why is the 993 worth so much more than a 996?

spare me the diatribes about the 993's air cooled pedigree and "last of the air cooled era" blah, blah, blah. i get that. is that all there is too it? i love a purist's car. but there has to be more to it. and no, i wouldn't dump my 996 for a 993 if i could afford one. unless it's a C4S. maybe.

Not only that-- also production numbers.

My experience; when I went looking for a newer car I too was drawn by the 993 hype. So I drove a C4S and a Turbo and immediately thought too much like the 930. Then I drove my first 996 C4S and thought instantly that it seemed right. I then drove another and then a standard 996 then a 996 cab. Well I took my DEPOSIT off the 993 and bought the 04 C4S without even telling my wife. I have not looked back and that was in Feb of this year. I took back everything I said about the 996 that I thought I heard from people that obviously did not know what they were talking about. I found the 996 S car to be superior to the 993. PLUS it has a really cool cup holder!

SO...When will you tell your wife?

there are a lot of 996 out there...a lot!. did I mention a lot!

bernocco, had the exact same experience. loved my 95 C2 but bills mounting. reluctant to buy a 996. then i drove a C4S. loved it. then drove a 996 C2 and found it light steering and no match for the C4S. been living happily ever after with my 03 C4S.

I'm afraid we can't answer this question without considering the diatribes...

I think the issue is the market....its the best judge of value...and that can be defined in any number of ways...I do think the later (water cooled, non dry sump) cars are nearly ideal for 95% of the Porsche buying public...however...Just one guys opinion...Jerry

They gave a Nobel prize to an economist a few years ago for proving that value is subjective and that markets are not 'ultimately wise'. 993s are worth more than most 996s because the people who bought them said they are.

I love that! Dont forget the 996 is " Not a real Porsche"

This is easy without diatribes but hard with most b/c for some reason there is a great deal of snobbery (not warranted) by the 993 crowd. There is an articficial hype created by those that tout the "air-cooled" angle. They don't want to come to grips with the fact that air cooled is WAY behind the times and water cooled is a huge leap in engine advancement. Second, production numbers. Up until the 996 there was not alot of p-cars made (like the 996). Simple supply and demand. The 996 IS a better car, an evolution of technology, reliability, etc, etc, etc. Do I love the 993? Absolutely. As well, I love just about every single variant of a p-car. I own 2 996's and absolutely love them both. However, I will buy another one at some point soon. It will probably be a 993 or 964. As me if I will ever get rid of my CAB or GT3. NOT A CHANCE!

Agree 101%. Most people seem to forget that the aircooled engines was invented by Prof. Ferdinand at the VW times, because the majority of Germans didn't have money to keep they'r car in a garage; so the water radiators would freeze in winter time damaging the engines.

You're right. That's why you are selling yours.

Here's a quick funny story. I was instructing a couple weeks back and my student had a 993. Beautiful car and as we were coming back into the pits he says "oil temp looks great" and that was it. I was puzzled for a second and ask him as I leaned over to look at his gauges and not seeing "engine temp (ie, coolant)" I asked him how do you know you engine coolant temp? It took a split second and we busted up laughing from my stupidity

Haha...not your fault. Your mind was ahead of time

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/thumbup.gif

Easy there. The bottom end of that old fashioned air-cooled car is more or less the basis of many of the higher end 996s and (I think 997s). It is a more robust piece. Let me say that I'm a 993 owner who really likes 996s (especially the C4S and GT3). All this air-cooled vs. water-cooled snobbery we see from time to time is ridiculous. As an owner of a 993, I am delighted that the 996, 997, 986, and even the Cayenne have been successful. This success has enabled Porsche to remain viable and independent. Certaining a good thing. The 993s are special cars. While the average run of the mill 996 is a better performing car, I'm not sure I'd call it simply better. I think you all would admit that the later cars are built to a price. In other words, we have lost some neat things - the way the door sounds when you close it, the gurgling of the oil, returning to the oil tank, etc. This is all great stuff. On the other hand, we've really progressed. The later cars are certainly great cars. I think one of the main drivers of value has to due with evolution. The 993s are the last of the line. Some may argue the best of the bunch. The 996 started a new line. The 997 has improved on the 996 (at least in my opinion). Therefore, as 964s have lesser value than 993s (and I believe in the future the gap will widen), 996s will likely follow in the path of the 997. Given a choice, I'd much rather have a 997 than a comparable 996. To my eyes the 997 is better looking with a nicer interior. However, this certainly doesn't make the 996 a bad car - just not as valuable on the used car market. The good news (for me at least) is that my next daily driver will be a 996. They are a fantastic value. Cheers

I should have said 996 will follow in the path of the 964 (not 997). Oops.

Joe, you just confirmed the ignorance of the 993 camp. I don't care how you look at it, the 996 is a better car hands down. It is more reliable, cheaper to maintain, more advanced technology, etc, etc, etc.. Do I love the 993's? Of course. Is the body sexy with those curves? Hell yea. But better in terms of performance and reliability. Not even close. Trust me, while PAG wants to make a buck they don't go backwards in ANY category (except maybe styling). Now go enjoy your door closing Come back with what you want as my flame suit is on. But I will not be dragged into the delusions of the 993 camp. It really is amazing that EVERYBODY but 993 owners realize there are other cars in the Porsche lineup other than the 993. Not quite sure where it started or where it came from but it really is quite comical.

There's a 993 camp? Cool, I love camping. Gotta go pack.... let's see... I think I need my archaic thinking, ignorance, alleged arrogance, and... hmm... oh yeah, can't forget my snobbery. Don't leave home without it. Geez. Some folks have a lot of ego invested in their cars.... almost funny. Almost. Porsche makes many great cars... old and new, oil and water cooled. Why all of the chest thumping? Odd. Oh, and some of my best friends drive 996s... lol (that is a "hey I'm not a racist" reference, humor intended)

i like both

Dell, I sincerely think you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. Did you read my post? Perhaps you need to go back and read it more slowly. I think you'll find that I agree the 996 is a better car in many ways. But not in every way. No ignorance or delusions here. My point is that we did lose some things along the way. That's all. And, I did mention that my next car will likely be a 996, didn't I? Not sure how you can read this and then comment that 993 owners do not realize there are other cars in the Porsche lineup other than the 993. For the record, I think most Porsches (save the 924) are great. Seems as you (as a 996 owner) are the one with a chip on your shoulder. In response to my post praising the 996 while offering a possible reason why they depreciate, you call 993 owners (including me) ignorant. Let you in on a little secret - I'm not the one who looks bad here...... Cheers

maybe I overaccentuated your statements however you never actually are willing (nor is the majority of the 993 camp) to admit that the 996 is an evolution of the P-Car lineage. If I offended you or read to "fast" my apologies. I have re-read your post and see that you made some fair assessments, some being the operative term, so I think it is time to let it rest. This is a political type discussion. Nobody is going to convince anybody on the other side of their stance.

Come on, isn't camping fun? My wife loves it as well. Her version of camping is a hotel that doesn't have room service Seriously, ALL the damn cars are great. Even those 924's

The 993 was the last of the old...The 996 is the first of the new. Well made old stuff is always worth more than well made new stuff. I've had both (plus four other older 911). The 993 was my favorite. It had all the charm (Real VDO gauges, hang pedals that made you sit a bit sideways, HVAC controls only Albert Einstien could figure out, and a stereo system made for deaf people.) The plus side, easy and cheap to mod, suspension, ECU, tails, spoilers and other body mod galore. Also much easier to work on. The higher maintenance claims are only half right. You take it in twice as much but it only cost half as much for service. I first saw the 996 at the autoshow in LA. One look and a swore i'd never buy one. 7 years later i bought a 03 996TT. Why?? because they are such a screaming value on the used market. Have no shame in your game. Any Porsche is worth owning.

Air cooled cars are cool anachronistic devices. Air cooled cars are unlike any other on the road, they are a pure throwback to the early 20th century. Real old fashioned stuff. In the case of the 993 owner - he has a right to be snobby because his old fashioned stanley steamer performs *almost* as well as the more modern cars we own, and performs *better* then 90% of the other cars on the road. Back in my air cooled days I'd delight in running circles around more modern cars, and I'd do so with a smug "my car is an antique and it's still faster than yours, an oh have you heard how strange it sounds?" attitude. 993's are worth more than the 996 because they are more interesting cars. They always will be, and deservedly so. They contain technology you will never again see on a production car. I loved my air coole d911, and will probably buy one again some day (like when I'm retired) and I will relish the odd way it's put together. 993's most defintely do not perform better than the 996, nor is anyone here suggesting they do. Performance alone does not determine value. It's only one factor, and in this case a minor one.

I think that's part of it. They are very interesting cars to a geeky engineer like me and I think this combines with basic supply and demand. Being fortunate enoough to be an owner of an '87 Carrera and a 996 let me put my perspective on it. The demand... To the die hard enthusiast the Porsche 911 is something sacred. It was conceived as a relatively simple and light weight sports car. Some will argue that the original 911 ended in 1989 with the '84-'89 3.2 Carrera. Some will tell you that even those are not true to the original concept and they have too many gadgets to add weight. Others will say the 993 is the final 'pure' Porsche. Of course this is all subjective, but there are people who just want a 'classic' air cooled Porsche. I suppose this is actually helped by the guys who insist that a 911 must be air cooled. Call them snobby if you like, but they are probably pretty smart as their attitude is maintaining the mystique surrounding their cars. Basically the enthusiasts are the ones driving the demand, defining a 'classic' 911 to the guy who's looking for a 'classic' 911. Of course there are those of us who see any Porsche 911 as a Porsche 911, and the 996 is a stunning 911. Of course there is still a demand for these too. Ask any guy in the street if he'd want a 911 and what's he going to say? But it is a different market, less controlled if you like, and the used 996 is having to compete on the used car lot with other sports and luxury cars. The supply... The 993 wasn't produced in anything like the numbers in which the 996 was produced. Even when new I would guess that the 993 was going to be a car that someone would buy and keep for years. The 996 on the other hand made a great high end lease or company car. These don't tend to be kept very long and sooner or later end up back on the market when they get traded in for a new Mercedes. So not only were there fewer 993's about in the first place, but of those that are out there relatively few end up on the market. Just search the internet and see how many 993's are for sale compared to 996's. I would virtually guarantee that the 993 to 996 ratio is at least 1 to 15, probably more. So to address the original question. A 993 is worth more than a 996 because there is a niche demand for the relatively few 993's that are available, whereas there are plenty of used 996's that have to be priced to appeal to a far wider demographic of customer. As a side note, the whole air cooled thing is an interesting concept. There is no doubt in my mind that the air cooled car's evolution is an engineering epic. But it got to the point where it was impractical to develop it further while meeting regulations and remaining competitive in the sports carmarket. To keep up with the competition Porsche needed to keep increasing power output and maintaining relaibilty without spending a fortune on exotic materials. The only realistic option that Porsche had was to switch to water cooled engines to increase efficiency. The air cooled guys can bash this as long as they want, but if Porsche hadn't changed I don't believe they would have survived as an automaker. Change is inevitable, like it or not, and Porsche has continuously evolved the 911 line throughout its history. Without the change the 911 wouldn't have been around as long as it has and wouldn't be the icon it still is today. It doesn't matter to the general public how the engine is cooled the 911, 964, 993, 996 and 997 are all 911's. They are seen seen as something special and every new 911 always will be as long as Porsche are willing to continue to evolve the car. Like it or not, the 911 probably wouldn't have survived much longer had Porsche not switched to water cooled engines. Which would you prefer?

Aerkuld6, good analysis (though I always chuckle at the air cooled/water cooled distinction. All engines are air cooled). Porsche historians will be happy to remind us that the 356 clan was up in arms when the 911 arrived. Not a 'real Porsche', apparently.

Keep in mind that the liquid cooled issue is not an issue. All 911s have been liquid cooled from the beginning. So, the 993 is not that far removed from the 996. Porsche has always believed in improving the line. They also have the business savy to turn themselves into a viable manufacturer who can remain independent amongst all those who failed along the way. I appreciate the fact that Porsche has gotten smarter along the way. I can say that I am happy to have cut my teeth on Porsches before driving Porsches was considered cool. (I started in 1974). But I sure as hell like their latest offereings! They are a vast improvement over the 964 and 993. The next time some yahoo gives you crap about his "air-cooled" Porsche just run up the window, turn up the a/c and move on down the highway. There are few of the older 911s that have adequate a/c to handle the Central Valley summers of California or Oklahoma on an August afternoon. Personally, I'd rather be comfortable! Let them maintain that they are 'air-cooled.' Guys,--they're all liquid-cooled. Always have been. If you do a thermal analysis of ANY 911 the majority of heat dissipation is due to OIL and not AIR pulling the heat off the engine.

There's just a lot more 996s than 993s Simple, done, good nite Let's say it was the reverse... you guys really think peeps would spend more for the the older, slower, more dated 993 than the 996? Hell no.

well, when I think of value and worth, all I have to do is look at that smile on my face in the rear view when I slip through a few twisties...

The issue air vs. water is interesting but ridiculous at the same time. I really enjoy and appreciate the 993guys fundamentalism. It is funny, and honestly i think that is a good and healthy thing. I say this without any sarcasm and I respect everyone here at this board. And I really love the 993. In terms of aesthetics it is in fact a winner generation. The number 1 generation, maybe. However for many justifications they give the 993 is a worst car than the 996 or the 997. The 993 and other previous Porsches are getting old and they look old. And feel old. For me every 911 is special. Some models better than other�s (like the RS for ex.) However state that the 993 Type is in generally more special than other Types IMHO is a mistake. I once ride in a 993 4S and the car felt like a pig. A big one. Beautiful but heavy and slow. Before bashing the 996 please get a key�

Sorry bro, but it's all about who's got more ***** and skills than the car there

It's the headlights. I've noticed that some 993 owners skip the 996 claiming that the 996 is water-cooled, mass-produced, etc. etc... HOWEVER, you see them turn around and buy a 997, which in itself is water-cooled and relatively mass-produced. But why, you ask? It's the headlights.

well it is the last of the air cooled cars....it is much nicer looking....it is made much,much,better...it does not look like a boxster....no cheap plastic...sounds better...feels more like a german sports car(not japanese)....more fun to drive...most will say its a proper porsche..engines dont blow up...

please let us know which models in the entire P-Car line had engines that "blow up". Never understood assinine comments like that without empirical evidence. Just another anectodal follower.

well dell,did 993's have issues that resulted in engine failure...no,yes valve guide issues that are corrected...i had 2 boxsters that had rms issues..1 needed a new engine..i have had 4 friends with 996s..3 of them needed new engines and ALL 4 had rms issue..what i meant by blow up is engine failure..sorry about that..please dont attack ""assinine comment""..its not cool..

not buying a NYC apartment and not buying a 993 in the mid 90's. The two biggest mistakes I have ever made. Could have had both for less than $250K back then and today they would have a combined value of $800K - $1Million today. as far as "simply" lesser numbers of 993's vs. 996 argument: Sounds right in theory but why aren't 914's and 944 ultra expensive? Its not just about the raw numbers on paper or reliability. There is a mystique about the 993 and 928 which is being rewarded in the market. late 60's 356's are also creeping into six figure territory.

