Why a 944?

[Fen]

ORIGINAL: Iain Davis

Agreed about the mileage condition thing - I've now had 2 3.2s - a Targa and now a Coupe - which I've bought privately and I think that it's true of all Porsches, along with a good history.

So what am I looking for then:-

Which is the best one and what's the right kind of money to pay for it?
What are the weaknesses and what jobs need to have been done?
How is it for daily use?
Are they pretty rust proof for the winter?
MPG?
Running costs?
Can you get your clubs in the back? (sorry!)
Why not an S2
Why not a 968?
Why not an Impreza?

Iain, I'll answer first as I'm pretty well qualified I think []. I came from a 3.2 Carrera Sport to my first 944 Turbo over 9 years ago. If you're replacing the 3.2 and you're like me back then you might not find it "Porsche" enough - it has far less character than a 3.2 Carrera. That said it's a better driving machine in almost every way; faster, smoother, quieter, more relaxing, better handling, better braking. To answer your questions in order:You've already said you're looking for a Turbo (if you don't plan to modify it for more power I'd consider the S2 though). In that case you may as well either get the latest you can or look specifically for an '88 Silver Rose car (doesn't have to be pink) or an '89 car as they had the "M030" Koni adjustable suspension as standard. A later car may have it as an opition. To be fair though buying any 15+year old car based on the suspension it left the factory with is a bit pointless but then again if it has M030 you have the right parts to get rebuilt. Silver Rose and '89 on all have LSD, 250bhp, bigger brakes and drive shafts, hardened 1st and 2nd gears, gearbox cooler. Later cars usually have leather front seat facings. All Turbos have air-con. MY90- have the 968 style "bridge" spoiler. Weaknesses are things like brake caliper plates "lifting" when they get corrosion behind them and binding the brakes up (is the 3.2 the same - I forget?), clutches are expensive to replace (lots of labour). Search; there are several threads with good buying advice and Turbo vs. S2 comparison. Wategates are shot by now and were a bad design to start with. Only £300 or so for a proper one so not scary. They are galvanised so shouldn't be rusty. That said some are but where they go is the bottom of the front wings and the sills, especially below and behind the back of the door. It's fairly easy to tell if it has been repaired or if it needs to be as those places are easy to check. I think the sills rust because the drainage holes get blocked (all along the bottom but hidden by a plastic trim) and the wings because owners don't clean the crud out that inevitably collects there. MPG is mid 20's. Less around town, possibly a little more on a run if you're careful. They are pretty high geared so cruise at low revs in 5th. Runnings costs are OK. 12k/12 month services with a 6k intermediate oil change. Belts every 3 years/36k to be safe. Tensioners and water pump every second belt change. Based on that a 72k service should be about £800 tops. Of course you can get clubs in the back and that is a most sensible question. The boot is high and shallow but long and wide. S2 is better for not modifying but you have to consider it has smaller brakes, lesser suspension, air-con was an option, leather was rare etc. It also has the 16V cam chain/cams potential problem. On the plus it's as quick real world as a standard 250 Turbo and a much nicer car to drive without turbo latency. Not a 968 because they are essentially an S2 in a frock (of dubious prettiness too) for twice the price. If the looks and a 6th gear the car didn't need is worth the premium to you then buy one, otherwise save your cash. Not an Impreza because they are the most overrated pile of junk ever. They are built like a Jap minicab, are not reliable, sound awful (the 944 is anodyne, not actively unpleasant), are very thirsty, not very fast, not great handling, have a poor image, depreciate like a stone. I did used to have one so I can comment with some authority.

 

[Guest]

It seems, then, that the S2 would be the car for me and thanks for the info. Would it seem quicker overall than the 3.2 in the real world? Say overtaking a line of cars.

The advice on the 968 is interesting - is it really that simple?

Glad to hear what you say about the Impreza - so much for your money but the stigma really puts me off so I'm glad to hear that they don't stack up to similarly priced Porkers.

 

[Fen]

S2 vs 3.2... Not sure. I've had both but with 5 years between them and I haven't driven a 3.2 since I sold mine in '95. What I remember of the 3.2 is that it's quite quick until 120 or so where the aerodynamics overcome the power. Assuming that is way beyond the speed you normally drive then it might be that the 3.2 seems slightly quicker, especially with the noise it makes. In real terms I imagine there is very little in it. There was a discussion about 968s being worth more than 944s on the 968UK forum a couple of weeks ago. At least one 968 owner said he would buy a 944 Turbo next time round, Big Dave on here replaced a written off 968 with an S2 and even of those who said they prefer the 968 most said it was cosmetic or wasn't really justifiable in terms of cost.

 

[Guest]

So what's the best book so I can gen myself up? Also is there a good buying guide?

 

[Fen]

There's a buyers guide linked from the top of this forum (which I admit I haven't looked at) and if you search on Turbo vs S2 or similar you should come up with some threads. In terms of a book I have Peter Morgan's "Original 924, 944, 968" which is on a par with the 911 one if you are familiar with that. There are others and doubtless someone else can recommend. Mods: can you move posts or just whole threads? Interesting and useful as this may be I just realised it's going off topic on the "Why a 944" thread which is probably one worth keeping as subject.

 

[Diver944]

No we can only move entire threads into a different forum []

The only input I can offer over and above Fens is that when I was looking to replace my S2 I looked at 3.2 Carreras and 964s. I drove a lovely 3.2 Supersport and at real world speeds was much, MUCH faster than a standard S2. The acceleration from standstill was way above the S2 (but then it does have 20bhp more as standard and is lighter IIRC, the traction was superb with all that weight over the rear wheels).

