Porsche 944 Turbo S
Discussion
Gaz. said:
I had one in 2009:
Ok it's a MY89 but from what I understand it's identical to a TurboS in all but name.
I loved driving it, I loved the seats. It was a nice car to drive despite the engine. Although it was a atleast a generation older than my Supra that was four years younger, I felt that the running costs were disproportionate to the performance and a big reason to sell it. Selling was actually a really pleasant experience, I had hundreds of people call or email me (it sold within 2 days) and all were nice people to talk to, it was such a contrast to selling my Japanese cars and BMW where just about every scumbag in Slough made themselves known.
I do miss it in some ways, the smell of the leather, the arches in the wing mirrors, the knowing glint from other petrol heads when out and about, the feeling that when you took it to a meet it would be photographed for someone else's pleasure rather than be cropped out from the background.
You say the running costs were disproportionate to the performance, sounds like it made up for it in lots of other ways.. Silly bugger. Ok it's a MY89 but from what I understand it's identical to a TurboS in all but name.
I loved driving it, I loved the seats. It was a nice car to drive despite the engine. Although it was a atleast a generation older than my Supra that was four years younger, I felt that the running costs were disproportionate to the performance and a big reason to sell it. Selling was actually a really pleasant experience, I had hundreds of people call or email me (it sold within 2 days) and all were nice people to talk to, it was such a contrast to selling my Japanese cars and BMW where just about every scumbag in Slough made themselves known.
I do miss it in some ways, the smell of the leather, the arches in the wing mirrors, the knowing glint from other petrol heads when out and about, the feeling that when you took it to a meet it would be photographed for someone else's pleasure rather than be cropped out from the background.
I had an M758 Turbo S as a company car in the early nineties, followed by a 968 (assisted purchase - very Gareth Cheeseman) and a host of other 944s since.
I now own a miley 944 Turbo which was bought for a sensible price needing a birthday service and a front oil seal. You can spend strong money keeping any 944, but they neednt break the bank if you know where to go, what to buy and what to pay.
Its a cracking car, but it desperately needs a polish. 944s tend to have shiny finishes and scruffy trim, but mines smart inside an oxidised on the outside...
I now own a miley 944 Turbo which was bought for a sensible price needing a birthday service and a front oil seal. You can spend strong money keeping any 944, but they neednt break the bank if you know where to go, what to buy and what to pay.
Its a cracking car, but it desperately needs a polish. 944s tend to have shiny finishes and scruffy trim, but mines smart inside an oxidised on the outside...
blade7 said:
Aside from things I bought because I wanted to, in 10k/5years my turbo has been serviced yearly, had belts/tensioners,4 tyres and a new FPR. What are you spending all this money on ? 
Amongst other things in my case, a full body restoration and respray, a new screen, massive quantities of replacement bits of external and internal trim, rubbers, seals etc, a complete top-end engine overhaul to go with the pre-emptive head gasket replacement, complete replacement of all the suspension, and the engine and transaxle mounts, new UJs, some wheel refurbs, etc., four full caliper rebuilds, new discs, etc etc. And the tuning work.You can run a 944 for a long time while accepting gradual deterioration of all the age-related stuff, but every component has its day and they are old cars now. Mine was perfectly serviceable and MOT-able when I bought it but now in most ways it's like a well looked after two year old car instead of a well looked after 25 year old car, and the difference is pretty profound.
I'm not done with it yet, it still needs the air con bringing properly up to date and the dash lights doing, and at some stage it will want a new clutch and a torque tube overhaul, but they are fine for now.
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 22 December 11:47
Lowtimer said:
Amongst other things in my case, a full body restoration and respray, a new screen, massive quantities of replacement bits of external and internal trim, rubbers, seals etc, a complete top-end engine overhaul to go with the pre-emptive head gasket replacement, complete replacement of all the suspension, and the engine and transaxle mounts, new UJs, some wheel refurbs, etc., four full caliper rebuilds, new discs, etc etc. And the tuning work.
You can run a 944 for a long time while accepting gradual deterioration of all the age-related stuff, but every component has its day and they are old cars now. Mine was perfectly serviceable and MOT-able when I bought it but now in most ways it's like a well looked after two year old car instead of a well looked after 25 year old car, and the difference is pretty profound.
I'm not done with it yet, it still needs the air con bringing properly up to date and the dash lights doing, and at some stage it will want a new clutch and a torque tube overhaul, but they are fine for now.
