Older Porsches tend to polarize people. On the one hand, you have folks that say there’s something magical about them that just isn’t present in other mere automobiles. On the other hand, you have folks that just don’t understand the mystique. I’m afraid I’m in the second group, although I certainly respect the right of the first group to have their opinion. This particular 911 is located in Laguna Hills, California and is up for auction here on eBay. Bidding is starting at $115,000 and there’s a reserve higher than that!
I guess it would be one thing if this were some pristine survivor. But if you look at the roof in this picture, you will see signs of a really bad respray–which are evident throughout the pictures, complete with overspray just about everywhere. You’ll also see a bent engine grille in this shot as well. Now this is an early car, being only in the second year of 911 production (serial number 301845) and it is believed to have only 62,165 miles. I don’t see any documentation of that, however, apart from all five wheels carrying a May 1965 date code.
I’m not sure, but I think I see ripples in the “frunk” lid as well in this picture. You would think someone would at least line up the fog/driving lights before snapping pictures? The car was purchased out of the barn it had been in since 1990, which does correspond with the inspection sticker on the windshield. By the way, I believe that’s a North Carolina sticker.
I do have to give the seller credit for including pictures that show exactly what you are getting into. And one of those things is going to be some rust repair on the floor. I love the way someone just painted over it previously–not! Perhaps the Porsche bubble hasn’t burst yet? I guess we’ll see, won’t we?
While the interior doesn’t look bad at all, I wouldn’t call it spectacular either. Nice to know the car has been used, though, based on the seats. Given the fact that there are two air fresheners installed, I have to wonder how it was stored in that barn and what odors still remain.
Nothing is told to us about the mechanical condition of the car. Sigh. Do me a favor–those of you that love these cars this much, tell me why? And those that don’t, feel free to chime in as well.
The body on this one gives me the heebie-jeebies. That “resell red” paint job is hiding a lot of secrets.
The opening bid is a joke.
I could see 30-35k I mean it is a classic and fun to drive Im sure but come on..
100k plus for how much fun???
You can get an 80s slope nose for about 25k and run circles around that thing.
Nice early 911 with the wrong color engine shroud, for this money it should be red……..as in 911S……..
The correct engine shroud color for a ’65 or ’66 Porsche 911 is black. The ’67 911S was the first with a red shroud.
This car still has it’s original Solex 40 PI carburetors. A complete set of those (including the linkage, air cleaner, mechanical fuel pump, manifold and fuel lines) is worth $6,000 to $10,000, maybe more.
On the other hand, something strange has happened to its air cleaner “snorkel” it seems to have been cut apart and rewelded to be positioned with the warm air inlet pointing down when the snorkel’s pointing left instead of right. There should be a paper hose connecting that to an outlet in front of the oil filter.
The soft fuel lines aren’t correct. That’s not hard to remedy but the correct line and ferrules are hard to find and pricier than the stuff at Pep Boys.
You are correct…..
I am with you on this. Never ever understood the passion people have for these cars. However, I do respect people’s opinion on these even if I don’t agree. This particular one has enough problems to look the other way. It is not worth the asking price.
4 days left and 0 bids at 115k. reason may prevail. we will have to see if the crazy money comes out.
I’d say it should be MUCH higher, like as high as you’d have to be to pay $115k for a clunker.,,,,
It seems people in California wear special types of glasses. I see this with the Alfa market too. Everything seems to cost more and be in crummy condition.
I suppose it never hurts to ask.
One thing to remember is that “they ain’t making them anymore” that adds to the price elevating daily. I for one do not see the value in this, since a new one that you can drive everyday actually costs less than this one. The appreciation of these cars is a puzzle to me, but have also said that about Corvettes.
I live in Laguna Beach and beware…alot of cars here have rust issues under all that shiny paint. #2 the prices of these cars are nothing but totally outlandish!! Really…115k ???? Really… This not a 1970 Chevelle SS 396 4 sp all o.g. vehicle….. Too much tv………
That stick on body side trim makes it all worth it…
You would have to be smokin’ the mega spliff to get that high man. JMHO.
