they say a normally aspirated 911 Carerra is generally more reliable than a
911 Turbo - since it's output is smoother and easier to control, specially
at higher speeds.
ok, but when does that factor kick in roughly...at how many years, or
mileage?
after the 1, 6, 9+ year mark...?
Guru - 27 Jul 2007 17:28 GMT
Of course the turbo has more hardware and some of it is stressed more than
in the non-blown cars. On the other hand, most of the problems with turbo
maintenance...not associated with high performance modifications...are many
times caused by lack of use. In other words, the turbos, like most cars and
certainly 911's, don't really work out well as "garage queens". If you let
them sit, moisture forms in places that it shouldn't be, and even Mobil 1
drains away from some important areas. Odds are that...say...a 2003 turbo
with 8K miles might well not be in as good a shape mechanically as the same
car with 25-30K miles, that's had regular maintenance.
The moral of the story is that if you buy them....drive them!
> they say a normally aspirated 911 Carerra is generally more reliable than
> a 911 Turbo - since it's output is smoother and easier to control,
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> mileage?
> after the 1, 6, 9+ year mark...?
Sheldon - 04 Aug 2007 04:30 GMT
> they say a normally aspirated 911 Carerra is generally more reliable than
> a 911 Turbo - since it's output is smoother and easier to control,
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> mileage?
> after the 1, 6, 9+ year mark...?
Depends what year you get. The later models can be driven on the track or
to the grocery store and to work every day and are quite reliable. The
earlier models can be quite finicky, and have only two speeds: Slow and "Oh
my God!"