the best 944 year

[arominus]

Anyone who say's the "S" is no better than any of the 8v cars has not driven one for more than a few minutes. Hands down it blows away any of the 8v NA cars. It may not "feel" much faster but it is! Its sneaky fast, especially on corner exits it screams out in a way that my 924S never could. The slightly taller 1-4 gearing hurts the car on the butt dyno, but seriously it still walks on NA's with no issue.

The best NA 944s are any of the 16v cars. The "quirk" is only that cam tensioner which you need to pay attention to, otherwise its still the same short block as the 2.5 car in the S.

Best of the best is the Turbo S or the 968.

[jhowell371]

I have a 84 and an 89 S2. I like the look of the early interior but the late model A/C is better.

[Tony-K]

I've owned an '83, two '84s, two late '85s, an '87 S, an '88 automatic and now an '89 S2. I've serviced dozens of 944s of all variants (Turbo, etc.).

My all-time favorite is the S2, any year. The most refined, the best combination of power and torque curve, overall just an incredibly solid car. Probably the all-around best car I've owned. And when you factor in late 944 features such as ABS, premium sound and air bags, it's seriously in a different league over the early cars.

I agree with arominus about the S. The car is deceptively quick, and handily faster than the 8-valve NA cars. You will really get the best of it and exploit its power by being in the right RPM range and right gear for a given speed -- and it's not difficult to find this -- I agree with arominus again that it only takes a few minutes of driving it to "get it". You really notice this on the freeway with the car's ability to pass. It is smoother, too. With all that said, I ultimately sold mine because I was doing a lot of highway travel at the time, and could not stand the fact that it was turning more RPMs in 5th gear than my 85.5 NA was. I sold it to a friend and am happy that he is still enjoying it.

I really like the simplicity of the early cars, but if you're going to go that route, I say go all the way and get an '83. In addition to being lighter, the lack of power "almost everything" suits the 1970s style and ethos better. Calling the power steering "leaky" and problematic, however, just means you've only ever owned an old car with an old rack!

I don't think there is anything particularly desirable about the 1989 2.7 cars -- they are heavier throughout, and the extra power is only compensating for the weight gained over the years. And the '89 has additional weight over the previous years, such as a beefier exhaust system that makes draining the transaxle a little bit more of a chore than on the earlier cars. But for performance -- particularly acceleration -- I'd take a light weight '83 over an '89. The one thing I do like about the '89 model year is the additional paint and interior colors as well as interior options (you see more split seats, premium sound, etc.)

To me, the "nothing" years of the 944 are '84-early '85, and '87-88(NA). Awesome cars, but these are not the standout years -- average performance, no particularly enticing options, few variants on the interiors, most are the same handful of exterior colors, lacking the raw simplicity of the '83s and the advancements of the latest variants. But every 944 -- even a plain guards red or silver 1984 with black basic interior and cookie cutter wheels with an automatic and all the wrong options -- is an AWESOME car.

Cheers,

Tony K.

[FLYGEEZER]

Thanks Tony-K, they are an awesome car. I've had my 1984 going on 15 years. Purchased from the original owner with all the paperwork from repairs & servicing from new. Over the years I've had a 914, 914-6 & a 912. This 944 is eons better than the others. I love driving this car, it fits my ass! The downside, It's black on black , hot here in Kentucky and it's an automatic but... now that I'm an old "geeze" and just getting over a broken foot (cast is off), the shiftless feature has become the compelling feature to keep the car. 122,000 miles has always had belts, pullys & pumps, on time. New dampener 4 years ago, Nut & bolts a very sound car, I would get in now & trust it to go anywhere. No rips or tears inside Very shiney origional black and some patena and 17" turbo twist wheels that was the deal of the century and yes, a black Colgan bra that fits like a glove. It gets compliments all the time and has a couple of prizes as best in class at events. I'll have to work on my computer skills and post a picture. Glad there are others that fell the same about the 944.

[sausagehacker]

Tony, thanks for the in-depth reply.

This thread is not dead yet

[midwestshooter]

My 1989 944S2 now has 156.000 miles - and is still a blast to drive. Over the years I've done a clutch, changed to a non-Freon A/C, and I'm about to replace an alternator. I do the belts every 50,000 mies - and my oil is Mobil 1 for high-milegae cars. I replaced the radio with a Sony - and I'm about to replace that one to get my iPod hooked up. The engine has never been opened up - nor has the 5 speed manual transmission.

I bought the car from the original owner in Los Angeles - 16 years ago. I have it in the Midwest now and I own a spare set of wheels with mounted snow tires for winter driving.

My ABS stopped working 3 years ago - and I have a temperature gauge that does not work - along with lamps in the dash that are getting dimmer and dimmer. Some day I may have to have the dash pulled apart for repair - and that could include a new cover as my dash top is all broken up. At present my horn has also stopped working - The Porsche service guy will work on that next.

