After owning a 82 911 turbo,i am now going back to a 944(i want a car that goes fast around corners,does not rust,and does not empty my bank acount at a allarming rate!) I have owned a number of 944,s including a 220 hp turbo,but have not driven a S2.I need some advice on what is the better car,a turbo or a S2? Thanks, Andrew.
S2 OR TURBO?
- Thread starter andyslade
- Start date
Guest
New member
Do you prefer beef or pork sausages? It's next to impossible to say what's a "better" car for you. All I can say, is drive them both, and see which you prefer. The Turbo gives you a bigger kick, but the S2 is supposed to be a bit more user friendly.....
As for rust, well, these cars are 15-20 years old. although they were galvanised in the factory, they do rust. It's not bad at all, but it has been said that the front wings are the main culprit. After that, you'll be pretty free and easy, just check the particular car you're looking at.
Last but not least, a Porsche that doesn't empty the bank account? well, that's a pretty rare beast, but assuming the car is in good condition, and has a good service history, you'll end up with just servicing bills (assuming you're allergic to swarfega), and the odd mishap for things like relays & senders (the "unexpected" costs are likely to be either little electical items (bearing in mind a fan relay can set you back over a ton, yet an ABS relay is around the £20 mark), or you'll end up with something serious like a belt letting go and ruining your cylinder head. Of course you can bear these things in mind, but can you actually plan for them....?)
all in all, the higher the initial outlay, the more of a solid car you "should" get, and those major failures are negated. If you buy a dog, expect to pay high kennel fees......
As for rust, well, these cars are 15-20 years old. although they were galvanised in the factory, they do rust. It's not bad at all, but it has been said that the front wings are the main culprit. After that, you'll be pretty free and easy, just check the particular car you're looking at.
Last but not least, a Porsche that doesn't empty the bank account? well, that's a pretty rare beast, but assuming the car is in good condition, and has a good service history, you'll end up with just servicing bills (assuming you're allergic to swarfega), and the odd mishap for things like relays & senders (the "unexpected" costs are likely to be either little electical items (bearing in mind a fan relay can set you back over a ton, yet an ABS relay is around the £20 mark), or you'll end up with something serious like a belt letting go and ruining your cylinder head. Of course you can bear these things in mind, but can you actually plan for them....?)
all in all, the higher the initial outlay, the more of a solid car you "should" get, and those major failures are negated. If you buy a dog, expect to pay high kennel fees......
Like what the boys said. In standard form there is little to choose between the two. A 220 Turbo and an S2 deliver near enough the same power and torque. The S2 delivers its power more evenly without lag and sudden belts of power which should make it better in the twisty stuff, particularly when the surface isn't as grippy as one would like. Base on that the S2 is better.
A late 250 Turbo has more power, better brakes, better suspension and is generally better but still has lag and boost.
My main issue with Turbos is they frighten me in the wet. I find I can't go for the loud pedal until the car has settled after a corner. Some may be able to anticipate when the boost will strike and get onto the power sooner. Perhaps my engine is on its way out and lacks power without boost so the transition is that much more abrupt. I don't know but, in my opinion, turbos don't make for a friendly car.
On the plus side, you can extract some spectacular power out of a turbo engine so, in a straight line or when good traction is available, they can be very, very, very quick.
There was a view that little could be done to improve a standard S2. Now, with a MAF conversion and a re-chip this may not be as true but we still await dyno figures to prove what is really available. One can obviously tweak the suspension and brakes but this isn't cheap.
The power of a turbo engine is pretty well only limited by finance in what they can produce.
So, in summary, if modifying and chasing big power floats your boat, go for a Turbo. If you want a quick, friendly car that isn't going to bleed you dry. Get an S2.
BTW - I own a Turbo.
A late 250 Turbo has more power, better brakes, better suspension and is generally better but still has lag and boost.
My main issue with Turbos is they frighten me in the wet. I find I can't go for the loud pedal until the car has settled after a corner. Some may be able to anticipate when the boost will strike and get onto the power sooner. Perhaps my engine is on its way out and lacks power without boost so the transition is that much more abrupt. I don't know but, in my opinion, turbos don't make for a friendly car.
On the plus side, you can extract some spectacular power out of a turbo engine so, in a straight line or when good traction is available, they can be very, very, very quick.
There was a view that little could be done to improve a standard S2. Now, with a MAF conversion and a re-chip this may not be as true but we still await dyno figures to prove what is really available. One can obviously tweak the suspension and brakes but this isn't cheap.
