Car of the Week: 1965 Porsche 911 coupe

[dodgechargerfan]

I bought the car in 1984 in Nevada and drove it daily for several years. From 1984 to 1985 it went up and down the Alaska Highway and then to the East Coast before settling into Park City, Utah. The engine is out of a 1967 911S (No. *960348*); I rebuilt it in my Park City condo’s living room in 1986. The car went into the first of four body shops for a new paint job in 1991 and emerged in 2008. Then it went into my garage, and it took me eight more years to finish the job — mostly fuel and oil changes and thoroughly disassembling and cleaning out the carburetors, putting all the body pieces (fenders, doors, etc.) back together, replacing the old headliner, and putting new (out of a mid-80s 911) front seats in it. At this point the car was far from concours, but pretty darn nice. It was running, but not really running well.

Read more.

 

[v8440]

The rear engine layout seems kinda hinky to me, though I understand that they've greatly tamed the tail happy tendencies of the 911 with electronics lately. It seems to me that the mid engine layout of the boxster is a better starting point for non-scary handling.

 

[TheIronSausage]

The 930 turbo was The Widowmaker.. It didn't make any power until about 4500 RPM, and then it made all of the power it could at once. That with the rear engine design was a little sketchy. The regular 911 is a really good drive (I think) Ironically, the handling issue usually reared it's ugly head when people came into a corner too hot, chickened out and lifted off. The car wants you to get on the throttle earlier as you exit the corner.. If you goose it before your brain is comfortable doing so, it just squats, grips and goes. I don't mean full throttle, that's just dumb.. But against all normal logic, it wants you to go in slow, and give the ass end power on the way around so it can grip. I'd have one. The sound the motor makes is excellent, and they really are easy to live with as a sports car. No Targas, no convertibles for me.. I don't even mind the green on this one. Also, because they've made the same damned car for so long, there's a lot of parts that interchange into the old cars. You can keep the sixties/seventies looks, and put modern 911 parts under them.

 

[v8440]

I happen to have a 2007 boxster, and I love it. It's pretty impressive on mediocre tires, decent mileage (high 20's average with a fair amount of highway miles) and they don't have many real problems. Mine is too new to have the troublesome ims bearing. I'm leery about the convertible top, but it works perfectly so far, and it's already 10 years old. Best of all, these cars aren't expensive and insurance is pretty cheap. With that said, I sure wouldn't turn down a 911. I'm just kinda befuddled that they put so many of their eggs in the rear engine basket.

 

[restoman]

I'd take that car in a heart beat!
Once you're used to a rear engine, cornering isn't something to be afraid of. Like Iron Man said, lifting in the corner is taboo, but who the Hell does that anyway? It's got 100+ more horsepower than my Beetle - I say it'd be a hoot to drive hard!

 

[69.5CUDA]

its a lil too old for my liking when it comes to the 911 ..gimmy the whaletail or nothing, course i love the 969 and 928?(the bubblebutt with the v8)

ive worked on 944's ..and even cow would fit in one comfortably

 

[Dr.Jass]

These cars are a blast, but yes--they will swap ends in a hurry if you're not careful. Which I wasn't. In my boss' car. Whoops. That car was in fact a 930, and it was a blast right up until that moment. After that I was so worried I'd damaged the thing, I drove it back to its owner like Grandma on her way to the farmer's market. As far as sticking with the rear-engined layout, the 911 was an extension of the 356, itself a direct outgrowth of everybody's favorite National Socialist project, the Beetle. It worked.

Probably the best version of the original 911 was the last--the 993, particularly the Turbo. Its AWD system used a multiplate clutch in the center diff, and whilst cornering you could get the tail to step out a bit under throttle--just long enough time to nail the corner, and then the front wheels would yank the car back on its line. It was engineered that way intentionally and it's big, stupid fun. When the 996 debuted in '98--the advent of liquid cooling in the 911--the car was changed significantly. Very little from a 996-up car can be retrofitted to the earlier models.

I'd drive the hell out of the feature car. I love 911s... wish I could find the black '78 SC my former brother-in-law had for, oh, less than a month.