All-in-all at 24 years old this 944S2 is still a head-turner and it still makes me smile at every high-speed corner on my country roads.

[944fanatic]

I got a 1984(29 years old) with no problems other than non working AC and a small oil leak.


106k miles, transmission is a bit funky in second gear(but i don't see any problems happening)


I love the old style dash with the 2 gauges and the clock it looks great

[924CarreraGTP]

I like the '86 951's, and N/A cars. I've owned a '79 924, early '85 944, an 85.5 944, and an '87 944S as well. I like the '86 a lot so far.
I really like the S2 Cabrio, and Turbo Cabrios.
I agree that the 968 Turbo S is probably the top of the heap. That's one of the fastest 4 cylinder cars ever built.

[VirginiaF1]

Any new (since last year) forum members wish to post their thoughts on this 10-year old thread?
I reaffirm my '88 8-valve nostalgic bias.. 2nd choice is an '89 S2.

[curtisr]

Originally Posted by verruckt

sorry, the best 944 is really a 924s.

+1

[amehl]

Originally Posted by todwic

I have wilk's chip. I was lucky enough to send it to him and he installed it and got it right. Well worth the ducets.

How much was it to send in your DME? Did you have to do the AFM too?

[gtgt__bangbang]

11/89 is best , according to my sticker

[TheAllusionist]

I read this thread hoping that there would be some post on the handling/feel difference. I have a 1986 951 and I have heard that some prefer the early offset and the race car feel to them, but I am curious as to what they mean by this. I had planned on putting a 1989 turbo M030 suspension under it so I could have late offset, larger brakes and sway bars..... but since it only has 48,000 original miles, figured I would keep this one stock and was here searching for more excuses to keep it stock and not mess with it too much! LOL Does anyone know what the difference in feel between early offset and new?

[VirginiaF1]

Originally Posted by TheAllusionist

I read this thread hoping that there would be some post on the handling/feel difference. I have a 1986 951 and I have heard that some prefer the early offset and the race car feel to them, but I am curious as to what they mean by this. I had planned on putting a 1989 turbo M030 suspension under it so I could have late offset, larger brakes and sway bars..... but since it only has 48,000 original miles, figured I would keep this one stock and was here searching for more excuses to keep it stock and not mess with it too much! LOL Does anyone know what the difference in feel between early offset and new?

Great question..
Only have driven an '84, my '88 and a '90.
Whereas the weight increases were clearly felt in transitioning,
the engine increases made up for the added mass in accel... IMHO.

As far as suspension suppleness, my limited experience also placed them in a similar order:
'84 - lithe but brittle/skittish; likely due to its original 27 year old struts & steel control arms?
'88 - once I replaced all 4 struts, nicely compliant but still well-controlled/agile.
'90 - with 12 year old struts, more forgiving but less sharp than my '88.
FWIW...

[TheAllusionist]

Originally Posted by VirginiaF1

Great question..
Only have driven an '84, my '88 and a '90.
Whereas the weight increases were clearly felt in transitioning,
the engine increases made up for the added mass in accel... IMHO.

As far as suspension suppleness, my limited experience also placed them in a similar order:
'84 - lithe but brittle/skittish; likely due to its original 27 year old struts & steel control arms?
'88 - once I replaced all 4 struts, nicely compliant but still well-controlled/agile.
'90 - with 12 year old struts, more forgiving but less sharp than my '88.
FWIW...

Thanks for the input and sharing your experience. I have read up on it and I have read that they changed offset for safety reasons, I was wondering if later cars "tramline" less than the early offsets, or what the safety issues could be.

Thanks again for some input.

[9FF]

Originally Posted by TheAllusionist

Thanks for the input and sharing your experience. I have read up on it and I have read that they changed offset for safety reasons, I was wondering if later cars "tramline" less than the early offsets, or what the safety issues could be. Thanks again for some input.

iirc early or late offset they both have the same wheelbase so there should be no difference in spec causing "tramlining". They only made them late offset to add abs but in doing so they added unsprung weight (bad), made the rotors easier to change (good) and fitted a beefier hub (good). All these things really have no effect on a street car, more effect on a track car.

I don't think there is one MY better than the other, it just depends what you want from the car, they all have their pluses & minuses. My preference FWIW is the Euro spec MY83 or MY86.

[jwmc1]

86...no doubt

[holtzy822]

'87 just to be different lol

[TheAllusionist]

Originally Posted by 9FF

iirc early or late offset they both have the same wheelbase so there should be no difference in spec causing "tramlining". They only made them late offset to add abs but in doing so they added unsprung weight (bad), made the rotors easier to change (good) and fitted a beefier hub (good). All these things really have no effect on a street car, more effect on a track car.

I don't think there is one MY better than the other, it just depends what you want from the car, they all have their pluses & minuses. My preference FWIW is the Euro spec MY83 or MY86.

Thanks for that information, it is appreciated.