Is it worth buying 944 Turbo to restore?

[blade7]

Fat Albert said:

I had a 220 that had been to promax and it was a lovely car pushing out well over 250BHP (it was not far short on straight line performance as my old 310bhp SAAB Aero) and of course the early 220 internals are much stronger.

Up to some point in 89 there was probably very little difference in the internals, after that it seems only the rods were changed to cast, though they were still strong enough for over 300 bhp.

[GC8]

What did it have done at Promax Jeremy? I was only aware of the LR boost enhancer and that was bought used from John Simms according to the history.

[NJH]

GC8 said:

Id probably go for an '86 as Neil suggests, but not because they 'have a stronger engine' (unlikely as most were M44/51 and not M44/50s) and not because 'theyre lighter' (no they aren't), but because the earlier and admittedly less safe geometry makes them nicer to drive.

Cheers Simon, when I drove Tref's red one several years back it was the way the car handled that stuck in my mind. It just felt lighter and sharper on its feet than an S2 despite probably weighing about the same and not riding any worse. I think the changes they made to incorporate the ABS where done well after the car had been developed and consequently resulted in worse handling and steering. I have never been that convinced by the -ve v +ve scrub btw, it was a thing SAAB made a thing about years ago much the same as they reckoned torsion bars were dangerous after their first model all those years ago. DIdn't stop nearly everyone else using torsion bars for decades after.