944 turbo model history quick question
- Thread starter djcla
- Start date
Diver944
Active member
The 250bhp turbos started in 1988 as a Limited Edition Turbo S, the normal 220bhp Turbo was available at the same time.
In 1989 all Turbos had 250bhp and the 220bhp was dropped (there may be one or two 220 cars that sold during 1989 due to leftover dealer stocks)
The easy way to tell the difference is the engine code stamped on the block by the exhaust manifold for cyl #4.
250 cars are coded M44/52
220 cars are coded M44/51
In 1989 all Turbos had 250bhp and the 220bhp was dropped (there may be one or two 220 cars that sold during 1989 due to leftover dealer stocks)
The easy way to tell the difference is the engine code stamped on the block by the exhaust manifold for cyl #4.
250 cars are coded M44/52
220 cars are coded M44/51
pauljmcnulty
Active member
Not difficult to up the power, but you'll need to change brakes as well.
Diver944
Active member
In simple terms they fitted a bigger turbocharger that could hold the boost of 0.85 bar to 5800rpm
You can easily chip a 220 car to 1 bar of boost and reliably make 280'ish bhp with less lag than the 250 car. The same process to a 250 car will yield circa 300bhp
Today I had a ride in a 250 Turbo Cabriolet chipped (and the rest) to 1.4 bar yielding 416bhp [8D]. New trousers were required afterwards [
]morris944s2john
New member
I think the 220 has the same callipers as the 944S2 and the 250 has bigger pistons in the Brembo callipers.
hartge bob
New member
To go to 250 brakes on a 220 you need calipers, discs, pads AND new hub uprights, the caliper mounting on the 250 is different to the 220.
Peter Empson
PCGB Member
Depends on you plans for the car, but I might suggest (and I'm sure I've read it from those that have owned/driven both) that the 220 can actually be a bit nicer on the road as it has less lag. It will also be slightly lighter (although I'm not sure by how much) thanks to things like those smaller brakes, and reducing unsprung weight is definately a good thing in my experience.
hartge bob
New member
That's interesting Paul,
Do you know how this would compare to a big black setup in terms of pad area, weight saving etc.
Is it just a bolt on for 220 hubs or is bracketry involved?
Diver944
Active member
Bracketry is involved because the mounting points are axially on the 220/S2 and radially on the 996/Boxster.
You cannot do it on the 250 car because even though it too is mounted radially, the bolt holes do not line up for the 996 callipers.
The callipers are apparently much, much lighter and also benefit from not having the calliper plate issue. They are also freely available at breakers etc. The pad and disk size are comparative with the Big Blacks, or you can go even bigger by fitting the 6 pot GT3 callipers and disks, but then you have to use 18" wheels
You cannot do it on the 250 car because even though it too is mounted radially, the bolt holes do not line up for the 996 callipers.
The callipers are apparently much, much lighter and also benefit from not having the calliper plate issue. They are also freely available at breakers etc. The pad and disk size are comparative with the Big Blacks, or you can go even bigger by fitting the 6 pot GT3 callipers and disks, but then you have to use 18" wheels
ORIGINAL: Diver944
Today I had a ride in a 250 Turbo Cabriolet chipped (and the rest) to 1.4 bar yielding 416bhp [8D]. New trousers were required afterwards [
I just read about that one......nice ought to be a candidate for "the rollers of truth", so we can see how it compares! oh.....but there are no rollers any more just a hole in the floor![
]
Peter Empson
PCGB Member
Oh no![] What a great shame.
] What a great shame.
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
