944: S2 or turbo?
Discussion
Discuss 
Can anyone explain the difference in driving experience, performance, running costs and every day usability/reliability between the two?
What attarcts me back to the front engined Porsche's is their phenomenal balance and the potential for driving like a loon this brings. I'm a bit worried that forced induction throttle response will numb the 'steer on the throttle' sensations? Also have a absolute maximum budget of £6000, preferably rather less, so a turbo may be optimistic price wise.
What do you think?
Can anyone explain the difference in driving experience, performance, running costs and every day usability/reliability between the two?
What attarcts me back to the front engined Porsche's is their phenomenal balance and the potential for driving like a loon this brings. I'm a bit worried that forced induction throttle response will numb the 'steer on the throttle' sensations? Also have a absolute maximum budget of £6000, preferably rather less, so a turbo may be optimistic price wise.
What do you think?
£6k? I think you'll be looking at a rough turbo for that.
S2/Turbo - big debate. What driving do you do - open roads or town? The turbo is quicker when on boost, slower when off boost (and turbo lag on standard cars is quite significant.) Turbos are more efficient when driven gently, but more thirsty when driven on boost all the time.
Some people rate the S2 as the better car as it is a more progressive engine. It certainly is very smooth, and pulls quite tidily when revved (4k is the magic number.)
Running costs - probably not much in it. Either can cost big £ if you buy a bad one.
What the turbo does give you is huge tuning potential. You can have 300 horses from a turbo without spending too much, and that makes for a very quick car. The S2 is pretty much untunable.
The handling of either is fantastic.
Oli.
S2/Turbo - big debate. What driving do you do - open roads or town? The turbo is quicker when on boost, slower when off boost (and turbo lag on standard cars is quite significant.) Turbos are more efficient when driven gently, but more thirsty when driven on boost all the time.
Some people rate the S2 as the better car as it is a more progressive engine. It certainly is very smooth, and pulls quite tidily when revved (4k is the magic number.)
Running costs - probably not much in it. Either can cost big £ if you buy a bad one.
What the turbo does give you is huge tuning potential. You can have 300 horses from a turbo without spending too much, and that makes for a very quick car. The S2 is pretty much untunable.
The handling of either is fantastic.
Oli.
I bought an extremely tidy Turbo with Mo30 with low mileage for £5650 so they are out there.
I love driving it and think that handling and performance is excellent despite being completely standard. Not driven an S2 but had a 2.7 a few years ago and the turbo is FAR quicker and much more impressive. I have driven the turbo on a couple of track days and it really handled Silverstone GP circuit very well. The tighter twists and turns of Cadwell Park a couple of weeks later didn't quite suit it as well - the handling and brakes were great but the lag (or my inability to drive some bits of the circuit without being "off cam"
meant that it felt a bit slow through "The Mountain" section, Hall Bends and the Hairpin.
Anyway, I'd recommend a turbo to any body.
I love driving it and think that handling and performance is excellent despite being completely standard. Not driven an S2 but had a 2.7 a few years ago and the turbo is FAR quicker and much more impressive. I have driven the turbo on a couple of track days and it really handled Silverstone GP circuit very well. The tighter twists and turns of Cadwell Park a couple of weeks later didn't quite suit it as well - the handling and brakes were great but the lag (or my inability to drive some bits of the circuit without being "off cam"
meant that it felt a bit slow through "The Mountain" section, Hall Bends and the Hairpin. Anyway, I'd recommend a turbo to any body.
Edited by andy97 on Wednesday 6th December 12:27
zcacogp said:
What driving do you do - open roads or town? The turbo is quicker when on boost, slower when off boost (and turbo lag on standard cars is quite significant.)
These days a majority of my driving is a mundane commute either via M25 or suburban roads, but really I want something for on road b-road blasts. As a result 100-120mph times aren't important, I'd like something with a good 40-60 pace to get past the dawdlers and above that either should be more than addequate.
The main thing that puts me off the turbo is the response. There are other cars I'd rather have if it wasn't for the balance offered by a 944 (judging by my 924S atleast) and I'm worried turbo lag will prevent me from exploiting this too much for fear of a "where's the power. There it is. Hedge" experience!
