924/944 running and maintenance costs

[Buchanan Automotive]

Yes , the 944S ( 1987 & 1988 ) with its 100mm bore,  was only a 2.5L engine , not that there is anything wrong with that , but in effect it was an experiment to give the 2.5 944 engine a bit more sportiness by not just giving it a twin cam 16V head but also quite warm camshafts , meaning it preferred high RPM  to get the best out of it & remember we are talking about the era of unleaded fuel & in a lot of markets the new to those markets use of unleaded fuel ( mostly low octane ) meant a loss of power for all petrol powered cars , not just Porsche , so using more advanced engine management & twin cam 16V head & a trick magnesium alloy inlet manifold , the 944S was an interesting experiment , but suffered from lack of low down torque & was only available as a manual trans car in 1987 & 1988 

The 2.7L  944  engine ( single cam ) , this has always caused confusion with Porsche enthusiasts , for the 1989 year model only , Porsche decided ( quite wisely )  to give the base model ( entry level ) 944 a bit of help in performance ( overall )  & because the 1986 - 1988 944 auto trans version ( unleaded ) was a bit lethargic , Porsche decided to do an interesting engine build for one year for the entry level 944 , so instead of 2.5L they made it 2.7L , as Sean mentioned Porsche used the brand new 944S2 3.0L crankcase ( 104mm bore ) , but used the old 2.5L crankshaft & of course special one off pistons to suite this set up  , this gave the unleaded 1989 base model 944 in auto trans or manual trans a bit more drive ability

The 2.7 L cylinder head , this was completely new and was necessary because the 3.0L crankcase was different ( new casting )  and bigger valves & a different camshaft  , even the inlet ports were a different shape & a different matching inlet manifold and different injectors were needed  & all for just one year  ( Wow ) how to spend money

Now here is the interesting part , when Porsche wanted to build the 968 Turbo S ( 1993 ) for internal  political sales reasons , they did not want the 968 Turbo S to have a twin cam 16v head when the same year model air cooled  911 Turbo ( 3.6 Turbo ) could only have a two valve head  , so Porsche used the 2 valve per cylinder 1989 2.7L cylinder head on the 3.0L 968 ( version of the 944S2 ) crankcase & the 3.0L crank & with low compression Mahle pistons you have the basis for the 968 Turbo S

We have built one 3.0L 968 Turbo S type of engine , using a 2nd hand 2.7L engine as the basis for what we need to make a 8 valve  3.0L turbo engine  , but generally we use the 3.0 944S2 or the 3.0L 968 engine as the basis for a 16V  Turbo engine , like what Sean has been using in his 951 for some years now

Note }  Here in Australia we mainly received the 2.7 L ( 8V engine ) in 1989 as an 944 Auto trans version only , but in bigger markets the 2.7L  8v engine was available in manual trans & Auto 

Regards
Bruce Buchanan

[OzJustin]

Hi Simon and welcome to the forum.

You’ve certainly generated some interest in this thread.

I’m surprised that nobody else has asked this question yet but the obvious question is why are you looking at a Porsche?

What are you searching for in your replacement for the Mitsubishi Mirage? Do you want reliability, practicality, looks, engine performance, handling etc?

While I agree with others that these cars can be reliable and not that expensive (relatively speaking) if you buy the right one, there may be other makes and models that better fit your criteria.

As a passionate owner I would love nothing more than for you to join the ranks but you should be doing it for the right reasons. These cars (especially the older 80s versions) are true driver’s cars and demand a certain type of owner to truly appreciate. This is your car if you want perfect balance, excellent handling with great feedback in corners, very mechanical inputs and sounds, smooth engines (but lethargic by modern standards depending on the model you choose). If you get excited by the thought of chucking it into a corner and feeling every road imperfection, feeling the steering load up and the engine growling away then a 924/944 could be the one.

If you want something a bit less mechanical/more modern but still want the Porsche badge then I agree a Boxster could be another option. You will lose some storage space in them compared to the 80s front engine cars though.

Exciting times ahead for you.  