Have you actually ever read a post before replying? My sentence was about the the concept of value and worth... it is not about money, air cooled, water cooled, etc. Most of us buy these cars because they are fun and feel good to drive. Why don't you go back and look at your posts and what percentage of them has something plainly negative or some kind of back handed compliment?? Whats your point?

Hate to let facts intrude on a talmudic debate like this, but a couple of things: Porsche sold somewhere around 80,000 993s in four years, one of their hottest sellers ever. They are only slightly more rare than 996s because the latter was in production a couple of years longer. And the engine blowing up thing is, as Dell pointed out, not a constructive comment. Both cars had their problems, and both cars required about the same financial commitment from their owners. Engine failures are more dramatic, but some would say more desirable than the death of a thousand cuts that a troublesome 993 can inflict. I just never get this debate.

. . .and my girlfriend (and others) look at me like I am crazy when I talk about how the doors sound when they close. I started going off the other day about how my 996 just doesn't have the 'Porsche feel' (that my previous 8 Porsches have had) -- I suspect automation is to blame for this? Anyways, when she didn't understand what I meant, I opened and closed the door-- and said "See!!! Hear that?!?!" She rolled her eyes changed the subject. Good to hear that someone else agrees with me !!

993 is old. I do not get it either. I like new stuff because technology progresses. It is pure nostalgia and peeps repeating the mantra about air cooled. Who gives a ****. I have seen inside a 993 and it is well, just old looking. I always look for the newest car that I can afford and would never look backwards. 997 or 993?, you would have to be a fool to take the oldie mouldie one.

cuz they they're missing the 911 on 'em that's the problem

Well, the 944's were built in huge numbers, just see how many of those you can find for sale, so that's understandable. The 914, while it might be a great lightweight and good handling car, isn't the prettiest thing that Porsche has ever produced is it? So it isn't "simply" lesser numbers, it is a combination of low supply and specific demand.

Sorry dude don't get your panties in a bunch don't take it personal as i didn't have my dead poet's society English class deconstructionism glasses on reading your post on an internet car forum

It's simple, there is a small segment of the sports car market that prefers a heavier car, a slower car,and a poorer handling car based on more dated technology and built based on retro design themes and they are willing to pay more for it.

That is funny sh*t.

Holy cow... that's exactly why I wear a Rolex!

you are confusing early RMS replacement that was refined over time with the PROPER seal and tool with engines blowing up. Remember, PAG/PCNA replaced engines as an easy way out as "insurance" . Those motors did NOT blowup but rather they replaced them so they could tear down the ones they removed to R&D them. While I agree that the M96 isn't exactly the pinacle of Porsche motors like the M64 dry sump, it certainly isn't a slouch either and EXTREMELY reliable.

ya know dell i love all of these cars and would like one of each..i prefer the air cooled cars cause those were the cars i lusted for as a child..my daily driver is an 87 911..i loved my boxster s and i loved the 993 that i owned...i would buy a 996 at some point..i just prefer the looks,smells,and sounds of the older cars..i know that the 996 is a better car than the older ones but i like the older ones..i actually prefer the 3.2 to the 993 in a lot of ways...and i must admit that i am nervous about purchasing a 993 cause they are at an age where things are going,and they are not cheap..

I think that sums it up for just about all of us! Excellent point. The poster I had was of a 930 slant nose (white). Of course I didn't end up getting one but instead bought my CAB and GT3. Still I would love to have a garage large enough to own every model (with an engine in back )

oooohhh .. yes, white slant nose cab... I actually still have a small (5x7?) pic of that car stuck to my tool chest in the shop. I just love 911s... they're like beautiful women... curvy in all of the right places. Every one just a little different, some with "features" better than others. All have their flaws. Why can't I have them all? What were we talking about again? Oh yeah, I'm married. And don't have an unlimited budget.

This sums up why I have 2 of them. One air cooled and one with water I likie both for different reasons. And now I crave an AM V8...just to keep them company

I wound up with a 993 for looks, certainly not for technical supremacy. Living in congested Atlanta, there's no way for me to tap but a fraction of the 993's performance capabilities anyway. At the time, though, I was blissfully unaware of the 993-996 debate and in my naivete actually started looking at pre-996's assuming they'd be cheaper. I was wrong about that, of course, but in the end I ponied up for the more expensive car. (Hey, it was the right color combo!) No regrets, luckily. There is something about this retro anachronism of a car that works for me, probably because I'm becoming a bit of an anachronism myself, ha ha!

Actually, the 993 sales figures I have seen are approx 49,000 sold. Porsche sold somewhere around 190,000 996's, and it being a later car, probably more of these 190,000 cars are still on the road. Thats almost 388% more 996's than 993's. These are figures are worldwide. To get approximate N. America, divide each number by two. This is substantial.

I have air and water. I love them both and actually prefer the look of my '84 to the look of the 993.

The only cars I would change my 996 GT3 for would be a 993 RS, 993 Turbo or a 996 GT2. Others are not interesting or too pricey.

I have actually several comments here. First, although 993 prices have been strong the last few years; they have been falling ever since the 997 came out. Best guess is the market has learned water cooled is here to stay and they are being pushed down by the newer/better performing cars. The common styling traits between the 997 and the 993 is also probably helping the 993 lose some of its status. The worst hit are 993 turbos, which seem to have dropped $10K almost over night. I am see a lot of them now in the $50's, which is a significant change. Yes the widebody cars (C2S and C4S) are higher than the regular, but they also cost a lot more new and you can say the same for the 996 C4S. 95' 993's are realatively cheap and will stay that was as they are the poorest performing of the generation and the only year with basically a 964 engine with a better exhaust. There were many improvements including Varioram, better heads and subtle body changes that included integrating the 3rd brake light into the rear window. 96' was also the first year 18" wheels were optional on the base Carrera. In 96', you could get 18x8.0" wheels up front with 225/40 tires and 18x10.0" wheels out back with 265/35 tires as a factory option (same wheel and tire sizes as the previous 965 Turbo 3.6). These things easily justify the money for a 96'. This is really interesting because the higher resale Carrera 2S has the same 18" wheel and tire size option of the previous narrow body car, but also almost an additional 100 lbs to more around. The last 2 years (97 and 98) production was very low, which has also helped to hold value, whie the first model year of the 996 lastest almost 2 calendar years. What is interesting, is that the best driving/handling 993 is one of the more reasonably priced ones. That is the 96' Carrera with the M030 sports suspension and the M220 LSD. I had an opportunity to pick up a low mileage (37K) with both these options and sport seats in the low $30's. I passed baecause an early 996 is just a much faster, better handling and better driving car.

You are foregetting the most crucial development of the 993, the chassi! This came on all 993's from MY 1994.

I had a 996 blow up an engine right in front of me at TWS in 2003. It was like watching an F1 engine blow up. Lots of white smoke and pieces laying down on the track. Is that empirical enough? To the question of the original poster, I think that its not a matter which one is the better car. Its all nonsense as far as I'm concerned. Each 911 has its merits and its week points. What it comes down is what people like to buy and what is the supply vs demand. People vote with their dollars and the relative abundance of 996's compared to the 993 is not helping the resale values. Its irrelevant if its a "better" 911 or not.

That makes all the sense in the world. To me the 993 just looks 'right'. Of course I'm highly biased and quite ready to parrot some diatribes. That said, I'm looking to replace my 964 with a 996 as my daily driver, I hear they can be had on the cheap. The 997 looks amazingly similar to the 993, IMO.

Kevin - How many 986s were built? My guess would be that it would be comparable to the 996 output. So you have by Porsche's standards a tremendous number of cars that have the same front end, and exclusivity may be an important factor in the minds of many 911 buyers. I paid about $70K for my 993 and sold it six years and 30K miles later for $55K. So a 20% depreciation in six years was by far the best that I ever achieved with any car that I owned. Actually when I advertised the car for $55K, I fully expected to have to reduce the price considerably, but the buyer loved the car's color, the way it was equipped, and the excellent condition of the car. So he paid the asking price without hesitation, and the way the prices are holding on 993s in today's market, he may be able to sell it for no less than $50K. As far as why the 993 is holding its price so well, I'm in the camp that it's because it is an air cooled car and there aren't many of them available. As far as performance is concerned, it was a great car in its day but the last ones were built ten years ago. So it would be unreasonble to expect it to compete with a 997 or even a 996 for that matter. But I expect that a car's power doesn't mean much to 993 buyers. It's probably the way the 993 looks and handles, and of course the feeling that the 993 is the last 911 to be true to the original 911 concept: light weight, air cooled, no frills sports car.

Up to the end of 993 production, I believe that Porsche built a total of somewhere around 400,000 911s. 993s represent about 20% of those. From memory, I'm pretty confident of my source. Your 996 number feels a bit high, but could be right. In any case, my point wasn't an absolute comparison, but rather just to say that on an annual production basis they aren't that far apart. The idea that 993s are rare and 996s were mass produced is erroneous. The 993 sold like hotcakes, for a Porsche at the time. And even at 190,000, units, the 996 was a limited production car. There are individual factories in this industry that produce numbers like that for car companies for single models each and every year. BMW over roughly the same number of years sold almost 250,000 Z3s alone. 190,000 units over six years is not, for today's car industry, substantial at all. The fact is that in real world car terms, Porsche 911s of any stripe are special (if you don't live in California).

Grats for selling the car for such a great price. Superb timing. Honestly, I think that 993 prices are a bit of a bubble. It doesn't make sense that the most plentiful oil-cooled cars are the most valuable, or won't for long. I think you'll see values settle out to something more proportional to the rest of the series, and you'll feel very smart indeed. That's certainly when I'd start to look at a 993, which I love.

I love the way 993s look, but under your standard, wouldn't the 964 be the ultimate? I mean, afterall, by the time the 993 came around, it had lots of frills and, more importantly, it was pretty darned heavy. In fact, the 993 is heavier than the 996, right?

Yes, a similar number of 986's were sold, but with a 1.5 - 2 year longer sales cycle. As for current buyers choosing 993's over 996's due to the headlight design, I'm sure there is a segment of buyers of any model of car for whom styling is the dominant factor in making a choice. From what I see and read, 993 values were very, very strong up until 3 years or so ago, and if you sold at that time, yes, you probably did very well. However, those that bought at that price are now experiencing a "correction" (for lack of a better term) in depreciation. 993 values have dropping steadily and consistently, and are now pretty much in line with other Porsche models. Very low mileage, pristine 993 C2S and C4S are the exception, perhaps due to collectability, but if one piles the miles on one of these, the value will most certainly plummet into the normal ranges. As for the 993 looks, handling, light weight, air cooled, no frills sports car, most who have owned both 993 and 996 will tell you the 996 handles better. The 996 is also lighter than the 993. And the 993 could be absolutely as luxuriously appointed as the 996.

LVDell, just as long as the engine was in the back what the hell is that supposed to mean. We wont even talk about the 928 with you 911 guys although there have been a few converts. My take on the 911 is what an awsome car but to small for us larger dudes and not very comfortable on long drives. I also think that it is over priced, I cant believe the production numbers are so much more on the 996, I do see alot of 996's but I also see large numbers of 993's. The 928 was my drug growing up and I puchased one about 4 years ago. They are very different animals for sure, even when comparing the 911, but I do love them all and like was said earlier in this thread if I had enough money I would one one of each including the ones with the engine in the back. Andy

Not supposed to mean anything Andy. Chill out as I was being facecious. ALL cars in the P-Car family are great. Just b/c the engine is in the wrong end doesn't mean anything. It was just a statement. Now that my friend is what I call empirical. Just one data point, but nonetheless, a data point for the set. But why did it blow it? Oil starvation maybe? Your skill on the track has exceeded the capability of a M96

My 996 sales numbers come from PAG financial documents available on their website. The figures are for fiscal years (ends in June, IIRC) rather than model years, so are approximate. The 993 figures are those I've seen here on Rennlist (see pic for an example, which shows 993 US sales, which should be approximately half worldwide sales at that time). I can probably dig through some old Excellence mag's and get some PAG or PCNA sourced figures. If you can post your sources, that would be good too. In this thread, we're talking about 993 values vs 996 values . Production numbers of BMW's, or plant capacities for other manufacturers have nothing to do with this discussion. I didn't claim 190k units over 6 years production is substantial "for today's car industry". I stated 190k 996 units is substantial vs 49k 993 units, and supply undoubtedly has an impact on the current values of these cars. The number of BMW Z3s sold, or Toyota Camrys, or any other car, do not.

I know im just playin. LOL Andy

Then you have my apologies for the "chill" comment. I am still on my first cup o' joe this morning

Hey Andy, There were a bunch of (100 or so) Sharks in the NW N.Carolina mountains a couple of weeks ago. Annual get together. http://www.928gt.com/t-sitm.aspx I was in Blowing Rock with a bunch of no-good Boxster people (about 60 Boxsters, six or so 911's).

Every year there are fewer people that were brought up in the aircooled Pcar era meaning fewer people left to support the prices especially as the cars get older and very expensive to fix. The cheaper "throw away" 996 motor will become much more attractive.

Having owned the 964C2, the 993C4S, and now the 996TT, I can appreciate the significant differences, some say nuances, between these various generations of 911. Note, they are all indeed 911's. The 993TT is to me a P51 pulling Xg's around the pylons at the Reno air races. All noise and thunder and eyeball popping performance. The plane is still a stick and rudder experience, and only the very skilled can extract its maximum performance. It's loud and hairy chested. It once was the pinnacle of the art. But now it's used for fun, not in anger. The 996TT is the F16, much higher performance in many areas, but easier to fly at the performance level of the P51. Is it as fun as the P51, in many ways YES in some ways no. It's the one I want to use if I have to go to war, but if I'm looking for a hobby experience, I would select the P51. Just a thought.......

I really dont know why...It could have very well been Oil starvation as this was just a DE and the car was just a street car. It was a silver Carrera 2, I think it was a 99...

Hey Kevin H I wish that I was able to attend those function but it is way far away from good old Utah. There is a strong 928 community there with the thanks to 928 specialis, I hope to attend one soon. I have been researching the 911's for quite some time for my brother and we found a nice 02 C4S for him a couple of months ago. What a sweet machine it is indeed. LVdell i was on my second cup. I attend some pca drives on occasion and was received at first with the what the hell you doin here attitude but I think they have been coming around and we have alot of fun together. A friend and I formed a 928 owners club here in Utah and we have a good 30 members but we have small turn outs but we are a fun group and we turn many heads when we have a group get together. I really mean it when I say I love p-cars some more than other I guess you could say I am car crazy. Andy

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/thumbup.gif

Nice analogy Fred. If you could have only one plane, and you had to fly your plane long distances regularly in order to compete, would that be a factor in choosing the F16 over the P51? I like to travel in my 911. I appreciate the additional space (3" longer wheelbase, I'm tall) and better climate control in the 996, and I quess some would say, "refinement". But when I drive hard, the car is still, a 911. I also find a lot to love about each and every model of the 911.