The power of a turbo engine is pretty well only limited by finance in what they can produce.
So, in summary, if modifying and chasing big power floats your boat, go for a Turbo. If you want a quick, friendly car that isn't going to bleed you dry. Get an S2.
BTW - I own a Turbo.
ORIGINAL: lazza
S2 is half the price of a turbo - that might help[]
Lazza
Not if you have to rebuild the engine it isn't. [
] Sorry, a bit below the belt there Larry.If both cars are in exactly the same condition a Turbo will cost more than an S2. I'm not sure it is twice the price, or is that just what you have been telling Helen?
chrisr
New member
The old S2/Turbo question.
The boys in the know have already answered it as it should be. Personally just make sure you buy the car on condition and both should give you endless hours of pleasure, they are IMO a vastly underated car in many people's opinion. If you get a dog then any Porsche is going to open your wallet and leave you struggling to find a fiver. As said the S2 delivers power more smoothly and will not punish you as much as the Turbo for an over zealous right foot and less chance of mods and therefore potentially less £££'s per mile to run ... however the Turbo can take you beyonds the realm of 300bhp and deliver a blistering straight line/corner speed that will leave the S2 trailing in its wake ( and half of the Porsche field )
I drive an S2 but would also love and hanker after a Turbo , and a 993 C2 []
The boys in the know have already answered it as it should be. Personally just make sure you buy the car on condition and both should give you endless hours of pleasure, they are IMO a vastly underated car in many people's opinion. If you get a dog then any Porsche is going to open your wallet and leave you struggling to find a fiver. As said the S2 delivers power more smoothly and will not punish you as much as the Turbo for an over zealous right foot and less chance of mods and therefore potentially less £££'s per mile to run ... however the Turbo can take you beyonds the realm of 300bhp and deliver a blistering straight line/corner speed that will leave the S2 trailing in its wake ( and half of the Porsche field )
I drive an S2 but would also love and hanker after a Turbo , and a 993 C2 [
]
Guest
New member
That's the biggset problem with the turbos. They're fine for a few months, the going fast is very pleasant thankyou. but then you read a bit on here or on other sites and think "oh, that little mod isn't bad for the money, I'll get that". Then the next one comes, then the next, then the next, and pretty soon you've a few grand stuck in a 350hp (or more!) car........ []
Right John? []
]Right John? [
]
ORIGINAL: pikey7
That's the biggset problem with the turbos. They're fine for a few months, the going fast is very pleasant thankyou. but then you read a bit on here or on other sites and think "oh, that little mod isn't bad for the money, I'll get that". Then the next one comes, then the next, then the next, and pretty soon you've a few grand stuck in a 350hp (or more!) car........ [
Right John? [
Ahhhh.... Also known as "Caterfield Syndrome"...[
]
ORIGINAL: pikey7
...... and pretty soon you've a few grand stuck in a 350hp (or more!) car........ [
Right John? [
If only the money I've spent on the car so far would be providing 350hp. I was potentially on my way until a replacement gearbox (and Stage II clutch, and lightened flywheel, and new bolts and fixings for all of the afore said) ate the new turbo budget. This had already taken a hammering when, ripping off the splitter meant a replacement splitter, front PU, lamp units and side pieces. These have all still to go on pending the preparation and spraying of the front PU to the correct colour.
I've had new front tyres and a full belt service just recently, as well, so I daren't even consider what I've spent on the car in the last 3 months.
If anyone says owning a 944 is cheap, they are going to get a good smacking. [
]
You're only saying that 'cos you're too far away for me to get at you easily. Don't worry though, I'll have my day (If I remember - I've got the long term memory of a gold fish) [
] I think Chris could have a point there though. Turbos are perhaps more likely to have been given a good thrashing in their early lives (and perhaps there after) - being more likely purchased by enthusiasts than posers and executive's wives. Also, because of the additional power available from the turbo, this will inevitably put greater strain on all of the other components and will induce wear and failure earlier.
In summary - Turbos are more expensive full stop
We have both models and as far as costs, the only thing that has been more expensive is servicing my Turbo as opposed to Tony's S2.
TTM
Well-known member
ORIGINAL: John Sims
If anyone says owning a 944 is cheap, they are going to get a good smacking. [
They can get no too expensive to run, I guess it depends how well you can live with gremlins (one half-falling sun visor here, 4 half-beaten wheel caps there, a slightly noisy torque tube here again, etc).
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