I would rather see a vehicle in it’s orginial state, no matter the condition, then try to hide the deterioration by putting some paint, or something else on it and calling it good as they have done with this 911. At least in the orginial state you know what you are getting, and there are no surprises later. Usually the price is not going to be as high either.
Yikes!
Having recently sold my long held ’70 911 T, I can say that while they are not magic busses, driving an old 911 is a lot of fun. It just feels right. Like sitting in a slot car. Mine was not particularly fast, it was a T after all, but it was an original California car, with sunroof, dealer air and much of it was original. And not a speck of rust. Oh yeah and blue plates lol.
This seller is delusional. Yes its an early swb Porsche I think, but its pan is totally rusted, overspray in the boot and resprayed black over the gas tank hides a multitude of sins.
Dealers are a funny lot. Like a shark fishing for minnows. I dont think there are a lot of minnows in the old Porsche world.
I sold mine for less than half this ask…which in my view left the buyer plenty of room to restore the car and profit down the road. Fair to both of us, though I immediately rued my decision. :)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Woodie Man. Since I’m a huge slot car fan, I can appreciate that analogy. Maybe I’ll have to try one again someday :-) The bubble will have to burst first, though!
Jamie….Wait long enough it will! More or less. I’m afraid my shot at it has come and gone though………I harbor this ‘delusional’ idea that I have old car powers that others dont. That out there, sitting somewhere, is another old original unmolested unrusted Porsche, unknown to dealers, flippers and my compadres at BF, with my name on it…just waiting for me to come upon it.
I traffic in delusions!
I had a ’67 S and I can say that it SWB’s are definitely a fun car to drive. That said, there are enough things wrong here with this one to make me think it’s like Woodie Man said…a dealer fishing for a guppy still biting at the Porsche bubble bait.
The broom stick holding the hood open, the bad – and I mean BAD clean-up job done in the engine compartment, seats are saggy, dash is bit, takes TWO air fresheners to get the musty smell out, fog lights are wrong (the correct Marchal lights are made of unobtanium), could have rust issues hiding…all says over-priced by 2/3
See pics below. Heres a bad little mgb gt for sale in Laguna Beach race ready and street legal. 12.5k and alot more fun than that 115k rust bucket….
A 65 911 is a holy grail car.
There are a lot of questions that need to be answered and an in person inspection needs to be done. Yes the paint looks horrible.But, this car is not priced incorrectly especially if it really is an original 65k mile car with all of the original bits.
If I had an extra $100k lying around and an empty garage space I would be on the phone with that seller right now.
I would love to own a true 1965 911 some day.
Good luck finding an unrestored 65 in any half way decent condition. They are not out there.
Say Luki? How much did the insane seller pay you to tell us what a great deal this car is at over 100g?….
Really.lol
How bad does a respray have to be when the paint and primer are peeling off to bare metal…..or did they even bother to use primer?
115k for a car that will need to be painted and patched before being driven. I could buy a nice 308 for that money. I get buying a car for originality, but the price does not reflect the current condition of what appears to be a project. I know that porsche is a valuable brand and 911s are very nice to drive. But it’s clear that these cars have reached a point comperable to american muscle cars pre 2007. When people were willing to pay almost stupid money for cars that needed lots of work. I would love to own a porsche 911, and if you don’t care about money, but there are plenty of cars that I want more for the money
Just look at the name of this outfit.. “The Finest Euro Classics” Yea right. I don’t see a lineup of the finest Euro Classics, do you? Starting bid at 115000? It will not happen. Again, it will not happen….
Hagerty’s Price Guide
1965 Porsche 911, Current Values
#1 Concours$262,000
#2 Excellent$189,000
#3 Good$142,000
#4 Fair$94,100
Must be Hagerty that’s trying to sell this one!
quite worthless in my opinion,
be it Haggerty or NADA
(see the Alfa GTV6 post from today)
who even comes up with these figures, based on what ?
I don’t know about Porsche’s, but Hagerty pricing seems pretty spot-on for Austin Healey’s. I own one and see them bought and sold by members in the club and new members. The prices in the same tool Luki used, again, seem very close to what I see in the actual market place.
Those air fresheners are old technology. Porsches nowadays use a high-tech system called Fecal Aroma Reduction Technology, or FART for short.
I’m not a P-car man, but IIRC, 911 production began in the fall of 1964 and the US got the 911 beginning in 1965. I’m guessing that the seller is hoping someone will pay up for a ‘first year’ car. The SCM Guide says the median purchase price actually paid at auction for 1964-65 coupes was $253K, which more or less aligns with Hagerty values from Luki if you think of cars somewhere between Excellent and Concours.
Trouble is, it has already been messed with (peeling resale red paint, rattle can black in front trunk and underside), so a lot of the value as a first-year survivor has gone. The other thing is that values have cooled somewhat, and some people (not me) could think that the $115K asking is “reasonable”.
Fresh ad on Pelican Parts.
1965 911
Price recently lowered to $100K, NO ENGINE. This is a major project.
The member has over 3000 posts and has been a member for over 10 years, but the arm chair quarterbacks on BF know more.
I wish the market was not up there because I want one.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-cars-sale/943852-early-1965-911-project-sale.html
Luki–help me understand why they are so special? I’m being serious, not sarcastic, in case it comes across wrong. I genuinely want to know!
Jamie, from my viewpoint (experience driving several, including an early 911 RS) the “special” aspect is that these are lovely and lively cars to drive! They certainly can’t rack up performance numbers like later examples, but there is some indefinable magic to them and, though they are anything but, they exude a simplicity that appeals to gearhead geezers like me.
Never did buy the whole “mystique” aspect of Porsches, any more than I did for BMWs, Rolls-Royces or whatever marque hordes of fans are devoted to. My whole thing is: what are they like to drive and look at? The early 911s score big on both counts.
What does an early 911 drive/ride like you asked? Like a bus. Although I am sorry I sold my lime green 74 Targa over 10 years ago only due to rising values. It was a beast to drive. The shifter is sloppy, the tail end flys out if you are not into the gas during turns, it’s noisy, you need ear plugs driving one and they rust. I still have my 76 930 Turbo along with my 78 928 euro 5 speed. The 930 drives just as bad as the 911 except the power snaps your neck into the seat when you push the pedal down so it’s even more tricky in the turns. The 928 is like silk, the 911s are like concrete. I still can not figure why the 911s have gone up while the 928s are still level. Maybe in time. Anyway, I speak as an owner, not an “Armchair Quarterback” Mr Luki. They are great in the snow due to all the weight under the rear wheels.
Those that have….can ask whatever. Those that had, offer an opinion.
Are there a small group of folks who ARE NOT armchair quarterbacks who would pay 100k for a ’65 911 shell offered by a (impliedly knowledgeable) pelicanparts member with 3000 posts?
Not yet.
Your point that the ’65 911 swb is sought after by the aficionados is well taken. What they’re worth is a whole other matter imho.
So when the peanut gallery chimes in that this particular offering is a bridge too far maybe it would be better to address the issues that present in this particular car.
Uh… The price is not $115,000. The 100K Porsche might actually be a better car. 115K might almost be reasonable money for this car but 115K is the opening bid and 115K does not meet reserve. The photography is very selective. Anyone willing to pay that kind of money for a 911 is going to be a serious buyer and is going to inspect this car very carefully and will likely to find some very serious issues under all that respray. Anyway, that’s how it looks from my armchair, reading carefully.
Just buy a nice rust free 65′ Corvair Corsa and put Konis and a quick steering box on it . Two bags of Golf clubs fit in the trunk.
Spend the remaining 95 K on a ski chalet in Slovenia.
Thank me later when the Chalet soars in price.
One other thing…..some of us prize.I mean really prize….cars that are as they were built by the factory……not some well intentioned “reconstruction” or “restoration” by however skilled a craftsman they may be.
Every time I see an over restored.say ’58 Cameo truck driven by one of my age cohorts, I shake my head. I don’t get it; add to that Woodies with modern drivetrains. But each to his own said Mrs O’Leary as she kissed the cow.
That said the pelicanparts ad you referenced is for a sheet metal reconstruction by the sellers own admission. All well and good. But along with the missing engine I can’t fathom where its inherent value lays other than it was one of a few built which is no longer in any sense of the word original or as built.
See Mrs.O’Leary reference above.
These are magnificent cars, a couple of leagues above common British sports cars…….and they are a good car that will not leave you on the side of the road in a rain storm. I have owned, driven and worked on many, they are a special car. For the money they are selling for these days, I would prefer something a bit more exotic………..I sold a 68 911L to buy my Maserati in 1976…….but prices on these cars are being driven by the European market. Here in the US, we are just along for the ride. My 1967 911S was an incredible car, 2 liters, dry sump, 7500 RPM redline that made British cars of the day look silly in any competition. It is tough to explain the Porsche phenomenon to a British car guy that is satisfied with there tractor engines cars or an American car guy with a 65 Mustang. These cars are near perfection as a drivers car, in pre fuel injected, turbocharger days, these cars would get your groceries, the kids to school and win an auto cross on the weekend.
With you on that one, Dave. I used to say mine was a VW in 1st and 2nd gear…but hit 3rd and wind out that throaty 2.0 and it was a totally different story.
They won’t leave you on the side of the road unless you neglect the original chain tensioners. Rode with my friend in the tow truck when it happened to his 65.
When I drive a 911, it feels, and sounds, just like driving my old vw bug. Now my bug did have a big bore kit and webers, was lowered, and ran real good for a bug, but I certainly wouldn’t be buying something like this for the driving experience. FYI with sticky tires I could beat the 911s, even Turbos, at an autox, back in the day.
I’ve driven one or two of these, and they have really left me under-whelmed. I look at this one and while I appreciate the fact that it is an early one, all I see is a money pit that will consume anything that gets close to it!
If it’s a really really early numbered 1965 911 they are off the chart. I sold a rusty rat box to a dealer two years ago for $115K, engine was rebuilt but needed a complete restoration. At that time the car “done” was worth $300K, because it was one of the first 300 serial numbers. Yeah, it’s nutty… but they are extremely rare and some people just really like rare cars that are fun to drive. This one is going to need a lot of work… but I don’t think the price is out of line for one of these.
This is chassis # 301845 so it’s near the end of the ’65 model year (which ended at or a little after # 302061 built in late July 1965).
The highest chassis number built in 1964 was 300235–those bring a big premium, and the first 40 or so (might have been 41) were designated 901s–those demand even more…
But any “true” ’65 in good condition’s worth plenty.
301845 needs work but it looks like a good restoration candidate. The lack of photos of the areas where the suspension attaches (and rust repairs are a challenge) don’t appear in the photos so I won’t call it a great restoration candidate.
It does have it’s original Solex carburetors–that’s a big plus, and it looks like it has leather seats. Leather’s rather rare in that era.
The black plastic bezel on the ignition indicates a non-locking steering column. Some might consider the brass bezel on a locking column a desirable touch.
Hagerty gives one a “suggested price” of what they have sold for. We all know it is only worth what you can get for it. Evidently he up until this point has NOT got his asking price. I just went through Ebay recently to see plenty of cars I saw a few months ago that have not sold and those owners are still trying to sell. Some at lower prices and some not. The next question is “how bad does he wan to sell it”. I will assume this car is listed for the first time, so he doesn’t need the money yet.