Chris71 said:
These days a majority of my driving is a mundane commute either via M25 or suburban roads, but really I want something for on road b-road blasts. As a result 100-120mph times aren't important, I'd like something with a good 40-60 pace to get past the dawdlers and above that either should be more than addequate.
The main thing that puts me off the turbo is the response. There are other cars I'd rather have if it wasn't for the balance offered by a 944 (judging by my 924S atleast) and I'm worried turbo lag will prevent me from exploiting this too much for fear of a "where's the power. There it is. Hedge" experience!
My S2 doesn't feel that quick to 60. It's deceptive, as it is a comparatively civilised and refined car, and Autocar tested the S2 at 6.0secs for 0-60, but it really doesn't feel *that* quick. Where it shines (or at least seems to, to me) is 60-120 (on a private road.) The acceleration doesn't drop off, it just keeps going and going. The main thing that puts me off the turbo is the response. There are other cars I'd rather have if it wasn't for the balance offered by a 944 (judging by my 924S atleast) and I'm worried turbo lag will prevent me from exploiting this too much for fear of a "where's the power. There it is. Hedge" experience!
The turbo is meant to be really quite laggy (spot gap in traffic, press pedal ... start to move, slowly ... carry on moving, slowly ... watch gap closing up ... wonder if something is broken BL00DY H3LL THE GAP IS NOW 200 YARDS BEHIND ME) but I am told that this can be easily cured with some aftermarket fettling.
Drive several of each. Choose on the relative merits. If you are in London and want a nose around an S2 then drop me a line. However, it is similar to the 924S you mentioned in terms of size and layout, although the power delivery is quite different. (The 924S and 944S shared the same engine, which was very peaky. The S2 is much more grunty at low revs.)
Oli.
zcacogp said:
Chris71 said:
These days a majority of my driving is a mundane commute either via M25 or suburban roads, but really I want something for on road b-road blasts. As a result 100-120mph times aren't important, I'd like something with a good 40-60 pace to get past the dawdlers and above that either should be more than addequate.
The main thing that puts me off the turbo is the response. There are other cars I'd rather have if it wasn't for the balance offered by a 944 (judging by my 924S atleast) and I'm worried turbo lag will prevent me from exploiting this too much for fear of a "where's the power. There it is. Hedge" experience!
My S2 doesn't feel that quick to 60. It's deceptive, as it is a comparatively civilised and refined car, and Autocar tested the S2 at 6.0secs for 0-60, but it really doesn't feel *that* quick. Where it shines (or at least seems to, to me) is 60-120 (on a private road.) The acceleration doesn't drop off, it just keeps going and going. The main thing that puts me off the turbo is the response. There are other cars I'd rather have if it wasn't for the balance offered by a 944 (judging by my 924S atleast) and I'm worried turbo lag will prevent me from exploiting this too much for fear of a "where's the power. There it is. Hedge" experience!
The turbo is meant to be really quite laggy (spot gap in traffic, press pedal ... start to move, slowly ... carry on moving, slowly ... watch gap closing up ... wonder if something is broken BL00DY H3LL THE GAP IS NOW 200 YARDS BEHIND ME) but I am told that this can be easily cured with some aftermarket fettling.
Drive several of each. Choose on the relative merits. If you are in London and want a nose around an S2 then drop me a line. However, it is similar to the 924S you mentioned in terms of size and layout, although the power delivery is quite different. (The 924S and 944S shared the same engine, which was very peaky. The S2 is much more grunty at low revs.)
Oli.
Not wquite: the 924S has the 2.5 8 valve 944 engine. the 944S has a 2.5 litre 16v engine.
I had a slightly modified '89 Turbo which I drove everyday for 2 years. Fantastic. It was still OK off-boost- you could do more then the speed limit before the boost kicked in, so you can also drive it on snow, etc and on-boost it was very quick- easily quicker then my current Aston.