[Troubleshooter]

19 hours ago, sim84 said:

It'd be a nice touch, but it doesn't have to be an 84. If a car from a different year turns out to be a better buy I'd go with that. I was reading about the 944 and saw there were a few revisions over the years. Is there a particular revision that I'd be better off with, all other things being equal?

$5900 and it's an '84!! Just came up...…...

https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/dodges-ferry/cars-vans-utes/porsche-944/119299197

[TINGY]

Well that looks like a car that you could sink 15k into overnight!

[Troubleshooter]

4 minutes ago, TINGY944 said:

Well that looks like a car that you could sink 15k into overnight!

Yep, I never said it was any good!  BUT  definitely worth a call at that price to see how much of a money pit it would be..

[TINGY]

Agreed, probably a good base for a project.

[sim84]

2 hours ago, OzJustin said:

I’m surprised that nobody else has asked this question yet but the obvious question is why are you looking at a Porsche?

What are you searching for in your replacement for the Mitsubishi Mirage? Do you want reliability, practicality, looks, engine performance, handling etc?

Good question. The thing that excites me about a vintage Porsche rather than a Hyundai Veloster or a Toyota 86 is that I love the look and the 80s vibe. An 80s 944 is just the perfect kind of retro to me, and I honestly can't think of a car that has looks I prefer. That's the main thing motivating me to read and learn at the moment. Good engine performance is nice, but I'd rather better fuel economy than a speedy engine. Both for the sake of my wallet and the sake of the environment. If there was an inexpensive mod that could be done to improve the fuel economy at the expense of the engine performance I'd do it. Practicality doesn't matter too much. I need to be able to fit a guitar or two and an amp in the car, that's fine. Reliability is pretty important, in that I can't afford to be constantly throwing money at it, and if it doesn't get me to work the vast majority of the time, it won't work as my only car.

 

3 hours ago, OzJustin said:

these cars (especially the older 80s versions) are true driver’s cars and demand a certain type of owner to truly appreciate

Can you elaborate on that?

[Gavn]

23 hours ago, sim84 said:

Sydney, Newtown area. Do you know a dealer in Sydney that has used Porsches I can try?

Swing down to Cavacos at Gleve & spend 10 min chatting with Dave or Carlos about how much you would be looking at spending per year if they were to do your work (assuming perfect case of a car that just needed servicing).  That's your minimum spend without anything going wrong.  If you're willing to do the work yourself you will save a bit but you'll need tools, space & time (as others have mentioned).  Given it's an old car you should also be willing to spend on the big unforeseen/unlucky costs such as engines/gearboxes.  No one wants these & it's not normally part of what people factor in but it does happen & if you can't cover it then you're up for selling a non running car.  Best to go in with eyes wide open and if you just get hit for routine servicing then that's great.

[SteveF]

On 8/19/2018 at 11:54 PM, sim84 said:

Sydney, Newtown area. Do you know a dealer in Sydney that has used Porsches I can try?

Simon, if you are ever over in the Hills District you are more than welcome to have a look at my '86 944 and I am happy to share what I have spent on  maintenance if that will help with your decision making process.

[ANF]

8 hours ago, Gavin (CliffToCoast) said:

 No one wants these & it's not normally part of what people factor in but it does happen & if you can't cover it then you're up for selling a non running car.  Best to go in with eyes wide open and if you just get hit for routine servicing then that's great.

This is oh so very true! A few on here and out there (including me!) are/ have gone through this. One day you have your perfect car the next day you face a big question.... owning a classic car is an experience, mostly to be savoured, but shit sometimes does happen.

I think you need to allow more for yearly maintenance (and if you don't spend put it away for when you may need to)

[OzJustin]

9 hours ago, sim84 said:

Good question. The thing that excites me about a vintage Porsche rather than a Hyundai Veloster or a Toyota 86 is that I love the look and the 80s vibe. An 80s 944 is just the perfect kind of retro to me, and I honestly can't think of a car that has looks I prefer. That's the main thing motivating me to read and learn at the moment. Good engine performance is nice, but I'd rather better fuel economy than a speedy engine. Both for the sake of my wallet and the sake of the environment. If there was an inexpensive mod that could be done to improve the fuel economy at the expense of the engine performance I'd do it. Practicality doesn't matter too much. I need to be able to fit a guitar or two and an amp in the car, that's fine. Reliability is pretty important, in that I can't afford to be constantly throwing money at it, and if it doesn't get me to work the vast majority of the time, it won't work as my only car.