I like the early Porches, what I don’t like is what the “investors” have done to the prices, note I said prices ( not values ) this starting price is “nuts”, by the time this is restored to $115k value you will have spent twice that!
One Take on Price
the boomers R in the wealth range and have the nostalgia (how old were they in ’65?) to force these prices up. If some 1 knew a friend’s father who had 1 of these in the day (or some other emotional attachment) he might want to purchase that feeling… nothing to do w/true market value but it effects it (s/d).
I believe I C some of our same era vehicles going to Japan & Europe right now, same reason/idea.
I’d like to have 1 of my mother’s 850s same reason (like the Karman Ghia not a racer). Sit in it (sure drivin’d B even more fun!) and kinda return to that time (12 – 19 y/o) of feeling like ‘no bills’, “aint that new girl at school cute”, etc, etc. Back to the old problem(s) tho (s/d, what’s your competition’s wealth, how many of that model left, which models do the competition seek, how close to home is it, urban or country…).
My ’66 911 was built in April 1966.
It is number 301459 so I assume this one is newer.
Robert you are one lucky guy. It is generally accepted that 301900 is very near the last true, end of July serial number for model year 1965.
See below. Adam Wright says the car we have been discussing is a 65 and it’s serial number is sequentially 400 higher than yours. Adam knows the difference for a good reason, he is someone with a ton of early 911 experience and knowledge and that is his livelihood.
An April 1966 build date for #301459 makes no sense. April 65 yes, 66 no.
Keep in mind Porsche was still selling brand new 1965 356s and that they wanted all 911s to be 1966 models so as not to confuse the public.
Does you paint code plate in the door jamb read 64-xxx or 66-xxx?
This is good news for you in the money department, if you care.
I was working from memory, and it ain’t what it used to be. The date is 6606 and the number 304349. It is titled as a 1967 model but it looks like a ’66. The plate in the door doesn’t have a paint code, just the above numbers. The plate at the lip of the luggage is pictured below. (My Corvair was built in April 66, and I turned 304 into 301 because Porsche.)
The picture didn’t show. I can’t type zig marks, but the Heizenrichtung typ is: 911 /\/\/\/\/ S 66
301382 has May 1965 date stamps on its instruments and was delivered at Auto Rossel in Wiesbaden on 21 June 1965. It probably sat at the dealer for a while waiting to be picked up. 301379 left the factory in May.
301459 should have left the factory in May or June 1965.
302061’s production date was 27 July 1964 and it has a 64 paint code–302101 has a MY 66 paint code [6602] and was delivered on August 18th 1965.
The last 911 before the end of summer break would have been between 302061 and 302101. Probably not much higher than 302061.
I’ve Driven them fast, washed and waxed them, look at them all of the time and still don’t get it.
Maybe I’ve had too many beetles.
The question whether it’s OK to want to buy, own, and drive an old Porsche with needs seems to come up a lot. It comes up just about every time an old Porsche is offered for big money, at least on Barn Finds and no doubt lots of other places.
I have read about and listened to opinions on this since around 1960 when I bought my first well-used sportscar, and it’s pretty clear that it’s a very personal thing. I don’t think that is going to change anytime soon.
So why do old Porsches bring such high prices compared to other iconic sportscars? A good comparison would be the current price difference between a 1950s Porsche 356 and an MG TD or TF. Another would be the price difference between a mid-1960s Porsche 911 like the one here, and various traditional British sportscars of the same time period.
I think there are probably a few reasons, like original purchase price and perceived quality. But I think a major, or maybe the major reason, is the fact that Porsche spent a lot of effort and money supporting the participation of their cars in racing. Porsche have had a lot of success over the decades, and were still racing hard and winning when MG, for example, wasn’t. Ferrari and Porsche, both long-time winners at the highest levels of international racing, are probably the most recognized names in the world of sportscars.
If somebody likes old Porsches with needs despite high prices, good.
If not, that’s also good.