Hey Andy, We've had people drive from Miami, Texas, Michigan, Connecticut, NY, Canada, etc at our NC meets. And we've had folks fly in from California and the UK! During our little 7 car caravan coming back down to Atlanta, we had several Sharks mosey by........ Every Shark driver acknowledged our Boxster/911 caravan, and we gladly returned the

I wasn't quarreling with your numbers, and if you doubt mine you can go ahead and find better ones. And I don't need a lecture from you on how to conduct a debate, nor do I see where it says that you're the relevance sheriff. My citation of other car manufacturer's numbers was context for taking issue with people who believe that the 996 was "mass produced", and to defend my position that 993 valuations are - using this term in the technical sense that economists use it - irrational. Context. It's an excellent approach to resolving subjective debates, which this is. Try it sometime.

You cant dispute that the 996 is over procuced after seeing those numbers but I have heard some say that the 993 is WAY better built than the 996, I dont think that that is the case they seem to be the same quality to me. It amazes me at the pride of the 911 community against other 911's, but I think it happens in the 928 community also. Andy

I wouldn't consider my questioning one of your statements "lecturing". I just think most of those who are reading or participating in this discussion of 993 values vs 996 values, realize that when someone refers to the 996 as being "mass produced", it is in direct comparison to the production numbers of the 993 and not BMW Z3s. That's all I was saying. Didn't mean to offend.

Naw not selling because its not a real Porsche, its replacement has two Turbos....Nuf said.

Not offended, but thanks. I just don't get why people are so hard headed about this subject. By any objective measure, we're privileged to own a limited-production, iconic sports car (you have to admit that the list of more exclusive cars is short, and a lot of them end in 'i'). I think that self-hating 996 owners, wherever they may be, are halfway the authors of their own depreciation. Mark me down as being in the 'love 'em all' camp. Porsche was in many ways forced to make radical changes to the original formula. I love them for deciding to try to keep the essence of it, rather than use the opportunity to toss it altogether and build something much less interesting. The added volume was a product of broader appeal and the necessity to pay off all those dev costs. If you were to spend some time in the automotive marketing world and see how much damage focus group thinking can do - context again - you'd be very forgiving of those Porsche guys... unless your engine blew up, of course. Kidding Del. Anyway, sorry for the speechmaking.

** spoken as in the scene in Top Gun after the introductory classroom ** No no Bruce, there's two L's in Dell. :toorder:

Oh, crap. Spelling mistake AND incisive pop culture reference. I will consider myself schooled.

Not really. Despite the different look of the car, only 15% was new from the 964 before it and almost all you could easlily see from the outside of the car. They 95' engine was a carryover 964 (same bottom end, heads, intake, etc.) with a freer flowing dual exhaust. Despite the 964, looking like its predecessor, it was actually 85% new. Yes the 993 rear suspension was all new from the 964, but the actual chassis was really a slightly modified 964 as the current 997 chassis is a slightly modified 996. Porsche now plans an interesting game. When they come out with an all new chassis, they make it look like the car before, while the greatest styling changes are done with the least amount of chassis changes. Expect the 998 to look like the 997, but be drastically different underneath.

Porsches are about performance but they are also about aesthetics. I think Porsche made a mistake when they debuted the 996 without the sexy curves of the 993 and earlier 911. They also made a mistake making the front end resemble the Boxster. That, coupled with the "modern" interior and the resulting complaints about the plasticness and similarity to the entry-level Boxster interior was another strike against the car. Then take the classic air-cooled sound of the 911 and compare it to the sound of the original 996 motor, and that turned people who have owned 911s before off further. If Porsche had stuck the water-cooled 996 engine into the 993 body shell, I think people would have been much more receptive to the car. And look how Porsche reacted; they stuck the Turbo lights on the 996 in 2002 and that car fared better, because it doesn't resemble the Boxster so much. Then they put the curves back onto the 997, and that won more favor from the 993 crowd. Take a look at the tires they are putting on the Boxsters now, they are taller profile and look awful, but they ride better. It also distances the Boxster from the 911, which they should've done all along. I've owned a lot of 911s ... my first was a 1980 911SC, I've owned 3.2 Carreras, an 87 930, numerous 993s, a 99 996 cab and an 02 996 Targa. Having been driving 911s for the past 17 years, the 993 feels the most like an old-school 911, with good performance and good AC, but retaining the classic gauge, the sound of the air-cooled motor and the curves. That is the appeal of the 993, and that's why a lot of the 993 guys are so vocal about preferring the 993. The 996 is quicker, handles better ... but the 993 feels like its roots are back with the original 901, and that will always appeal to people ... for the original character of the 911, the 993 was the pinnacle of it. No one's prizing or collecting the last of the 964s, and I don't think the last of the 996's is particularly sought after, either. The 993 was the end of the air-cooled era and it will always be a little bit special. The 996 and the 997 and whatever comes later will always out perform the 993 and all the earlier 911s, that's the tradition. But the 993 will always retain that character the newer car lost in favor of more modern production, better economics and, ultimately, higher production numbers. I liked my 996s, but I feel more at home with the 993.

vjd3 well said I cant believe that Porsche put the 911 front end on the boxter. I still try to determine which one is headed toward me a boxter or the 911. Its like what Merc did with the c-class and made it look like the s-class. stupid stupid stupid Andy

You know, I sorta disagree. From an esthetic standpoint (ok, I used to be an architect, so bear with me), the 996 (and really the original '99 to '01) was more "pure" than either the later 996 ('02-'04) or, gasp, the 997. In the early 996, there was hardly a staight line on the whole car: every line was fluid and organic, and this theme carried through from the exterior right on into the interior. The car looked like it was liquid that had been pulled by the wind, and, IMO, the narrowbody version was the truest rendition of this concept. Even the taco wing spoiler carried this consistent theme . . . The early 996 aerokit 996s are truly a thing of beauty from an conceptual standpoint (I personally like the result as well). If you spend some time looking at each of the lines of the early 996, including in the interior, you can see the baroque ovals and forms that are worked through the entire car. The headlights were also "pulled" up the car along with this same concept. When the "update" came along, they exaggerated the headlights, which still carry the theme and look good in my opinion. However, they introduced more rectalinear elements in the front bumper and side skirts, which, in my opinion, departed from the design concept unnecessarily. Don't get me wrong, I still think they look good (I have one), but it wasn't as pure. Then comes the 997. Now, don't get me wrong, but, from a conceptual standpoint, the 997 is no longer consistent. Rather, the 997 is a deliberate throwback to the past, that is partially, but not fully IMHO, successful. Now, the round headlights are, from a conceptual standpoint, inconsistent, and they are a rigidly pure form (a circle) that is plastered onto a more fluid and graceful line of the body. The widebody cars can, from certain angles, look vulgar as well because they no longer flow with the "fluid" lines of the rest of the car (which still looks like a 996 apart from headlights and hip "bulges"), which is very unlike the hippy cars of the past (like the 993) where the hips looked more integral to the car rather than "tacked" on. I do really like what they did with the diagonal line, lights and rear spoiler of the 997 . . .beautiful. The interior is now a contrast, and absolutely inconsistent with the design concept of the exterior. Of course, that is not necessarily wrong, for good design frequently has contrasts, as does food, wine, etc . . . The interior now is rectalinear, in a throwback reference to the interiors of Carreras and SCs. Line them up side by side and see . . . but nothing is flowing. Now, I like all Porsches, but I think they can do better than the 997 (I am sure they will), and I think that the 996s are underappreciated at the moment, just as i think 964s are underappreciated. Just my thoughts.

I am completely seeing what you're seeing TD and I ain't no architect

I actually don't disagree with you vjd3; although I think that you represent a minority, moving back from a 996 to a 993. However, with the risk that Porsche lost loyal long term customers (that went with the company very close to bankruptcy), Porsche did win a lot of new customers with the Boxster and the 996 along with new competitive production cost that made the company very profitable. So tradition yes, but I'm glad that I can still buy a Porsche that is a Porsche rather than have them only around on the antique car shows or like Morgan - buy a BMW in a new German Morgan dress.

I've never liked the 996, it's slab sided appearance, those awful headlights and stories of catastrophic engine failures and the guys at my specialist mechanics can't stand them, and I mean from the MD to the floor mechanics!!!. so today my friend turns up with his heavily abused 97 model 996 and I took it out for a spin and I have to say I really liked it........and he really doesn't look after it at all (we are talking mould on the back seat potatoe chips on the floor and a broken wine glass!!!)so it rattles a bit but I liked the way it handled and the power delivery was pretty good for a tip.........yeah good.....it had a nice vibe too it even though it was shagged out.......would I chop in my 993 for one, that's a tough one....I know the 993 is a bit of an old ****ter in some ways but it has a certain 'charm' and I have total faith in the power unit (if not the aircon) which I didn't have with my 964(which blew, spun bearing!!) nor would I have with a 996. Values, well in the UK there are just so many 996's out there and the competition is fierce so I guess there's a bit of a price war, as it were, between 996 sellers, whereas the 993's are a little rarer it seems, I'd guess the same for the US

Pinky Lai still had some of the conceptual sketches for the 996 on his web site the last time I looked. Study them a bit, and your observation starts to really hold water, IMHO. It was a very sensitive, intelligent interpretation of the concept rather than a cartoon of the original. A temptation too many car companies can't resist. The market may not always be wise, but it is always right, so the 996 ends up a less than famous chapter in the 911 story, but I'm with you.

Pinky Lai's website: http://www.designnstyling.com/

TD you stated what I wanted to say, though with the maturity and the patience I lack. Personally, (and let me state I really do like all 911's just some more than others) I think Porsche took a step BACKWORD designwise with the 997. I suspect in response to a very vocal air cooled crowd. Too bad. At least they all drive like no other car on the road and that's really the bottom line for me. My favorite Porsche being built new now: The Cayman.

That is cool as hell. I didn't know anything about pinky lai. Wow. So, looks like I wasn't so far off afterall . . .

If it was a Silver cab, the story I recall at the time was a oil-water seperator failure. May have been a different incident.

Wow, I guess I'd better sell both my Harley and my 993, unless I can figure out a way to strap one of those innovative, new radiator contraptions onto them. It's interesting that this thread designed to discuss why 993's hold their value better than 996's has mostly become an explanation by 996 owners why that shouldn't be the case. But it is a fact, so what's the point of crying about the unfairness of it?

Now I know why my Harley is air cooled. Those darn Wisconsin winters must be the reason.

A Harley engine is an antiquated design especially when you compare it to a modern water cooled V-twin. However, a Harley isn't sold on performance so it probably doesn't matter.

1) production volume 2) nostalgia

I'm sure you will find more than one Hardly-Ableson rider that will strongly disagree with your assertion. Regarding the 993's air-cooled design, yes, it is rather old in nature but, amazingly air-cooled engines are still quite common in some of the high-performance light prop aircraft sold today, so given the intended purpose (air-cooled fun) the 993 smokes the 996 10-ways to Sunday.

You hit the nail on the head.

An interesting analogy but flawed IMHO. There are many reasons air-cooling makes good sense in light aircraft and just as many reasons that make air-cooling problematic in cars. But as long as we are making up silly analogies keep enjoying your "P51" 993 and I'll keep enjoying my "F16" 996.

Here's why I'd pay more for a 993 than a 996 (and probably even a 997): To me, the 993 is more sensual, visceral, engaging, and "satisfying" -- all subjective characteristics. An earlier post about the way the doors latch and the gurgling sound the oil makes expressed this well. I owned a 996 and it was just too sterile and refined for me. Yes, it was objectively superior in just about every way but I still didn't like it.

Rather you comment should be Here's why I'd pay more for a 993 than a not GT 996 . That would be more accurate. And the exact process I went about when buying my GT3. Cost was not an issue....I was gong to be happy if I spend 40K or if I spent 100K. I chose the GT3 but almost pulled the trigger on a 993. Reliability, cost to maintain, and track worthiness was was pushed me toward the GT3. Had I not bought one, I would have bought a 993 (or 964). By the way, I own a not GT based 996 as well and love it also. More of a comfy city cruiser and a great one at that. Plus I can run the A/C without having to roll my windows down at each stoplight

Good point. I'm hoping the 997 GT3 I've ordered will have more of the subjective attributes I mentioned.

Not quite. Close but nothing like the 996GT3 or the 993 visceral feel you long for.

Congrats on the 997 GT3, YA911Fan. That's the ultimate 911 so far by far and eclipses the 996 GT3 in every way.

Come on now Ben. Have you driven both? The 2 cars share the same rear badge but couldn't be more different in many ways. Please give us a detailed juxtaposition to back up your subjective comment. ps. I love them both but they are just different.

Thanks in advance (don't have it yet...). But clearly not everyone agrees with your assessment!

We can debate production numbers, air cooled v. water cooled etc. However, this is mostly B.S. important only to the small percentage of owners who are Porsche "enthusiasts," like many of the people who post to these groups. The simple fact is most buyers who aren't enthusiasts would choose a 993 over a 996 for the same reason they'd pick Jessica Alba over Rosie O'Donnell, even though Rosie is probably more intelligent, more interesting, and much wealthier. If the first 1999 996 had left the 993's body alone, we wouldn't be having this debate. The prices of any model year 996 would clearly exceed any model year of the 993. But the simple truth is most buyers love the 993's looks and aren't that crazy about the 996's looks. When 996's were brand new, they obviously had the advantage of newness to attract the substantial crowd who either lease a car or want a brand new car. That significant advantage is long gone and what we are left with are two aging used cars, one that most people think is beautiful versus one that appears to be an expensive Boxster with hung over eyes. I'm not sure why anyone even debates this topic when the answer is so obvious.

Well, I don't know why people bother to debate it (who cares what anyone else thinks), but the answer isn't so obvious. Are you saying that the majority of Porsche owners are poseurs who would purchase a car solely on the basis of appearance (or even what others say aka "the last real Porsche) than weight, handling and hp? Say it isn't so! The real answer most likely lies in production numbers. I would bet that if the 993 and the 996 had been produced in equal numbers, you would see much, much more consistent pricing. I feel very confident that production numbers are a much bigger influence than subjective issues like style or "nostalgia."

Hey, guess what? Not everyone agrees with you. Don't like 993's...never did.

I will repeat my Rosie O'Donnell v. Jessica Alba analogy. Put the guts of a 996 under the skin of a 993 and we wouldn't see the current price anomalies. The newer car would sell for the higher price. As for being poseurs, yes we all are and that includes you. Don't tell me you don't get a thrill when someone stops you to compliment you on your car's looks. If we weren't poseurs we wouldn't have purchased sexy looking race cars to drive 35 MPH on LA freeways.

I don't actually. I hate driving on the streets and I am embarrased to drive a Porsche with the baggage that it carries. For this reason, I have seriously considered selling my street car and sticking to Porsches that I would use exclusively on the track. I am an extremely selfish person in that I bought the Porsche because I like how it performs . . . I would be equally happy if nobody ever saw me enjoying myself. And I just flat out disagree with you. People have different tastes. I like the way 993s look . . .but . . . I also like how 996s look. Maybe you don't, but there are some who prefer 996s. Now, if the production numbers were equal, I am sure the depreciation rates would be similar. P.S. The Rosie/Jessica analogy is pretty stupid. Why you would call the 993 Rosie just because she is a little overweight is beyond me.