The S2 are lovely, but if you're going to have cake, you might as well use full-fat double cream...
zcacogp said:
Chris71 said:
These days a majority of my driving is a mundane commute either via M25 or suburban roads, but really I want something for on road b-road blasts. As a result 100-120mph times aren't important, I'd like something with a good 40-60 pace to get past the dawdlers and above that either should be more than addequate.
The main thing that puts me off the turbo is the response. There are other cars I'd rather have if it wasn't for the balance offered by a 944 (judging by my 924S atleast) and I'm worried turbo lag will prevent me from exploiting this too much for fear of a "where's the power. There it is. Hedge" experience!
My S2 doesn't feel that quick to 60. It's deceptive, as it is a comparatively civilised and refined car, and Autocar tested the S2 at 6.0secs for 0-60, but it really doesn't feel *that* quick. Where it shines (or at least seems to, to me) is 60-120 (on a private road.) The acceleration doesn't drop off, it just keeps going and going. The main thing that puts me off the turbo is the response. There are other cars I'd rather have if it wasn't for the balance offered by a 944 (judging by my 924S atleast) and I'm worried turbo lag will prevent me from exploiting this too much for fear of a "where's the power. There it is. Hedge" experience!
The turbo is meant to be really quite laggy (spot gap in traffic, press pedal ... start to move, slowly ... carry on moving, slowly ... watch gap closing up ... wonder if something is broken BL00DY H3LL THE GAP IS NOW 200 YARDS BEHIND ME) but I am told that this can be easily cured with some aftermarket fettling.
Drive several of each. Choose on the relative merits. If you are in London and want a nose around an S2 then drop me a line. However, it is similar to the 924S you mentioned in terms of size and layout, although the power delivery is quite different. (The 924S and 944S shared the same engine, which was very peaky. The S2 is much more grunty at low revs.)
Oli.
Eek! I hope not, the engine in my S felt like a tractor after a number of small revvy powerplants in previous cars!! I loved the torque, but it hit the rev limiter at what felt like it should be about half way up the rev range. Can remember taking the new owner out for a test drive, punting between two roundabouts in 2nd or 3rd gear thinking "do I really want to get rid of this?"
The only problem I can see with a 944 is it's best enjoyed in coupe form. I really miss open air driving with my Quantum, but have heard very mixed reviews of the cabriolets. Hmmm.
williamp said:
Not wquite: the 924S has the 2.5 8 valve 944 engine. the 944S has a 2.5 litre 16v engine.
Oh. With apologies - I stand corrected.williamp said:
The S2 are lovely, but if you're going to have cake, you might as well use full-fat double cream...
I don't think it's quite that simple. The turbo is undoubtedly more powerful (220 or 250, depending upon the model, vs the 211 of the S2) but they are different styles and delivered in different ways. A lot comes down to what you like, your driving style and the roads you normally drive on. The turbo is more compromised, but you can make it go VERY quickly. The S2 is more capable in a wider range of situations, but not as quick as the turbo in other situations. As I said before, drive both and see what you think. FWIW, the thing that impresses me most about the S2 is not the speed, it's the handling and build quality.
Oli.
I prefer the 944 turbo to the S2, but the wait for power (and trying to anticipate overtaking while on the throttle) can get frustrating. However - after 2 years being too busy to finish it - I am now back on with my 3 litre 944 turbo - that I am hoping bridges the gap in between the S2 and std turbo.
I am hoping that the bigger capacity spins up the turbo sooner and brings the induction efficiency lower down the power band to enable the car to be less laggy. I expect a mid range increase of at least 20% (the increase in capacity) and hope that the relatively smaller turbo will still produce good top end - but not too much. We previously tuned a 2.5 litre 944 turbo until eventually (only at around 300bhp) it just spun the wheels when it hit the power band and you got nowhere in it - even in the dry and up to 4th gear - so I am hoping that this hobby provides something that will drive the extra power/torque rather than spin up too quickly.
Fitting a new head fixing arrangement at the moment and awaiting a new type head gasket (promised as a Christmas present) so some time in February - I hope to report the results. Mind you I still have my Carerra GT sat part rebuilt in the back of the garage for the last 12 years - so it will be a first to find time to get a project actually finished!
