the fuss was about a Porsche.

In 1986, I was visiting an uncle in Germany. I was driving on a lonely 4 lane country road in a VW Golf doing about 75 mph, the top speed that particular car would go. From out of nowhere, I heard this wooooooossssshhhh pass me. I check my mirrors regularly by habit and never saw him coming. I had just enough time to catch the "Porsche" on the back of the 911 as it quickly disappeared into the distance. It made me want one some day. I still want one. Some day.