Of course many people agree with you -- and lots of people don't like sports cars, period -- but the Porsche market says the vast majority of used 911 buyers agree with me. I know it irritates 996 owners that the majority of buyers are so stupid as to buy an older, inferior product for a higher price, but get over it and enjoy your technologically superior cars.

Look closely at my avitar. I don't just like superior cars...I have a better looking car, a 964

Actually, I am turning into a big fan of the 964 myself . . .

I couldn't disagree with you more. The 993 is a beautiful car, but put it next to a 996 (especially an aerokit car) and it just looks dated. Additionally, if so many people prefer the "look" of the 993 why did the 996 outsell it so dramatically (when they both were "new"). Sorry, but you just can't take out the dramatic difference in production numbers when you compare used car values. Add in the "last air-cooled" status that the 993 has and the answer is (as you put it) "so obvious".

I would think a 964 Turbo 3.6 might be a very, very fun car to own.....

LOL.....

Didn't the people "speak" as to which car they liked more by buying a whole lot more 996's Or was it a sympathy buy for Porsche since the "people" didn't want them to go out of business before the 997 came along? Another car I don't like

Oh lookie what I found. Another convert https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...ferrerid=35196

Wow. What a long thread. If you've seen my input here lately, I'm a long time 1973 911 owner, and I got a Boxster S a few years ago. I've been thinking of selling the Boxster and buying a Carrera cab, primarily for the back seats. I've generally actually like the Boxster S better because to me in normal city driving, it's more sporty/fun feeling - to me. The reason I picked up on this thread is that today I was at a local well known Porsche mechanic. He went on and on about how bad the 996, 997 and Boxsters are. He said they are unreliable, their engines blow up, and their engines are Subaru engines. He was also pissed that Porsche will not supply parts for guys like him to rebuild 986, 996, and 997 engines. I wonder how much of the anger was because of that fact, or that like anyone else, there is a point when people get older and don't want to admit that they are not as good as the younger folks, and that therefore this concept applies to the cars they like. After listening to him go on and on, I wasn't sure if I should immediately push my car off a cliff and hide in embarrassment for ever having owned one, or I should just walk tall and enjoy this great car that is not appreciated by all. Heck, I'm one who never cared for the masses loved MGB or similarly loved Miata. The masses aren't always right. In fact, they tend to be lemmings, which is all the more reason to look elsewhere. Then again, as pointed out, with the number of 996s sold, where are the lemmings now?

What a bitter, sorry excuse for a mechanic. Find a new one. When he spews this babble ask to to give you some empirical evidence to support his anecdotal "evidence". He can't. He is just perpetuating the myth that keeps running throught the P-Car community. Let me guess, he talks about how unreliable they are b/c the majority of the cars he see's are 996's? Get him a calculator so he can figure out % of cars produced that are in his shop.

+1. They used to have a term for these people a couple of hundred or so years ago: Luddites. I always want to ask them in exactly which year should progress have stopped. With steam? The domestication of horses? Fire? Walking upright? Cellular division? Sigh...

Ha! Yeah they should have stopped with the 1901 Mixte hybrid (by Porsche)! Oh, wait, we're coming back full circle!

They should have stopped with your 73 911! I have always loved that color early car. Very nice.

I had a 964 and agree they are great looking except the hideous safety bumpers that look like afterthoughts. They weren't well thought out, probably because they were mandated after the car had been designed.

I'm no track nerd and you know this so I'm not going to come in here trying to d!ck measure based on amateur track time skills as I have no interest in spending money on the speed crack addiction. I'm a potential buyer and a fan of cars in general. Now with that disclaimer of sorts... I've driven both and the 996 GT3 is certainly a fast, raw car worthy of the badge, but at the end of the day, the 997 GT3 is not only faster/better in all performance categories, but it's also much better looking (i'm pretty vain). A more tractable car on the streets yet even better than its predecessor at the track. Well done, Stuttgart. I know you're going to grab your pom pomos and put up some crowd points for your 996 GT3 and rightfully so, but in the light of the 997 GT3, there is no comparison. Porsche hit a grand salami with the 997 GT3. it's the complete package.

My mechanic is also not a fan of 996's, but what the heck does he know? He's just an ignorant grease monkey.

Looks-wise, put up a widebody 996 aerokitted car alongside a 993 widebody aerokitted car. The 996 is going to look more modern and date the 993, but the proportions of the 993 are better as it just has those curves that the 996 and even the 997 just don't have because they are so big now compared to the 993 at least from a visual standpoint (not sure how the measurements come out). Interior-wise, the 993 being much smaller feels much more intimate even if the materials and instrumentation and overall dash design are completely dated. Dated carries a negative connotation in most cases, but in my post here, dated can also be timeless. The 993 is timeless. The 996... not so much, but all things being relative, it's a 911 so yes it'll look good for a long time. With all that said, my $ went to the aerokitted 996 widebod because it is the better package overall.

I don't know how anyone can discuss looks and not mention the headlights. The 997 is proof what a major design blunder they were on the 996.

I agree, the 997GT3 is a phenomenal car but they really got it right for the track (detect sarcasm) with those great track features like PASM and the sunroof. Will a 997GT3 outperform a 996GT3 at the track? I sure hope so, if not PAG has gone backwards. That was not my point. My point to you was your blanket statement that the 997 is better in ALL categories. It isn't. It is a great track car for the street. But if you want the raw feel that we all crave for the track you will need to do quite a bit to capture that in the 997. When I thought about picking up a 997GT3 last year I asked myself if I thought it was worth 30K at the time to "trade-up". It wasn't. I proablywould have driven it more on the street though. The 996 is a dedicated track ***** for me. I'll take both ps. Ben, your lack of desire to explore the car on the track (or crack addiction as you call it ) thoroughly explains why you prefer the 997. That's not a bad thing, it is exaclty what PAG is marketing to. Wow, I don't know about you, but I buy a car for headlights (detect sarcasm).

Such strong statements... proof may be in the pudding for you, but check what ya eat before you swallow.

I've owned both 993 and 996. Both great cars. As an Econ Major many moons ago, I believe the price differential is down to supply and demand though. If push came to shove though, a 996 GT3 would be my choice from all the various flavors of 993 and 996. Then 996 Turbo. Then the 993 Targa I currently have.

There are very few people on Rennlist that I actually would message and listen to and Frayed is one of those guys (u know where you stand with me). He is a dedicated track guy, but also has an appreciation for street image. His money went to the 997 GT3 and I believe he had a 996 GT3. I trust his assessments of cars just as much as the pros do it on Evo, Excellence, et al. i read up and compared my own driving experience with his notes. and it is better in all performance categories. I'm all for raw cars, but the 996 GT3 is a bit too raw for my liking and for all that rawness it's still slower than the 997 GT3, bottom line. I'm a fan of both, but I am a much bigger fan of the 997 GT3. It's the complete package for me. 996 GT3 looks bore me. The 997 GT3 on 19" champion RG5s.... BALLLN!

watch this and maybe you will understand http://coochas.com/porsche/Resources...0Evolution.wmv

Wow...how come so many answers for this subject? The original question was: "why is the 993 worth so much more than a 996?" The answer is: Because it is. Plain and simple...nuff said.

I have to partially agree. The original 996/Boxster headlights are not particulalry visually appealing, to me at least. They remind me of fried eggs. I do like the later 'Turbo' 996 lights a lot more though, but even more so the 'traditional' round/oval 997 lights. I think that is only appealing to the traditionalist though. My girlfriend likes the 'Turbo' 996 lights better than the 997's. What does this have to do with the prices of 993 vs. 996's? - Not much, just remotely interesting that it may only be people with Porsche knowledge that prefer the 997 style.

.............pass the tub please, I'm hungry........buttered?

We're going to need more than a tub for this...get your goggles ready...

10-4 brother..........beer? do we have beer?..................I'll get it

Exactly. It really is pretty obvious.

996s are as common as Lexus cars, i see 5-6 of them on the way to work in my Toyota during rush hour... many with women driving, none wave because they dont know that is a 911 tradition, etc. The 993 is great, but its' not just about the 993, it is about any older air cooled Porsche...unique, not everyone has one... appealing in the same way that a mechanical watch is compared to a digital casio... the casio will keep better time, but doesnt look nearly as good and not as engaging... having said all that, the 996 GT3 is a bargain these days I think, many in the $70s, and the 997 GT3 is just tops in my book... but the bottom line is that i think one would need a GT3 water cooled car to match the involvement of the older models.... Dive, Dive, Dive...

Comes down to looks and feel. Yes the 996 is a more modern looking car, but the 993 is a more beautiful car. Only one of then could be shown in an art museum... And I don't think it'll be a 996 with an "spoiler kit"... Hands down, a 993 is art!

The 993 front end is the ugliest Porsche ever made, it sucks! I am tired of hearing how ugly our front ends are. The 993 looks like a damn frog. The 996 front end has one of the most unique looks in any car. I always wanted a 993 but cant get past the ugly front end, looks like a 968.......hmmm kind of like the 996 has the same front as the Boxster. Hypocrites!!!

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] http://www.carsauto.com/images/products/Large/WP0CA29942S652957_3.jpg

I am German and have 2 very good friends working at Porsche. They drive Porsche company cars beginning with the 993 model. As already stated here, every new 911 model was "better" than the old one but none of them had the character of the 993 with the classic gauges, the engine sound and the smell of burned oil after a nice ride. More interestingly, they told me that there are a lot of Porsche engineers that think the same ... Depending on my intended usage of a weekend driver they both recommended the 993. As a daily driver for longer distances they would go with the 996. I did not regret to go with an "old" 993.

They are exactly the same. Guess which one is the 996 and which one is the boxster...

WOW!! This type of thread never ceases to amaze me! Each to their own. I happen to like the look of most of the 911's - although the 997 just seems.... well BIG? But....I have just driven a new 997GT3RS. I want one of those REAL bad - BUT - with what PCA did with the 996RS and the "percieved" values - realeasing two "rare" models within 3 years and the associated TEARING up of $$$.... it proves that supply and demand dont always account for everything....... there were only 11 GT3RS imported here... Why arent they selling for more? The answer is REALLY SIMPLE! The 997 is just a Quantum leap ahead. As was the 996 over the 993. As was the 993 over the 964. As was the 964 over the "g" series cars..... and on and on...... Supply and demand has plenty to do with it - but still - And I am a die hard 993 fan - the 996 was quieter, faster, more ergonomic and appealed to a WHOLE different crowd. There was a time when the 911 was a TRUE enthusiasts car - the 996 made that style of car afforadable and appealing to the masses... hence why so many were sold- so we are back to a "Supply and Demand" comment. So getting back to the title of this thread - Who knows? Really - Imagine how boring the world would be if we ALL wanted 996's?? Simon.

That's easy the 996 is on top and the 986 is on the bottom. Two great looking front ends!! I take it from your rolled eyes you don't think very highly of the Boxster. Too bad, it's another great Porsche and another car that trounces the 993's popularity based on it's sales!!

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/beerchug.gif

this seems timely... 200k mileage 993, no rebuild https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...8&page=1&pp=15

I'll throw my .02 in here. Forgive me if it has been said over the past 11 pages (wow). Both are great cars, I just got done shopping for both.They serve some different needs in some cases. The 996 is more comfortable for example while the 993 seems to be bettter in build quality. Both great, just different. I will agree that 993 prices are higher due to lower production numbers. I also believe and witnessed first hand that the 99-00 996's drag prices down somewhat due to an (undeserved) reputation for problems. Once you get past those years the prices seem to hold far better. I am happy with my 993 because it serves my needs. I also enjoyed the 996 and see advantages to both cars.

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/beerchug.gif https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/beerchug.gif

Wow, an unbiased opinion from a 993 owner! It's nice to find another enthusiast who genuinely appreciates the qualities in both cars.

They are both great cars. I like the Boxster, more so in the "S" and 987 form. The "Rolled eyes" were meant for the poster that said that the 996 front end and the Boxster's were not the same. Sales numbers are not everything. The Ford Taurus has outsold both the 993 and the Boxster, but that doesn't make it necessarily better. Just more massed produced and targeted to a different crowd.

I have never understood the boxster insult. Arguably, the boxster is more of a traditional sports car than a 993, 996 or 997, all of which have morphed into GT cars.

Who insulted the Boxster?

Quick - Someone post a "996 Forum thinks Boxster sux" post on the 986 Forum!! Sorry - couldnt resist! SImon.

One of the biggest insults that gets thrown at the 996 everyday is that it looks too much like a Boxster. I was simply remarking that I have never understood that insult. Who cares? Did we buy our Porsches to prove how much money we have to spend?

I see...Didn't know about that... But granted, Porsche should have made an effort to make them slighlty different at least. They tried to minimize production costs by using the a lot of the same parts for 996's and 986's. I guess they learned their lesson and they listened to its customers. Proof is that the 987 and 997 fronts are totally different now.

OK Help me with this. 993 = lower production numbers because fewer people wanted them. 996 = greater production numbers because more people wanted them. People generally want what they can't have so now that there are more people in the world than when it was built, the 993 is looking a lot better and I still do not like them

AFAIK, the production numbers were not based on demand, but rather production choices/limitations by Porsche. The strategy was to make more 996s than 993s. So, I don't think you can equate original production numbers with demand. The reason why production numbers are important is that it determines the supply available on the used market. Quite simply, if you are looking for a 993, you have fewer choices. If you are looking for a 996, you have far greater choices. The fewer the choices, the higher the prices. Not that difficult, really.

If the 993 had the front fenders from the 964, it would of been the best looking 911, but.........Porsche used the styling queues of the 968 front end.

It's supply AND demand that matters -- supply by itself is irrelevant. Two interesting examples to consider are the CGT and the Mini. Which one has the higher depreciation?

CGT does, but I don't understand what you are trying to get at. If you looked at the pools of buyers for 996s and 993s, I am nearly certain, although I have no facts to back this up, that the pool of buyers for 996s is higher, probably much higher. However, if you look at the ratio of buyers to supply, of course it is lower for the 993 because so many 996s are available. So, of course supply and demand matters, but that doesn't mean that there is a bigger pool of buyers for 993s.

And the 987 got the better of the two. :-) Noah

OK, I'll restate -- the ratio of 993 buyers to 993 sellers is higher than the ratio of 996 buyers to 996 sellers. The ratio of 993s to 996s manufactured is irrelevant (imo). The CGT/Mini example was just to point out that the only thing which matters is the supply relative to demand, not the supply itself.

Well, I agree with you. I also think that you probably would agree with me that if you manipulated the variables of cars produced (i.e., either increasing the quantity of 993s produced to equal the quantity of 996s produced, or reducing the quantity of 996s produced to equal the quantity of 993s produced), the resale values and depreciation rates of the 993s and 996s mostly likely would be much, much closer.

It's obvious. The one in the middle is the Boxster.

