time for a 911?

[TTM]

An "issue" that can be seen among a good number of 944 owners (more so than with any other car it seems) is they expect their cars to perform everywhere in any field better than any other car, and I would source this recurring issue in that overwhelming badge.
To start with, why do people who hanker after a rear-engine Porsche even bother entering Porsche ownership with a 924/944/968 ? Because it bears the same badge as a 911 ? I just don't get it. They are just different and were designed to serve different functions and appeal to different people - would Porsche even have bothered making twice the same car ? I believe not.
This brand loyalty among most Porsche owners that sort of castrates them into keeping around the same badge is pretty sad.

Most 944s are about 20 years old, and as such it's about time most people now consider them as proper classics, regardless how well they can still accelerate, handle, be practical and (relatively) cheap to run. Yes they can give some moderns a run for their money, but pretending to make them "better" than a similarly-priced (~£40k) modern does not even spring to my mind, and when coming from some pretended "German-Sports-car-driver-jawohl-mein-Führer" people (fortunately not the gents on this board), you wonder how long that old pathetic complex will keep in the mind of people.

As much as we tend to be bitten by the upgrade bug with which most Porsche-badged cars accomodate well regardless of when they were built, 944s should first be taken for what they actually are : old second hand cars.
If you present Joe Public with an '88 3.2 and a Silver Rose, he will see a classic in the 911 and a used car in the Silver Rose which he believed may have been built ten years after, though there is hope 944s will find an afterlife similar to that of an Audi RS2 with a "designed by Porsche, built by Audi" label.

 

[pauly]

ORIGINAL: TTM

As much as we tend to be bitten by the upgrade bug with which most Porsche-badged cars accomodate well regardless of when they were built, 944s should first be taken for what they actually are : old second hand cars.
If you present Joe Public with an '88 3.2 and a Silver Rose, he will see a classic in the 911 and a used car in the Silver Rose which he believed may have been built ten years after, though there is hope 944s will find an afterlife similar to that of an Audi RS2 with a "designed by Porsche, built by Audi" label.

Hmmmn I did consider a 3.2 for my first porker but rightly or not I felt the performance would be a bit lacking, great noise etc but nowadays a bit of a sheep in wolf's clothing, and litle you can do about that without spending many thousands.

 

[Wigeon Incognito]

TTM - I understand your point, but believe the 944 is now fast gaining that classic status that you hope it might.

In fact, I'll admit something now. As I was growing up 944s were new and my passion for cars was growing. I hated the things. I thought they were an ugly pastiche wrongly bearing the Porsche name.

Now, the hate lessened to mere dislike until about 18 months ago when I suddenly 'got' the 944. They're a rare sight now, and from some angles they really are striking. Maybe the past few years of the 80s/early 90s becoming 'cool' again affected my view but the 944 began to strike me as this beautiful timewarp of belts and braces retro fashion.

Obviously fashion isn't enough to make me want a car, but after driving one my mind was set.

Since I've had the car it has received nothing but compliments. No 'poor man's Porsche' tag that a Boxster might attract, no 'flash git' tag that a modern 911 maight attract. Just admiration.

For those that know their cars it's a driver's car, for those that don't it seems to strike them as a modern classic; this status possibly achieved prematurely compared to other cars of the period.

All in all, compared to a 911 of the same period I agree it has not achieved the same status but attribute that as much to the long heritage of the 911 as much as anything else. As a car it's different, but having driven (although I admit not yet owned) 911s of numerous iterations I wouldn't say it is worse - better in some ways, not as good in others, but admittedly lacking that subjective pazazz a 911 seems to harbour.

Time for a 911? Not yet, I'm still enjoying my 944. I do however accept that a 911 has a different Porsche experience to offer me, one that I intend to sample in the not so distant future.

 

[appletonn]

ORIGINAL: georgethackray

Hi Nick,

Can't see the pic! (Someone will read this post in a few days time and wonder what I'm on about, but I promise, at the time of writing, there's no picture!)

George, don't know what you're on about....[]

Thanks[]

 

[TTM]

ORIGINAL: Wigeon Incognito
All in all, compared to a 911 of the same period I agree it has not achieved the same status but attribute that as much to the long heritage of the 911 as much as anything else.

You are undeliberately raising an interesting point - what has the rear-engined Porsche brought to international racing since its glory peaked in the late 80s with the success of Porsche in endurance racing ? Apart from being a boringly safe bet for private works, I don't know ...
It would be nice if the FIA radically changed the rules in order to let a breathe of fresh air among the cars seen in paddocks and kill the supremacy of Porsche. Porsche might then reallocate some budget from the marketing dpt. to the enginering office in order to create an all new car such as the 944 instead of resting under their laurels. Being creative again, now that would be a challenge for major German car manufacturers.
Sorry for wandering OT ...