Baz Hartech.
I am hoping that the bigger capacity spins up the turbo sooner and brings the induction efficiency lower down the power band to enable the car to be less laggy. I expect a mid range increase of at least 20% (the increase in capacity) and hope that the relatively smaller turbo will still produce good top end - but not too much. We previously tuned a 2.5 litre 944 turbo until eventually (only at around 300bhp) it just spun the wheels when it hit the power band and you got nowhere in it - even in the dry and up to 4th gear - so I am hoping that this hobby provides something that will drive the extra power/torque rather than spin up too quickly.
Fitting a new head fixing arrangement at the moment and awaiting a new type head gasket (promised as a Christmas present) so some time in February - I hope to report the results. Mind you I still have my Carerra GT sat part rebuilt in the back of the garage for the last 12 years - so it will be a first to find time to get a project actually finished!
Baz Hartech.
Well my 3.0 turbo is finished today after 4 years of collecting parts and changing the spec we will setup the running in map for the Motec on saturday. I hope it will satisfy the 968's need for more power to complement the capable chassis and that the KW kit I plan to install will keep the extra power under control. The problem with the smaller turbos on the 3.0 is that they run out of steam too early and create too much backpressure which is a problem with the kkk housing on the hotside. What turbo are you using Baz?
This is like a game of Top Trumps
My 3.2 litre Turbo was finished on Saturday (as Nick knows because he picked it up with me) and I have no idea what people mean regarding off boost lag This new engine absolutely blitzes my wifes standard S2 from low down revs and this is with a low compression turbo engine 
It actually uses a crankshaft supplied by Baz last year (Cheers Barry) and truly is the answer to every 944/968 enthusiasts prayers. Low down, instant throttle response and an evil bit of boost just waiting in the wings
I haven't even touched the boost yet, that is strictly out of bounds until 1000 miles of 'break in' are finished, but I am at 800 miles now
My 3.2 litre Turbo was finished on Saturday (as Nick knows because he picked it up with me) and I have no idea what people mean regarding off boost lag
This new engine absolutely blitzes my wifes standard S2 from low down revs and this is with a low compression turbo engine It actually uses a crankshaft supplied by Baz last year (Cheers Barry) and truly is the answer to every 944/968 enthusiasts prayers. Low down, instant throttle response and an evil bit of boost just waiting in the wings
I haven't even touched the boost yet, that is strictly out of bounds until 1000 miles of 'break in' are finished, but I am at 800 miles now hartech said:
We previously tuned a 2.5 litre 944 turbo until eventually (only at around 300bhp) it just spun the wheels when it hit the power band and you got nowhere in it - even in the dry and up to 4th gear
Did you ever think about fitting new tyres
My car is similar spec and even with R compound tyres Id'd only spin up in 2nd in the wet....it might scrabbble for grip in 3rd, but not on normal tyres.
Edited by davyboy on Wednesday 6th December 17:05
Having driven both cars and having owned a 944 Turbo Cabriolet for a while now, I think it comes down to what you want.
My 944 T really is such a fantastic everyday supercar. Don't be fooled by the date of manufacture, these cars still go like stink. The car will embarass plenty of much modern machinery in a straight line, and show another bunch its tail in the twisties.
It also FEELS quick on boost, something its normally aspirated cousin doesn't I feel.
I drove an S2 for 50 odd miles and my first feel for the car was how much lighter it felt! It felt like any modern Honda (I was suprised and had my Turbo examined, but all was found to be fine). However, the car is punchy and VERY rev happy. However, it is certainly MUCH slower (or certainly feels it, before the statistics brigade rock up!) than the turbo for your everyday traffic olympics...
Get the Turbo if you want to feel speed and have some fun in the wet and get the S2 if that doesn't take your fancy. They are both 944's and therefore tops.
My 944 T really is such a fantastic everyday supercar. Don't be fooled by the date of manufacture, these cars still go like stink. The car will embarass plenty of much modern machinery in a straight line, and show another bunch its tail in the twisties.
