Too good to be true? 911 996 for $19k

The mileage is quite high. Looks pretty clean though.

 

119k Miles??? holy cow! Decent price thought.... half what it would be
without that detail... car looks nice. Probably make it to 200k at this rate...

 

It's a tip, and no mention of the engine being replaced. So no, not too good to be true. Jump in if that's your thing, but you can easily end up dropping $10K on a replacement engine.

 

One owner is good for the car.


Get a ppi, if it passes, keep it for a few years and you will lose little, at the time of resale. If the car is good mechanically, it should work out well.

 

Sounds like market price to me. Have seen quite a few 996s with lower miles in the low $20s, so not surprised they are dipping into the high teens.

 

Drive it.
Tips are bog slow.
996's were accused of "Lexusizing" Porsche, the Tip makes it complete.
Still; $20k.
Not bad.

 

The 996s are becoming the 964s, or the 2.7 engined cars of the this generation. The 911s that were not well received. I think with the 996's it's because the front end and the interior looks too much like the Boxster. If the prices keep going down, I am going to start looking for a 996 Carrera 4 to purchase.

 

That is in my opinion a fabulous deal. When I saw the headline I figured this had to be a 1999 or maybe a year 2000. But when I clicked and found it was/is a 2003 I was very surprised.

A poster above notes "if it had a replacement engine" but that would only really be a consideration if this car was an early version with the 3.4 liter H6. Even so a 3.4 is a fine engine, it just does not rival the 3.6 liter (which this one has) in power (320 HP) & reliability. Additionally the tip with a 3.6 is not a bad combo for speed either. While not a drag car this car would not really be defined as slow.

The miles are higher but as I too would say that this car has lots left in it.

Great deal for someone.

 

I know of a 996 in driver condition that sold for $14K recently.

 

Certainly, but again, it just had to be a 3.4 liter earlier version.

The 2002- up with the 3.6 was quite an update. Additionally the interior was improved (the "soft touch" materials/coatings) as well as the exterior as the later style headlight appeared (they have the pronounced curve around the turn signal). Those versions are v e r y nice cars and when priced anywhere near $19k make them truly a value leader.

 

I had my car for sale for months, finally sold for 26K which I feel was a great deal for him. I am not surprised if a plain jane 996 sells for 19K. Mine had plenty extras. 996s were never that popular like 993 or classic design from '78-'89. I bought my '87 Carrera cab in '93 for $31K and sold it in '04 for $18,300. I lost a lot on this one.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Rear. Main. Seal.

Those engines are time bombs. I wouldn't "own" a 996 if it was given to me. Stay with the Turbo, GT3 or GT2 - those avoided the issues.

 

the tip is really going to kill it, almost as much as 996+high miles.

 

On the SF Bay area Craigs list there is a 1999 996 that has a replacement engine with 53K on it. It is now down do $15,500 last time I read the listing. Prices on them is def coming down.

 

Rear main seal was not a problem with the Tip, only the manual trannys.

 

Sorry Joe,
The RMS was definitely a problem on the 996/997 cars regardless of the transmission,not to mention the intermediate shaft failing at any time.
If there is any doubt got to the PCA site and do search on either the RMS or intermediate shaft issues.

 

While I have dealt with this issue personally these woes effects such a small percentage of cars that it is unfair to negate the whole series because of them.

Furthermore I don't consider all the F355's as problem cars because of the headers or exhaust valve woes either.

 

The RMS problem is almost legendary. Nonetheless, according to a couple of detailed articles on the problem, I recall one or both being in Excellence magazine, I think at least one of them was by Jim Pasha? the rear main seal problem is much rarer in autos. I am sure somebody knows about these articles, they are really well known,and were very well researched as I recall. I no longer have them at my fingertips.

Furthermore, though not entirely relevant here, by 2002, Porsche got the RMS problem largely under control and from what I hear, problems on later 996's and earl 997s involve a relatively inexpensive repair rather than a complete engine replacement.

 

RMS, who cares... In a Ferrari we put crazy money for maintenance so what if and that's a big if one needs to drop $10k in a replacement engine.

 

Thats like a 30k service here with a few extras'

 

Yes, it's one thing to drop 10K on a car that'll still be worth 30K or more (say it's a 308) in a year and it's another to do so in a car that's still depreciating like a rock. Like comparing Red apples and rotting oranges.

 

I wouldn't say a $19k 996 is "still depreciating like a rock". They have to be close to the bottom of the curve. I'd bet that driveable, non-wrecked 996s won't ever drop below $14k

 

there have been several 1999/2000 996s for sale around here in the teens with about half to two thirds that mileage. that price seems like a fair deal given it's a 2003.

 

I've been more than intrigued by the idea of a 996C4 given today's pricing, but am definitely gunshy given the legendary RMS failures...

Can someone with some real-world knowledge of these cars please chime in regarding 3.4 vs 3.6, years to avoid, etc.

No need to remark on the tiptronic versions as I will only drive manuals, regardless of whether the computer can shift faster in certain applications.

Thanks in advance,

-Tad