944 advice required S2 v Turbo

[simon clark]

I am after some advice on which of the above to choose and what to look for when buying.

I will be covering 25k miles a year (mainly motorway) and 8 - 10 trackdays. I have discovered the Turbo is cheaper to insure! and someone told me they are less complicated to maintain as they have the 8v head and not 16v.

Prices seem to vary hugely on both models and really only want to spend £7k - £8k as I don't need one in concours condition as it will be my work car.

The questions I have are?

1.What are typical values
2.When are the service intervals, inc the belts etc
3.What are main things to look for when buying

Any help would be much appreciated

Many thanks

Simon

[diver944]

Hi Simon great choice

This is a common question which has been covered pretty well by this post just last week:

www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=94402&f=48&h=0&p=3

Major Service intervals are once a year or 12k miles for the S2 and the same for the Turbo but with an oil change at every 6k miles.

The official interval for the belts is 5 years or 48k miles but most owners use a 3 year or 36k rule. Some use 2 year 24k rule as there were quite a few belt failures in early years A change of both cam and balance belts will cost £200-300 depending on which specialist you use. Cheap insurance compared to a £1k+ rebuild if one snaps.

The S2 also has a chain connecting the two camshafts, this is not covered by any official interval but should really be changed before every 80-100k miles

The Turbo may have a simpler 8v engine but all the ancilliaries are a hell of a lot more complex. It has a lot of electronics and sensors and piping that can mean a lot will be down on power

Checkout these buying guides and what to look for:

www.pistonheads.com/porsche/
www.connact.com/~kgross/FAQ/944faq.html
www.clarks-garage.com/

>> Edited by diver944 on Sunday 25th April 16:13

[cuneus]

How many years are you thinking of keeping the car for ?

[simon clark]

Many thanks for your help, drove a 1989 Turbo today that had a suspension problem, the rear damping was uneven and under acceleration, or even when just bringing the clutch up at highish revs, the rear became unsettled, any ideas? if its useful, it had the SO13 suspension option

I plan to keep the car for 12 months, why?

[williamp]

the 89 Turbo is the best year to go for, Turbo wise:

the M030 suspension (adjustable Knoi), LSD and external gearbox oil cooller and ABS were all standard. After/before, some were options or unavailable.

I own an 89 Turbo, and it feels very planted on the road. It could have been tyre pressures- these cars are very suseptable to subtle pressure changes, but possibly the Koni's were adjusted incorrectly left-right.

The 89 also has the 250 bhp engine, and of course its easily modified/ tuned..

Simon, I see you're from Tonbridge. I live in Maidstone. Contact me off-list and we'll have a Beer and a chat re: Turbo/S2...

Will

[neon_fox]

williamp said:

the 89 Turbo is the best year to go for, Turbo wise:

Ummm... just so the poor guy doesn't get confused:

In the latter half of 88 Porsche released an uprated 944 Turbo (sometimes called the S, SE or Silver Rose edition) with uprated engine, brakes, suspension etc. etc. which in 89 became standard issue until the car was 'replaced' by the 968 in 93. So technically an 88.5-92 is the best year to go for...

Oh, and you can tell it's a late 88 rather than an early 88 by looking at the engine code in the log-book, the correct code for the SE is M44.52

Fox
---

[Thom]

neon_fox said:

So technically an 88.5-92 is the best year to go for...

As William said, M030 was standard equipment on '89 turbos, and it's a significant plus over the not so good stock suspension set up that came on '90 and '91 cars - also there aren't so many '90 and '91 around with M030. M030 or an equivalent "sport" suspension should be compulsory on a turbo 250 hp, IMO. Otherwise they can be quite dangerous to drive on the limit.