I'm thinking buying a used 911...

I'm thinking buying a used basic 911 C(2005-2008/low mileage/oval headlight) and would like to know which year has the least problems. Thanks....

2008 was the last year of the .1 series, while 2005 was the first. I'd go with the 2008 on the theory that they sorted out many of the early issues by that time.

Thanks for the reply. I saw quite a few old 911(2002-2004/C2, C4 & C4S) with very low mileage(no winter) -80,000 to 100,000km recently at a very attractive price. Should I put them into the consideration too ? What are the pitfall in buying older 911 ? I don't like the headlight of the 2005 or older 911. What were the Porsche designers thinking back then ?

You're talking about the 996, with the ugly headlights and there is a reason why they are at attractive prices. Personally I would go with either the so called last purist porsches which have awesome styling 964 (Early 90's) or 993 (Late 90's) or a 997 and avoid the 996. The 996 for me has not aged well in terms of styling, and they've had more issues than the 997 as far as I know. The 997 may be the last of the true rear engined, engine behind the rear axle, with the new 991 having the engine on the rear axle, but also the relatively simple interior of the 997 may provide more charm compared to the new model. If you compare the 996 to the 997 driving wise you may find it feels heavier (it will be slower but that goes without saying). The pitfalls are the same for any older car i.e. they are more likely to break, the difference being with Porsche is that it will cost more to repair. What do you exactly want from the car? If you don't need 4 seats have a drive of a Cayman as well just to mix things up.....you'll be surprised.

Hi, I would definitely go for an early 997, or a 993 if you wish to spend a little less and don't mind extra risk on potential maintenance issues. Both should involve minimal depreciation next 2-3 years. Avoid 996, doesn't even look right..... Thank you for hearing my 2 cents worth.

I have a 993, a '96 with under 30k miles. Love it to death but I need a SUV and have no room for it. Something has to go. This is gonna be tough. Anyway, the 993's are great cars. They were made 1995-1998. Quite a few changes came in '96 and little changed after that. The last of the air-cooled Porsches. Well built. Great sound. Plenty quick. Loads of torque. Fantastic brakes. Telepathic steering. You know, like the Cayman...only different! Like any Porsche, have a Pre Purchase Inspection (PPI) done at a Porsche dealer on any car you are interested in.

Hey Edle, buy Brad's car - it looks fantastic!

Love your car...the line of the 993 is ageless. It still looks very very modern and way better looking than the 996. I wish I have the $ now but thanks for the thought.

Keep doing your research. 993's are great cars. The S's and Turbo command the highest prices usually, but narrow bodied 993's are wonderful cars. Higher mileage cars can be good deals if they are maintained. These engines will last a long, long time if looked after. Leather can wear but trim and body is very robust. Have fun!

There is nothing wrong with any of the models. I looked at quite a few before i bought one and my 996 was just a deal to be had. Low miles and a quality car. i also drove every one i could get my hands on. The newer 996 and 997 drove the best IMHO and not any difference between the two that i could tell - though i am no formula one race driver they be able to tell. The 993 I think still looks the best and brings the highest price for what it is considering age and technology. Drive a few before you buy and see for yourself and make you own decision because only you can make yourself happy with whatever you buy.

I saw quite a few of 996 & newer 997 + old/new Boxster in the road lately since the weather is dry/hot. Actually the 996 looks really nice too, its headlights looks bad in fotos but in reality they look fine. I think all of them are great cars. Thanks for all the advices.

I recently traded my 2010 Boxster S for a 2005 Turbo S Cab. The TTS is in incredible condition inside and out with low miles and is an absolute beast on the road. Nothing wrong with a well maintained 996.

I'd go with the '05 997S, but that's just me. :burnout: A couple of cars in $50K range in my area, for example, are: '03 996 Turbo w/50K miles @ $49K and '06 997 Carrera S w/50K miles @ $47K. I've always found the old rule of " buy the newest you can afford " to work well. The PPI is vital also, as others have mentioned. At the end of the day, they're all good cars. Best of luck in your search! :cheers:

According to CR, go with a 2007. That's what I did-a base CPO coupe. Trouble free over 5 months of ownership.

Talked to a guy today with a 2004 911 Turbo for sale. He mentioned the car popped out of second gear when slowing (I think), noting this was regular problem on the turbos. Knowing Porsches, is this absolute BS? Sounds like a bad second gear synchro. Feff

Woah, wait what? Would you mind expanding on this a bit. This is the first time I'm hearing this and it's pretty major news. It also would confirm what we're seeing in this picture: Has this been discussed anywhere else?!

It would be very difficult to mount the engine on the rear wheels along with a transmission unless they went to a transverse arrangement.

Agreed, but I do wonder if they have somehow managed to shift it so that the weight is evenly spread across the rear axle somehow instead of the majority being behind it....... Anyway, this should be another thread.