996TT or E92 M3

[Kingy]

Purely a theoretical thing, but I've been thinking about the 996TT recently.

Clearly a 911 Turbo is never going to be 'cheap' to run, but with the sort of prices being asked these days, you have to wonder how much more they're likely to depreciate? Given that depreciation on a £25k car is normally likely to be quite significant, if that were less likely to happen with a 996TT, some of those 'savings' could offset some of the running costs?

I gather that the engine in the 911 Turbo is pretty solid (GT1 bottom end?), but they're prone to throwing bills with things like radiators etc?

As a daily, (say 15-20k a year for 2 years) they'd seem likely to have a similar TCO. They're similar in terms of power, (though I imagine the 911 would be the quicker car) but the M3 is more modern, and has I-Drive/Bluetooth/Xenons/Cruise Control, could be warrranted, while the 911 Turbo is, well a 911 Turbo, and it's difficult not to love that iconic sillouette.

http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3610718.htm

http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3639171.htm

Using the two cars above as looking like decent examples, which would you choose to blow your pretend £25k on, and why?

 

[Dr House]

There is no way I would get a 996 Turbo when doing that many miles, the interior of the 996 is very dated and its going to throw up some rather large bills.

Personally I would look at a early 997 and get a OPC warranty on it
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3698965.htm

I don't know how I feel about this one but its cheap for a 08 car but has done moon miles
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3784023.htm

this looks nice but does not say how many miles its done
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3573737.htm

This one looks idea, not done too many miles, 06 car and ok spec.
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3370520.htm

 

[InQ]

I would expect them both to be expensive to fix, the 911 could throw up some eye watering bills no doubt. If it was going for either i'd factor in some extended warranty cover, the M3 warranty from BMW is reasonable-ish but has ranges of cover and different excesses to tailor the amount you pay (either in 1 lump sum or monthly).

 

[[TW]Fox]

Just too many miles a year to enjoy this sort of car (Though the M3 might work) without resenting the costs unless you are minted, and if you are minted, well, you'd probably be moving on from 10 year old 911's.

You kinda cancel out the low depreciation thing if you stick a billion miles on it.

 

[Shadz]

When I looked at the 996 Turbo i automatically though not keen.

Were as the M3 that looks the dogs ******** and although both of them would be really
expensive to fix I would be saying M3 all the way.

 

[Hades]

My heart says 911. My head says regular non-m 3 series with that mileage. But m3 if you really want to.

 

[Matt82]

M3
There must be reasons the 996s haemorrhaged all their value

 

[Kingy]

There is no way I would get a 996 Turbo when doing that many miles, the interior of the 996 is very dated and its going to throw up some rather large bills.

Personally I would look at a early 997 and get a OPC warranty on it
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3698965.htm

I don't know how I feel about this one but its cheap for a 08 car but has done moon miles
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3784023.htm

this looks nice but does not say how many miles its done
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3573737.htm

This one looks idea, not done too many miles, 06 car and ok spec.
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3370520.htm

That's the thing about 997s though, lots of C2s & TipTronic boxes at this price point. Is £25k enough for a good manual C2S with the right options?

Just too many miles a year to enjoy this sort of car (Though the M3 might work) without resenting the costs unless you are minted, and if you are minted, well, you'd probably be moving on from 10 year old 911's.

You kinda cancel out the low depreciation thing if you stick a billion miles on it.

Its easier to model the depreciation on the 996TT given that shadier looking two year older examples with more miles start at £19-£20k. If you could get the one I posted with the rads done etc for £24k, put 30-40k on it, and aim at £18k for it in a couple of years, it'll have done £6k in depreciation in two years. Realistically the M3 could double that, but lets be hopeful & call it £5k a year in depreciation and hope for £15k back in a couple of years. That's £4k less in depreciation, plus an extra couple of grand fixing the running costs on the M3 via a BMW warranty. Is a 996TT with rads done likely to cost significantly more than £3k a year to run/maintain than a V8 M3? If it's close enough to be a zero sum game, then it's purely a case of which you'd prefer?

M3
There must be reasons the 996s haemorrhaged all their value

Must say, with your past I'm suprised you came down on the side of caution...

 

[panthro]

I wouldnt want to do 20k a year in a 996TT. The newest examples are close to 8 years old and for 25k you'd be looking at a 02-03 car. At this age things start to go wrong more often and you'd need a healthy fund to keep it going.

 

[Matt82]

Must say, with your past I'm suprised you came down on the side of caution...

there is some logic to it, in fact, we were looking at these at work the other day

compare 996 turbo prices to 993 and 964

the 996 has faired worse than all the others, take into account its age, but youre still looking at spending at least 20k on one.

20k into a car whose value has been dropping like a stone can only be a risky thing. at least the M3 has a chance of retaining some.

ive bought lots of sketchy cars, in fact they seem to be becoming cheaper and cheaper as i get older (house had a lot to do with that) but if you dump £2.5k into a sheddy M3, whats the most you can loose?

 

[Housey]

I think sticking 40K onto a 996 Turbo X50 in 2 years could cost big, but the miles also shouldn't be a problem from a wear and tear perspective, the GT1 block in the turbo as used in the GT3 is strong beyond belief so I would expect the costs to be consumables such as diff, clutch, brakes, rads and perhaps turbo's. If you get one that has been very well maintained with a good history then it would eat the miles and an X50 Turbo with Porsche BHP, i.e. proper BHP is one hell of a quick motor even if it is close to 10 years old. The M3 could also throw up some big numbers but like the 911 should have no problems topping 120K miles without anything major being needed if well looked after. You need to remember that higher mileage cars are not always bad things as their miles tend to be up and down motorways, so clutches and things last much much longer. My RS4 had 108K on the clock and was running the same clutch it came from the factory with. I did 20K miles in 14 months in my GT3 and again NOTHING went wrong, not one thing. All I changed on that car were tyres and some brake pads but then that had 6K on the clock when I bought it.

However a 2K bill for 'stuff' is normal on these sort of cars so if you can stick 4K in a bank just in case I'd not bother if you are running without a warranty.

 

[NathWraith]

Not really clued up on 996 turbos or M3's but I would imagine doing a lot of mileage would be far more bearable in an M3 compared to a 996 turbo. Probably cheaper too.

 

[JackRegan]

If TCO is an important factor then neither car.

If you really want of fancy an 996TT and you can afford it then scratch that itch I say. If the potential bills a 996TT could throw up put you off then a warranted M3 with the balance left of a service package I'm sure would put a smile on your face.

TCO on both cars will be high over two tears and 40k miles , but imo these cars aren't bought by or aimed at people who maintain spredsheets talking tco into account.

Jack

 

[Housey]

It depends what you are used to. I'd rather do 20K a year in a 996 Turbo than most of the cars people drive on this forum I'd suggest as it would be more relaxing and more suited. The thing was designed to drive across Europe, hoon around some race track and hoon back via a vineyard or two, it's an exceptional mile muncher and not tiring in my humble opinion. 996 GT3 is different but not once did I regret taking it out the garage for a 400 mile round trip with a business meeting in the middle...

 

[Kingy]

I wouldnt want to do 20k a year in a 996TT. The newest examples are close to 8 years old and for 25k you'd be looking at a 02-03 car. At this age things start to go wrong more often and you'd need a healthy fund to keep it going.

What things? I'm not 'knowing better', this is all fantasist devils advocate stuff...

From what little I've read, the turbo engine is solid and doesn't have the RMS/IMS issues that are more of a risk with the Carrera models (was this what did for Wills 997 C2S?). I've seen radiator replacement mentioned frequently, (including the one I posted that claimed to have spent £5k on it in the last 14 months). Question is, is that £5k the tip of the iceberg, or is a well maintained example likely to cost less than my £3k a year guesstimate(on top of what a V8 M3 would cost)?