I wouldnt call those 'typical ownership costs' though Simon. Im all in favour of cars being refurbished, but a car can be looked after for a good deal less.You can run a 944 for a long time while accepting gradual deterioration of all the age-related stuff, but every component has its day and they are old cars now. Mine was perfectly serviceable and MOT-able when I bought it but now in most ways it's like a well looked after two year old car instead of a well looked after 25 year old car, and the difference is pretty profound.
I'm not done with it yet, it still needs the air con bringing properly up to date and the dash lights doing, and at some stage it will want a new clutch and a torque tube overhaul, but they are fine for now.
blade7 said:
You can run a 944 for a long time while accepting gradual deterioration of all the age-related stuff, but every component has its day and they are old cars now. Mine was perfectly serviceable and MOT-able when I bought it but now in most ways it's like a well looked after two year old car
+1There are plenty of people who buy older cars/classics and assume that an MOT pass indicates the car is almost as good as new. In reality a 25 year old car in most cases has shagged dampers, sagging springs, worn bushes, an LSD that doesn't lock, binding calipers and host of other niggles that aren't apparent to owners who haven't driven a well maintained or as-new example.
Olivera said:
+1
There are plenty of people who buy older cars/classics and assume that an MOT pass indicates the car is almost as good as new. In reality a 25 year old car in most cases has shagged dampers, sagging springs, worn bushes, an LSD that doesn't lock, binding calipers and host of other niggles that aren't apparent to owners who haven't driven a well maintained or as-new example.
While this can be true, some times people change components because they assume they have had there day when in fact the parts might still have plenty of life left in it.There are plenty of people who buy older cars/classics and assume that an MOT pass indicates the car is almost as good as new. In reality a 25 year old car in most cases has shagged dampers, sagging springs, worn bushes, an LSD that doesn't lock, binding calipers and host of other niggles that aren't apparent to owners who haven't driven a well maintained or as-new example.
My example was an 18 year old 300zx (60k miles), I spent a lot of money replacing the suspension components, refurbishing the brakes and lots more. In reality, the bushes I replaced were absolutely fine, I felt little to no difference in suspension behaviour after replacement and the brake piston and seals were also fine - was expecting part seized and pitted pistons.
I was happy I had done the work for my piece of mind, but am now also aware that it wasn't essential and made very little difference to my car.
Another example was gearbox oil on another car. The forum of choice at the time was convinced that the oil would be toast at the mileage I had even though less than OEM scheduled mileage. Dropped the oil - it looked like new, had no nasty bits in it. Was a complete waste of time and money.
If you've had a car from new or near-new, and done 100,000 miles on it in five years, the gearbox oil might well be OK.
Though I would still change it: in fact I am about to do just that on my BMW which is five years ant about 103,000 miles old. Even if it looks perfect the fact is that oil's lubricative qualities derive from long-chain molecules and over 100,000 miles of being chopped up by meshing gear teeth, a lot of those long chains have been shortened. Not every degradation of oil can be detected by looking at it.
If you buy a car that's 25 years old, and had 10 owners, and done 100,000 unknown miles, then even if the oil is as it left the factory (which it won't be) then in comparison to a good modern synthetic gearbox oil, it is totally rubbish and can be vastly improved upon. Oil and tyres are two of the areas in which modern equivalents are enormously better than the products of 25 years ago.
Though I would still change it: in fact I am about to do just that on my BMW which is five years ant about 103,000 miles old. Even if it looks perfect the fact is that oil's lubricative qualities derive from long-chain molecules and over 100,000 miles of being chopped up by meshing gear teeth, a lot of those long chains have been shortened. Not every degradation of oil can be detected by looking at it.
If you buy a car that's 25 years old, and had 10 owners, and done 100,000 unknown miles, then even if the oil is as it left the factory (which it won't be) then in comparison to a good modern synthetic gearbox oil, it is totally rubbish and can be vastly improved upon. Oil and tyres are two of the areas in which modern equivalents are enormously better than the products of 25 years ago.
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 22 December 16:26
I could agree more with most of you guys above. Mine is a garage queen now, never resprayed or damaged in any way. These cars are getting at a stage of needing complete overhaul. I believe that good ones will appreciate soon. I ve watched prices in Germany rising recently. Good ones are 12k+ and slightly rising.
Could be a near future young classic.
I would buy another one (turbo S prefferably) as they are getting harder to find
Could be a near future young classic.