It also FEELS quick on boost, something its normally aspirated cousin doesn't I feel.
I drove an S2 for 50 odd miles and my first feel for the car was how much lighter it felt! It felt like any modern Honda (I was suprised and had my Turbo examined, but all was found to be fine). However, the car is punchy and VERY rev happy. However, it is certainly MUCH slower (or certainly feels it, before the statistics brigade rock up!) than the turbo for your everyday traffic olympics...
Get the Turbo if you want to feel speed and have some fun
in the wet and get the S2 if that doesn't take your fancy. They are both 944's and therefore tops.You might get a decent 220 turbo for £6k. But I personally wouldn't pay less than £7k for a 250.
Better off looking for an S2 in that price range(such as my cherished example, which will be up for sale on PH soon at just under £6000!)
Quick Autocar/Motor roadtest comparison:
944T 220 0-60 6.0 / 0-100 15.6 / 1/4 mile 14.8 / Max 157
944T 250 0-60 5.3 / 0-100 13.5 / 1/4 mile 13.6 / Max 163
944 S2 0-60 6.0 / 0-100 15.5 / 1/4 mile 14.4 / Max 150
F*cking great cars for the money,the lot of them.
Better off looking for an S2 in that price range(such as my cherished example, which will be up for sale on PH soon at just under £6000!
) Quick Autocar/Motor roadtest comparison:
944T 220 0-60 6.0 / 0-100 15.6 / 1/4 mile 14.8 / Max 157
944T 250 0-60 5.3 / 0-100 13.5 / 1/4 mile 13.6 / Max 163
944 S2 0-60 6.0 / 0-100 15.5 / 1/4 mile 14.4 / Max 150
F*cking great cars for the money,the lot of them.
I have an S2 and a modified late turbo 250 and even if the turbo is way faster both in straight lines and in corners the S2 still pleases me most. It does not require silly speeds to give fun and the thinner wheels and slightly softer chassis set up actually make it more of a rewarding drive.
Probably a similar reason why people like 968s so much although they're certainly "inferior" to 944 turbos.
Whichever you will go for you won't be disappointed, but £6k sound optimistic for a really sorted turbo.
Probably a similar reason why people like 968s so much although they're certainly "inferior" to 944 turbos.
Whichever you will go for you won't be disappointed, but £6k sound optimistic for a really sorted turbo.
Edited by Thom on Wednesday 6th December 18:51
I had a 944 Turbo for 5 years and it was great fun and very reliable. I also got nearly all my money back when I part Exchanged it for my 993 !!
The turbo kick is addictive and the lag not too bad.
I drove an S2 before buying the Turbo and it was very nice and torquey and could be driven v quickly in a flowing sort of way.
I also liked the AirCon and leather on the turbo and it seemed more refined.
My running costs were unbelievably low just tyres/pads/oil and filters plus I changed the belts twice. When on a long run with the wife aboard it would consistently do 30 mpg - but a l o t less if you spanked it !!( The car I mean)
The turbo kick is addictive and the lag not too bad.
I drove an S2 before buying the Turbo and it was very nice and torquey and could be driven v quickly in a flowing sort of way.
I also liked the AirCon and leather on the turbo and it seemed more refined.
My running costs were unbelievably low just tyres/pads/oil and filters plus I changed the belts twice. When on a long run with the wife aboard it would consistently do 30 mpg - but a l o t less if you spanked it !!( The car I mean)
Edited by johnmaddox on Wednesday 6th December 23:22
When you're looking back 20 years from now you'll still be justifying to yourself why you bought an S2 & not a turbo, buy a turbo & 20 years on you won't be justifying why you didn't have an S2
On the road the lag on my '89 250 is huge & does make it difficult to finely control power at low revs on the road, on the track you're on boost pretty well all the time anyway & I don't think it's an issue.
Why choose? Buy one, then the other
On the road the lag on my '89 250 is huge & does make it difficult to finely control power at low revs on the road, on the track you're on boost pretty well all the time anyway & I don't think it's an issue.
Why choose? Buy one, then the other
Edited by Riverside on Wednesday 6th December 23:22
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff