@@BuzzLOLOL the '88 model was making 214 horsepower and this one was only making 172. Edit: US spec 911SC was making only 172hp but Euro spec had a 205hp engine. Power was upped to 214 with the 3.2 Carrera after '83 I think
I have owned a Slate Blue 1983 Porsche 911 SC Cabriolet since 1992. It is still a joy to drive, smooth and fun. I also owned a 1987 Ford Mustang GT Convertible, a beautiful car but the quality of the Porsche without question was better. I sold the Mustang and kept the Porsche.
It's so sad that "sporty" cars today weigh twice what this thing does. A great deal of fun can be had with moderate power if your car doesn't weigh as much as a truck. I imagine only motorcyclists will enjoy a good power to weight ratio these days.
Curb weight, HP, Torque, exterior dimensions and performance figures are damn near identical to an R53/R56 MINI Cooper S (2002-2014). Since my comment is guaranteed a snarky "but, but a 911 is rear engined Flat-6 with RWD, and the MINI is a front engined FWD hatchback" reply... well I already said it, cause no shit.... Point is, both the 911 SC and MINI are a hoot to scoot for a reason!
". . . caught the old convertible fever . . . it seems to be spreading through the auto world like chicken pox at a day care center." 0:28 Who wrote that line?
1983's $34450 buys you $83K today. The cheapest 991 convertible is $102K. I know the 991 has better performance and has more luxury features but has the 911 progressed in over 30 years? That explains why the cheaper Cayman/Boxster is gradually replacing the 911.
No, you didnt take into account average salary which was $15290 in 1983 adjusted for inflation is $36k today (2018) average salary for 2018 is $56k so $20k more than what your avg pay would be in todays money, and if you do the price in that years money vs avg pay 2018 is actually cheaper than 1983 by %3. I can go deeper with gdp accounted and world market share but I assume your in the US based on your currency usage as am I. Inflation is a MFer but its not the whole picture.
Damn 55-mile-per-hour speed-limit back then -- limited *so* many of the tests that could be done... You can't publish 70-to-zero braking tests because you couldn't legally go more than 55 MPH on the highways. You can't publish noise levels at 70 mph, because you can't legally go more than 55 MPH on the highways. You can't publish passing tests from, say, 50-mph to 70-mph, because you can't legally go more than 55 MPH on the highways. Even the damn fuel-economy numbers were skewed by the fact that they couldn't run fuel-economy tests at anything faster than 55 MPH, which meant that *your* fuel-economy was always *shit* compared to the published numbers. It was so ridiculous. And what's even more ridiculous is that the stupid 55 MPH law lasted from 1974 'till 1988 when it was finally upped to 65 (but only in some rural areas) -- and then it took *another* 7 years (to 1995) before we got rid of Federal speed restrictions entirely. Bleh. Big government knows best, right? *NOT*
Cool classic review! But ilmao when he said that 0-60 in 7sec classified as rocket ship!! 😂😂😂😂for those days that was fast, but today! Many suv's are faster👍
Anibal Babilonia // This is the detuned American 911 of the early 80s. European versions had about 20-25% more power and were a little lighter to boot.
Sub 7 seconds to 60! Rocketship territory!👋🤣👍ohh boy! Now a days a semi truck can do that and its considered snail pace! Being sarcastic!! But back then that was considered fast! How time have changed!
+pbfloyd13 No, it means exactly the opposite - the 911 has a much higher specific output; i.e. Porsche's engine with 2 less cylinders and nearly 3 fewer liters of displacement made basically the same amount of power as the Corvette's V8.
You guys are cruel and stupid ridiculing Porsches and Corvettes from early 80s and calling then "slow" and low power,the 4 bangers back then were the crappiest ever,the industry was under attack for years from a bunch of Hippies and tree huggers in the government and if you want a run for your money why don't you compare your "modern" and "powerful" rice burners to new Porsches and Corvettes,then you'll have something to talk about.
The industry never stopped being attacked by "hippies" and "tree huggers"... which is probably a good thing because if it had? There probably wouldn't be the Tesla Model S P90D, which despite being fully electric, would absolutely destroy any Corvette and almost any new Porsche when it comes to acceleration.
Well,first of all,I don't think Porsches are faster than Corvettes,not nowadays at least,second the Teslas are long overdue and as much as I like 'em the majority of the car buyers still sees it as an oddity specially considering the vast reserves of oil they found in the US and Canada,the ones the press refuses to talk about,the death to industry is still the C.A.F.E.
I automatically give a thumbs up to all these retro review! Thank You for posting them.
Always loved the huge rear flaired arches on the old 911's, they look way better than any new Porsche IMO.
