996 Turbo vs 996 40 Jahre

I'm currently looking at upgrading my 996 C4, the main reason being I would love a manual tranny again. With a budget of up to £28,000 maximum, I'm undecided as to what the best route to take is. I've got myself together two options. a) Purchase a 2004 996 40th Anniversary with 50,000 miles and 3 year warranty. or b) Purchase a 2000 996 Turbo with 80,000 miles and a 1 year warranty. As my C4 is an automatic 296bhp car with perhaps some drivetrain losses from the AWD system, I know that there will be a very noticeable power change when upgrading to the 345bhp 40th Ann, alongside slightly better handling and feedback (due to the RWD, probably superior as I only ever drive the car in dry conditions). But , is it worth paying the same price for a far higher mileage, older and less clean Turbo example? Also, I've heard that there are less than 100 996 40th Anniversary's in the UK, would this slow the cars depreciation time as opposed to the Turbo? All-in-all, which route would be the best to take? Cheers Paul

These days, if you look around, £28000 will probably get you a 2001 or 2002 Turbo wth around 60000 miles. No contest. Drive one and you'll be convinced. Something like this perhaps: http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/1547873.htm

Are you buying it for the money or the driving pleasure.... I'm sure that will answer the question for you... [&:] garyw

Good point; however, my original plan was to buy a 40 Jahre and keep it for four or so years while it holds it's value, then purchase a young and clean 996 Turbo example as they depreciate past the 40th Anniversary. Now am I being realistic here, or am I living in fairy tale land? Of course, you're not biased Richard [ ] I've already driven my brothers 996 Turbo S, unbelievable [ ] Am I right in thinking that it has 489bhp? Many are advertised as having the same power output as the Turbo X50; 450bhp...

Hi Paul I run a 40th Anniversary car, I too wanted a turbo (S) having driven one BUT I had a good friend who has run a C2, a C4 and a Turbo S, the cost of running and maintenance on the turbo was prohibitive when compared to the "normal" C2. My car is an 04 with 50k on the clock, full dealer history (used indies after I bought it - Wrightune are very good, as are RPM in Cheddington if you live in the Bucks/Berks/Oxon area). I purchased mine 2 years ago for £35k and it is now worth as you have discovered, about 28k, so not bad on depreciation in my opinion, recall there were somewhere around 280-300 40th cars that came into the UK, so a pretty rare beast, I believe Turbo's (sorry Richard!) are a little more common that that.... It seems from his amazing tech knowledge, that Richard is pretty self sufficient when it comes to maintenance so his running cost experience will perhaps not be the same as someone like me who knows to check levels,and do very basic stuff. If I look at service costs here are some comparisons (this for Turbo not TurboS, I don't know if they would be more or not): My 40th at an indie ( I rang and checked): prices inc VAT Turbo Costs underneath 12k £253 £327 24k £419 £698 48k £547 £901 96k £703 (M)/904 (Tip) £1023 (M)/1237 (Tip). Clutch: £836 £1163 cheers mark

Mark, thanks for those prices, it does seem the Turbo costs a fair bit more to maintain! I thought that only the manual tranny was available on the 40th's? Mmm, I think the 40th Anniversary would be the sensible option. Besides, it should still feel like a huge step up - the increase from around 270 to 340 bhp being put down on the road will be felt, I'm sure! I just think it'd just be better to have a very nice condition 40th Anniversary, young, low mileage and with a warranty - something that I would feel really satisfied with and keep for a long, long time. If after a few years I feel the need to change, then Turbo it is! But at the moment 345bhp is enough power for our roads, especially for me as most of the cars time would usually be spent on B/A-roads, whist it is still capable of reaching 150+ without breaking a sweat if need be. Am I correct in thinking that the post-2003 996's have strengthened headers/cams? Would this reduce the risk of an engine faliure? Cheers Paul

I don't find the Turbo that much more to maintain. Sure, the spark plug change is a lot more work, but a 12000 service is basically the same on both. The 24K is more expensive, as I said, but my indie charges £525 for a 48k service. (Mark - I think you might want to look at Wrightune's service pricing!) The performance figures don't tell the whole story either. For A/B road runs the Turbo is fantastic. The overtaking ability is what really shows. If used sensibly, it gets past almost anything so quickly that it makes it effortless. Of course I am biased, but I am not poo-pooing the Carrera in any way. They are just different. I always had an itch for a Turbo, and I finally got a chance to scratch it. Agreed they aren't as rare as the Anniversary Edition, but I'm not sure either will hold their value any better than the other. The C4S is the one which has the desirability factor, and the prices of those haven't been immune.