 

Can you elaborate on that?

I guess what I’m trying to say is ‘will you appreciate the handling, mechanical nature and driver involvement?’. If feeling these characteristics will put a smile on your face every morning then any blood, sweat and tears will pale in significance. If it’s just the badge then any extra maintenance over a Toyota 86 will likely get tiresome. As others have said, go and test drive a kind forum member’s car and you will know pretty quickly. Hopefully you’ll be grinning from ear to ear wanting to buy theirs.  

[TwoHeadsTas]

13 hours ago, Troubleshooter said:

$5900 and it's an '84!! Just came up...…...

https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/dodges-ferry/cars-vans-utes/porsche-944/119299197

Happy to go an have a look at this for anyone interested.  PM me.

[Troubleshooter]

10 hours ago, sim84 said:

Good question. The thing that excites me about a vintage Porsche rather than a Hyundai Veloster or a Toyota 86 is that I love the look and the 80s vibe. An 80s 944 is just the perfect kind of retro to me, and I honestly can't think of a car that has looks I prefer. That's the main thing motivating me to read and learn at the moment. Good engine performance is nice, but I'd rather better fuel economy than a speedy engine. Both for the sake of my wallet and the sake of the environment. If there was an inexpensive mod that could be done to improve the fuel economy at the expense of the engine performance I'd do it. Practicality doesn't matter too much. I need to be able to fit a guitar or two and an amp in the car, that's fine. Reliability is pretty important, in that I can't afford to be constantly throwing money at it, and if it doesn't get me to work the vast majority of the time, it won't work as my only car.

 

Can you elaborate on that?

Sim, in light of everything on this thread I think a 924 auto might be the best compromise, performance will suit, looks are similar enough overall compared to any other car (exc968, 928) and entry cost for a decent one may be around $7k - so you're already about 10k in front of a man 944 and 13k in front of your budget, that'll leave enough for years and years of maintenance. You could pick up a reasonable 944 auto at about 11k and with a bit of luck it'll fit your overall budget for a couple of years.....924 has a Porsche badge so the girls will still flock ….. and your young lefty muso mates will hate you....

[sim84]

14 hours ago, Gavin (CliffToCoast) said:

Swing down to Cavacos

Thanks Gavin, I'll try to pop in there.

13 hours ago, SteveF said:

Simon, if you are ever over in the Hills District you are more than welcome to have a look at my '86 944

Thanks for the offer Steve, I'd love to take you up on that. I'll PM you.

4 hours ago, Troubleshooter said:

924 has a Porsche badge so the girls will still flock ….. and your young lefty muso mates will hate you....

Ha! I haven't met many girls who have given the first damn about cars. And I think my lefty music mates will just raise an eyebrow in confusion, but that's ok, I'm not doing it for anyone but me. So autos are significantly cheaper? That's a shame, usually it's the other way round with used cars. Autos don't feel like real driving to me, I think a manual is a must.

[TINGY]

FFS, don't buy an auto.

Buy the best you can and do lots of research and be as informed as you can before you decide between a 924 and 944.

Don't make a rash decision and buy the wrong car, also, i think you may be in for a shock about real world maintenance costs on keeping these cars. I would recommend putting away $1500 a year for ongoing costs of maintenance, you will be surprised at the little things that need to be replaced over a 12 month period,  rubbers, hoses, plastics etc are not getting any younger and need updating. Whatever you don't spend can be rolled over for the following year and ultimately be needed for the big belts and rollers service if you get the 944.

 

[Rob]

^^^^^^^ what Tingy said.  After the initial glow of owning a "Porsche" has worn off, you'd be on here asking Bruce Buchanan and others "how much to swap in a manual gearbox?"

