944/968 galvanising
- Thread starter pauljmcnulty
- Start date
Yes Jon, originally for sale at £4250
pauljmcnulty
Active member
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.
Exactly. "Lux" is incorrect, but easier than "series one or two, naturally-aspirated 8-valve 944. [
]What would be nice is a handy abbreviation for the two body types: Turbo/S2, and Lux/S. Big bumper or narrow bumper cars?
When I was looking for my first Lux, would have been 2003 or so, there were some sorry specimens out there with rotten sills even that early. I was only looking at series 2 cars, so some were not even 15 years old! I viewed a 1988 at 911 Virgin that needed sills and a re-spray (priced accordingly), and there were a couple of 2.7 cars where you could see your feet when you looked through the b-pillar vent.
Interesting point about moving the body-in-white between factories. Would that be the same for the cabs? I've wondered about shells being exposed to the elements before assembly: it could even be as simple as a bottleneck on the production line meaning cars being left outside.
I've tended towards feeling it's more to do with where the cars were kept when in the UK, though. Some will have been outside from new, others garaged. A few years living by the sea, or in an area where there's a lot of gritting in winter, will cause immense damage that might not affect a car that lives on the street in London. For some time it only seemed to affect the NS sill badly, probably because that was where the roadside crud was worse.
An interesting thought Paul...worrying to think that unpainted bodies might have been left outside. Unlikely, surely?
On the matter of galvanising, I worked with light gauge galvanised steel for a little over 20 years (for British Steel) and the result of much testing indicated that the main cause of corrosion was continuous/repeated wetting. Bright zinc forms an oxide skin (dull finish) then wetting washes this off allowing another oxide layer to form. This process gradually and progressively depletes the zinc layer until rusting of the steel itself begins. This would support the observation that the N/S sill corrodes first.
Wonder if it's the other way round on LHD cars?
On the matter of galvanising, I worked with light gauge galvanised steel for a little over 20 years (for British Steel) and the result of much testing indicated that the main cause of corrosion was continuous/repeated wetting. Bright zinc forms an oxide skin (dull finish) then wetting washes this off allowing another oxide layer to form. This process gradually and progressively depletes the zinc layer until rusting of the steel itself begins. This would support the observation that the N/S sill corrodes first.
Wonder if it's the other way round on LHD cars?
BTW I've only had to repair the N/S sill on my car. So far....
Wonder if the plastic lower body covers on the 968 give better protection from rain and spray?
Wonder if the plastic lower body covers on the 968 give better protection from rain and spray?
Rot vs non-rot cars does not need anything as drastic as moving the body in white to a different factory.
If you let me loose in an automotive paint plant I could alter the rectifier voltage on the electrocoat section to drop the thickness of electrcoat paint from say a very healthy 100microns to miserly 10microns and take 10 years of the life of the bodyshell. I could effect this change in as little as 5-6 bodyshells passing through the immersion tank in a sequence. Then revert back to high voltage and get 100 microns back 6 bodyshells later.
There are a dozen other things I could do to cock up the rust resistance to a similar extent.
Fortunately most car companies know what they are doing and make sensible decisions on cost vs longevity of bodyshells. However mistakes can and do happen.....
If you let me loose in an automotive paint plant I could alter the rectifier voltage on the electrocoat section to drop the thickness of electrcoat paint from say a very healthy 100microns to miserly 10microns and take 10 years of the life of the bodyshell. I could effect this change in as little as 5-6 bodyshells passing through the immersion tank in a sequence. Then revert back to high voltage and get 100 microns back 6 bodyshells later.
There are a dozen other things I could do to cock up the rust resistance to a similar extent.
Fortunately most car companies know what they are doing and make sensible decisions on cost vs longevity of bodyshells. However mistakes can and do happen.....
pauljmcnulty
Active member
Yep, but that's in to the realms of conspiracy-theory! [&:]
I'd tend to take the view that the factory was closing down for August, and a few shells were left for a month out in the parking lot, rather than believe 944 rot is down to one lone, disgruntled employee winding the "microns" dial to 10, instead of 100?
As I've said, I do feel it's more down to the particular car's history than anything else. Salty roads or air, and living outside, will do a lot more damage than being wheeled across the parking lot to the spray booth.
There's a definite few years/models that do have a greater than normal problem with rust, though. I've seen more of the run-out Lux cars with serious corrosion, by proportion, than the earlier cars for instance? Also, as has been mentioned, the original Silver Rose cars have thrown up some very badly rusting examples, despite them being mostly garage queens. I can't say why for certain, but there must be a reason.
Either way, they still rust less than other cars from the same period, and apparently less than a lot of newer cars. [
]
Monkeythree
New member
ORIGINAL: pauljmcnulty
Yep, but that's in to the realms of conspiracy-theory! [&:]
I'd tend to take the view that the factory was closing down for August, and a few shells were left for a month out in the parking lot, rather than believe 944 rot is down to one lone, disgruntled employee winding the "microns" dial to 10, instead of 100?
As I've said, I do feel it's more down to the particular car's history than anything else. Salty roads or air, and living outside, will do a lot more damage than being wheeled across the parking lot to the spray booth.