I would buy another one (turbo S prefferably) as they are getting harder to find
GC8 said:
I wouldnt call those 'typical ownership costs' though Simon. Im all in favour of cars being refurbished, but a car can be looked after for a good deal less.
Of course it can, if you are prepared to accept that it will gradually age and that you are gradually using it up. Nothing wrong with that at all: it's what happens with 999 out of 1000 cars, and it's normal consumer behaviour. I'm just one of a small number of mild eccentrics who wants his car's life to be completely open-ended, and for it to be as good in another 20 years time as it is now.
Here she is on a Greek mountain road. Got her 12 years ago from a Porsche Club GB member in Brighton. Had her inspected by a close Porsche Center and the service manager told me that if i didnt buy it, he would. Bought her on the phone next day and travelled from Athens to collect her and drive through Europe
Edited by stv951 on Sunday 22 December 16:35
POORCARDEALER said:
Early N/A cars with the 2.5 engine, a clutch and fitting is almost the worth of the car..
Yes, but what on earth does the capital value of the car have to do with anything? That only matters if you want to sell it for a profit. Which given your user name is I guess where you're coming from.Mind you, a alot of people seem to have a spurious view that the effort required to keep a car good should somehow be proportional to what they paid for it rather than a combination of what it cost new and the age of the thing.
Given the low capital values of 944s for many years that is probably exactly the reason why so many of them are comprehensively shagged out underneath a superficially attractive exterior, and why the scrappage rate has been so high over the last few years. People have said it's a £3K car, I'll run it until it stops and if it needs more than £300 spending on it it'll go to the scrapyard.
All cars cost money if you use them. Your bank account neither knows nor cares whether you put any given £1 into refurbing an old car, or the depreciation of a newer car.
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 22 December 16:43
Lowtimer said:
Amongst other things in my case, a full body restoration and respray, a new screen, massive quantities of replacement bits of external and internal trim, rubbers, seals etc, a complete top-end engine overhaul to go with the pre-emptive head gasket replacement, complete replacement of all the suspension, and the engine and transaxle mounts, new UJs, some wheel refurbs, etc., four full caliper rebuilds, new discs, etc etc. And the tuning work.
You can run a 944 for a long time while accepting gradual deterioration of all the age-related stuff, but every component has its day and they are old cars now. Mine was perfectly serviceable and MOT-able when I bought it but now in most ways it's like a well looked after two year old car instead of a well looked after 25 year old car, and the difference is pretty profound.
I'm not done with it yet, it still needs the air con bringing properly up to date and the dash lights doing, and at some stage it will want a new clutch and a torque tube overhaul, but they are fine for now.
Fair enough, it sort of depends what your starting point is though, mine had done 79k when I bought it. I looked at quite a lot of cars 7 or 8 years ago up to around £10k and even back then there were plenty of neglected cars around. I think I've spent around £1000-1500 on maintenance over the last 10k/5 years, though admittedly nothing major has needed doing.You can run a 944 for a long time while accepting gradual deterioration of all the age-related stuff, but every component has its day and they are old cars now. Mine was perfectly serviceable and MOT-able when I bought it but now in most ways it's like a well looked after two year old car instead of a well looked after 25 year old car, and the difference is pretty profound.
I'm not done with it yet, it still needs the air con bringing properly up to date and the dash lights doing, and at some stage it will want a new clutch and a torque tube overhaul, but they are fine for now.
Lowtimer said:
POORCARDEALER said:
Early N/A cars with the 2.5 engine, a clutch and fitting is almost the worth of the car..
Yes, but what on earth does the capital value of the car have to do with anything? That only matters if you want to sell it for a profit. Which given your user name is I guess where you're coming from.Mind you, a alot of people seem to have a spurious view that the effort required to keep a car good should somehow be proportional to what they paid for it rather than a combination of what it cost new and the age of the thing.
Given the low capital values of 944s for many years that is probably exactly the reason why so many of them are comprehensively shagged out underneath a superficially attractive exterior, and why the scrappage rate has been so high over the last few years. People have said it's a £3K car, I'll run it until it stops and if it needs more than £300 spending on it it'll go to the scrapyard.
All cars cost money if you use them. Your bank account neither knows nor cares whether you put any given £1 into refurbing an old car, or the depreciation of a newer car.
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 22 December 16:43
First 944 I owned I bought in 1987, was a 1982 car in silver with Porsche pasha interior and I loved it
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff