I have a 1991 3.3 turbo and am considering changing it for a 3.6 turbo. Clearly, the 3.6 is the popularly favoured one (for the obvious reasons). But I am interested in the less obvious factors affecting the choice too. I am seeing very contradictory statements on the web e.g. in one forum the 3.3 was stated to be both more reliable and more tunable; in another the 3.6 was the one stated to be both; and in a third the 3.3 was the more tunable but the 3.6 was more reliable. Likewise, 3.3 fuel consumption was stated to be better in one forum and the 3.6 elsewhere.
I have always loved the older Porsche (1970s and early 3.2) because of their solid reliability - this is important to me. Also, whilst fuel is not a major factor for me I have to admit ;-) to a leaning towards "green" where possible - a "sports" car should be fuel efficient almost by definition (as in converting fuel to power) - and the 3.2 was an excellent compromise of performance and fuel efficient, with the 3.3 being not too bad off boost.
Any advice on the obvious and not-so-obvious factors that I should consider will be gratefully received.
Iain.
I have always loved the older Porsche (1970s and early 3.2) because of their solid reliability - this is important to me. Also, whilst fuel is not a major factor for me I have to admit ;-) to a leaning towards "green" where possible - a "sports" car should be fuel efficient almost by definition (as in converting fuel to power) - and the 3.2 was an excellent compromise of performance and fuel efficient, with the 3.3 being not too bad off boost.
Any advice on the obvious and not-so-obvious factors that I should consider will be gratefully received.
Iain.