[Jason E]

Sim, i drove an early car (83/84/85 - can't remember which) in auto & it really wasn't much fun (read horrible).  Maybe practical but certainly no fun.  I love the idea of an auto (as my Brisbane commute can be trying in my manual S2 at times) & looked at buying 968's with a tipper as they are a much better proposition - but more expensive (30k & upwards).  I've never driven a post update auto so can't comment on it's merits or foibles.  

My experience of ownership has been constant fixing of "little things".  Of course I bought a neglected car & have been spending to bring it right.  Others have paid more than I paid to get in to a more loved car that may need less ongoing love.

THEY ARE GREAT CARS THOUGH.  I f%#kin love mine.  They just need love, constant love.  I can only comment on my experience but as OzJustin said, they need an owner prepared to do lots of jobs IF they arise.  In the past people have bought these cars realised they need work that costs time & money they then neglect to do the work or do it on the cheap & then a few years latter you've got a poor sad neglected 944 that now needs major surgery to cut out the cancer of neglect.

1 hour ago, Rob said:

^^^^^^^ what Tingy said.  After the initial glow of owning a "Porsche" has worn off, you'd be on here asking Bruce Buchanan and others "how much to swap in a manual gearbox?"

You'll also be stuck with an auto car that an extremely small percentage of the already small percentage of fools that actually buy these cars (read me) would want to take off your hands.  Not many people buy the autos (evidenced by the fact that the autos sit on Carsales forever until they fall in price so low that some will buy them as a beater).  Economically you'd want to get it real cheap & spend little on it.  

If you where getting an auto get a 968.

[sim84]

Definitely don’t want an auto, but the 968 is another potential option, hadn’t seen that model before. Bit more expensive, by the look of it though 

[tazzieman]

15 hours ago, sim84 said:

Definitely don’t want an auto, but the 968 is another potential option, hadn’t seen that model before. Bit more expensive, by the look of it though 

You need a few more $ to keep it running too.
The 944s are a comfortable sporting ride  without a lot of torque. A bit like a Toyota 86 , which has a harsh ride. 
Both can be chucked into corners with a certain abandon.
Agree, avoid the autos. Dogs.

[sim84]

I’m certainly leaning more towards a 944, despite the 924 being possibly more practical. I’m guessing either will have more torque than my Mirage. There are certain hills it can’t get up without verbal encouragement ?

[bear924]

A 944 is a more refined car than the 924 and is less 'classic', and certainly a better daily. The best thing with the 924 is that they are simpler if you decide you want to work on them yourself.  If you happen to buy a 924, don't buy one with a four speed box. The later (1980 +) 924s are better.

[XLR8]

On 8/24/2018 at 3:10 PM, sim84 said:

I’m certainly leaning more towards a 944, despite the 924 being possibly more practical. I’m guessing either will have more torque than my Mirage. There are certain hills it can’t get up without verbal encouragement ?

A 944 may have more torque, but I doubt a 924 would outrun your Mirage in a straight line.

[floorprawn]

2 hours ago, XLR8 said:

A 944 may have more torque, but I doubt a 924 would outrun your Mirage in a straight line.

I think you may be underestimating how gutless a Mirage is, 924 in good nick(and non-US spec) is easily faster- 94kW and only a tonne, remember! - and a 944 is an outright supercar by comparison

[sim84]

I'm not anticipating getting into any drag races. I occasionally do it for fun, but it's more of a satirical thing to rev the engine while in a stock mirage pulled up next to a hotted up WRX or something. 

[sim84]

As an update - over the weekend, SteveF was nice enough to let me get behind the wheel of his ‘86 944. Lovely car and a great guy. I found it very engaging to drive. It seems like I need to budget more than I’d initially hoped to get a good example and have enough left over for an initial  service. I’ll be saving my pennies over the next few months while watching carsales etc. Thank you to everyone who replied, it’s been very helpful - and an especially big thank you to SteveF for taking time out of his Sunday afternoon to chat to a newb!