944 sills
- Thread starter JamesBall
- Start date
Suffolk944
Moderator
Yes but the later cars (by which I mean last couple of years production) are anecdotally said to be more susceptable to corrosion beyond that.
Thanks very much for the encouragement. From what you are all saying, it seems that an S2 was a little optimistic. I am going to see what is supposed to be a very good 924S on Friday. However, much as I like the 924, I've got a nagging doubt and might regret not buying a 944. A 2.5 or a 2.7 might be the way to go. Really appreciate all the feedback from everyone. Desperately missing having a toy having owned a very pokey and very light weight Austin Healey Sprite for 18 years. I have been hankering after a transaxle Porsche for some time and am keen to get one before the summer is out. Any thoughts on whether a 2.7 is a significantly better car than a 2.5? I'm guessing from what everyone has said, that condition is the all-important factor.
From all accounts there is not a lot in it performance-wise. In any case, after all these years the differences between a good individual car and a tired car are much more significant than any of the minor differences in specification between the various 8-valve normally aspirated cars. Same goes for the 924S which has basically the same 2.5 litre engine.
Joss Walker
New member
You might like the earlier models after your Sprite, from all accounts they are far more 'chuckable' in a lighter go-kart type way than the more 'civilised' S2s and many people on this forum love them (including Hairyarse Andy who sold his excellent looking S2 after a few weeks because he really wanted an earlier model) Reading back, my earlier comments do seem to have been a little bleak, there are a few S2s around that have done over 200k on the original engine so I think that bares testament to how well built they are. The other benefit of our older cars is that when you open the bonnet you can actually do stuff, not just stand and admire how pretty the computers and plastic moulded covers look, you must be handy after your Sprite project so the regular servicing would be well within your capabilities and would mean that normal running costs would be little. Can you tell that I'm a little worried I may have helped scare off a new fan?
Suffolk944
Moderator
Bit more torque in the 2.7 and perhaps a BHP or two ? One thing to bear in mind is that a few parts (engine wise iirc) of the 2.7 are unique to it and being less common that their 2.5 equivalents are more expensive to buy if needed.
Super_Marv
New member
I wouldn't disagree with that too much. I did hear that Porsche improved the design of the sills slightly on the 968 to improve the airflow and prevent moisture staying in the sill (not sure how accurate that is though) My '93 car has got some very light surface corrosion towards the back of the cill. I've covered it with cavity wax and will continue to do so and I've put a coat of underbody wax underneath the sill too.
I am always interested in this issue and I think the view i take is that unless you want a real stonker of a car you may as well just pay the least to get the job done. ( wow I can feel the pins going in as I said that!!) My 1984 Square Dash has had over £2000 spent on it on mechanicals in the last 2 years. At the last MOT it needed a hole patching on one side but the driver's side sill was perfect, had all drain holes intact. The garage did a small floor section and part sill for £120. The car outwardly looks lovely with no bubbles on either sill but just had 1 small section that needed attention underneath. I know this is controversial but surely we shouldn't commit our cars to the crusher when its perfectly possible to make do if all we want is a daily driver? As someone else has said here if you can do your own work you are a star and I wish you were my mate and would do jobs for a few crates of Guinness. For us other mere mortals its a case of doing what we can on a limited budget. i know you mostly won't agree with me but I got another year out of my car for a small amount of ££.
I've just sold an early 2.5 square dash and have had my 2.7 for a few months now. More torque from 2.7 but only 2-3 extra bhp. really only balances the extra weight in the later cars. Far more significant is the front geometry. On the square dash (all 2.5) and the very first oval dash cars ('86 model year) have a setup that gives a more lively feel, in my opinion. The later cars have the front struts at a greater angle and the hub faces 50mm approx further apart, also most early cars dont have power steering (it was an option) - later ones have it as standard. With your Sprite history I would certainly try an early car - they have the 23mm offset wheels, cookie cutters usually, but sometimes swapped for later ones. Good luck
Yes, but that's all your car needed, which is great. We all know there have been other cars needing extensive work on both inner and outer sills, rear suspension mounts, seat belt mounts, and so on. Not to mention the costs of doing lower wing sections as well. These cars arenot going to be fixed for £120.
Joss Walker
New member
Steve, can you pm me a photo please (of you, not the car) my little voodoo doll won't work unless it resembles you! I agree that we should all do what we can to keep them running. Unfortunately mine had gone too far for patching, as was all too apparent when we started cutting away the bad bits, and after a few years of owning I had been convinced that I wanted to keep it so decided to move into the uneconomical territory of ownership. If it can be patched do, we don't all want to win concours events, and the more kept on the road the better, any which way we can!
