Long time 993 owner wanting to take the plunge

[4n6md]

Relatively new to the forum-I have been a 14 year owner of a 993 that now only gets driven a few times a year after being my daily driver for years. I am interested in selling the 993 and taking the plunge on an early 911, with an eye towards an S edition. I am curious how many others have made the transition towards an earlier car, and what your experiences have been like. My only real reservation about taking the plunge is that my 993 has been absolutely bullet proof over the years, and I am somewhat worried about reliability/maintenance costs of an early car. Of course, I will get a PPI performed.

I am also looking for some pricing guidance on S cars. I am interested in a coupe and am thinking about a '67 model, but I am open to other years/suggestions as well. At most any new purchase will only receive light driving duties. I am not interested in any projects and would prefer something already restored. Is a budget of 100K a reasonable amount? Thanks for the assistance and thoughts.

[CVLCPorsche]

Welcome! I am both a longtime 993 owner and early car owner. I love both cars for what they are and the greatness of each.

The 993 being the final iteration of the classic 911 is fast, capable, comfortable and makes a reasonable attempt to be a usable and modern car. I have owned many over the years and even sponsor a 993 specific event (www.993FEST.com ) so you know I drink the Kool-Aide...

With that being said if I could only have one (thankfully I am blessed with many P-cars, love them all!) it would be an early car! Why? The original design is just so timeless and elegant, I find myself walking away from my early cars backwards... I also love the drive, the almost 1,000lb lower curb weight just radically changes the feel, steering on an early car is just surreal. That's not even getting me started on the charm and rev happy nature of a small displacement flat-6.

In terms of reliability and maintenance costs they have different needs. The early cars are simpler with way less systems, however parts are way more expensive and MUCH more difficult to find if you are looking for NOS/OEM parts. In general anything you need for a 993 is a quick call to Sunset away. I think it's about a toss up.

A 67 "S" is an amazing machine but $100k while a lot of $$ doesn't go as car as you might think for one. It will buy one but nowhere near a top of market example, so it depends on what you want. Most of the ~$100k 67's don't excite me, more like $140k +++. Honestly I think good values are nice and well sorted 69-73 "E" cars. For less than that amount you can buy a damn nice car, that is great to drive and will appreciate.

[fryardds]

Very good advice. I was thinking the same thing about looking for a super nice E model for the budget you mention. Have you driven any Early 911s yet? Hopefully you will be able to drive a really good example to know what you looking for. What part of the country are you in?

I sold a really nice '96 Carrera (that I had for several years) about 10 years ago and went looking for an RS. I wasn't unhappy with the 993 at all I just thought an RS would be a really fun car to own for all the reasons mentioned above. The RS had some expensive needs initially in the form of a needed suspension and engine rebuild. Once those were done the maintenace has been just in the form of routine stuff. Take your time and look for a very good car.

[whatizname]

I am right with you on your thinking - See an earlier post I did:

http://www.early911sregistry.org/for...ng-some-dreads

I loved my 993 but I was more concerned with keeping the miles off of it than I was driving it. I was a beautiful low mileage example '95 that was a thrill to drive, but there were some things that I would have liked to change, but dare not. (read: adversely affect value) I think that cars are meant to be driven, and P cars especially. My new 911T is a '72, and although wanting to modify it some a la R gruppe, I still feel it would not affect value dramatically.

Go for it I say!

[4n6md]

Thanks so much for all the comments and suggestions-genuinely appreciated, and glad to know that I am not the only one that has contemplated a move to a more vintage air cooled vehicle. I have yet to drive an early year car, so that will probably be the first order of business once the weather becomes a bit better suited, as I am in the NE. It is a bit discouraging to note that the better S cars are now above the 100K price point. As I am the kind of guy that tends to hold cars for a longer time frame, from a collectability standpoint would I be better off to up my budget and look for a targa version, as I note that those cars seem to be more highly valued? The car will primarily just see light weekend driving duties.

[graemel]

Personally the 'S' will always command the higher price. I suppose I cannot really comment as I have still not yet driven a swb car. I've owned a few 993's and they are great 911's. I suppose I have more experience of the 3.2 and can only comment that they are more involving to drive. No power steering or abs brakes etc. A much rawer experience and I imagine the swb to be more of the same with non servo brakes. I suggest you drive a few good examples of the marque and see if you like it.

[fryardds]

As I am the kind of guy that tends to hold cars for a longer time frame, from a collectability standpoint would I be better off to up my budget and look for a targa version, as I note that those cars seem to be more highly valued? The car will primarily just see light weekend driving duties.

My observation has been that, apart from the soft window Targas, that Coupes command a premium over Targas, all else being equal. It will be important for you to decide by driving each body style which one you prefer.

[setho]

I have both 1966 and 2000 911's.... The '66 is a relatively recent purchase.

They are fundamentally different cars. The 2000 is "get in and drive". It does everything pretty well. It's quick, handles well, brakes well and has good heat and air conditioning.

The '66 is a more visceral, more involved experience. No power steering or brakes. It handles well for a 45+ year old car, but it's easy to get in trouble with if you're not careful. Mine has a 2.7L in it, so it's got a bit more power. It's easy to bring out oversteer with a blip of the throttle. Because it handles well, you can drive faster than you probably should with the weakness of the brakes.

The '66 is harder to find parts for and generally more expensive to fix things. I've put almost nothing into the 2000.

I love both, but for very different reasons.