I'm not defending the Porsche as such, just curiousity really. The M3 is newer, warrantable, better specified (nav/bluetooth/Xenons/Cruise Control/MFSW), with a better interior with less dull (and also less 'fabulous') interior colour combos. It has a high revving n/a V8, which sounds much more me than a lower revving turbo. It's RWD rather than 4WD, which is again more me.

I don't like the interior of the 996, I don't like the dated exterior either.

But I still want one...

 

[Kingy]

20k into a car whose value has been dropping like a stone can only be a risky thing. at least the M3 has a chance of retaining some.

Has it dropped like a stone, or just had longer to depreciate? The 996TT was ~90k new? Call it £95k, and pretend that the one I posted is 02 not 52, & £95k-£25k=£70k in 10 years, or an average of £7k a year. The E92 I posted has a few boxes ticked, so was maybe ~£60k new, and isn't yet 5 years old, so average depreciation looks pretty similar? Looking at the price of a 2000 996TT, and a 2005 M3 (ie two year older examples), and the M3 looks a greater deprecation risk to me?

I think sticking 40K onto a 996 Turbo X50 in 2 years could cost big, but the miles also shouldn't be a problem from a wear and tear perspective, the GT1 block in the turbo as used in the GT3 is strong beyond belief so I would expect the costs to be consumables such as diff, clutch, brakes, rads and perhaps turbo's. If you get one that has been very well maintained with a good history then it would eat the miles and an X50 Turbo with Porsche BHP, i.e. proper BHP is one hell of a quick motor even if it is close to 10 years old. The M3 could also throw up some big numbers but like the 911 should have no problems topping 120K miles without anything major being needed if well looked after. You need to remember that higher mileage cars are not always bad things as their miles tend to be up and down motorways, so clutches and things last much much longer. My RS4 had 108K on the clock and was running the same clutch it came from the factory with. I did 20K miles in 14 months in my GT3 and again NOTHING went wrong, not one thing. All I changed on that car were tyres and some brake pads but then that had 6K on the clock when I bought it.

However a 2K bill for 'stuff' is normal on these sort of cars so if you can stick 4K in a bank just in case I'd not bother if you are running without a warranty.

I was hoping you notice this... Do you know (or know where I can look) what sort of costs are associated with the consumables you mention? I'm thinking £1k-£2k each depending on which bill crops up / where you take it?

2-3 * £2k bills is one thing, but if the £5k in 14 months the seller above mentioned is routine, then that's a different story. I was taking that as a selling point (ie it won't need doing again for a while) rather than a warning?

Not really clued up on 996 turbos or M3's but I would imagine doing a lot of mileage would be far more bearable in an M3 compared to a 996 turbo. Probably cheaper too.

See I'd always thought that's exactly why you see so many miles on the 911, ie, the whole everyday 'supercar' thing. I've never driven the Turbo, but I'd got a mental image of the 996TT maybe even being a little softer than the M3...

 

[Dr House]

Just get a E92 or E93 335i and remap it.

They cost nothing to run, in the real world for day to day road use its just as fast as a M3 and a warranty will only set you back 40 quid a month.

You can have my 07 cab for 17k

I upgraded to a 911 but if I was doing 20k per year I would rather do it in a 335i

 

[[TW]Fox]

See I'd always thought that's exactly why you see so many miles on the 911, ie, the whole everyday 'supercar' thing. I've never driven the Turbo, but I'd got a mental image of the 996TT maybe even being a little softer than the M3...

The everyday supercar thing relates to the fact you don't need to do 2000 sunny day miles a year and lock it away for the rest of the time as with, say, a Ferrari. You can use it every day.

Doing 20k+ PA is a rather different ball game! It's almost twice the national average mileage. At £1.50 a litre..