Listen, I can't believe how supportive and helpful you lot are. I don't want to be negative about the Austin Healey or the MG car club's, but you are all genuinely supportive of each other. It's good and healthy that there is some disagreement and divergences of opinions, but there is a clear message coming through. I was initially very reluctant to join this forum, but I'm so glad that I did. Joss has just e-mailed me at home with information of a 944S which is clearly well known to a lot of you in the club. I have just e-mailed the owner to say that I am genuinely interested in the car. This could not have happened without all of your support and advice. I'd like to thank everybody that has contributed to this post. This particular lead may come to nothing, I may end up buying a 924S and turning it into a carrera GT replica, but I have been overwhelmed by the help that I have been given by complete strangers. If ever a register/forum deserved to succeed, it's yours. I just don't understand why so many transaxle Porsche get broken/scrapped. I personally have turned two basket case sprites into really good cars and they have absolutely nothing on a Porsche. Time to go to bed now, am really rather weary but far more enlightened. Thank you everyone.
pauljmcnulty
Active member
I've come to a slightly unscientific conclusion that something changed when the 944 production moved from Neckersaulm. Late 944s do seem to corrode faster, the late turbos, S2s and 2.7 Luxes. I'd be very concerned about assuming 968s won't go exactly the same way. Do you mean surface corrosion on the inside of the sill? The issue with the 944 is that the thick stone guard holds the corrosion inside until it's well-advanced. A 944 with visible blistering on the outside is likely to be concealing pretty serious corrosion. I'd guess a 968 hides it's rust even more so under the plastic sill covers. [
] The airflow point might be relevant, but that's the point of the 944/968 design; the sills are vented fore and aft so airflow dries the moisture out. That works in theory, but in practice all cars spend time not moving, and with moisture in the cavities through both water ingress and condensation. All you can do is continually monitor the inside of the cavities for corrosion and treat them.
Alpine
New member
I would have thought that £3500 is plenty for a 944. I would also have thought that unless the cils are really bad, some localised welding would be much better and cheaper than repalcing a full set of cills, so in reality a cost of £1k to £2k on cills should be pretty rare. You need to find a car that has been pampered by a private owner for a couple of years, and used as a dry weather 2nd car. Ask for pictures to be e-mailed to you before you travel and it should avoid a wasted journey. Avoid traders as they add a mark up so you are paying over the odds, and you loose the benefit of speaking to the previous owner, which is vital. You'll find a car in no time.
Huw, I really think you will find what you want in your budget. If you buy a good-looking car with a new MOT (or make it a condition of sale) you have a year to build up a fund to cover longer term issues such as sill corrosion. Of more pressing immediate concern is the cambelts etc etc which can eat through £1000 in short order. But having said all that, if you like the car, why not just go for it? As you say, this very vibrant forum will happily hold your hand through the early days of 944 ownership. From what you are saying, I would agree with others that a nice, well sorted lux (2.5 or 2.7) might be just the ticket rather than a 16 valve car.
Super_Marv
New member
Yeah, the corrosion is on the inside of the sill. There was a bit of corrosion on the underside, but it didn't seem too bad. It wasn't getting close to structurally crumbling away at least! Does the 944 S2 have drainage holes all the way along the bottom of the sill? I took some pictures of the outer part of the sills on my car, with the sideskirts off here: http://s46.photobucket.com/albums/f119/Jaberwoky/968 Sill Cleanup/ I'm certainly not ignoring the fact that 968s may have the same problem with rusting sills as the 944...I quite agree that it's a thing which needs to be monitored often.ORIGINAL: pauljmcnultyI've come to a slightly unscientific conclusion that something changed when the 944 production moved from Neckersaulm. Late 944s do seem to corrode faster, the late turbos, S2s and 2.7 Luxes. I'd be very concerned about assuming 968s won't go exactly the same way. Do you mean surface corrosion on the inside of the sill? The issue with the 944 is that the thick stone guard holds the corrosion inside until it's well-advanced. A 944 with visible blistering on the outside is likely to be concealing pretty serious corrosion. I'd guess a 968 hides it's rust even more so under the plastic sill covers. [
pauljmcnulty
Active member
Wow, looking at the accumulated crud under the sill covers I can easily see that being as bad a problem as the 944 in coming years. Unless that's cleaned out regularly it's just an abrasive, salty problem waiting to happen. Much the same as the front wing liners on the 944. [&o] I don't know why people find it unusual that any car over 20 years old has some corrosion, or live in hope that their slightly newer model won't be affected. Treat it early and keep it protected and it's not a huge issue, it's the ones that have gone for years without attention that are costing the big money. Also, a large part of the repair cost isn't the metalwork but the paint; if you're effectively respraying most of the car at the same time it's no surprise that the bill is £000s rather than £000s.
bumperblue
New member
For my moneys worth I would imagine that every one of the "rust free" cars has some rust in a nook or cranny somewhere. It may be not visible, they are 20+ year old cars after all and have probably been driven! I think the difference is that some owners of the cars were aware of the issues early on and started the continuous process and I mean continuous, of checking, rustproofing , checking rustproofing, repairing checking etc.. Its part of ownership, no biggy. The current crop of rustproofing chemical seem to work effectively.
Fat Albert
New member
Hi Huw, I would echo much of what has been said here, if the car is going to be for general enjoyment rather than preservation then taking a pragmatic view on the sills seems to be the best approach, ie just deal with what appears when it appears. I have had mine just over 2 years and have covered 19,000 miles so far, in that time I have had to fit less consumables than I would have done on an 'ordinary' car due to the better balance (my old SAAB 9000's would eat tyres and brakes) and pay the same/less for them It has just gone through its 3rd MOT, although I did have to replace a Bulb, ARB droplink and the windscreen, total cost including MoT and service: just under £400, not bad for a 23 year old performance car with 213,000 miles on the clock! I know what you are saying about the classic forums, my neighbour Rallies MGs and tried the MG clubs/forums early on, but soon gave up...
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