"West Germany's Kaiser of performance" is such a John Davis thing to say.
one of THE cars to have in south beach Miami in the early 80's...
And still to this day! Air cooled Cab in Miami, DOPE
Still one of my dream cars!
4:55 "A 0-60 time of 7 seconds qualifies for rocketship status." :D
Has to be a typo... 5.7 seconds sounds more like it... see the '88 tests...
@@BuzzLOLOL the '88 model was making 214 horsepower and this one was only making 172.
Edit: US spec 911SC was making only 172hp but Euro spec had a 205hp engine. Power was upped to 214 with the 3.2 Carrera after '83 I think
@@thirdstar9255 neat...lol
The advancement in automobiles in the past 35 years is just stunning but it's still fun to watch these old reviews!
Plenty of them yes but not the 911. I just found out that 34K is 83K and the cheapest one is over 100k.
This car was a MUST when driving down to the beach in the 80's.
SC = 1983 model year and the only m/y for the SC convertible (1st year making the convertible). 84-89, its was a Carrera.
I have owned a Slate Blue 1983 Porsche 911 SC Cabriolet since 1992. It is still a joy to drive, smooth and fun. I also owned a 1987 Ford Mustang GT Convertible, a beautiful car but the quality of the Porsche without question was better. I sold the Mustang and kept the Porsche.
And for four times the price when new, I would hope that the Porsche had far better build-quality. ;-)
Wow this is older than me. Thanks for these retro videos! Please keep them coming.
Makes me think of Commando.
Rediscover Film "Where is she Sully?"
Rediscover Film haha i thought of commando too
go to the helicopter, ha ha, good movie. ;)
+Rediscover Film
Damn it! BEAT ME TO IT Sully!!!
Remember when I said I would kill you last?
That color only looks good on that car... and it looks REALLY good on that car.
Awesome video, gorgeous Porsche!! Thank you so much motor week!!
My Ears!!!!
Still interesting though.
Wow! just keep them rolling in. Odd, I was going to ask for this review in the Maxima review. Freaky. Thank you very much!
It's so sad that "sporty" cars today weigh twice what this thing does. A great deal of fun can be had with moderate power if your car doesn't weigh as much as a truck. I imagine only motorcyclists will enjoy a good power to weight ratio these days.
Curb weight, HP, Torque, exterior dimensions and performance figures are damn near identical to an R53/R56 MINI Cooper S (2002-2014). Since my comment is guaranteed a snarky "but, but a 911 is rear engined Flat-6 with RWD, and the MINI is a front engined FWD hatchback" reply... well I already said it, cause no shit.... Point is, both the 911 SC and MINI are a hoot to scoot for a reason!
Always loved these cars and they bring good money now...
6:32 driver's look says it all
DA BEARS
There are family sedans today that would hang with this car. Lol! But back in the day they were kings!
That audio quality though...
I know... WTF happened?
Redey1290 😖😖
Not just the audio
I still think it's interesting how plainly he said "West Germany". So strange to think how long it's been.
Here's a MotorWeek Retro Review of the Porsche 911 SC Cabriolet from 1984.
Only 172hp...back then they could never have dreamt of a 700 hp 911 GT2 RS doing 0-60 in 2.6 sec and the Nordschleif in 6min45...
The European version of the 911SC had 200hp.
@31B4P it doesnt though
And no one wanted it. You can't have any fun with modern Porsches. Its overkill.
I didn't realize that the adults from the Peanuts cartoons did car reviews.
i wonder about headlight washers. how cam they be effective without wipers? & doesnt the solution cleaner mess the paint up ?
Awsome retro series!
Any plans to upload a Carrera 3.2 test?
Excellent audio!
Nice!
That burgundy Porsche in the beginning is actually a 928.
+Robert Smith
thats not a 928
Robert Smith just has 928 rims
". . . caught the old convertible fever . . . it seems to be spreading through the auto world like chicken pox at a day care center." 0:28 Who wrote that line?
Haha! I know right? I was like WTactualF?
I've always had a convertible...
1983's $34450 buys you $83K today. The cheapest 991 convertible is $102K. I know the 991 has better performance and has more luxury features but has the 911 progressed in over 30 years? That explains why the cheaper Cayman/Boxster is gradually replacing the 911.
No, you didnt take into account average salary which was $15290 in 1983 adjusted for inflation is $36k today (2018) average salary for 2018 is $56k so $20k more than what your avg pay would be in todays money, and if you do the price in that years money vs avg pay 2018 is actually cheaper than 1983 by %3. I can go deeper with gdp accounted and world market share but I assume your in the US based on your currency usage as am I. Inflation is a MFer but its not the whole picture.
Love the audio
Weird seeing a 911 with 944 rims
Dennis Snider Its weird seeing Fuchs 5 spokes on a 944 to me. Fuchs are synonymous with 911s
Awesome!
Damn 55-mile-per-hour speed-limit back then -- limited *so* many of the tests that could be done... You can't publish 70-to-zero braking tests because you couldn't legally go more than 55 MPH on the highways. You can't publish noise levels at 70 mph, because you can't legally go more than 55 MPH on the highways. You can't publish passing tests from, say, 50-mph to 70-mph, because you can't legally go more than 55 MPH on the highways. Even the damn fuel-economy numbers were skewed by the fact that they couldn't run fuel-economy tests at anything faster than 55 MPH, which meant that *your* fuel-economy was always *shit* compared to the published numbers. It was so ridiculous. And what's even more ridiculous is that the stupid 55 MPH law lasted from 1974 'till 1988 when it was finally upped to 65 (but only in some rural areas) -- and then it took *another* 7 years (to 1995) before we got rid of Federal speed restrictions entirely. Bleh. Big government knows best, right? *NOT*
What? I don't understand. Are you saying big government doesn't work? What? They don't tax me enough?
Cool classic review! But ilmao when he said that 0-60 in 7sec classified as rocket ship!! 😂😂😂😂for those days that was fast, but today! Many suv's are faster👍
Anibal Babilonia // This is the detuned American 911 of the early 80s. European versions had about 20-25% more power and were a little lighter to boot.
I know! European spec cars where always faster than their USA counterpart.
They are also disposable boring commodity items with zero chance of ever being collectible.
Anibal Babilonia ; SUVs? Most minivans would out run it!
Dodge Caravan's have 100hp more than this 911 !!
Sub 7 seconds to 60! Rocketship territory!👋🤣👍ohh boy! Now a days a semi truck can do that and its considered snail pace! Being sarcastic!! But back then that was considered fast! How time have changed!
Wow I've never seen a 911 with "phone dial" rims until now, at it actually looks pretty good
Chandler Burns Those aren't phone dials, they're Fuchs. Phone dials (and variations) were on 924 and 928 models. The 944 got Fuchs or Cookie Cutters.
still a nice car though.
I suspect a typo... 0 - 60 in 5.7 seconds... not 7.0 seconds... rear engine cars get off the line quick...
lol what was up with that intro into the car? 4:59 looks like they had alot of fun at motor week back in the day
BigXSmoke1 Fell on the floor laughing when I saw that!LOL!!Wonder what kind of numbers they got out of that Chrysler Laser in the background
Is it the gain on the mix that blows out the audio on some of these videos?
3L, port injected flat 6 with just 172 HP. And what's that at 5:00 ? Little's?
9 to the 1 to the 1...
There is no substitute.
from 14.5 to 10.8 wow.
14.5 sec to the quarter?.mmmm i think this is a 204hp version euro or the number of q 14.5 is, 15.5 s....
Sounds like he's turning into a bear
Muito da hora 👍👍👍👍🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷
👏👏👏👏👏👏👍👍👍🇧🇷🇧🇷
Dial-a-gear Gearchange.
170hp out of a 3 litre?
most corvettes of that era couldnt get more than 180hp out of a 5 litre.
go figure.
So you're upset a smaller engine makes less power?
0__0
makes sense...
+pbfloyd13 No, it means exactly the opposite - the 911 has a much higher specific output; i.e. Porsche's engine with 2 less cylinders and nearly 3 fewer liters of displacement made basically the same amount of power as the Corvette's V8.
pbfloyd13 lol
Read the post again dude.
The Porsche makes MORE power per cc.
they actually made closer to 220 HP in Europe. They didnt have catalytic converters over there back then
You guys are cruel and stupid ridiculing Porsches and Corvettes from early 80s and calling then "slow" and low power,the 4 bangers back then were the crappiest ever,the industry was under attack for years from a bunch of Hippies and tree huggers in the government and if you want a run for your money why don't you compare your "modern" and "powerful" rice burners to new Porsches and Corvettes,then you'll have something to talk about.
The industry never stopped being attacked by "hippies" and "tree huggers"... which is probably a good thing because if it had? There probably wouldn't be the Tesla Model S P90D, which despite being fully electric, would absolutely destroy any Corvette and almost any new Porsche when it comes to acceleration.
Well,first of all,I don't think Porsches are faster than Corvettes,not nowadays at least,second the Teslas are long overdue and as much as I like 'em the majority of the car buyers still sees it as an oddity specially considering the vast reserves of oil they found in the US and Canada,the ones the press refuses to talk about,the death to industry is still the C.A.F.E.
The golden days before childhood illnesses caused mass hysteria and forced vaccinations.
mx-5 are better...
They weren't around in '83.