interesting discrepancy on Porsche.com

CJFusco · CJFusco's Garage

If you go under the model history section of porsche.com, there is a year-by-year discription of model changes... I noticed an interesting tibit when I was browsing through the 1980s section...

"1982: Porsche extends the range by introducing the 944 based on the 924 but featuring even wider wheel arches and a four-cylinder Porsche engine (2479 cc, 163 bhp/120 kW)- basically speaking half the 8-cylinder in the 928. The new model has a clear effect on sales of the 924, which start to go down for the first time..."

"1986: The four-valve Porsche 928 S4 goes into production with an increase in engine size and power (4957 cc, 320 bhp/ 235 kW). The new range consists of the 924 S/944(2457 cc, 150 bhp/110 kW), the 944 S (2457 cc, 190 bhp/140 kW) and the 944Turbo (2457 cc, 220 bhp/162 kW). The 911 Turbo is also available in both Targa and Cabriolet guise."

So, according to Porsche.com, the 944 debuted with a 2479 cc engine, and then displacement dropped to 2457 cc with the 1985.5 models? I have never heard of this displacement drop before...

http://www2.us.porsche.com/english/usa/company/history/models/80.htm

Nabeel · 09-18-2003, 10:00 AM

Hmmm....it is definately the same engine. I'm also curious as to why they used the Euro-spec 163hp rating for the '82 description and the USA-spec 150hp for the '86. Granted, all '82 models are European, but from what I saw, this page is on their USA website. In that way, they also give the impression that the 944 engine got smaller and less powerful during its production run, neither of which is true.

CJFusco · CJFusco's Garage

I actually have a few U.S. magazine road tests (ROAD & TRACK, CAR AND DRIVER, MOTOR TREND) of the early 944 (82-83 manufacture dates) that list rwhp at 163; the previous owner of my car (a menchanic) also claims to have had my car (a U.S. model) dinoed at "around 160 hp" ... perhaps there is something to this porsche.com find.

Macfreak007 · 09-18-2003, 01:57 PM

maybe thats why the early cars always seem to be just a little quicker..

pearldrum · 09-18-2003, 05:15 PM

haha, I'm surprised they even mentioned the 944...

Nabeel · 09-18-2003, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CJFusco
I actually have a few U.S. magazine road tests (ROAD & TRACK, CAR AND DRIVER, MOTOR TREND) of the early 944 (82-83 manufacture dates) that list rwhp at 163; the previous owner of my car (a menchanic) also claims to have had my car (a U.S. model) dinoed at "around 160 hp" ... perhaps there is something to this porsche.com find.

Are you sure they were not simply listing a European power figure because the US numbers were not available at the time? Not to undermine the authenticity of your observation, but I find it hard to believe that the 944's engine actually went down in power over the years. Of course the early cars are quicker because they are lighter, not because of any power advantage. As for your car making around 160 on a dyno, I suppose +/- 5 percent or so would be within production specs, since engines are not all created 'equal.' Was your car stock at the time?

PS- the magazine claims couldn't have been 163 RWhp, because that would translate to 200+ at the crank....You must be referring to the regular hp figures.

CJFusco · CJFusco's Garage

yes, regular hp figures. sorry.

"Are you sure they were not simply listing a European power figure because the US numbers were not available at the time?"

Could be... they make no mention of this in the magazine.