Menu toggle

944/968 galvanising

pauljmcnulty

Active member
As it was sooooooo off-topic on the other thread! [&:]

968s.....reasons they rust less please.

Less made, and more are garage queens? Better factory treatment? Or did Porsche spot the inherant weak area at the rear of the sills on a 944 and re-design the sills on a 968?

Given that the 944 was essentially manufactured to early-70s standards, perhaps with factory techniques changed a bit along the way but not a lot, was there a huge step-change with the 968?
 
I know the 964 was hand built and the 993 (1992/3 manufacturing year) moved to robot built. I am guessing perhaps the change from 944 to 968 happening about the same time MIGHT mean a similar change in manufacturing technique and maybe the moulding of components to allow a robot to handle and assemble them?
Maybe galvanising techniques improved around this time?
Maybe 968s are simply so much newer that their rusty years are still ahead of them? [:(]
Cheers
Mick
 
This could be expanded out further

Lots of rust issues on 76-79 924
Little rust issues on 80-84 924
Lots of rust issues on 85-88 924S and 84-91 944's
Little rust issues on 968's

Go figure?
 
The 944 was built in the VW/Audi Neckarsulm plant and the 968 was built in Porsche's Zuffenhausen plant. Body in white surface treatment processes can be completely different plant to plant so I would assume that Zuffenhausen simply had better/more modern surface treatment technology and therefore the 968 BIW was better protected than the 944.
 
There's also anecdotal evidence that the last run-out versions of the lux (that's series one or two N/A non-turbo 944 for the pedants [;)]) rust more than the rest. Was that due to moving production, and less care taken on the slower-selling 2.7 Luxes?

The turbos and S2s don't have significant differences except for the sill and wing trims that trap dirt.
 
im sure the sill inner design is different on the 968 allows more air flow and less water to get trapped
 
OMG what have I started? Oil or tyres anyone??[:D][:D] All I know for sure is that, when I peeled back the windscreen seal to investigate why the paint was bubbling, I could see white galvanising below the paint - and an area where Autoglass had cut through both to expose the raw metal underneath. Also when I accidentally got heavy handed with correcting fluid on the A pillar, I saw white below the red - and stopped before I got to metal! Luckily I had touch-up paint so was able to correct my mistake!!

Maybe it's just that 968 owners look after their cars better!![:D][:D]
 
This nonsense. Lux rubbish aside, the 2.7l wasn't slow selling - it sold FAR more than the 1988 2.5l model.

Also: I am not a pedant Paul. Lux is a trim level and not a model name and the register secretary shouldn't be popularising silly made up inaccuracies.
 
OMG what have I started?

Lol, there's a serious point there!

The 944 shell was fully-galvanised. That hasn't prevented rot, nor would you expect it too over decades of exposure to a hostile environment. It rots less than anything else of it's peroid, so that's a good thing. [:)]

Just wondered if there really is a difference in the 968 update, or just that they are newer? In which case, prevention now is worth considering?
 
Well I think you all know my opinion on this subject having owned high mileage versions of both. The 968s don't suffer from rust thing is a myth, they are rare cars and not many high milers unlike 944s of which many have done huge mileages whilst living outside for 20 years. I was going to say the bottom of the front wings don't rust because its basically a plastic piece but then I remembered that on mine grit and dirt had got into the line between that piece and the wing such that it needed repairing. Not as bad as a fully rotten wing I guess, the area behind and below that vent in the rear quarter rusts justs like it does on 944s you just don't see it because a plastic side skirt piece covers it all over.

I think if someone looks after a 968 fastidiously and takes all the bumpers and trims off every several years, cleans and treats everything then puts it all back together with fresh seals then yes I think they probably will last better. Having said that one can spend the same amount of time and money looking after a 944 that hasn't rusted yet so its a bit of a moot point.

Build quality on our 968 was worse than on my H reg 944 S2, I stripped the 944 down to a shell and had most of the 968 apart in my time with it so I think this whole thing around where they were built or the materials used is another myth. Remember that Porsche almost went bust in the 90s.