No, I don't agree with that. I don't think the quantity of either model accounts for the different depreciation rates. That's the point I'm trying to make. However, I do think the 993's high resale value is directly attributable to the 996!

di�a�tribe (dī'ə-trīb') Pronunciation Key n. A bitter, abusive denunciation. de�nun�ci�a�tion /dɪˌnʌnsiˈeɪʃən, -ʃi-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[di-nuhn-see-ey-shuhn, -shee-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation �noun 1. an act or instance of denouncing; public censure or condemnation. 2. an accusation of crime before a public prosecutor or tribunal. 3. notice of the termination or the renouncement of an international agreement or part thereof. 4. Archaic. warning of impending evil; threat. Ok, now that I understand the word "diatribe" I'll give you my thoughts: 1. 993 looks cooler (I could give a sh*t what anyone else thinks as long as I like the looks) 2. basic supply & demand dictates the values and apparently 993 supply is thin; demand strong. 3. 993 is more fun to drive. And yes, I have driven several 996's including a 996 GT3. Not worth the extra money for "smile factor" in my book. I rest my case.

Yeah, we'd all take the 997 if we don't mind spending 80 large on a fast depreciating asset. C'mon bro, pull your head out of the sand....would you rather have a mint 69 Camaro or one from the mid 80's? Which is a cooler ride? If you can't answer that then you are missing the whole point of what "demand" and ultimately retention of value is all about. And the 917 in my avitar? How about that? Looks old right? Its absolutely sick looking. Who cares how it stacks up performance-wise against newer cars. I'd love to have one for the track and if a guy shows up with something more modern and faster who cares? There are speed limits here in the states last I checked and I don't want to lose my license and be relegated to walking the bus or my bicycle. Performance and latest technology is not all things to all people. Enjoy your --6! p.s. the correct answer is the 69' and few of us 993 owners care about oil+water vs. oil cooling. I could have had a 996 but would by far rather have the last model M3 if it came right down to it.

Comparing a 997 to an 80's Camaro? The Chevrolet that is normally compared to the 911 is the Corvette. And 997 being the latest model of 911, most would think the latest Corvette would be the best model for comparison, unless of course, one's intent is to insult the 997. Maybe someone should post in the 997 forum that there is a thread in the 996 forum where 993 guys are referring to 997s as 80's Camaros.

Time for me to unsubscribe to this thread. Have fun y'all

WHAT? I guess I better get a job in the auto buisness since I can design what ever I want and just make a bunch of them or not make a bunch of them no matter what the customers are buying

Anybody who thinks that supply and demand detemine market pricing must have studied economics at the high school level, sometime prior to 1980. Sometime when you're bored, look up 'behavioral economics'. Here's the answer to the original poster's question, as best I can cobble it together: 993s cost more because Porsche doesn't make air cooled cars anymore. That simple fact, irrespective of the value of the technology and irrespective of supply, is enough to bubble pricing. For many, that attribute has sentimental value, too. It's emotionally charged, and this, too, increases the value people choose to perceive (a concept called 'framing'). Porsche owners are culty and think and behave as a pack about certain car related things. This will cause perceived values to rise specifically within this group (while the general population doesn't give a hoot and wouldn't pay that kind of money for an old car on a bet). And, by this same token, those among them who have 993s will respond to all this in many cases by not selling or trading in their cars. That creates not only the fact of scarcity, but psychologically increases desire among those within the group who don't have one by promoting this scarcity. It has nothing to do with the quality of the car, objectively or subjectively, nor with supply and demand. It has to do with something you can't get anymore which tends to drive markets into a frenzy. At least temporarily. But it's a bubble, because the only group for whom the value of the car is high is the hard core Porscheophile, and they are almost as limited in number as the cars themselves. 993 owners will hang on to their cars for awhile, then a bunch will want to cash out and sell their cars. Meanwhile, as that happens, the hysteria over the loss of the air cooled car will die down, people will move on to something else, and the market for the 993 will normalize in size. When these events collide, prices will drop and fall into the historical pattern for 'important' Porsche models... a bit of a premium, but not a fortune... and there they will stay until enough of them have rotted away that someone says, 'OMG the 993s are disappearing!' and the cycle will start over in miniature with fewer cars, but even fewer people who give a damn enough to pay for them. The 12 pages of debate about this only proves it's emotional valuation. You have a bunch of old school Porsche lovers trying to defend a status quo, versus a bunch of insecure newcomers trying to square their purchase decision with what they fear, and the seemingly prima facie evidence of market values fueling the debate. Vintage behavioral economics. They gave someone a Nobel for it in '02. Now you know.

Behavioral economics most definitely affects value, but so does supply, and saying that supply and demand is irrelevant is not really accurate. If you want something and you cannot find very many examples of the car, you will be forced to pay more because sellers will not have to cut their price in order to find a willing buyer. Silver 996s are everywhere. No matter how badly the group of buyers want them, the price will be constrained due to the size of the inventory of the used market . . . the sellers will reduce the price to ensure that "their" particular silver 996 is purchased over every other sample.

^ | | +1 WHAT HE SAID.

It's not that 'supply and demand' is inaccurate. It's that it's a vague and grossly oversimplified explanation of how markets work, especially little tiny ones like this. Hell, even oil and gold aren't that simple.

Thanks Bruce for stretching what I have been saying to 4 paragraphs

A perfect example of how inadequate 'supply and demand' is as an explanation for market pricing. As a consultant, I couldn't make a living if I said this kind of stuff in seven words. But 50 pages, and I'm off to the Porsche dealer!

Very nice......Did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night also?

Yeh, I know....... context, man, context.

Precisely. And I knew you knew that as well, but I just had to push back since you introduced your valid point by suggesting that supply and demand is outdated and irrelevant. The truth is that Porsche buyers are not a single homogenous group. I would dare to say (with no research to back it up) that there are more discrete sub-markets to the Porsche buyers pool (including just the pool for 911s) than there are for most types of cars. Among others, you have the: (1) guys who use the car solely for racing and/or track events; (2) guys who use the car for track events and driving on the streets; (3) daily drivers; (4) weekend joyriders; (5) poseurs and others who buy the car solely for status; (6) those who think its unique form is beautiful; (7) street racer types (they are out there); (8) engineering types who like the uniqueness of the design; and (9) nostalgic types who like the marque for sentimental reasons. Each of these submarkets would react differently to each mark, including the question of "which is more desireable, the 993 or the 996." There is no single right or wrong answer. So, the "illogical" desire for one model over another, which is completely valid phenomena, influences the decisions of some groups, but not others, but one of the main issues remains how easy it is for each subgroup to find the type of 911 they seek.

I'm quite certain that's true. And, similarly, I think you'd find an equally wide variety in the perceived value of 993s among them. That said, I think that if you compared Porsche owners to car owners in general, they would emerge in that context as much more alike than different, attitude and values wise. Each of them, of course, would dispute this vigorously, but that's because they're all individualists.

Thanks, I WILL! PS. A P51 is water cooled ! I'm thinking more like a P47!

Thirteen pages of 993 vs 996 bantering and I haven't read a single post!

Have so.

so go watch my video and give me tips !

The 997 is 1" LONGER than the new Corvettes.

Which says more about the C6 Corvette than the 997. The 997 is for all practical purposes, the same length as the 996 (within 1/4"). Chevrolet reduced the length of the C6 a full five inches from the length of the C5.

Todd, You have mail! Sorry about the delay. Nice driving. I'm pretty sure you'd beat up on most 993s driving like that! (I couldn't resist!) Jim

Thanks for taking the time Jim. I am really sorry we didn't meet at the Glen.

My evil twin loves joining these pointless threads. My good twin says these threads only prove how good all of us who own these dream cars have it. If you would have told me when I was about 22 -- at a time I was satisfied if my old '66 Chevy would just start every morning -- that someday I would be debating with people whether my 911 version was better than theirs, I would have said you were nuts. At that time my dream car was a 924 and a 911 was far beyond my wildest dreams. Life is good, especially from the seat of a 993, beloved by me ... and the resale market.

So I assume it was your evil twin who ran over a posted a thread in the 993 forum suggesting that everyone come over and troll the 996 forum? The thread had a legitimate question. I wish that not every legitimate questions devolves into a debate about superiority of 993 v. 996. That is pointless.

Woops...another ***** in the armour https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...ferrerid=35196

I'm sure you wrote that in jest but I'll respond anyway: No, not really comparing 997 to an 80's Camaro, just pointing out that the latest and most modern isn't always the most desireable although I definately prefer the 997 to the 996 due to styling.

Me too except my 993 purchase must have influenced my decision to get my 50th anniv. submariner. So that means the watch technology is older than the 911/993 then? Hmmmm....I must be reverting to all that is "old school."

I bought my 993 as a second car-- for nice weather, weekends, hobby etc. I considered a 996 and Boxster S too (even had a 987S on order). In the end, I opted for the 993 because, to me, it seemed like a much more interesting car to own, particularly as a non-daily driver. Above all, I like the looks of it much better. But the fact that it is the last of the air-cooled era also really appealed to me (along with the uniqueness of it-- the sound, smell etc.). I really like the retro cockpit, dials, etc. coupled with the more modern amenities that appeared when the 993 came out. I also like the fact that it doesn't seem to be depreciting that quickly. Although this wasn't the biggest issue, it is nice to know that as a third car which will only see a few thousand miles a year it will not be losing significant $$ value over the years. I also have to say, that it is nice to know that there were only 1700 993 C2S's sold in the U.S. and that I have a really nice example of one with low mileage. I'm not saying it is a collectors car by any means, or that it will be worth more one day, but it's a nice feeling to have a "hobby car" that is somewhat hard to find, and when people who know what it is see it they know that it is something special.

Here is a reason I like 993's

I paid more to get a 993 because of the looks alone. If it weren't for my personal preference for the look of the 993, the 996 is by far better value for the bucks. If I have to recommend a Porsche and the buyer appreciates the 996 as much as the 993, my recommendation is 996 hands down. Now go out and love your Porsches!!!

I Like the 993 because it smells and taste better and the fact that I get several compliments everytime I'm on the road

So you are saying that if I get a 993 the feces-throwing monkeys will stop attacking me every time I drive my 996? I will say that you 993-drivers, er, I mean, monkeys, have a really good aim.

You guys have turd throwing monkeys in DC? How unfortunate, sounds messy.

You should see my dry-cleaning bills. Too bad those $%^&* Korean drycleaners lost my lucky pants. Hopefully my lawsuit will pan out and I will have $58 million very soon. . . .

Hey...why make such a racist remark Monkeys come in all colors

I used the term so that people would get my joke. Sounds like ya missed it http://www.nbc4.com/money/13502041/detail.html http://frogstar.soylentgeek.com/wav/getnthru.wav

No offense, but I doubt that the international web community that visits this forum will get a joke about something that is happening on your little corner of your universe.

Oh for pity's sake. Don't be so sensitive. I posted a link to the news story. Unless you have been living under a rock, everyone has heard about the idiot DC judge who is suing the poor Korean drycleaners for FIFTY EIGHT MILLION dollars because they lost his lucky pants, particularly the Korean community who is watching the case very carefully. I was joking around, and there was nothing racist about it, and I posted a link, so I don't need anybody to preach to me. Lighten up people.

Because it has more 964 parts on it...

I have heard about it all the way down here in TX. It was on the national news. I find often on Rennlist that other forums are much more tight in their posts than we are here on the 996 forum. Lacking a sense of humor, where here we all seem to have a good time, sometimes at each others expense but at the end of the day move on. If 993 guys want to come over here then they need to understand how things run OVER HERE. I saw absolutely nothing wrong with your original post TD. My .02.

And now you've got the "I know it's not fast but it feels fast and I know it's heavy but it's got big fenders and I'm so pissed the guy in the boxster didn't wave at me I just bet he pronounces porsche with one syllable" crowd preaching at you. Nice job Todd.

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/roflmao.gif https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/roflmao.gif https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/roflmao.gif https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/roflmao.gif https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/roflmao.gif

Lighten up with the troll talk. These boards would put us all to sleep if we didn't have good natured arguments, and most of this thread was of that nature. Very few posters hit below the belt to point out "real negatives" of our cars, like lRMS issues on 996's and SAI problems on the 993's. But if this type of thread bothers you, why are you still posting to it a dozen times a day, when the original question was asked and answered at least 100 posts ago.? Admit it. You obviously like petty bickering as much as the next guy.

oohhhhhhh the interweb is serious and I am obviously being very, very serious because my manhood is tied up in proving that my 996 is superior to the 993. yes, very serious indeed. And I never post tongue in cheek, no siree bob. this is all very, very serious business. And this is my house so I can say whatever I want because I own the place. Yes, my higher post count makes me much more important and I have authority over all with lower counts. And I am never sarcastic, so take me seriously!!!!!!!! Oh yeah, and become a member why don't you . . oh, I see you are, well no matter, become a member again you cheapskate! But I can see how you would be pissed at me when, afterall, this is what you posted https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/359856-993-v-996-resale-values-new-thread.html I'm on a roll today!

I know if I bought a new 996 (back in the day) and saw a car with the same front end, but at a cheaper price......I'd be pissed! The entire front end including the doors (IIRC) are the same for both, so it comes down to mid or rear engine. Thats just mass marketing for the sake of capital acquisition and nothing more. 993's were built when the company was down in the dumps and was an expensive car to produce. I think thats what its all about. These aren't supposed to be high numbered mass market cars for any yahoo to own. P-cars have always been an exclusive club of enthusiast, not a yuppie's car with automatic trannys as an almost standard feature. Just my .0002 cents

I don't care in the least. I did not become a member of a club on the basis of the car I bought. I bought it to drive. So, if it looks like a cheaper model, so much the better. In fact, I prefer it because I am ashamed to flaunt wealth. The only thing that matters to me is how the car drives. The 996 is lighter and faster on the track, and it is a much more comfortable daily driver. That's why I bought one, not because I care about what anyone else thinks about my choice, or whether it looks like a cheaper model. When I first went looking for a Porsche, I was looking for a 993. They are very pretty after all. After looking for a long time, I decided that the 996, for my needs, did everything the 993 did but better. If I had known more about Porsches at the time, I very well may have focused on 964s, but you have to start somewhere.

I'll give you all your points about faster, comfort etc.......... Why on earth would you be ashamed to let your life successes be shown by means of the car you drive? If you have done well in life, you should embrace the ability to show it. All things done in taste shouldn't be viewed as shameful. I love that I am fortunate enough to own and drive my car, as well as the fact that with the new 997's it looks even more new again.......something we 993 guys tend to get asked on a regular basis. And it looks like nothing else on the road........priceless!

I'm really not trying to be difficult here . . . I promise I love to drive beautiful cars. However, if I had an option to push a button that created a hologram around me that made the car look like a Geo, I would be ecstatic. I would rather people think of me as being far below my means and judge me on that basis than treat me a certain way (better or worse) because they think I am a man of means. It may have something to do with my philosophy of life. Some people think they are lucky for what they have, while others believe they have earned it. I think I have been very lucky in that I have been blessed to be born of good parents in a great country at a great time in history, and further that I have had opportunities to be very well educated and to have been successful in my career. Although I have worked hard, and I still do, I still have been lucky. So, when I drive my Porsches, I would just as soon be invisible, unless I am trying to pass you on the track and then I just want you to get the $%^& out of my way!

Chris, I'm going to tell the wifey you said that. She won't take kindly to your comments. She worked hard to buy that 100K 996 CAB some time back "in the day". She looked at MANY different variants but when it came down to it, seeing that 996CAB sitting on the showroom floor took her breath away. Many years later, 65K miles on it, several track events, and not a single problem over all those years I'd say she not only has the car SHE wanted (which everybody seems to miss the point here) but a damn reliable one at that. See you at the next track event! Maybe by then she will have forgot and won't have to kick you tail in on the circuit Just don't remind her about the kink at CMP **for those of you that think I am attacking Chris, I am not. We are good friends and I am just razzin' him**

Thats exactly my point D. If I spent 100k on a car, I wouldn't want a 60k car (Boxster)with the same front end on it. I'd like to feel like I got something other than..... I'm not saying there is anything wrong with either car......just don't care for the similarities in the two.....thats all. I'm sure K's cab is beautiful Oh and that butt kickin' thing........................my brotha please Love ya, mean it!

I suppose I can understand and appreciate that. Could not agree more (lucky and blessed) Lost me on that one. I want everyone to know that I, without a college degree, made it! (with the help of a smart, well educated and willing wife of course). Oh and if you can pass me......you'll have to earn it

I'm ok with that. If we are in a race, just don't block me. If we are at a DE and I am at your bumper through the corners, just make sure to lift!!!

Only if in the same class would you get a block I'll get right on that

95 C4 993+77 Bronco Sport=best of both worlds.

many toys are collectible, 993 = toy for the slow................

Your right about the 993 being slow as far as sports cars are concerned. At least the non-turbo's. But its still a great toy regardless and some view them as collectibles. I view them as cars and have no connection to them. I have driven much faster women in my life than my 993! But I isnt slow or been clasified as we todd did the last time I asked.

Funny how this "slow" 993 has yet to earn anything less than a 2nd place trophy, and when it stoops so low, its a Cayman S that beats it, never a class sharing 996. AAHH the sweet taste of victory

Well the 993 is only slightly slower because of all our heavy gauge body panels weighting us down. As apposed to those Hyundai thin body panels on the 996......guess thats what happened with left over Boxster bodies back in the late 90's

That's pretty funny. When I raced my 996 (2004-2006) the only 993 competition came from RSCSs and an occasional TT. Even then, I beat them a lot more than they beat me. Please don't even pretend a 993 isn't the slowest Porsche track car of all time. Jim

Particularly a cab. Who's he racing? Ghettoracer?

You forgot to mention that leather is heavier than rubbermaid plastic.

But they do lose weight after the rear window explodes or the front and rear window channel rust out.

Ouch, that is going to hurt.....

Better words have not been spoken...by a cone racer? Real men don't race cones

That must be one of the most ignorant posts on RL ever.

This is getting way OT as it should now be titled (we all have big penises but need to figure out a rationale to claim it is even bigger) ......Time for me to unsubscribe

Same for me...I just wanted to work one guy up before I quit. I may have gotten more than one

I thought you did yesterday... https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...35#post4290735

Danny, I'm reminded again why I run the other way when these threads start. While I don't agree that autox isn't real driving (it is) the far more ignorant posts are the ones that proclaim 996 drivers don't know what a 959 is or someone thinking the leather in a 993 is somehow better then the leather in a 996 or whatever the latest silliness is. The idea that a 993 regularly beats 996s is pretty unbelievable you must admit. There are a bunch of PCA club racing results to dispute that idea. Clearly it's time for this thread to die. The 993 guys can go back to lala land where your cars are fast and beautiful and etched from steel by the gods of Olympus. The 996 guys can go back to lying under their cars with trouble lights waiting for th RMS to start leaking. Have a good day all. Jim

Yup, but you also forgot that we 996 drivers need to search for different spoilers and lights so that nobody could possibly confuse us lofty 996 drivers with those lowly drivers of the ***** porsche, the 986. Oh the shame . . .

Quotes source post: 4290735

I did but Chris (a good friend of mine who happens to have the wrong model of P-Car ) dragged me in. It was fun and comical and then others chimed in again with typical bs and I reminded myself why I unsubscribed.

All part of the allure of what makes an "oldschool" 993 a Porsche

I thought you unsubscribed Go away now JimB......that was a funny post. You do realize we are just razzin here and the crack about the 959 and the leather etc, is just in good fun? I would be willing however to almost agree with the 959 comment though. I would bet more older P-car drivers know what it is vs. 996 owners that lease their automatic "911"....at least back when they first came out anyway, maybe not these days....?

Sir, yes sir!

Great post! Jim, as usual you hit the nail on the head.

Oh I know it's all in fun although I sometimes think some 993 owners actually believe that they've purchased the greatest 911 of all time. I owned a 98 993 and loved the way it looked but..... I guess there's no harm in loving your car though. You might be right about the 959 but I'm not so sure anymore. Granted a huge number of 996s were sold or leased to paper rich web investors in the late 90s and early 2000s but there's also a huge number of real enthusiasts that drive them now. 996s started off on the wrong foot with the Boxster front end and the rumors of Japanese influence but they've actually turned out to be great cars. Much easier to work on than 993s (thank you Japan) and really well built. I owned a 99 996 at the same time I had my 993 and I really think quality was a toss up. Anyway, I've got to get to work. Have a good day all. Jim

The 993 and 996 are both great cars. If its owning one or the other, who cares. Well. some do but I dont. I dont love my car, I dont name my cars, I just drive them. I do like good beer, fine wine, and top shelf liquor but there will be someone out there that says my Grolsch, Silver Oak/Cakebread, and Porfidio is not as good as Miller Light, 2 buck chuck, and Jose Gold. Different strokes, different folks. I drive 2 Ford SUV's too. Is there someone that wants to pick on me?

See now I love my car. I don't name them or anything like that. But it looks great, goes pretty well and just has a huge cool factor. I don't get that out of the 996, but it may actually be a "better" over all machine, all things considered. They are lighter and faster on track in stock form so something has to be said for that. The looks are what loose me (until the 02's with the new lights). I am considering the purchase of an early 996 as a track beater instead of destroying my 4S. Thought about another 993 but the PCA webpage shows a lighter power to weight ratio and I want to go fast, not look good (well as good anyway )

These trophies and mini plaques are from my local track named willow. I never get out to coney things as they are on Sundays. Its okay though The 996 guys never seem to hang around for trophy time, seems they already knew they lost. (just to clarify, I'm talking about the 996's I share a class with, of course the turbos and GT3's mop the floor with us all day long)

I shouldn't have said it to begin with....sorry for the poke.

In what club is the 993 in the same class as a 996? In PCA the n/a 996 competes head to head with the Euro 993RSCS and 993TT. The 993 isn't even competitive with well prepared 964s.

huh? very quiet here

Apparently it has become boring. You can always re-read the thread, and re-read this one: https://rennlist.com/forums/996-forum/360201-why-is-the-993-sooo-far-superior-to-all-other-porsches.html

Maybe it is because of weekend. Perhaps this kind of discussion roll better while at work

Don't worry...all Porsches will be coming down in value...why you say? This might answer your question or this This one's a doozy! So is this As we say on HP... Got Popcorn? Peace...I'm outta here

Just sold my 1995 nicely modified C2 and bought '02 Turbo because of the ridiculous value of the cars. I agree the 993s have intriguing noises and so forth, but they also have loads of wind noise and rattles. The 996 is like a trip into this time period. I loved the 993 look, although the 996 looks much more up to date (headlights, etc). If you like old technology, noise, and repair bills, go with the 993. I loved mine, but the 996 is a breath of fresh air (or should I say water). By the way, I want to lower mine a bit. What is the best way to go for mostly street use?

rnr, pss9 - congrats

Considering a similar move myself. What sort of $$$ delta was there between the 993 C2 and the 996TT? Love the looks of the 993 and the wonderful yellow color but.... I guess I need to drive a 996 and see how I like it first... down the slope I go.... down down down.... (I guess I could replace my CLK and 993 with a nice 996....)

Quotes source post: 5222680

Another suspension option is factory x73 kit. Enjoy your new ride.

Quotes source post: 4277007

Very well stated. I have read several (not all) posts on this, as I am interested in the topic as well. So far the "Geeky Engineer" has stated this the best. I also like the self-deprecating humor. Andy T

I dont buy the whole Porsche needed to evolve to water-cooling. Ask the 1000hp guys if there is a cooling problem on their air-cooleds. Figuring out the cooling equation to lean the motor at idle to meet emissions shouldnt be a major issue, it is simply more airflow around the jugs and more air through the oil coolers. My 500hp engine runs cool even on 90 degree days after mashing on the loud pedal on every street I encounter. They (Porsche) should of just used another cooling fan on the engine and more oil coolers for the oil..........I still dont buy it......there was something else going on

Quotes source post: 5224294

Unfortunately, he is wrong. In fact, the number of 996s produced is less than 2:1 versus 993s. What he is right about is that the 993 guys keep their cars' mystique alive. Whatever all the barroom economists on boards like this think, the fact is that market value is largely subjective. Why is gas so expensive? Supply? No. Supply is at a 15 year high. It's expensive because of speculators who don't have anywhere else to put their money right now, and pump prices are tied to futures. How about a share of Bear Stearns? Would have set you back $159 not too many weeks ago. Their friends up the street picked up the company for $2 a share last week. Same company as it was, valued on hope last year and valued on fear last week. In 2002, the Nobel Prize for Economics went to a guy who was finally able to convince the world that psychology has more to do with 'value' than supply or demand. A large part of the problem with 996 values is us. The fact is that a 993 owner can potentially expect to spend as much money over the life of his car on repairs as a 996 owner could replacing his motor could. But to those guys, these things are a badge of honour for owning a Porsche. To 996 owners, they are an outrageous example of engineering incompetence and corporate negligence. All how you choose to see it. And as values continue to fall, more and more people who don't buy into the romance of Porsche and don't have deep pockets are going to buy them, be disappointed, and tell the world.

Quotes source post: 5224524

Come on Tippy, how many "1000 hp guys" are really out there? What kind of longevity can you get from a 1000 hp motor? If you don't buy Porsche's stated reason, what else was going on? Why do you think they are lying?

Quotes source post: 5224524

I think most of us would agree that Porsche has the best automotive engineers in the world. Have you noticed that when allowed the set aside the �911 mystique� they build mid-engine, V8-10, water cooled street and race cars? I think that should tell us something about how the best think a car should be built. I agree the 911 is a great automotive icon but in reality the enthusiasts and marketing department are keeping Porsche from building the best race and street cars they can. I�ll say it again, let the 911 continue as a great GT car but free the engineers to build us the best sports cars they can.

Quotes source post: 5224614

Great post Jim!! I agree! It would be interesting to see what kind of car they could turn the Cayman into if the engineers were given free rein in the company parts bin.

Quotes source post: 5224524

It's not a conspiracy. The issues of noise, emissions and fuel economy as imposed by German law were real, not made up. The thing that people forget is, when you invest in developing a new engine, you do it in the hope that you can keep developing that platform for years to come so you get your money back. It's not that the air cooled motor couldn't be forced to meet the regs and get a little more powerful. It's that Porsche needed an engine with ten + years of development potential ahead of it. That, the 993's engines could not give them. They could be 'fixed', but they had a limited future.

Quotes source post: 5224631

No kidding. I lust over the idea of a 3000 lb. Cayman with a GT3's suspension and engine. A Cayman based cup car would be great. Personally I think there are two groups that are a real boat anchor on Porsche. There is the "I own a 911 and therefore I've arrived" crowd that just want to drive around with their Porsche letter jackets pretending to be cool. And there are the so called "enthusiasts" that seem to think Porsche should remain mired in 1960�s technology. Maybe it�s just me but calling anyone a �sport car enthusiast� that puts history and looks over performance is a joke. But that�s just me. I could be wrong.

Quotes source post: 5224833

You know what you get if you build the fastest possible Porsche with no flaws and absolutely up to date engineering? A Nissan. Porsche has an interesting problem. If they lose their quirkiness, they'll get eaten alive by more 'modern' car companies in the marketplace. If they keep it, they'll wither away and lose their cred. Their only hope is to keep racing, and keep the 911 distinct for as long as they can while they invent their future. With all due respect, I think that to say putting history and looks ahead of performance a "joke" in the sports car world is a bit simplistic. Sports car enthusiasts have a century of history of falling in love with beautiful, flawed cars. Keeps life more interesting. If everybody demands only objective definitions of superiority, then eventually there will only be one of everything.

Quotes source post: 5224608

I was not speaking of longevity, (even a water-cooled 1000hp motor wont last long), just cooling the engine with more power. I hear it again and again about the engine making too much power to cool, wrong. I dont think they were lying, I am just wondering why the change myself? It can be done.

Quotes source post: 5224722

and you cant do this air-cooled?

Quotes source post: 5224902

Read the rest of my post. You can't do it air cooled and end up with an engine with ten more years of development potential in it. Even motorcycles, snowmobiles and ATVs have gone to liquid cooling...

Quotes source post: 5224865

Nissan hasn't build a great sports car since the 240z so I'm not sure what you're talking about Bruce. And who said anything about building a perfect car? I was talking about building the best sports car! Sports cars are far from perfect. To make them light you compromise on sound proofing and stereo equipment. To make them handle you compromise on ride. To make them stop you have squeaky brakes. To make them powerful you compromise on reliability. It's those compromises and many more that make great, but flawed, sports cars. My point is that being required to hang the engine from the rear bumper because the marketing department wants it there is not the right compromise. BTW, I have nothing against 911s. We currently have a 997 cup, a 996 cab and an 84 euro cab. I've owned a 993 and built a pretty fast 996 race car. We also have a Cayman S which is one amazing sports car that just cries for more power. Again, just my opinion.

The combination of water and air cooling is the most effective, practical and advanced means to cool, bottom line. This is not to say just air does not do the job, it simply does not do it as effectively as w/H2O. I believe this to be the main reason the movement to H2O took place. Why not use the best/most effective methods in mowing forward.

Quotes source posts: 5224912, 5224958

Why did they make the move if air works already? That is my question. You can make the same power and keep the engine cool using air/oil cooling. If Eddie Bello can cool his 1100hp motor on the street and pass emissions, why do I need water? There are several 930s/964Ts/993TTs making huge power and passing emissions. I am not bashing the 996 (cant wait to be in another),just questioning the blanket statement that an engine needs water-cooling to pass emissions due to stricter laws. I know someone read this probably in Excellence and quoted it here, I just dont understand why non-Engineers figured it out on their cars but Porsche cant?

Tippy, give up, man. Water-cooled is superior to air-cooled. It's like trying to discuss the Converse sneaker back when shorts were really short v. the Air Jordan series. There's a home for them flat, rubber, simple Converse sneakers, but no one's going to bank on them for future builds because it is outdated technology. I love the 993, but it's too dated for me to like, though a Turbo with Turbo S aerokit would be fantastic. It's the one TT car I could enjoy because of its place in 911 history. It's the most iconic of the best of the last gen.

Quotes source post: 5225118

It's not about what CAN be done. It's about what it makes sense to do. Heaven knows, there's no percentage in second guessing what's possible today when it comes to engineering. It's about what's practical, to build, own and maintain, and to comply with the various laws and realities we live with. I'll answer your question specifically: Snowmobiles moved to liquid cooling to allow them to build engines that reliably produce more power. Period. My lowly touring sled makes 100hp, gets better mileage than fan-cooled engines half its size, and is half as noisy. ATVs do it for the same reason, and add one: Utility machines don't generally operate at high speeds. The ATV equivalent of heavy traffic is a mud bog, or a treed area. A liquid cooled engine will stay cooler under that kind of stress, and be quieter and more reliable besides. The only air cooled engines I have left in my life are on a lawn mower and a weed whacker. I contend that the air cooled flat six was nearing the practical limit of its development potential for a road car, so it didn't make commercial sense for Porsche to invest in compliance and additional horsepower. It's called 'diminishing returns'.

Quotes source post: 5224947

We agree: The conversation is about building the best sports car. All I'm saying is that the single minded pursuit of eliminating flaws will, by definition and so long as there is consensus about a product's purpose, eventually eliminate differences, too. And differences are fun. Your remark about the 240z is funny and ironic in context. And it seems to me it's only been a few days since guys around here were at it tooth and nail, half of them creaming their jeans over a new Nissan sports car. I'll tell you a story: Many years ago, I was on a test track in Nagoya. We were comparing a bunch of sports coupes for a car company I worked with. They had rounded up a bunch of both direct competitors and benchmark cars. I remember as clearly as if it was yesterday that the car I was most impressed with by far that night was a Nissan. And the car I loved the most, by far, was a 944. I guess what I'm saying is - and maybe I'm alone in this - I actually think that objectivity has almost no place in a discussion about sports cars. Yeah, I know, stopwatches and all that. But these are emotional and sensual products. I have more fun accepting them as such, or I would have bought a Corvette.

Preach, Bruce, preach.

Quotes source post: 5224833

I agree. I think Porsche could go even further than the Cayman in the future. There is no reason they can't bring out a 2,400 - 2,500 lb mid-engine car car (ala-Lotus Exige) w/GT3 motor and brakes. It could be a true enthusiast car that goes back to the "Giant Killer" basics. For racing the power to weight would be huge and the car would be much easier on tires and brakes.

Quotes source post: 5225279

I think you hit the nail on the head with this observation.

Quotes source post: 5225118

Let me say this. For starters, the more the hp goes ^ in an air cooled motor the more heat it will have to displace. This can become a real issue during the summer ambient air temps, especially under heavy loads Do the same to H2O cooled and this is no longer becomes a concern. When something is hot would you rather blow on it or dunk it in water to cool, please don't say blow. The answer is simple. Water displaces heat far better than air, no one can argue that. So it would not make sense to NOT use the best technology available in cooling, unless one lives in the desert or Antarctica.

it'd serve as a halo for-track-nerds-only car, though. i'd never buy the lotus elise cuz it's just too small and i'm not into that ultra-racy, ultra-compromise type ride since i use my fun car 99.9999% for the street just like the rest of the buying public. the 911 is in that nirvana, well balanced market spot. it tugs at the heart strings of the track nerds and also has cred with hip-hop gangsta rappers as apparent in their lyrics to this very day where it's full of Escalades riding on 26s, Bentley coupes with the custom stitching, etc. Rick Ro$$ still raps about the porsche, so does 50Cent (heck in one of his older vids he's in a 993 in silver riding out!). its image is mint. appealing within multiple socio-economic levels, both genders, of all ages, etc. the uber-cayman is just... too track nerd. it doesn't have the sex appeal of the 911 just like the 911 doesn't and will never have the sex appeal of a Ferrari. and it wasn't designed to ever overcome the 911 and the 911 the ferrari. they have their own place. and the track nerd place is just too niche for porsche to spend $ on is my guess. they already got the 911 dominating. now the cayenne is a big **** SUV. completely diff focus and i would consider purchasing a new body cayenne TT if i had a need in the future for a roomier car. i'd never get a cayman or a boxster or whatever. i would look at a porsche sedan because again, it's diff enough from the 911. panamera, baby. excited for it!

Quotes source post: 5225415

That's fine Jim and I are not saying get rid of the 911. Porsche should absolutely keep it. However, the race track doesn't care about history, or lineage, or image. Throw the "track nerds" a bone and make a uber Cayman. The 911 won't cease just because Porsche makes another fast car. In fact, history proves (944T) that Porsche can make it's sub-car just as fast and the 911 will live on. On a final note Ben, go to a dealer and grab a test ride in a Cayman (try to forget it doesn't say Carrera on the back and throw some curves at it). You may be impressed. IMHO, it is one of the best handling cars Porsche has ever made.

Quotes source post: 5225312

Bruce, I can see we are in violent agreement which doesn't surprise me too much. I love the 944 story. I have an old Car and Driver test somewhere that compares the Nissan of the day (280Z?), the 944 and the Alfa GTV6. For me the choice was obvious and that Alfa is still my favorite car of all time. Perfect it wasn't but it was darn close to a perfect sports car. Having said that, I still think Porsche should let the 911 migrate towards the GT end of the sports car spectrum and let a better platform like the Cayman slide into the high performance spot. Jim

Quotes source post: 5225503

Ben and I already have a plan to have a beer next time he's in MN. You can bet we'll be going for a ride in the Cayman!

Quotes source post: 5225503

def not saying to get rid of the 911 - in fact, what i'm saying is it'll never go away because it's so dominant in the porsche line-up in terms of being the IT car. sales volume wise, we got that boat car killing it. And Ray, I'm not a badge ***** just to be a ***** about it. Heck, if I wanted that, I'd be rolling a Merc G-wagon on dished out 22s to maximize the gangsta image. yet I used to drive a Honda S2000 and loved every minute of it. And I have little to no doubt I'm going to enjoy what the Cayman has to offer in driving dynamics. I loved the S2000, I'm sure I'll love the Cayman. But as I age, I want more than just lightweight flickability in my fun car. I need a sense of history, prestige, and style. The 911 is the all-in-one deal for me. Not the best at one thing, but a very good "renaissance man" car.

Quotes source post: 5225514

Interesting move, though I'd argue that the 911 is not really a sports car and more GT car since being water-cooled. I mean the Ferrari 360 felt like an outright sports car. The 911 is the sports car GT coupe... Isn't it technically a GT coupe with the rear back seats?

Quotes source post: 5225526

Keep the beer, give me a shot of Goose straight up, MN winter cold.

Quotes source posts: 5225279, 5225405, 5225244

This is the only reason to me to move to water. Yes and no, for the first statement, it depends on many more variables. Cylinder wall thickness, cam specs (duration and overlap), cylinder head config., compression ratio, etc.... You say it is not an issue with water, you will have to increase volume and surface area of the radiator to adjust to heat dissipation, same with air. Came out around the same time actually....

Well, that's it, then. It's a conspiracy, perpetrated by the evil coolant industry bent on world domination. The air-cooled engine has been killed, just like the 100 mpg carburetor, by corporate malfeasance.

Quotes source post: 5226180

Tippy, in hot weather, do you not agree that the water/air cooled method is a far superior heat exchanger in comparison to just air cooled?

Quotes source post: 5226259

Just to back you up, here... air cooled engines are inherently simpler and lighter. The tradeoff is that they don't manage heat very well. This is why they're preferred for lots of light aircraft applications (where they're operated in cold ambient temps) and for your weed whacker (where efficiency isn't as important). The higher the specific output of an engine, the more heat it will produce. That's a simple fact. So, it logically follows that the more powerful you make an engine, the more of a liability poor cooling becomes. Yes, you can engineer your way around it, but it makes no sense to do so if the solution completely negates the benefit of air cooling in the first place, ie that it's simple and light. This just seems like such an odd thing to argue over...

Funny that after I got my 996, my aircooled buddy asked me to pop the lid to see the motor. True, you sure don't get much of a view of the motor compared to a 993. 993 also has imho the ultimate "classic 911" look, but the 996 was clearly a leap forward in terms of a modern car.

Quotes source post: 5226286

+1 Class dismissed

Quotes source post: 5226180

wtf are u smoking dude

arent the aircooled really oil cooled... hence the air/oil heat exchanger up front.

Quotes source post: 5227028

I think they are all oil cooled, just different ways of cooling the oil.

isn't it true that Porsche went to water cooled because of noise suppression and emissions issues and NOT heat dissipation????? And isn't it also true that even while making air cooled roadcars their race cars had already gone water cooled???

Quotes source post: 5227391

It was both. One specific reason was they said they could not make a 4 valve head stay cool enough on an air-cooled car. They felt they needed 4 valves per cylinder to get better power output.

Quotes source post: 5227499

I knew I read this somewhere. I just dug out my "Porsche 911 Story" by Paul Frere. He writes the following; "There were many reasons for abandoning the air-cooled motors.......... But the most important was that experiments made with air-cooled engines having four valves per cylinder had indicated that adequate cooling of the cylinder heads and valve seats was impossible to achieve. Four valve technology, however, was essential to achieving a high specific power output, while at the same time meeting current and future emission regulations worldwide. Liquid cooling also does away with the large cooling fan, a major source of noise; it also has the advantage of better noise absorption and considerably simplifies the cockpit heating system." So that is probably the real reason................OR ...............BruceP is right and "It's a conspiracy, perpetrated by the evil coolant industry bent on world domination. The air-cooled engine has been killed, just like the 100 mpg carburetor, by corporate malfeasance."

Quotes source post: 5222841

+1 What he said...... X73 Love mine! It is the way the car should have been delivered. eric

Quotes source post: 5227524

I like the second theory by BruceP better. Makes much more sense. It gives alot of credit to the air-cooled guys.

Quotes source post: 5228461

I just looked up ethylene glycol on Wikipedia. Apparently, it was first prepared by a French chemist. So I guess we have to invade France to stop this madness.

Quotes source post: 5228492

LOL....... At least it's a short trip from Iraq. It should also be an easier occupation... Fire up the tanks.....we're rolling out for coolant.....

Quotes source post: 5228656

Just spat coffee all over these papers I'm marking...

Ok, I'm in. First oil now water..although I just want their women and wine

Blood for Coolant? Tough slogan to pull off

Quotes source post: 5228825

Bush and his cohorts can pull it off... they pulled off the War for WMD thing.

Brucie, ls, Benny, not arguing, I call it stimulating conversation, me and my friends always talk this way. Just stating air/oil cooling could of continued on if Porsche wanted to. The only thing that would of been hard to manage is the noise, but alternating fan blade spacing creates less noise than equal spaced blades. Old tech that worked, look at your SUVs cooling fan........ bye guys, dont want you think I am arguing about this, I am happy I dont have to worry about my water pump failing now for the time being.

Quotes source post: 5230073

I took it as an informative discussion as well, mostly since you really have no argument In all reality, your p-car would run circles around most including mine, as long as it's a cool day It's all good Tippy

and dont forget that air cooling is present in all internal combustion engines. The air that moves through the engine does take away a fair amount of heat. So, this means you all are driving (partially) air cooled cars

Quotes source post: 5231413

All are air cooled, actually. Both in the sense that heat gets evacuated through the exhaust and in the sense that heat is radiated from the block. We all drive oil cooled cars, too, since oil (in a four stroke engine) naturally removes heat from high friction areas as it circulates. But what a non-water cooled engine cannot do is manage heat generated at the top end, where the valvegear is. Oil can only cool where it circulates in volume. Air can only cool where there is a large surface area to distribute heat from. But if you want to increase specific output of a normally aspirated engine (specific output means power produced per unit of displacement), you have to do it by making the engine move more air by moving it faster. Eventually, the things you do to accomplish this produce heat around the heads, and that's when water cooling comes into its own. Coolant only has one job, not two like oil has, and it can be directed to where it's needed via its own plumbing. The whole debate is silly, as is the distinction between types of cooling. As the specific output of Porsche engines increased, even Porsche - despite performing miracles with the original flat-6 design - eventually hit a point where the heads had to be cooled. That's all it really came down to. Add noise laws and efficiency targets, and it was a perfect storm. (Apologies to any real mechanics in the room if I misused a term in here anywhere. I'm confident of the principles, less so of the mechanics).

let this thread die already!!!!

Quotes source post: 5232101

Personally I'd rather see 100 pages on the evolution of our cars than one on how to shut your hood or where to mount your sub-woofer. There is a lot to be learned for peoples differing opinions.

Back to the original question... "why is the 993 worth so much more than a 996?" Just because it's like, WAY better!!! If you don't believe me, just ask anyone with a 993. They'll tell you.

Quotes source post: 5232144

I hear you Jim... the whole 993 vs 996 debate is something so personal... its kinda like the "what kinda oil we using" threads... Besides, I was just trying to change the pace a bit and roped you in

Quotes source post: 5232165

see what I mean

Quotes source post: 5232165

Just how much does a 993 cab weigh??? Trouble maker.......

Quotes source post: 5232271

993s are valued by the lbs?

Quotes source post: 5232186

You got me. I have no time for the 993 debate anymore. They are holding their value because there is a group of people willing to pay up for them. I don't get it but it's their money and they can spend it however they want. I do enjoy the discussion of the evolution from air to water and, hopefully someday, the move to mid-engine. Ray, you're always looking for trouble aren't you!

This entire post is complete waste of time. The fact is we are all paying way too much for any P car. Some of us do because we have a passion and other just have too much money. Jan 08... A new study has found that German sports car maker Porsche earns an incredible average of $28,000 in profit on every vehicle it sells. The figure — printed in Germany's Welt am Sonntag newspaper, citing a study by B&D Forecast — dwarfs the per-car earnings of virtually any other automaker. Comparatively, luxury and sports car maker BMW makes about $3,200 per car. Audi nets a less impressive $1,580, and Chrysler and Volkswagen earn just $900 and $400, respectively. Porsche's overall earnings for 2006 were $2.7 billion. Overall sales totaled 96,794 vehicles. Aren't we all suckers??? LOL

I recently got to test drive the 993TT. It was a nice drive. Nothing awe inspiring, but the ride was better than I thought and the car was quieter than my 996 with PSE. I actually really came to enjoy the "dated" but classic interior and the car felt a lot smaller than my 996 (not a bad thing). I guess the romance to this car is that it's the 993, last of the aircooled, and has what a good number of Porsche fans call the apex of 911 visual design. And also, because of this, it was cool to feel like this car isn't going to lose any value for many years to come assuming you keep the miles low, but that's just silly so drive it like it's your last day with a functioning left leg. The 996 and even more so with the 997, 998... there's nothing really special about it along the "rarity" front. I see more 997s than I do 996s on the streets of Seattle. Is that a bad thing or a good thing? I don't care. Just go with the flow. It's out of our control.

Quotes source post: 5232388

I hate when people quote this data without taking volumes into account. We are suckers if we think we're suckers. But Porsche is a business, and any business person will tell you that you can't take margin to the bank. You can only take gross profits to the bank, and Porsche is very, very far from the most profitable car company in the world in gross dollars. You'd have to be an idiot to run a company that does less than 30,000 units a year of its most famous product, still be one of the least automated car builders in the world, highly susceptible to the health of the economies in which you sell, and not take all the margin you can. The best thing about this is that the margins are only borne by the first guy to buy the car. After that, they're a bargain. It's called depreciation.

Quotes source post: 5232551

That's cuz it's Seattle. 911 production is absolutely tiny compared to anything else in the world that doesn't end with an 'i'. Look it up. We have them, so we see them. Some of us live in rich parts of the country, so they seem more common. But in the automotive scheme of things, they are still relatively rare.

Agreed, and even in Seattle, it's really tough to spot your 993 Carrera4S/CarreraS/Turbo.

Quotes source post: 5232551

Depends on where you look. I'm sure that F430's aren't rare in Beverly Hills but that doesn't make them "commonplace" nationwide. Take a look at Porsche's total production run for these cars compared to most cars and you will find these cars are fairly rare. I know in my neighborhood I don't see many Porsche's. I probably only see another 996 around once a month (if that).

Quotes source post: 5233305

Bruce, no offence, but what are you talking about??? Bottom line is always net not gross. Porsche company is not about volume but profit margin. Economy of scales my friend...you either sell less with bigger margins or more with smaller margins...economics 101. They don't compete with Honda or VW, where they sell in volume with low margins. Porsche made $2.7billion in profit not gross sales...thanks to us. VW would have to sell 450,000 cars.

Quotes source post: 5233459

No, they don't compete with VW because they own a majority stake in the company. It seems that a lot of people think that VW owns Porsche, when it's the other way around.

Quotes source post: 5233459

It'd be hard for VW to make $28k margin with products like their FOX. You can't compare SWATCH with IWC watches either. It depends on the company, sometimes mass production companies are more profitable than luxury brand makers, sometimes not.

Case and Point.

Quotes source post: 5233459

I think what Bruce was pointing out was that you can't just take a car company's bottom line, divide it by the number of cars produced and pretend you have the average margin earned on each car. I don't remember the specifics but Porsche has had a very successful money management function for the past several years. It wasn�t long ago when it was reported that way over half of its profits were from non car related functions. Having said that, there is no question that Porsche makes money on every car. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.

Quotes source post: 5233435

i understand also that america's middle class has better standard of living than 98% of the rest of the world or something ridiculous like that. but do most of us here live middle class? likely not. we're all logging into this huddled, niche internet "metro" called rennlist where our eyes are attracted to 911s on the road. i def see more of them now after having fallen in love with one than before where i was like that's cool but i'd rather have my M3 (remember, ray? ). so my point is - i think we're in general agreement here - relatively speaking, the 911 isn't a rare car in the major metros like seattle where one can drive it all year comfortably - while i am well aware of how much they make per year which is way way less than what GM/Toyota/Honda outputs in F-150s, Camrys, and Civics. i don't see a 996/997 carrera and go WOW that's been a long time! a 993... not a WOW, but more like oh cool there's another one and it's prob one i saw before around town. porsche is going to make more 911s in the future. it's great, but it just makes the aircooled all the more special due to its rarity and "ultra" low production figure sin comparison to the watercooled 911s. considering all factors in my purchase, the 993 didn't meet my needs. the 996 checked off more of the wants on the list. like many of you successful, opinionated, thoughtful people, if i wanted a 993, i would've gotten one. but the 996 had the right timing, has the right look, has more rights checked off than the 993 so my money went to the watercooled side. but because there were many checks on the aircooled side, i cannot begin to knock on it and can admire it/respect it for what it was and has become. the 993 can be summed up like this: less is more.

Quotes source post: 5233459

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, and it seems like you're agreeing with me. You seemed grumpy about Porsche's profits. All I was saying is that unit margin, especially in a capital intensive business like cars, is far from the whole profit picture. The fewer you sell, the more unit margin you need because so little of your cost base is variable. What you take to the bank every year is the sum total of those unit margins, whether it's 100,000 vehicles x $2,000 or 1,000,000 vehicles x $200. Porsche makes the most money per car, yes. But Porsche does not make the most money, if that simplifies things at all. Everywhere in life that you buy something that's relatively rare, or has prestige or whatever, you pay disproportionately more for it than the added cost of goods would by itself justify. Doesn't matter if you're talking shoes, scotch, watches, stereo equipment, or flying first class. It's worth it if you think it's worth it, and it's not if you don't. But profit is not a crime (regardless of what the IRS seems to think).

Quotes source post: 5233728

IIRC, contract engineering is a fairly large profit center for Porsche as well.

Quotes source post: 5233459

Let's not forget, that the main reason for these good results for Porsche is because of the Cayenne, which outsells all of the other models by more than 5 to 1. I doubt that Porsche would have such good profit performance, without the high volume Cayenne absorbing a lot of overhead... ...Rickker

I'm a 3.2 Carrera owner, and don't feel "invested" in this 993 vs. 996 thing. But I'm starting to think of maybe getting 996 as a daily driver because they seem like bargains. As an outsider looking in, and a potential addition to the demand side of the 996 equation, I say: The basic shape of the 996 is gorgeous. It harkens back to the clean lines of the early cars. People complain about the lack of curves? 911 styling isn't just about curves, it's also about lines. On the minus side, the headlights are the wrong shape. To save a few development bucks, Porsche threw the classic round 911 headlights under the bus?? What were they thinking? Wrong, wrong wrong. 996 interioir lifted straight out of the Boxter and does not relate in any way to prior 911 insides. It's not "bad", it just doesn't have any continuity with the previous 3 decades of 911 dashes, doors, etc. Rather, it's from a less expensive, less exclusive sibling. The fact that Porsche went back to many of the earlier 911 interior design elements in the 997 shows they know a mistake was made in this regard with the 996. 996s seem to be everywhere (Marin County CA). 993s, not so much. Some posters on this thread seem to be personally offended that 996 values are so low. Maybe people bought these cars new and are disappointed that they have depreciated faster than prior 911 models and blame "snobbish" 993 owners/buyers for the stronger demand for those cars. Relative maintanance and repair costs for 996 vs. 993 could be an issue too. Neither car is cheap to own, but would a 996 be more likely to rack up 5-figure repair bills? If, as a buyer, you don't care about certain classic 911 design elements (obviously include air cooling also), and appreciate the 996's sleek shape, it's a very good value relative to other 911s, and particularly relative to the 993. I don't think the above factors that are affecting 996 vs 993 values are going to change, so I expect 996s to remain relative bargains.

I love my 993 and for what I paid, I could have bought me a much newer 996. I didn't choose the 993 because it was necessarily "better". I personally liked it better for the classic lines and raw ride. In terms of real bang for buck "VALUE", you just cannot beat the 996. It is a lot of car for the depreciated price point and you just can't dis that. There are many people who, for any number of reasons, prefer the 996. Reasons range from refinement, performance, personal preference for cosmetics etc. Why it matters to some is beyond me. Be happy with what you have and don't feel compelled to defend your position on it. It really doesn't matter.

Quotes source post: 5233912

Hey Bruce, no sweat....All I wanted to point out is that we are all paying too much for our P car. Does't really matter weather the 996 is worth less than a 993. Its all about demand and supply, that is what makes the world go round.

I'm a 996 owner because I was looking for a bargain, but I still think the 993 is a far more **beautiful** car. Hard to argue with that. There's something absolutely pure and uncluttered in those lines that has never been duplicated, even by the 997:

An awful lot has been said about this debate but I think it all boils down to four words............................ OLD SCHOOL, NEW SCHOOL With that said, I too like the look of the "old" car but again I say - what made me purchase the "new" car was the technology PERIOD! Would I like to have a 997? Yea, I think so, but after my mods on my 04 C4S (X-73, cold air box, MKII Exhaust, 19" wheels and tires) I see very little need to upgrade. eric PS, Yes, I had my local mechanic do the work!

i think its mostly the way the car looks. that and the timing of the boxster - everything looking like it all came from the same parts bin in a hurry. i need to skip over the 996 and buy the 997 at some point. maybe the right time will be just before they release the 999 with some batman looking headlights or some other design dork.

Reason 9,993!!!!!!!!

I'm willing to pay extra for a 993 because: - It's more "visceral” which is 993 code for it has a very dated chassis which makes it feel like it's going fast even when it's going slow which is good because it’s really sorta pokey. - It’s got round headlights and I really like round headlights. As a matter of fact round headlights are one of the most important attributes of a sports car. I’d rather have round headlights than a stiff chassis or a great suspension any day. I like bulgy fenders too. I like bulgy fenders way more then aero efficiency or weight savings. I love the way the doors sound when they close. That’s another important aspect of a great sports car. It’s way more important than track performance. I would never drive my pretty little sports car on the track but I shut the doors every day! There you go: 9,996 reasons!

I guess this is why this is justified 1997 Turbo S for 133k http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Cars-...m200224193962&

Quotes source post: 5433353

Give me a break.... The Turbo S was very low production (only about 183 produced). It's expensive because it's rare.

Quotes source post: 5433353

Or this: http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...ice=&cardist=6 '98 993 C2S, 24,000 miles for $74,000. (993 C2S obviously not as rare as a 993TT S, but only 1752 made so asking prices still really high for good, relatively low mile examples)

https://rennlist.com/forums/996-forum/431776-wild-custom-996-c4s-conversion-to-997-custom-widebody-orange-paint.html maybe because people do this

Quotes source post: 5433579

Once again a low volume model with very low mileage (2,400 miles/year). This model represents the top N/A 993 and no more are being produced. It is the last of the aircooleds (last year, top N/A model). I'd be shocked if it didn't sell at a premium. You both know these cars don't represent where the bulk of normal 993's are retailing. Why be disingenuous about that fact? The 993 is a great car. It will always hold a special place in Porsche's history as the last aircooled 911. Furthermore it was produced in much lower numbers to the 996 or 997. Both of these factors obviously affect the value of this car on the used car market compared to the follow on models. Surely you understand that right?

Not disingenuous...I agree with you. In fact, I bought such a car last April (see signature) with 29K miles, so I realize there is a premium for them.

[QUOTE=JimB;5433232]I'm willing to pay extra for a 993 because: - It�s got round headlights and I really like round headlights. As a matter of fact round headlights are one of the most important attributes of a sports car. I�d rather have round headlights than a stiff chassis or a great suspension any day. I like bulgy fenders too. I like bulgy fenders way more then aero efficiency or weight savings. QUOTE] If only the GT1 that won LeMans in '98 had decent headlights, then it would be a really great car. Kidding aside, I like them all and would own one of each variant...if only I could choose cars over college bills for the kids!

Quotes source post: 5433722

I do completely understand..... I own a 1985 Alpina B7 Turbo. I completely understand that the lower # of models made, cause the price to increase....But, I still think that anyone who would pay 133k on a 993 Turbo S, however rare is either touched in the head or has more money than sense.... To me there are better options from Porsche for that kind of money

well i don't think that $133K Turbo S is going to see the outside of climate control too often. It seems like a few people have taken it upon themselves to corner the market on the low production, low mileage cars purely for collection (speculation). You often see 993 TT listed at or cheaper than C2S. That's collectability talking. It may be about a lot of things, but can't be about performance, that's 997 GT3 / TT money

If a 993 is old school whatbdo you call an 84 targa? And does anyone have knowledge or in site about putting a 993 motor in said targa?

Quotes source post: 4277706

Wow! They should be creeping into million dollar territory--since the last 356 was a MY65. You're still here? Go home. It's over.

At least a million for a 993...

Now, if only they could make the 996/997 SOUND like an air cooled engine...THEN they'd have it right The later cars, whether Porsche, Ferrari, Lambo all have that flat raspy sound. When an air cooled Porsche drove by...you knew exactly what it was...and the oil on the ground was a dead give away that there had been one parked there.... Oh well, I guess I'll eventually get with the times...(searching for a super 05 Tip Cab) Hey, I'm an old curmudgeon...

Quotes source post: 8794368

993's sound pretty cool especially with aftermarket setups, but they didn't sound as cool stock as a stock Mk II 996 w/PSE. Furthermore, a 996 w/straight pipes sounds positively bad ***.

Quotes source post: 8794929

I agree...A stock 993 is pretty quiet from the outside. Of course within the cabin that's different but as an outside observer you need an aftermarket (or factory PSE) to make anything after a 993 sound decent.

I love the way 993's look! Especially as I pass them on the track.

IMHO, the 993TT perfected the 911s styling at the time. It modernized the original design without deviating from the original DNA and bundled it into a perfectly proportioned package. The 993TT is still one of my favorite cars just to look at. On the other hand, the 996 introduced a lot of changes to an enthusiast group who was largely happy with the status quo. Porsche didn't just do away with the air cooled engine. They injected new DNA into its design (fried egg headlights) that seemed to come from its lesser sibling, the Boxster (rather than the other way around) and, of course, the car got bigger and heavier again. It was a conspiracy of too much change for a group that never asked for it. How many air cooled fanatics were clamoring for a water cooled engine or a revolutionary new design? At least one of the books I've read on the 996 questioned who Porsche was trying to appeal to when they built it. I happen to love older Porsches, especially the 993, but I wasn't discouraged by the shift to water cooled engines and while I've always preferred the round lights on the 993 and 997, I have always thought the 996 was and is a beautiful car in its own right. There will always be old codgers in the fan base who argue against change...which is good for keeping the old cars healthy and on the road. Here's a thumbs-up to the old codgers! lol As for why it's more expensive, I say we start a movement to charge more for our cars on resale...who's in? -Eric

993 will only raise in value, such car in a good cosmetic condition is truly a marvel. collectable item. 996/997 is not a collectable so their value will drop.

Quotes source post: 8796225

Eric, check your facts the 996 was actually significantly lighter than the 993 before it. Porsche desparately needed the change that 996 brought. Porsches sales as that time were disasterously low, and one can reasonably argue that the sales success of the 986 and 996 saved the company. If you look at the sales figures the 996 and the 997 after it raised 911 sales to levels far far beyond the success of earlier models.

Quotes source post: 8796362

Right you are. I should have said that the "perception" was that it was bigger and, therefore, heavier. My bad though you are correct. As for the rest of your comments, I completely agree with you that Porsche needed the 996 and that it was a sales success but neither of those things necessarily translate into collectibility. In the supply and demand equation you need to look to who collects Porsches and what those people look for in their cars. If most Porsche collectors are air-cooled purists then that will drive up the value of those cars. A lot of "Porschephiles" felt disenfranchised by the company when they abandoned the air cooled engine in the 911. And, if a significant portion of the original 996 buyers had no real affinity for the brand (and I'm not saying this is the case) then maybe the 996 wasn't built with the typical 911 fanbase (or collector) in mind. Who knows? When it comes to collectibility I often think of the quirkiness and limited availability of my own '73 Saab. Saab only built about 10,000 Sonett IIs, V4s and IIIs between '66 and '74. Few people have any idea what it is and, most importantly when it comes to value, few care. You can pick up a Sonett that's in great condition for a relative pittance. As you know, supply is only one part of the equation. -Eric

When was the last time an aircooled motor had a IMS failure and destroyed same?

^^^ wtf, enough with the IMS already.

Quotes source post: 8806791

When was the last time you read about a 996 needing a $7k-$10k top end rebuild or having an SAI problem? Let me know when Porsche builds a perfect 911 as it has not happened yet. Welcome to Rennlist, nice first post.....

...if you drink enough kool-aid ....

Quotes source post: 8806791

The last time a 996 had valve guide wear and excessive smoking.