Hi Richard I thought you might respond I did look at Tony's prices but they do say Updated 25/03/2008 in the bottom right hand corner of the "modern" v classic porsche. I wondered if his prices had increased since then? I have used Tony and I think he is excellent, I will be calling him tomorrow anyway to see what his 2010 prices are.

If you look at the downloadable document it shows as 04/04/2009. They are the up-to-date prices.

I think I'll have to test drive both the standard 996 Turbo and the 40th Anniversary Carrera to see which way I go. Am I correct in thinking that the post-2003 Carrera's have strengthened headers/cams? Would this reduce the risk of an engine faliure? Cheers Paul

I'm not sure what you mean by headers and cams. The manifolds (headers) don't cause problems (apart from the mounting studs rusting) and the camshafts themselves don't tend to be problematic either. If you mean the intermediate shaft for the camshaft drive, then I believe it was the same shaft used in all 3.6 Carreras. It isn't a common failure, but it isn't immune. The only failure I can recall on this forum was on Rob Kellock's 3.6.

Paul, What about option c)... a (maybe-slightly-leggy) 997 ? There have been a few for sale in the 28K to 30K bracket recently, such as this one... http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/1549449.htm which looked rather yum at that price, especially as it had the all-important sports-chrono and sports exhaust and only 55K miles! Just a thought? Oh and please don't ban me from the 996 forum ;-)

Yes, but as the ad says it is a 1954 model, it is nearly as old as me!! [ ]

... are you sure that doesn't just mean it's only running on 3.25 cylinders?

I read (somewhere, I think on Rennlist) that post-2003 996's have strengthened headers/camshafts, but I couldn't see why, so thanks for explaining that, appears they don't. Diesel130, I'd much rather have a 996 Anniversary than the 997 C2. From what I have read the 997 C2 feels lazy and has a sloppy throttle response as opposed to the 996 Anniversary with the raw X51 engine - 345bhp vs 321bhp. The only reason I'd consider it would be for the interior, but that is low down on my priorities list! [ ] Thanks for the suggestion though. Richard, is there some sort of strengthened IMS bearing that can replace the original IMS out there? Cheers Paul

Your best bet is to talk to Barry Hart at Hartech. He has more experience of this issue than most, and some innovative solutions to strengthen the engine.

+1 Baz is your man - do a search on PH, where he regularly discusses those issue.

I have a Turbo S and am pretty certain that it should be 450bhp but I am sure I read something that said the 996 Turbo S was 489bhp. Can anyone confirm?

Terry! It is a matter of some debate about the power output of the Turbo S. If you look at the brochure (on the FAQ pages) it states that it is 450bhp. However, in the engine codes list, and the option code for X50, on the PET, it shows 331/340kW (450/462bhp). 462 was the 'standard' output for the GT2 engines for MY2001-2004, which increased to 489 for MY2005. My first thought was that the X50 option outputs referred to USA/RoW, but I now think that 450 refers to Turbo X50, and 462 to GT2. What I would like to know from anyone with a GT2 - does it have an X50 option code on the VIL?

IMO the 40th Anniversary might be rare, but I doubt if the layman could spot the difference from the outside/inside unless you told them, it's just not different enough to warrant being sought after in it's own right (unlike the C4S). It's also a watercooled car, and tarnished with the same 'oversupply' brush, so I only see prices creeping lower over the next few years. Although we all like to say, 'This one's a keeper' we rarely stick to it [ ] You will soon be looking for the next faster better thing, and you've already got your eye on a turbo. So you will always be thinking, hmm should I have bough the turbo instead? Or 'Shall I get that turbo now or next year'? etc. The minute you face one at the lights/motorway and know your car is no match you will be dissapointed. Save yourself the money/faff in buying and selling twice and get the turbo now. It is in an entirely different league preformance wise. I once raced one off the lights in my Carrera 4, I might as well have been in a Lada, it left me for dead. It really is the performance car bargain of the decade, devastatingly fast, and very comfortable pootling round town. Every person on the street knows about the 911 turbo, it is the stuff of legend, wouldn't you like to own one? [ ]

