Jump to content

Potential newbie questions


Solstice

Recommended Posts

Guys, be gentle, I’ve been considering replacing the Caterham with a 3.2, I really fancy a classic after several lotus’s and most recently a 981 spider.

I’ve been doing my due diligence (mostly spending hours on YouTube!) what I don’t quite understand is that the stock 3.2 doesn’t necessarily get great reviews, where as the CS gets great ones, from what I can see the difference between the 2 cars is pretty negligible, and I’m sure a few choice mods would see the stock car out perform the CS.

Am I missing something? The Evo review rated the 3.0 and the 964 but not the 3.2 which sort of surprised me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have owned 964's, 993's, 3.2's and SC's. Ignore the reviews and drive some cars, see what resonates with you.

One 3.2 will drive massively different from the next, the cars are old and how they have been maintained will make a big difference to the experience. 

Returning to classic 911 ownership 2 years ago I wanted a 3.2 and eventually bought an SC. Its fairly modded and makes me smile more than any other 911 I have owned.

If you have owned a Caterham and like a raw feel then you are right to look at impact bumper cars.

Lastly yes you could easily make a 3.2 drive like a CS. Weight, suspension and brakes will potentially make it drive better!

If you are near Surrey happy to take you out in a sorted impact bumper.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try a 3.2 for yourself. I tried an SC and a 964 before I bought mine. I also tried a dodgy 3.2 which was the worst of the three. When I tried the one I bought it was absolutely the best of the lot - personal preference of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks chaps, just trying to get a feel for things before I start the slog of finding the right car, we moved to west Wales a couple of years ago it’s beautiful and there are great roads, but one thing I didn’t consider is how difficult it would make things like car buying (I bought a Cayenne privately from a chap in Woking recently, it was a 10 hour round trip to view and another to buy, which means you need to be sure the car is pretty much right before viewing)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone gets something slightly different from classic cars. 
For me, I particularly like open top Targa motoring and the technical challenges. Others will aspire to the ‘church of the lightweight’ and make it as fast as possible. 
I guess decide what’s important to you too. The 3.2 comes with the G50 gearbox which is often seen as more sought after, given its easier to operate and more reliable.

Eitherway, would suggest you return to this forum - in my 13 years of ownership I have only seen active, credible, and helpful advice here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All 3.2s are not the same and a lot of the reviews are regurgitated BS that do not reflect real use/ownership.

Today, condition is the biggest factor. A tired old dog is a tired old dog regardless of breed.

If absolute authenticity is not a worry then a car owned by an enthusiast who has made a few mods is a good starting place.

Going back to 3.2s. They started much lighter with less luxurious appointments and ended heavier and more comfortable.

For example, the only difference between an SC and an early 3.2 (upto around '85) is the engine, an oil cooler on the gbox, slightly bigger brakes with rear proportioning valve and footwell heater blowers. After this the seats and some interior parts changed, then rear chassis was changed to accommodate the larger G50 gbox and more luxury was added all resulting in a weight increase. The biggest driver perceived change was however probably the big increase in understeer dialed in by the factory to make the "safer" which can be corrected (if not already done) with a decent geo set up.

Mark

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given your location it may be worth trying to catch up with Haith @Busybee 

He's gained plenty of experience with IB's recently and seems to have a group of fellow enthusiasts around him who may also be able to guide you - even if it's just Speed Camera Locations!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Solstice said:

(mostly spending hours on YouTube!)

Be careful of this as well. A lot of YouTube is US centric and their 3.2s are different again.

As well as having less power (lower compression ratio, cat, etc) they were even heavier (enormous rear bumperettes, front bumper oil cooler protector, etc. and most likely AC), so not as lively as most ROW cars.

A lot of US cars, although not all, do not suffer from the same corrosion issues as bedevil UK cars and so this aspect is not always highlighted as a big issue in the US.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buy on condition alone.  Little difference between an SC and 3.2 in the real world.  You notice this on road trips, we all get there at the same time, full of enthusiasm for each others cars.  You do get a little more mpg from a 3.2 if that's your thing.  Also all SCs will now be MOT and tax exempt, certainly by the end of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Nige said:

Also all SCs will now be MOT and tax exempt, certainly by the end of the year.

