Oh, by the way...and I hope this wasn't what people perceived by my original reply. I'm a huge 911 fan! I've loved those cars since well before I had my drivers license, have had the good fortune to drive a few of them, and maintain that I will own one someday. I was only trying to highlight that 1999 is the worst possible model year for modern 911's that I personally know of.
I do not consider myself super knowledgeable about the yearly changes to 911's, but as with most cars that I really love and would consider owning, I do research them pretty aggressively. The 996 model (non turbocharged variants) have some of the worst resale value of all modern 911s though, so don't plan to buy one if you want to keep your investment largely intact. The reasons for this (from what little I know) are that they were much more mass produced than earlier models, but also because they mostly narrow body cars, without the gorgeous fender flares that we all love so much (993 had them, 997 has them). All of that, and the addition of water cooling, has really driven 996 pricing down relative to older models.
It's so striking, that you will see 1997 and 1998 C2/C4/C2S prices staying well above 1999-2001 996's. The widebody 996 models (C4S and Turbo) fare significantly better, but are much more expensive than the narrow body 996s.
I'll tell you this much. Anyone who has driven any generation of 911 and didn't enjoy it just isn't a proper car enthusiast in my mind. They are sublime to drive, but we tend to judge all cars pretty harshly on straightline speed after owning modified Supra turbos!
Steve T.