If your after more power than your 3.2 then I would look at a Turbo [] (it's what I bought in the end, and kept the S2 as well)

 

[Guest]

Sorry guys, I hijacked your thread. Let me try to put it back on track.

Why a 944 - well I've never owned or driven one but here's my take on it.

With the mighty 3.2 Carrera, Porsche had really developed the 911 as far as it could go and they needed to move on so in the eightees they came to a junction in their history and could easily have gone either way - infact they went both ways for a period of time.

If you consider the 911 to be the product of great engineers and designers who wished to break the mold and create something different and ultimately better then you have to consider the fact that when they had finished with the 911 they would want to move on to something which attempted that again. With the front engine/rear gearbox layout of the 944 they did just that and significantly they did it much better. It took several years of very clever engineering to make the 911 drivable and it is only today with the 997 that everyone agrees that the rear engine design works as well as it's mid and front engined competitors. Prior to that, the choice of the rear engined car was the preference of those who liked the layout rather than a genuine option for anyone who wanted that type of car. With the 944, however, Porsche had created a car with near 50/50 weight distribution which few people seem to dispute is one of the best natural handlers of all time.

It would be wrong to complain that Porsche continued with the rear engined car in preference to the front engine/rear gearboxed one. The 964 is a beautiful and capable machine, whilst deeply flawed, but the 993 is a superb car and one which I would gladly own. To me it is the other contender, along with the 3.2 Carrera, for best 911 of all time. This does not, however, make it any less illogical that, from an engineering excellence point of view, Porsche continued with the layout that has "incorrect" weight distribution over the one who's weight didtribution is nearly perfect. Considering how very special the 997 Carrera S is reported to be and what an amazing engineering achievement that is bearing in mind the ill-handling 901 of 1963, just imagine how good the flagship car would be if Porsche had continued to develop the 944/968 layout.

So why a 944? Because in the eyes of the engineers this was the true successor to the 911 of the 80s - the 964 was the product of centimental marketing men who didn't want to let go of the icon and who can blame them. But in the 944 you have a real rarity in Porsche history - a deviation, and a very successful one, from their norm.

 

[Guest]

I should first clarify, the 944 isn't mine, it's my wife's car. I do however drive it regularly (got it at work at today) and I look after it.

As for reasons why, I'd had a 350-odd bhp Nissan Sunny GTIR for a few years, had had my fun and wanted to move on. Originally the plan was I was going to get a FD3S twin-turbo RX-7, however the wife had been having a bad year health-wise, so I decided that I needed to cheer her up rather than waste my money on another fuel-guzzler (was averaging about 15mpg on high boost in the Nissan, RX-7s manage about 10mpg...). She'd actually been after a Mk1 MR2, which I'm not a big fan of, but she liked the retro shape and they are supposed to handle well, so we went looking for one. After the 5th rusty shed that was supposed to be immaculate, we both decided to give up on MR2s, thankfully. So we were at a bit of a loss, what would be retro-cool, reliable, not a rusty shed and not be hugely expensive to run? Actually I already knew, but as I'd always fancied a 944 and this was supposed to be her car, I kept quiet.

The wife went through a few other possible choices (Fiat Coupe Turbos, VW Corrado VR6s, 200SXs) but couldn't find anything that fitted her requirements. Then one day we were both leaving work when a 944 went past. The wife immediately perked up, asking what the car was and if she could afford one. I told her she could easily and the seed was sewn. I decided she should get a Lux, as they are the cheapest to service, insure and there are few about in decent nick, if you're prepared to travel. I'd personally have gone for a Turbo, but I had to buy what would suit her, not me and she's not interested in supercar performance.

We looked at 4 cars in total, the first 3 were again mis-represented as mint and definitely weren't (it's not fun driving for 4 hours to see a car that smokes more than a pile of burning tyres!), but car number 4 I knew we'd buy as soon as I saw it. Stone Metallic Grey with black interior and the leather fronted seats option, it was much nicer than most of the 944 colour/interior options of that time and it was also an early oval dash. Perfect! It had done 94k miles, the last owner had ownerd it for 15 years and he even had the name and phone number of the service technician that had been looking after it for the last 8 years, in case I wanted to call and chat about the car. Actually we both left the viewing thinking he was a nice guy but more than a little obsessed with the car (along with the huge history file, he also had brochures for the tyres he'd tried on the car...), but he was moving on to a 968 Club Sport and it was time to say goodbye. So pretty much the perfect person to buy a 944 off then. Once we'd passed his tests (he was definitely vetting us, which I found very amusing!), we agreed a price and arranged to pick the car up the next weekend.

I'd driven all the previous 944s we'd looked at but this was the first one that didn't have serious problems and after a decent stint driving it home (I had to let the wife have a go at some point []) I was really, really impressed. The inherent balance of the car was immediately apparent and although it did the typical Lux thing of leaning like a canoe when really being thrown about, I enjoyed driving it. It was pretty slow compared to what I was used to, but the rest was so good, I decided I could live with that. My wife loved it too, she was off straight away to show her new toy off to her friends, who all being the usual Fiesta/Corsa shopping trolley drivers, were all very impressed.

Can't say it's all been plain sailing though, the water pump failed pretty soon after we got it and the clutch had to be done soon after that as well. Add the coolant temp switch failing and a leaking power-steering serpentine section, it's not been trouble-free motoring, but no car would have been. However, the fact that it's as fun on the b-roads as it is effortless, cruising from Reading to Halifax and back a couple of times a year, I'm definitely glad we chose this over the others she considered. And when it's time for me to get another toy, there'll be a Turbo arguing with it over the garage space...