1999->2000 vs. Lower Miles

If you were deciding between 2 identical 996s to purchase, which would you folks prefer and why? 1999 w/ 60,000 miles 2000 w/ 80,000 miles How many miles difference would it take to change your mind? Thanks for your opinions

Not sure they're identical. It's my understanding that the very early '99s had some issues that were fixed in the later cars. Porsche tends to correct issues and make their cars better in successive years. The 2000 car has 20K more miles, FWIW. If both had a PPI done and no significant issues found, buy the one you like best - color, equipment, overall condition.

Those miles indicate usage by the owners on both cars, and that's good news. They aren't garage queens. These cars seem to be happier and appear to have fewer problems(RMS etc) when driven regularly.GL with your search....drive both and see if they differ from a driving standpoint.

Quotes source post: 5004959

yes i realize they're not literally identical, and that newer cars have slight improvements which is why I asked the question ... how many miles does it take to outweigh the improvements in the newer year? by "identical" i mean they're equally optioned, both in the same condition, both have a clean PPI, drive the same (to my very unsophisticated sense), etc. Right now this is a hypothetical question. I'm just trying to get a sense of how important the community thinks a newer year is.

Quotes source post: 5004966

btw, at which point does mileage (on a 99 for example) stop being "good news" and start to raise questions about impending breakdowns... 90k? 150k?

To my knowledge, nobody here has worn out an engine. 20,000 is a big difference for one model year, though... the '99 was driven regularly, but the '00 was more like a true daily driver. But, on the other hand, there are some little improvements on the 2000 vs. the 1999. In both cases, high mileage means the cars have dodged a number of quality related failure bullets. So, for me, the difference would come down to the car's history. Documented is better than not. Fewer owners is better than more. On-time regular maintenance is better than annual oil changes. And somewhere between 90 and 150, there is bound to be a 'major' service along with tire and brake replacements, worth enough money to actually affect the price of the car if it hasn't yet been done. That kind of thing.

Id take the '99

The '99 has been driven an average of 6,666 miles per year and the '00 and average of 10,000 miles per year, so I don;t think that is much of an issue. The general consensus here is to buy the newest car you can comfortably afford.

Quotes source post: 5005245

+1, but it does depend a lot on the service history and how well the cars have been looked after.

The best service history would be my choice.

Quotes source posts: 5005359, 5005362

Very true and very good point........ but I bought my 996 without ANY service records and I got 102,000 miles from it.....yes, it was indeed a gamble but it was a helluva deal at the time

I would lean toward the 00, but service history and option differences would weigh heavily. Are they optioned similarly?

Quotes source post: 5005343

No question - I agree. If the cars are optioned similarly, and are in basically the same condition, I'd go with the '00. There are many of these cars out there that are in nice shape that can be bought well. Drive them and buy the one you like best and can best afford.

Let's say they both have the same maintenance & ownership history. Only discernable differences are the model year & the mileage.

Quotes source post: 5006016

Then base your choice off the following: 1) Color 2) Any registration savings? When I bought mine last year, it would have cost me an additional $400 to register a '00 versus a '99. Every state is different, of course. 3) Condition of leather interior 4) Does the '99 have the "orange" headlights? Really, that's about it. Nobody is going to show up and say "Oh, geez, you DEFINITELY want car X over car Y. Pick one and enjoy!

The interiors of 99's had the bumpy surface, sort of like a basketball, unless they had leather. It was kind of cheap looking/feeling. This was dropped in 2000 when they went to the "soft-touch" paint. Horsepower was increased from 296 to 300, probably not noticieable, I think it was changes to the intake. I think 99 were a mechanical throttle, 2000 went to egas/electronic throttle. The headlights changed so they were not yellow at the bottom. Some other changes were also made. To me the upgraded interior is the most important, the old interior was really cheap feeling. I bought a 2000, but that was in 2000.

Quotes source post: 5006328

They changed the headlights in the middle of MY99. Most '99s seem to have the clear headlights (mine does).

Quotes source post: 5006401

I bet the PO changed them...never heard that before.

The retrofit kit has clear lenses. Maybe those who don't have the ambers have retrofit lights?

Quotes source post: 5006401

I think this is right, that it was a mid-year change. My late '99 has clear lights and also what someone earlier called "cheap plastic dash", but I actually prefer that low-glare/lightweight functionality over full leather and pimped-out wood steering wheels, etc. I'd say get the lower mileage car, in this case the '99. Get a good price on it.

There are slightly different engines used for the 2 model years: - MY98/99 (3.4) C2: M96/01 - MY00/01 (3.4) C2: M96/04 M96/04 updates: Porsche changed to e-gas, modified the fuel injectors, used a new crankshaft, a new air injection pump, auxiliary drive belt tensioner housing as well as a new alterator and pulley. The VIN of the car should tell you if the '99 car is a '98 or a "real" '99 (EU '98 cars were sold in the US as early '99 cars but probably before the change to clear lights ...). VIN differences for the model years: '98: WPOAA2 99Z W S6 '99: WPOAA2 99Z X S6 '00: WPOAA2 99Z Y S6 I usually try to get at least the 2nd model year of any car (my 996 is a '00 and I did also stick to that with all of my 5 BMWs I had to date) as the manufacturers have shortended their development cycles dramatically in the last 15 years so they still "develop" the car at least during the first model year. Doesn't mean that a '99 is a bad car; just my habit when buying a car.

With cars this close, I'd make the call on options and final price.

I'd go with the '00

Dharn55, hwk72 .. that's great info, thanks!

Having owned both a 1999 and a 2000 C2, I can tell you that other than options I could not tell them apart. I think the '99 actually feels a bit stronger, but that might be because it has some nicer options like a short throw shifter and fabspeed exhaust. As others have said, what counts most is knowing as much of the history of the car as possible. My '99 came completely documented from the original dealer that sold it. The '00 was kind of a blank page. I never fully trusted the '00 due to not knowing the history, although in the year I had it, it never gave me any trouble. I say buy on price, options and history with the history probably most important.

Quotes source post: 5008487

+1

i don't think you can prioritize between the three. i'd think the best advice is to demand meeting your expectations along all fronts. they are ALL important. so you got a car with great history but has the pos plastic vents, console whatever that you're not happy with. you go for it? no. so you got a car with ****ty history, but awesome price and awesome options. no. there are 911s out there with all 3 so go for the best.

I bought a '99 with 47k on the clock. I don't have the technical knowledge that most here do, but mileage maybe a factor. Depending on how long you will have the 996, the lower the mileage the better value the car will have if you need or want to sell it. For one year, 20k is alot of difference.

The sense I'm getting from posters here is that model year (99-00-01) is basically irrelevant. Based on the input here, i'm not scared of a higher mileage (70-80k) model. If the higher mileage means i pay less up front, then I don't mind losing a little on resale.