Unfortunately, not quite on the tax (and ULEZ!!!).

Mine just turned 40 so no more MOTs, but needs tax until after April next year.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/07/2023 at 20:31, gt two said:

I have owned 964's, 993's, 3.2's and SC's. Ignore the reviews and drive some cars, see what resonates with you.

One 3.2 will drive massively different from the next, the cars are old and how they have been maintained will make a big difference to the experience. 

Returning to classic 911 ownership 2 years ago I wanted a 3.2 and eventually bought an SC. Its fairly modded and makes me smile more than any other 911 I have owned.

If you have owned a Caterham and like a raw feel then you are right to look at impact bumper cars.

Lastly yes you could easily make a 3.2 drive like a CS. Weight, suspension and brakes will potentially make it drive better!

If you are near Surrey happy to take you out in a sorted impact bumper.

Excellent advice,

Either cars are good to drive once sorted, so if you get an offer of a drive in each, then I strongly suggest you do that first before making a final decision.

Good luck. 

Edited by Ant7
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would buy on

  • RHD (unless you want a LHD)
  • condition
    • straight (no accident damage)
    • either things to do known (i. rust) or already sorted before hand
    • decent engine/gearbox
  • history
  • HPI clear
  • genuine mileage (but also any genuine mileage up to 300k)
  • number of owners
  • colour combo (i.e silver paint with red interior, etc)
  • matching number (original engine)
  • sport over non sport (unless you want a non-sport)
  • manual over sportomatic (unless you want a sportomatic)
  • Price of course

If at the end of all of that it ended up being any SC or 3.2 I wouldn't think any further. Sure the 3.2 G50's are more desirable, so if you had two cars in a dead heat I would choose the 3.2 G50, but otherwise I would be more than happy with any 1974 to to 1989. I suppose I would be less intrested in a 2.7, or a non galvanised pre 76), but I would absolutely have a 75 to 77 3.0 carrera over a 3.2 every day of the week, and twice on sundays. Ive been lucky enough to own a 911 from every year in the 1970's except for 1 year. So i guess I really like 70's 911-s lol. 

Regardless enjoy, they are beautiful well built machines, and I am hooked for life on air cooled 911s. If thats what you want, you wont regret it. 

Edited by Strictly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went from a 1988 3.2 Targa with G50 gearbox to a 1982 SC Coupe with the 915 gearbox. They are very different cars both in terms of the gear change characteristics but also in terms of the character of the engine. You really should try an example of each if you have the opportunity.

The SC feels much more 'old school' which I prefer and the 3.0 engine feels zingier compared to the 3.2. It's all down to personal preference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lesworth said:

The SC feels much more 'old school' which I prefer and the 3.0 engine feels zingier compared to the 3.2.

Ah, Zing ! - must be IB Friday ! :)

zing-logo-header.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/07/2023 at 09:51, Roy M said:

Given your location it may be worth trying to catch up with Haith @Busybee 

He's gained plenty of experience with IB's recently and seems to have a group of fellow enthusiasts around him who may also be able to guide you - even if it's just Speed Camera Locations!

Cheers Roy and hi @Solstice. I’m in mid wales and I hear you. Nothing is close to us 🤦‍♂️

I’ve had both 3.2’s and SC’s and quite honestly in their original format the SC is my favourite of the two. Zingy motor. Feel a little more raw. 

My first aircooled Porsche was a 77 SC targa which I still have. Guards red, recently restored. Had to drive it home with a cushion behind my back as the seats didn’t get restored unfortunately 🤦‍♂️ Great car. Handles really well considering it has nothing but stock parts and an exhaust. Motor is a peach. Sadly I don’t drive it a great deal these days. Other cars, lots going on.

Happy to chat to you and show you some cars if you’re not too far away. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...