1990 944 "s3" vs 1986 951 turbo. And the 951 it is, now dynoed. Post #: 28

[EPDM]

Oh no not anooother s2 vs turbo debate.....! I hear you say.

Well I'm a newbie and know naught, naada, noting! In fact, I can't use this forums search machine to find anything on the subject at all! [] Surely, half the disc space is bound to be alocated to this wonderful agelong topic? But where...?

There is a twist to the story.

Which one would you take over an "s3" vs a pre wideaxel, no abs 86 turbo? The s3 being ...ofcourse.... a 1991 s2 with 968 engine ( 240hp) as it was initially planned to be. Whilst the measily 1986 951 is the one with th small offset wheels and not even ABS, but the potential to have ze hell tuned out of it.

Why the choice? Well because this bloody god forsaken country up here in the North of the EEC has nothing else to offer atm. This country being Finland.

I used to do a bit of endurance racing some years ago ( e30 325i...don't laugh) and before I turn 50 and my thingy shrivels up anymore I damned well aught to get a Porker! Am I right or am I right! ..[]

Thing is, everything is about ...ooh...3-4 times as expensive in this neck of ze woods compared to you lot in Blighty. So money is tight. Neither have ze ball dangling M200 rear differetial, whilst the s3 has the koni coils up front (M0300) but the 951 has some sort of coilover suspension though I don't know which one.

Drove the s3 today,and its as you would expect, a rubber band effect, reacts to the throttle nicely and so forth. The 951 I will test drive on wednesday heared its used to have a highr level of tuning and now is downgrade to about 260hp, with just bigger injectors and tuned eprom.

So let the games begin. As a summer car and as trackday weekend car which would you take, asuming the cars where otherwise in the same state of whatever.

 

[TTM]

The turbo has a tuning potential the S3 will never have, but will require lots of tlc, which should be ok if you can find your way with a spanner or two. Or rather with a comprehensive tool kit and a few special tools. The S3 would shine best as an everyday/touring car though it can be made to go nicely fast if fully stripped down. It won't be anywhere near as expensive to run as the turbo if the boost bug bites you and you decide to make it go much faster than 260hp. I like the idea that you could build in the future a 3L turbo out of the 968 engine, but that is not a cheap route either. With that said this might not be considered "too expensive" compared with the purchase price of the car. It all boils down to what you want to do with the car and how much resource you are ready to sink into it, money and/or working hours. The turbo on the track will drink quite a bit of fuel. You can always try to fill it with Salmiakki but I expect poor results. And welcome to ze forum

 

[EPDM]

Jup, thats the way I c it 2. What exactly are the weak spots of the 951 everyone seems to go on about? The turbo itself doesn't cost the earth. Are we talking more about age related pumbing that preferentially needs preventive maintanance rather than.."oh it seemed to have broken". I own a garage and tune mainly bread and butter cars on the dyno ( represent superchips and viezu) so a spanner I can hold....but not one with a porsche special logo inprinted on it.

 

[TTM]

Yes, mostly age-related. These old KKK turbos are bulletproof when treated with care - proper engine oil replaced regularly and if the cooling system is fine. If the headgasket is original it's probably worth replacing before taking the car on the track. The single oil radiator is not enough under hard use and you may see oil temp go as high as 120 deg C. Turbo bearings will obviously enjoy cooler oil more. These engines produce a lot of heat.

 

[edh]

ORIGINAL: TTM Yes, mostly age-related.....These engines produce a lot of heat.

There's your two main issues right there..both great cars, I'd probably go for the one in the best condition if you don't have many cars to choose from.

 

[zcacogp]

Hmmm. Welcome to the forum Niko. You've effectively asked a variation on the age-old "S2 vs. Turbo" question but with a twist - that being that the S2 has a 968 engine. The common answer to the S2/Turbo question is that you need to drive both, work out what you want to use the car for, look at lots of examples of both and buy the one that best suits your needs. The turbos are potentially faster but more expensive to buy and run, and are less well suited to driving in town. S2's are more progressive to drive, quicker in real-world driving than an unmodified turbo and tend to be cheaper to run. Different people have different preferences; I have an S2 and would be very unlikely to change it for a turbo, although others prefer the turbo. One question I would certainly be asking in your situation is how good was the conversion of the S2 to take the 968 engine. I don't know anything about the 968 lump but would imagine that a LOT hangs on the quality of the workmanship in doing the conversion. Building specials is very rarely a path to reliable motoring and a bad conversion could turn out to be a whole hill of expensive problems. Oli.