There's a definite few years/models that do have a greater than normal problem with rust, though. I've seen more of the run-out Lux cars with serious corrosion, by proportion, than the earlier cars for instance? Also, as has been mentioned, the original Silver Rose cars have thrown up some very badly rusting examples, despite them being mostly garage queens. I can't say why for certain, but there must be a reason.
Either way, they still rust less than other cars from the same period, and apparently less than a lot of newer cars. [
As Paul 290T said, mistakes can and do happen. That's one thing. But I've also been in a lot of automotive assembly plants in my time and the disgruntled employee scenario is practically non existent in my experience. Far more common is that production process parameters permit a variation in the product that isn't captured by the OEM during the product testing and proving stage and are not fully understood until the product is in the field in the hands of the customer. Sometimes that customer experience feedback comes early enough in the product lifecycle that the OEM can trace the problem back to the process parameters and adjust them accordingly but often it doesn't.
Another factor is that most OEM's regularly change specifications and suppliers as cost saves. This usually involves a battle between the engineers who say "this will be a disaster" and the accountants who say "this will be a huge benefit". Who wins depends on the climate at the time. Sometimes the changes pass off with no impact but sometimes the engineers are right and before long, the change gets reversed and the OEM reverts to the previous specification/supplier. These ripples eventually get felt by guys like us 20 odd years down the line.
Neil Haughey
New member
Yep our old 968 actually failed an MoT for corrosion of the rear torsion tube hangers. My S2 never failed an MoT full stop.
ISTR our 968 had an NS VIN when I checked it as I was aware that some cars may have been built across both plants as there has long been a story that some late S2s where built back in the home plant. Maybe another one for the mythology making?
ISTR our 968 had an NS VIN when I checked it as I was aware that some cars may have been built across both plants as there has long been a story that some late S2s where built back in the home plant. Maybe another one for the mythology making?
pauljmcnulty
Active member
There are a few S2s on a k-plate, but I'm not sure that it means production was carried over? More likely to be late-registered UK cars.
Does anyone know the history behind the plant change? I'd imagine it was massively expensive to move the stamping and welding gear between factories, when the 968 was essentially a run-out version of the 944. I'm not aware of any plans to develop it beyond the 968?
Once again I completely concur with the scenarios that monkeythree describes above. This definitely goes on in the industry.
My own illustration of how altering rectifier voltage can have a dramatic and instant effect on body shell longevity was not meant to represent the theory of disgruntled employees (though I could tell you a few interesting stories about such antics in the automotive industry) being the cause of 944 corrosion variability. The same effect would more likely occur through an accident. For example the undetected failure of anode membranes in the electrocoat tank. The paint chemistry would be mucked up and the throw power of the tank would be reduced. Same end result, the body shell gets less electrocoat paint than it should. This would get picked up on the next round of the process checks. But a full shifts production would have passed by then. So what do you decide to do with the 200 fully painted and semi trimmed body shells that suffered....
Or Maintenance power down the control panel to effect repairs, on re-powering they don't check the rectifier voltage ("because that's the production departments job"), and the computer that sets voltage does not have data retentive programming and has defaulted to some incorrect voltage. The scenarios are endless and really do occur, albeit rarely, in the process industries of this world.
My own illustration of how altering rectifier voltage can have a dramatic and instant effect on body shell longevity was not meant to represent the theory of disgruntled employees (though I could tell you a few interesting stories about such antics in the automotive industry) being the cause of 944 corrosion variability. The same effect would more likely occur through an accident. For example the undetected failure of anode membranes in the electrocoat tank. The paint chemistry would be mucked up and the throw power of the tank would be reduced. Same end result, the body shell gets less electrocoat paint than it should. This would get picked up on the next round of the process checks. But a full shifts production would have passed by then. So what do you decide to do with the 200 fully painted and semi trimmed body shells that suffered....
Or Maintenance power down the control panel to effect repairs, on re-powering they don't check the rectifier voltage ("because that's the production departments job"), and the computer that sets voltage does not have data retentive programming and has defaulted to some incorrect voltage. The scenarios are endless and really do occur, albeit rarely, in the process industries of this world.
Can't be too expensive, British Leyland moved TR7 production three times, Speke to Canley , Canley to Solihull, then again the tax payer was footing the bill.
944 man
Active member
My understanding was that the 944s were built in order to ready the line and familiarise the assembly workers at Zuffenhausen. I haven't ever seen an S 944, but I have heard of them.
I hadn't ever heard of an N 968 until Neil just mentioned it, though. My understanding was that all 968s were built in Zuffenhausen.
Did you know that NSU stood for Neckarsulm Strickmaschinen Union?
I hadn't ever heard of an N 968 until Neil just mentioned it, though. My understanding was that all 968s were built in Zuffenhausen.
Did you know that NSU stood for Neckarsulm Strickmaschinen Union?
Monkeythree
New member
My car was first registered in April 92 so I would guesstimate the build date to be around November/December 91. It has a Neckarsulm VIN.
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