 

[Neil Haughey]

Well in an attempt to sum up what we have all said and add a bit myself;

1) If performance is number one priority don't be blinkered, look outside pork, M3's are getting cheaper by the day and although we will never admit it cars like the skyline R32 and supra TT offer cheaper tuning potential then the 951 IMHO.

2) If a tactile drivers car for short blasts on country lanes is required the torsion bar 911 is hard to beat and a 3.2 carrera is financially a very safe bet (if rot free!).

3) A snotter 996 could be a surprisingly cost effective and decent daily driver but I think we all agree it is not the most classic of pork and one should look elsewhere for either a long term garage queen or weekend b road blaster.

4) The 964 and 993 work for many ppl as a half way house between a torsion bar 911 (probably to raw for some) and the 996 (not raw enough for a b road sane speed blaster).

5) The 944 still makes a lot of sense as a sort of jack of all trades due to the practicality and reasonable price parts meaning that it is a good bet for those spanner handy (although at 20 yrs old IMHO I wouldn't recommend one to somebody planning on using garages for all their work).

 

[Fen]

Some good summaries there, especially Thoms's post at the top of this page.

NeilW I don't think I said the 964 was boring, but I realised when in a 3.2 again that what I value in the 911 experience has been engineered out of the 964 and later cars.

Pauly - yes the Turbo is waaaaay faster than a 3.2, and much easier to get the best out of. However the 3.2 is much more satisfying to get right and makes ALL the right noises while it does so.

Lastly some gratuitous old 964 pics (well, Nick did it first []):

 

[TTM]

Fen, thanks for the flower bouquet. I will put it in my shiny new expansion tank - will be better there than somewhere else anyway (French humour, sorry).

 

[pauly]

Fen, stop putting pictures of nice 964s on here, it's not what I want to see after agreeing to buy a 944 []. Recently 2 traders have told me decent 964s are under rated and are bargains at £13k or so, and they weren't trying to flog me one either. I wonder if the 2wd version is more involving to drive and a match performance wise for a 250 bhp 944 ?.

 

[J.C944TurboMan]

In terms of 911 beating / eating - please... The 944T is not a fast car in absolute terms, and neither is the 911, so who cares which one goes slightly faster than the other? There are any number of cars you could buy for similar money that would blow both old Porsche models into the weeds if that's all you care about. If you can afford a 911 but choose a 944T then congratulations. If we're willy-waving however I can afford to have both (and did do for a while not so long ago). I actually DO own a 944 Turbo and I actually DON'T have any desire to own a 911. If the truth be told I'd rather not own a 944 either, but the facts are the facts.

I guess my view having long ago having worn through the shine of owning a Porsche is that they are just cars like any other - they are better than most, but they aren't the best. In my opinion the company lost the plot about 1996 and while the Cayman sounds good on paper having driven one I'm left in the position that the only current model I'd half-way like to own is the Cayenne - a situation that has been the case since the truck was launched and at least means they make something I like which was last the case when the 993 was still available new.

Credentials established I hope - do I have permission from the overly sensitive new boy to carry on posting in the forum I've used for 4 1/2 years now?


Alright Fen firstly you have my permission now that you have explained your self !!! Only joking pal you should not take your self so serious , spoke with Will today and he has said you are both good friends and he told me you are a true 944 enthusiast , so all forgiven .
I have some great original poster prints of the 944 and looking down from arial view the 944 design is so sleek and beautiful , As a young child I had a huge poster on my bedroom wall of a 944 and promised my self that I would one day own one , I through hard work my dreams have come true , I have owned a 944S2 a 968 and a 944T . I am now more involved in restoration and literally getting stuck in and doing the work on my 944T and it is really rewarding , here are some pic's . Best regards J PS. It feels so good when you beat a 911 !!!!

 

[rob.kellock]

ORIGINAL: Alpine

I've had my 944 for over 3 years now and I'm starting to get that feeling that I guess most of us have had at some time, which is that maybe I should get a 911. Been looking through Autotrader and up to £20k can get you in a 993 (just) or a 996.

Just wondered if any of you have ever had similar thoughts ?

back where we started, much has been said to negative the 996.

In the last 7 days I have put over 1000 miles on mine. The tactility of a torsion beam 3.2 Carrera is frankly of little interest to me and I suspect most current 944 owners (I had mine for 18 months). The beauty of a 944 is that it's a great daily driver. Cars progress. Is there anything made by any of Porsche's peers in the last 6 years that I would rather have driven on motorways, sweeping Scottish A roads, B roads and little country lanes? No.