 

[EPDM]

Thanks 4 all your answers and opinions. Another 944 this time a bone stock s2 version but with only 55 k miles ( 89k km) on the odometer has cropped up. Strangely the seller is will to sell it for the same price as the above mentioned cars. Low mileage is for some the holy grail, but not so for me. I want to enjoy the cars performance and not get depressed by every click of the odometer. Well anyway it will give me a good fresh impression of the performance difference between the s2 and "s3". Here a few pics of the s3, pity I forgot to take pics of the engine bay. The national porsche forum is full of the various steps of the engine conversion and its owned by the clubs magazine editior. Its seemingly quite a simple job. The engine had 50k miles on it, abd the car 120k miles. http://www.locomail.com/niko/epdmotorsport/porsche944/ here is the the stock low mileage s2 add http://www.nettiauto.com/porsche/944/7006045 and here the turbo http://www.nettiauto.com/porsche/944/6927339 which has fuchs wheels for the summer people seems to get weak at the knees about...no comprendo..nice seats though, but has a not so well repaired left front corner repair seemingly.

 

[blade7]

Condition is everything, if the low mileage S2 is the best buy that. You could convert it to a 3.0 turbo in the future.

 

[zcacogp]

That turbo is a mess at the front end. Sorting it out could prove expensive in terms of panelwork and time, and if a repair has been done on the cheap it makes you wonder what else has been skimped on. Frankly, I'd avoid it, unless it comes at a very good price. Oli.

 

[Masher]

By far the best looking/condition car is the S2. The S3 looks somewhat rough from the outside to me and the issues of modification have been mentioned above. The turbo to me looks like it's had front end accident damage since the panel gaps look all over the place. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh but just giving an opinion as I see it. best of luck with your decision, Mick

 

[EPDM]

I agree. I'll be going to see the stock s2 car tomorrow and let you know if its as good as it sounds.

 

[wolfie308]

I notice the turbo has rear side markers which have been changed from red to clear, however they are not present on the side of the front bumper as here....

which would suggest that the front PU bumper is not the original? []

 

[white944]

North America specification?

 

[EPDM]

ORIGINAL: white944 North America specification?

Seemingly, yes. Do they have any important other specs compared to ze wans from ze faterland?

 

[wolfie308]

AFAIK North American spec have amber side markers on the front as standard.

 

[EPDM]

The previous owner of the grey 951 chimed in the local forum. Owned it for 8 years and put emphasis on the technical aspects which are probably still in good order. So it all boils down to what one wants. A low mileage probably mint stock car, a slightly pepped up ok car, or a beat up banger which goes like stink... the twist on it that the beat up banger seems to have the only working AC..... "ah Iago the pity of it, the pity of it" (Othello)

 

[edh]

One thing that may let all of them down is suspension. Standard 944 suspension is too soft for trackdays - maybe OK if you're only doing one a year, but if you're doing more, you'll get frustrated. So if any of them have improved suspension (or even fresh suspension), that would be a major factor for me. I might also worry less about the cosmetics than some other people.. (although those wheels on the S2 are hideous..). See if you can find out what's fitted to the turbo - it looks very low at the rear. M030 on the s3 (maybe including ARB's?) is better than standard, but maybe not if it's 20 years old. I'd also suggest you get in touch with Olli Snellman - our resident Finnish 944 guru. [link]https://www.porscheclubgb.com/forum/showProfile.asp?memid=8449[/link] He knows these cars inside out, does some great work, and will probably know of others for sale.