It’s a 65, in a league of its own. Read my last article on PCA about 65 vs 66’s.
https://www.pca.org/news/2017-01-17/barnfinding-65
Adam Wright……so it’s your fault! lol.
By the way I have enjoyed reading your periodic pieces. Logic hardly ever rules when it comes to folks with the money to purchase a particular car and the price of that car. The ’65 911 falls into that category. For my admittedly limited experience and knowledge you might as well buy the 1964 356…..jess sayin :)
Woodie Man,
I’ve never driven a ’64 356C but I do own a ’58 356A and a ’65 911–they’re very different.
The 356A’s a wonderful, friendly car. It has a nice flat torque curve for great driveability. The handling’s precise and secure.
The 911 is surprisingly noisy and the engine’s almost torque free below 3000 rpm. Drivability isn’t that bad but you do need to shift gears a lot to go fast.
Two plusses for early 911s: the rack and pinion steering is much more precise then even the 356’s excellent ZF steering box and the throttle response from carbureted and MFI 911s is matched by few cars.
And, after nearly 20 years there’s still a “wow factor” when I sit in the 911.
The rust areas around the pan indicate that there is probably rust on the bottom of the inner longitudinals. If you’ve never replaced these pieces you can’t imagine how precise you have to be and how much labor is involved. Last one we did took using our alignment bench and a full week of 8 hour days. Overall bill to the customer including paint was $32K in late ’80s money.
I think most of people who make comments about the price of this early matching numbers 911 have no real idea about the difference of value between a 65 and a later 911.
Yes there are people who are looking at early examples and are ready to give money for that.
Classic 911 are the most beautiful Porsches (in my opinion).
And no more than one car among fifty (if not hundred) classic 911 is a 1965.
Rarity makes value.
I think most of us learned something through this thread.
That is a huge benefit of following BF.
The other great thing is that no one from the peanut gallery suggested dropping a V8 and slush box combo into it.
Oh correct Luki, we all learn alot on Barn Finds. We also learned alot through this tread, although I think most of us knew it already. You want to know what it is? Most of us agree that this car is overpriced. Hey, the listing is almost over and that 115000 starting bid has yet to be started right? The only way someone will place a 115000 bid on this car is by one of the seller’s friends just to make it look like there is action on this VW, I mean Porsche. If you like 911s, fine, there are so many better picks for a fraction of this car’s price. Does this look like a 115000 car? Tell someone you paid 115000+ for this car and they will walk away laughing.
Why would I ever want to buy a car that took a full week of 8 hour days on a laser alignment device to get the inner longitudinals kinda right? I’d maybe buy an original one for big bucks if I thought that was sensible and had money lying around in need of spending (No, it’s not sensible).
I hope it sells and makes someone very happy. On another note, I read a failed presidential candidate threw a million dollar bottle of bubbly through a $100K TV screen. I’m heading to the Slovenian mountains, this is nuts.
There is a stunning 1965 in next Amelia Island Auction :
http://www.rmsothebys.com/am17/amelia-island/lots/1965-porsche-911/1702027
(serial number 303058 much later than this listed in BF #301845)
So wait and see what price it will perform…
It would be more correct to say there’s a SHINEY 1966 model year 911 in the RM Amelia Island Auction…
That Irish Green car has:
– incorrect foglamps (there are excellent Hella 128 repros)
– black windshield wipers instead of silver
– incorrect S trim on bumpers and rockers
– incorrect script on rear deck lid
The rubber pads on the bumper guards MIGHT be correct–introduction was October 1965–but you seldom see them on original ’65s and ’66s.
And, RM’s description says “six-cylinder engine with two Solex carburetors” While some early prototype 901s had two triple-barrel Solex carbs, this car should have SIX Solex carburetors.
It’s been re-listed with a buy it now price of $125k, or you can make an offer.
This person relisted it for even a higher price at $125,000. Lol!!! I want whatever this person is on…