On Monday, did I travel 200 miles in complete comfort in fewer hours than I would wish to diclose on a public website? Yes. Have I just spent the afternoon in the Yorkshire Dales with a silly grin on my face? Yes. Have I still managed to average 28mpg? Yes.

A good 996 strikes me as very much the ideal alternative for those who enjoy their 944s but seek something a little younger. Am sorry but suggestions that a purist cannot like them because of fried egg headlights or a disappointing interior need to be set against driving one in anger.

 

[Fen]

ORIGINAL: rob.kellock

back where we started, much has been said to negative the 996.

In the last 7 days I have put over 1000 miles on mine. The tactility of a torsion beam 3.2 Carrera is frankly of little interest to me and I suspect most current 944 owners (I had mine for 18 months). The beauty of a 944 is that it's a great daily driver. Cars progress. Is there anything made by any of Porsche's peers in the last 6 years that I would rather have driven on motorways, sweeping Scottish A roads, B roads and little country lanes? No.

On Monday, did I travel 200 miles in complete comfort in fewer hours than I would wish to diclose on a public website? Yes. Have I just spent the afternoon in the Yorkshire Dales with a silly grin on my face? Yes. Have I still managed to average 28mpg? Yes.

A good 996 strikes me as very much the ideal alternative for those who enjoy their 944s but seek something a little younger. Am sorry but suggestions that a purist cannot like them because of fried egg headlights or a disappointing interior need to be set against driving one in anger.

Please don't take this personally, but if the best you can say about the 996 is that you can drive it above the speed limit for 200 miles, or for 1,000 miles in a week in comfort, or that it gets 28mpg then that to me is a damning indictment of a £60k sportscar from a manufacturer of the stature of Porsche.

I'm also going to suggest it's ludrcrous to believe that the members of a car enthusiast forum would in the main not be interested in tactility. Perhaps on a Routemaster bus fourm you might be right, but a Porsche one? Hardly. I feel sorry for you if your enjoyment of driving is at such a shallow level that the tactility of the experience does not interest you; I'd feel nothing less than handicapped if I were in that situation - you might as well just buy an XBOX and Forza 2 if you don't care about the feeling of driving the car.

 

[swright]

Fen and Nick. Please stop posting pictures like that as they are drawing me towards wanting one

Utterly stunning cars. I hate you[] You are messing with my 951 obsessed mind

 

[Hilux]

It would be nice if the FIA radically changed the rules in order to let a breathe of fresh air among the cars seen in paddocks and kill the supremacy of Porsche. Porsche might then reallocate some budget from the marketing dpt. to the enginering office in order to create an all new car such as the 944 instead of resting under their laurels. Being creative again, now that would be a challenge for major German car manufacturers.

I'm not sure I agree. The new hugely powerful Audis and BMW`s technically are amazing but what is truly creative is how Porsche manage to keep the rear engined pendulum car at the forefront of handling! McLaren and Ferrari were top of the tree in F1 for years at a time, it simply encouraged the others to play catch up and the frontiers moved onwards. Such is design and engineering in manufacturing across the world and not just in cars.

As for me? 911`s do not do it for me, I tried having loved the 930 since its launch in 1976 (I think) but have never been able to bring myself to buy one. The tactile enjoyment was not there for me.

The 951 was a concious choice of tin top having had stupidly fast and well handling kit cars (Westy and Ginetta 27 V8) Nothing else fitted the bill and 951`s are the best £ per performance you can buy IMHO

Drive a well sorted Radical, XTR4, Ultima, Ginetta, Cateringvan, turbo charged Elise or Westfield etc and then you`ll know what an involving driving experience is all about.

 

[Guest]

ORIGINAL: swright

Fen and Nick. Please stop posting pictures like that as they are drawing me towards wanting one

Utterly stunning cars. I hate you[] You are messing with my 951 obsessed mind

x2 .. I love 'em... Time for a "mistress" ... []

 

[TTM]

ORIGINAL: Hilux
The new hugely powerful Audis and BMW`s technically are amazing but what is truly creative is how Porsche manage to keep the rear engined pendulum car at the forefront of handling! McLaren and Ferrari were top of the tree in F1 for years at a time, it simply encouraged the others to play catch up and the frontiers moved onwards. Such is design and engineering in manufacturing across the world and not just in cars.

Well, I would certainly not call "creative" how Porsche always find resource to improve their rear-engined car.
Major car manufacturers schedule development programms within well-defined timescales, one consequence of if being changes to a model are never significant to the point of calling it a "creation" (well, at least in the dictionary sense of the term). Porsche is a good example of this process, partly because they know they won't be able per example to increase the capacity of the flat 6 ad vitam eternam so they absolutely have to find the balance between how little they need to modify the car in order to make the news & employ their development staff, and not too much faster than the model it replaces it has to be.
I would find "creative" starting with a blank sheet of paper and design a whole new car, which they almost did when they launched the Boxster, I say "almost" as it sadly shares too many styling cues and technical solutions with the 996/997 for really setting it apart.
I won't mention the Cayenne/Touareg and Panamera that appeal to a different audience.

Also, while I agree it's pretty sane to have "benchmark manufacturers" to compete against, you must admit the Schuey/Ferrari domination in F1 was certainly getting a bit boring and it may have significantly contributed to the change of rules in F1 in order to revigorate the interest of the public.
On the same note, I believe a change of rules within the ACO that would lessen the domination of diesel at Le Mans would bring back some more sports in endurance racing. Where is the interest in the GT3 class in which a horde of 997 RS is launched onto a handful of exotics ?

I find Rob's post quite interesting as it illustrates pretty well Porsche's tour de force in evolving their rear-engined car from an old design with unsubtle/robust mechanics and vivid handling characteristics to a sophisticated, ruthlessly efficient and practical GT - If we could travel back in time about 15 years ago this is certainly what a 928 owner would have posted.

 

[NeilW]

ORIGINAL: Fen
NeilW I don't think I said the 964 was boring, but I realised when in a 3.2 again that what I value in the 911 experience has been engineered out of the 964 and later cars.

I could be a total pedant and say look at post #54, but I wont. [] I do like the overall look of your 964; all the visual mods work well together. And to jump on the bandwagon, a gratuitous 964 pic:-

 

[rob.kellock]

thought you might bite []

ORIGINAL: Fen

if the best you can say about the 996 is that you can drive it above the speed limit for 200 miles, or for 1,000 miles in a week in comfort, or that it gets 28mpg then that to me is a damning indictment of a £60k sportscar from a manufacturer of the stature of Porsche.

it's not a bad starting point though is it?

anyway, off to play on my x-box and sign up for the Routemaster bus forum...

 

[Neil Haughey]

Don't go Rob. I agree with you. The point is when I was young I would do the b road blast thing. Now I see it as rather irresponsible and shallow in so much as that on a 1 hour blast you might get to 95% on 2 bends if you don't crash. After driving on track I really do not get the attraction of b road blasting this means for me if one is to have a sports car for driving on the road then a 996 at £15K is a very tempting proposition.

This just leaves the requirement for a pure track car and unfortunately none of the cars we have talked about excepting the kit cars, CSL and GT3 are ideal candidates, although a £15K 996 on KW V3 would be interesting.

I guess what I am saying is that perhaps I am in the minority on this thread in that if I was to get a 911 (very tempted) I would be looking to get a 996 or nothing else.

 

[sawood12]

Wow, this thread has moved on in a few days. I for one don't think i'm diluded in thinking the 944T is an outstandingly quck car by modern day standards - though it was back in the late '80's. If I did I wouldn't be planning the mods i'm planning. Normal modern cars have come along way and closed the gap with even supercars and it is true that the quickest modern hot hatches are probably as quick the 944T and the higher end ones, like the Golf R32, are definately quicker. But Davyboy was still able to hustle his near standard (i think) 944T round the ring quicker than a WRX scooby according to his website so I still think the 944T can still hold its own and a well modded one will be up with the M3's, and god only know's where a fully unlocked 3.2ltr 944T would be relative to modern stuff.

As Fen said you can't just refer ot 911's as 911's. They span 40yrs of development staying on top of the pile for much of that time so you can't say 911 aren't that quick. What about the 997GT2 which lapped the ring quicker than the Carrera GT which is a proper supercar??

I think the 'battle' between the 997C2mk1 and the R8 sums up why I like 911's so much. No matter what people say both cars were pretty equal in terms of performance and any difference between them is slight at best. However when you consider the R8 is about 50bhp up on the 997 and at least £20k more expensive, then that to me says the 997 is actually punching above its weight - its a Welterweight in the Heavyweight division and I like that. No matter which way you cut is Porsche has done amazing things with the 911 considering where they started from and the modern cars do easily hold their own, if not beat their competition. Many car companies have built cars quicker than 911's over the years but none have been a 'Porsche Killer'.

I don't think the 911 deserves alot of the negative sentiment directed to it. The facts speak for themselves. If you like the old-skool 911's then you're never going to like the modern stuff, but you can't deny they are not good and very capable cars. Lets not confuse personal opinion and prefereances with fact.

Anyway the new spiritual 944 is the Panamera - or at least if they ever do a shorter wheelbase 2-door version it will be. Then we'll see what Porsche can do with a modern transaxel car.