 

[EPDM]

Actually talked to the ex ex owner of the 951 this morning on the phone who had it for eight years up till about two years and 20k km ago. He had done quite a bit with the suspension so that both front and back are full caster and camber adjustable. Added crossbraces/bars. The dampers bistein dampers themself are not however the coilovers type so not height/ride adjustable. In his opinion ist better now than the m030 porsche option. And to be honest in my previous sportier cars with coils I have not adjusted them ever after the first adjustment. So if the setup is good then why change it... Also the engine has had the head rebuild ans well as the normal waterpump, chain and guides. It has a 1.0b vitesse chip and 3.0bar fuel pressure. But the inectors are still stock so 260-270ish is the guestimate. The chasis needs TLC, the front was indeed in a collision but this was even before his time. For me the technical side is more important compared to the visual so I'm not actually leaning towards this choice at the moment but I'm off now to test drive the low mileage s2 version.. tbc And yes I have been in daily contact with Olli during the last week or so..

 

[TTM]

If you are not bothered with looks, it sounds like the turbo would make a good track rat... but I would make sure it was just the body panels and bumper that were damaged, and not the actual structure such as the front section, side members, etc. Cosmetics on the S3 are not really flattering, while the S2 looks pretty good, and reasonably priced with this low mileage. Perhaps actually too nice to be turned into a track car...?

 

[EPDM]

ORIGINAL: TTM If you are not bothered with looks, it sounds like the turbo would make a good track rat... but I would make sure it was just the body panels and bumper that were damaged, and not the actual structure such as the front section, side members, etc. Cosmetics on the S3 are not really flattering, while the S2 looks pretty good, and reasonably priced with this low mileage. Perhaps actually too nice to be turned into a track car...?

Yes, you hit the proverbial nail on the head. So I went to drive the stock low mileage s2 this evening. Again my expectations were more or less personified..or eh carified. Eventhough the car had no service book for prior to the 70k or so km it had been in the current owners ( two brothers) ownership I have little or no doubt that the odometer was accurate. I took the pics after i had driven it for 20-30 miles so it looked a lot cleaner than that as it had been in storage and the winter tyres put on just for this outing. I used to reupholster leather steering wheels so have a "feel" so as to speak of what a certain mileage steering wheel should feel and look like. The car was basically flawless. All the switch gear looked as new and the paint itself original and such as one would expect. Basically all that was wrong with it was that the window wiper engine made a pretty horrific grinding sound straight out of some sci-fi movie. Strangely, the wipers themself worked fine. Plus the digital time clock was bust. On the road everything felt fine too. The suspension was nice and tight as it was in the s3. But yes, there was a little less grunt, pretty much to the extent as expected compared the the 968 engine powered s3. Still this difference is just crossed that imaginitive amount of power one needs on the albeit twisty but demanding race tracks in this neck of the woods. IOW its fine for the weekend spirited outings, but...just not enough for a decent track car as such unless as y'all know it would have to loose some serious weight. And would I want to strip out this particular specimen? Well the previous poster TTM took the words out of my mouth, no Sir. Obviously, the thought that, if any, this particular s2 has the potential at least in these latitudes, for actually not depreciating anymore. In fact I somehow felt privelidged to drive a car like this. A funny thought occured to me as I pictured the person I would think would go all weak seeying a car like this. He would be ...oh around 50 and a collector. A split second later I laughed as it also occured to me that I am nigh on three years away from that benchmark, but I ain't no collector. So I hope to digest all this by tomorrow and take the liberty to put a closed sign on my business front door. (You lot would have a "gone fishing" sign for it, we just make do this "fuck off" [8|] and off I go the the stealership a hundred miles from here tomorrow to c the 951. If my cristal ball is as accurate as it has been so far I am indeed faced with a strange dilemna. I have three cars could very well imagine owning but for different reasons. I just need to figure out what the most important reason is as they are mutually exclusive..so am I actually any wiser as to when I started off this thread? Well no, so I really hope I am tomorrow, but my gut feeling tells me otherwise.. tbc. oh I nearly forgot ze [link=http://www.locomail.com/niko/epdmotorsport/porsche944/944s2/]pics[/link]