You might all be surprised given all that, that I still feel the 968 was the pinnacle of the line.
 
I have no detailed knowledge of 968's but understood that the reason you don't see rusty ones is because they are newer, and they have more plastic trim. Give it a few years and they will rust in a similar way, but it won't be visible behind that trim.


Oli.
 
As a 16 year veteran of of Nissan Sunderland's Paintshop Engineering Department, I concur with Monkeythree.

If 944's and 968's went through a different paint pre-treatment process (i.e. factory) you might as well consider them to be completely unrelated models from a corrosion point of view. There is a huge amount of good or bad that can be done based on how the bodies are prepared prior to surfacer and topcoat paint application. Taken to extremes I would estimate you could add 10 non-corrosion years to the same body shell shell according to which end of the manufacturing specification you process at, even in the same Paintshop.
 
If 944's and 968's went through a different paint pre-treatment process (i.e. factory) you might as well consider them to be completely unrelated models from a corrosion point of view.

Yep, it makes sense.

There were all sorts of issues with steel quality back then, as well. Witness the Alfas built from pooor-grade steel supplied by the Russians in return for the old Fiat production tools! [:eek:]
 
on a quiet night you could hear a Lancia Beta rusting away just before it broke in half at the firewall bulkhead
 

ORIGINAL: Waylander

on a quiet night you could hear a Lancia Beta rusting away just before it broke in half at the firewall bulkhead

Beautiful cars, though. [&o]

My Dad had a Guilietta that fell in two with corroded sills, then a GTV that failed it's first MOT with corrosion, and a GTV6 that had suspension replaced in it's first year due to corrosion. You wonder why I was hooked on the 944s he owned? [&:]

I also loved his Merc 190E Cosworth, but again the corrosion seems to be so much worse on them. Rare as well.

Thinking back, his Monza GTE was kind of cool in a Capri way, but how many of them are left in daily use now?
 
That may have been me [:)]

The first models we noticed suffering from rear wheel arch, sill and lower front wing rot were the 86 Turbos and 88 Turbo S models about 15 years ago when the 944 was almost otherwise unheard of as suffering except around the rear number plate lamps and the tailgate latch areas.

The weird thing is, it seems like these 86 turbos and 88 turbo S models either really suffered badly, or almost not at all and the examples of those two models which are around today are nearly all in really fantastic condition, but at one point years ago, it seemed that about half of those models were suffering to an acute level.

I was just being trained during the run out of the Turbo S model and contrary to official stories there were 944 Turbo S cars being assembled at Zuffenhausen when I was there and only Turbo cup cars at Weissach.. All the ones I had seen at Zuffenhausen were Silver Rose cars, I was not at Neckersalm in 88 so can not comment on if there were any Silver Rose cars there in production or just the slightly later non silver rose 944 Turbo S models.

Looking back, the Turbo S cars which seemed to suffer from rot were all Silver Rose cars, and I do know all the Turbo S cars had their bodies built up at Neckersulm, or at least they had come through there, but as I was not in the paintshop I do not know if the Silver Rose cars I had seen being assembled at Zuffenhausen were painted there, or at Neckersulm.

So my theory, which could be complete tish, is that the cars which suffered the rot, in particular the silver roses which suffered with rot, were possibly transported from Neckersulm to Zuffenhausen in white base, protected or not, who knows, and may have therefore suffered somehow through not going straight from primer to paint to production line in one hit.

The thing that makes me wonder about this is once I was told that 1987/1988 Fords rusted because of a trade dispute left many cars exposed outside in primer only while they were stockpiled/bottlenecked and unable to be painted.. this could be a myth.. But it made me wonder at the time I heard it that maybe the movement of 944 silver roses from one plant to another had something to do with it..

But then again, maybe 1988 was a bad year for steel.. who knows.

Other than those 86 turbos and 88 Turbo S models which seemed to suffer, it was another ten years before we started seeing any 944's really suffering from rusty rusty sills, other than the odd car which needed small repairs, often cosmetic, for rust bubbles, which often would seem like an accident repair had seen areas sanded back down to bare metal and presumably removed the galvonised coating.. Then around 2010 we started seeing 944's suffering sill rot and lower front wing rot coming from the inside out.

Interestingly when we did start to see the sills and wings rotting from the inside out, it was always 944 S2s and 944 turbos as a rule and I have always put this down to the plastic under sill/wing trims/skirts which the S2 and turbo wear, collecting dirt which may block the drains and hold damp dirt against any exposed areas at the bottom of the wing.. But more likely, because they rust from the inside out, I believe it was the former.

968's have a different side skirt of course, which may not cause the same issues as the s2 and turbo trim/skirt

We have seen non turbo and S2 models suffer from rotten sills and front wing rot, but I think that in many cases is down to eventual blocking of the drains again and accumulation of mud in the lower wing.

On the "lux" thing.. I tend to refer to non S2 and Turbo models as a "lux" simply because it was next to impossible to buy a non turbo or s2 944 without the lux spec in the UK, many of the non lux uk spec cars were either ordered in Germany by servicemen with a tax break on buying a car in germany to uk spec, or someone in the uk ordered it from a uk opc and made a point of not wanting a sunroof.. So sorry if it does niggle anyone me using the term lux, but it is just used for clarity that is is not a turbo or s2 that I am talking about.. Calling it a 944 Base, vanilla or bog-standard as well as any other term might come across to non turbo or s2 owners as somehow talking down their cars which are special in their own right. :)

Pre 80/81 924's rotted out so quickly due to there being only partial galvonising, that I am pretty sure of.
 
O
ORIGINAL: Indi9xx

Lots of good stuff

I noticed when working on my car that the S2/turbo plastic sill covers only have 5 drain holes and IIRC, the sills themselves have 6. Furthermore, not all of the 5 holes in the covers align with the ones in the sills! I have previously speculated that this apparent design cock-up might play some part in the rusty sills debate.
 
In reply to Jon and the Turbo S rust issue, further evidence perhaps, remember the metallic grey one that was listed on Pistonheads at a very reasonable price, then snapped up by a dealer and immediately re advertised at twice the price ?

Well it would appear someone from the TIPEC site viewed it recently, here are his thoughts

"The grey Turbo S on ebay and Pistonheads is seriously rotten, needs a restoration, not TLC. I have restored an MGB so I'm not being picky, that one has holes in it! I didn't look any further than the state of the rear 1/4's, so can't comment on the rest of the car."

So not the bargain it initially appeared and those of us who get excited at seeing 'a bargain' are yet again reminded that there is in fact no such thing ...
 

Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members

Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the Club, who shall have no liability in respect of them or the accuracy of the content. The Club assumes no responsibility for any effects arising from errors or omissions.

Porsche Club Great Britain gives no warranties, guarantees or assurances and makes no representations or recommendations regarding any goods or services advertised on this site. It is the responsibility of visitors to satisfy themselves that goods and/or services supplied by any advertiser are bona fide and in no instance can the Porsche Club Great Britain be held responsible.

When responding to advertisements please ensure that you satisfy yourself of any applicable call charges on numbers not prefixed by usual "landline" STD Codes. Information can be obtained from the operator or the white pages. Before giving out ANY information regarding cars, or any other items for sale, please satisfy yourself that any potential purchaser is bona fide.

Directors of the Board of Porsche Club GB, Club Office Staff, Register Secretaries and Regional Organisers are often requested by Club members to provide information on matters connected with their cars and other matters referred to in the Club Rules. Such information, advice and assistance provided by such persons is given in good faith and is based on the personal experience and knowledge of the individual concerned.

Neither Porsche Club GB, nor any of the aforementioned, shall be under any liability in respect of any such information, advice or assistance given to members. Members are advised to consult qualified specialists for information, advice and assistance on matters connected with their cars at all times.

Back
Top