Ive read this thread with interest and having been fortunate enough to have a Carrera, C4S and now a Turbo S in the last 5 years thought you'd like to hear my experience Carrera - Handling was superb and very pure with power through the rears, on the twisties came alive in the dry, on the motorway the front end felt a little floaty. Wasn't a huge fan of the narrow body shape. I had PSE retrofitted but didn't like the cut out a low speeds. Fabulous car though a real drivers car. C4S - Felt much more planted on the road, front end noticably heavier, not quite as sharp on the twisties but more than capable. Looks to die for at the rear and front end much smarter too, (I think the 40 Jahre has the same front end does it not) PSE fitted retrospectively on this too but this time either on or off via the dash switch and no low speed cut out. Turbo S - To be honest never thought I'd own one but got a good deal on the C4S and the Turbo and Turbo S are such good value it'd have been rude not to.[ ] Car is lighter to drive than the C4S, ceramics and hollow spoke wheels help in this respect and is noticable at lower speeds. Car is blisteringly quick when you want it to be or can still be driven normally, I echo Richard's comments on the overtaking ability. Wide body and air intakes appeal to me as does the rear end though not quite as nice as the 4S red strip. Exhaust note nowhere near as addictive as the PSE on previous cars and no Porsche option. Basic spec on the Turbo S is pretty good with most boxes ticked as standard. In all 3 cases running costs have been comparable, no major items gone as yet (touch wood), What I would say is that when I got each car I thought I'd keep them, but got the itch to move up quicker than I thought, the current car is not a daily driver so fully intend this one stays in my ownershiplonger, and so does my wife. If it were me in your position, Turbo, that'll save you going through the changes I did. All very nice cars and you won't be disappointed with any though if you're like me you'll always wonder what's the Turbo like if you don't go down that route, Hope this helps. Ash

+1 I totally agree with Rodney.I was going round the factory when they were talking up the 911 40th Jahre car I was left completly underwhelmed.It appeared to be yet another blatant exercise by Mr Porsche to rope in few more quid on the back of this exclusivity thing. On the same factory visit they took us round the Weissach test track in 3 cars one of which was a turbo To this day i have never been driven in a car faster and made to do more seemingly impossible things,I was sold hook line and sinker The amazing thing the guy driving us didnt look like his pulse went above 60 What I realised then is it would be impossible to exceded the limits of the car and .... I need driving lessons Go on get the Turbo,you know you want to I agree with Richard though you should be able to get more for your money

Richard It's a shame you felt underwhelmed, I have to say I don't feel that way at all, I made a choice in a relatively rare 911, and it has given nothing but pleasure since I came into it's ownership, I was merely trying to offer an opinion from someone who had one of the cars being asked about. I did in fact have the <pleasure> of driving a 997 Turbo for a week after a 17 year old rolled her car back down an incline into the front of my car after one day of ownership! I would agree that the driving experience is totally different and naturally much quicker (the 997TT offers 480bhp if I recall correctly). I also have a friend who is a 911 devotee who had the same car as you do now, his cost of ownership experience was considerably higher than mine is currently. I will perhaps one day step into the Turbo and thus get a more rounded 911 ownership experience. In the meantime I will enjoy what I have, as the summer approaches (said with a certain amount of trepidation) I shall relish the thought of driving through the roads of Bucks/Berks/Oxon...now if only I can find a pothole avoidance device, there are some around my area that could swallow a 911 whole!

Sorry Mark wasnt trying to dish your choice or be offensive As with all these things they are subjective If you are happy with what you have, you are happy

The 345bhp > 1370kg of the 40th is more desirable to me than the (excluding AWD losses) 316bhp > 1500kg of the C4S. I've just been looking at some Turbo's - some nice ones out there for £28,000 - but I'd like a good warranty/FPSH if I'm spending this kind of money on a car. If a nice example at a reputable garage comes up I'll take it. But at the moment I'm thinking the 40th is still the way to go - my brother used to have an MkII 996 C4, felt (alot) faster than my current MkI C4. I'm sure an MkII X51 car without AWD losses would be far from underwhelming moving from an MkI C4! I think the only way this can be solved is from test drives - if the 40th feels faster than my brothers C4 did, I'll be more than happy! I'll definitely have a hunt for a good Turbo though.

So I recently went to a dealers to have a look at the 40th they had in stock there. I must say I fell in love instantly, the GT Silver is a beautiful colour in the flesh, and the interior was simply stunning! However, I didn't test drive the car, as I need to sell mine first - up for sale now. Saying that, the one there looked a bit suspect - it had plenty of dried out oil on the surface of the engine bay, and oil flicks on the underside of the car. Am I being stupid to think that the X51 cars should have the aluminum air snorkel? The one on the 40th I saw was plastic.

AFAIK the 996 x51 kit uses the same air box as any other 3.6 996. So the standard plastic parts. Although the inlet manifold is certainly different. The 996 x51 engine The 997 x51 kit as fitted to the 3.8 has a very nice carbon dual snorkel air box that several people have fitted to their non-X51 997 (it's cheaper than many of the aftermarket CAI (cold air intakes)) 997 x51 dual snorkel air box

That is very nice indeed.