Porsche Enthusiasts Club Forum

Straight choice guys, do I stay with my 944 square dash or move on to a 944 S ?

What would you do and why

Regards

jon

Id stay. The earlier the early car the crisper it is and the 944S (also a Lux btw, its a trim not a model) is heavy, stodgy and failed to deliver its promised performance.

I'd agree. Plus it sounds like you've done a lot to your car and shared some good times with it...

Not doubting your knowledge, just asking a question - isn't the 'S' a 16v? Or am I mistaken?

About fifteen years ago I had a 2.7 Lux which was an 8v, my son-in-law has a 2.5 Lux, which is also an 8v, and I have an S2, which is a 16v.

It is a 16v yes, but it is rather disappointing. You have to ring its neck to get any real performance and they tend to be out of tune as well as lacking low down go.

The S stands for Super and the S2 is their second and more successful attempt. The extra capacity that the new 2.7l/3.0l engine gave made a world of difference.

S2s dont seem to have suffered from the Ss camchain problems nearly as much either, which is probably because you dont have to wring their necks to get anywhere in a hurry.

Perhaps you'd prefer a turbo diesel

I have an S and against many previous performance cars I've had it does feel a bit lacking in power low down, but it's not terrible - just that the S2 does have good torque from low down, so comparatively the S is sluggish. Once above 4000 rpm mine pulls very well, and feels how you'd expect a sport car to feel, power to the redline - I'd imagine a lux would have run out of puff by 5000rpm?

I tried a 2.7 before I bought my S and don't remember the 2.7 feeling like a rocket ship from low down, but it was quite a restricted test drive.

I decided to get the best I could afford, no matter whether an 8v or 16v and I always fancy the underdog!!

In your shoes though, I would keep your early car as good ones seem to be disappearing.

Was that Norm's car? I was about to buy it off him when he first advertised it, but he was persuaded to increase the price very quickly so I didnt bother.

Id own an S, but even Porsche said that they werent great and that they offered very poor value. Paraphrased somewhat but not actually far from what the product director said in an interview in the late eighties.

Yes, that was the one.

My budget only stretched to a so so S2 or a ropey Turbo so I decided that as I couldn't afford a good Turbo, then I wasn't too worried about performance - just getting a good base.

Norm's car was cheap enough at what I paid imo.

The Turbo is still the model I wish I had, but I couldn't afford the extra after buying our S2000.

I'm glad I got the S though as they are becoming more scarce and whether they were a flop or not, driven correctly they are still an upgrade from an 8v NA, just not as nice to drive when feeling lazy. Part of me is tempted to try building a turbo 2.5 16v, but then the other part says to keep it original!!

Youd need a 2.7l for that. The S has all the wrong parts as the 126v head doesnt really work but the 2.7l will become a 3.0l with an S2 crank and the 2.7l head has larger valves. Thisd essentially be the engine that Porsche built for the 968 Turbo, which was a real flop. The S sold quite well, I think, but it disappointed and it cost a lot.

I was thinking about stripping it out and fitting the cage and seats which I have here, along with a spare set of Brembo brakes. I had intended to do this with my Turbo, but Ive grown to appreciate the electric everything and big stereo...

Mine hits the red line without too much bother

Wring it's neck, or drive it hard?

The 'S' is a great drivers car, you need to be on it all the time, it's a sports car and not meant for lazy poodling around!

Jon,

Yours is a great original early car, what are your reasons for contemplating a change?

Do you mean the 16v head doesn't lend itself well to turbocharging? I had read previously that with forced induction you don't necessarily gain anything by having 4v per cylinder vs 2v.

But I was thinking that you could use Turbo pistons and rods in the S engine, then obviously some fabrication for the exhaust and inlet/IC. But I suppose by that time, it's just as easy to drop a Turbo engine in, but it's not always about what's easiest!!

The original Motor roadtest for the S has it down as being slower than the 2.5 8V up to 100mph - but I just can't believe they didn't have a dud!! I've driven both (although only briefly in an 8V) and looked at the specs (torque/power graphs, weight, etc) and just can't see it. But maybe I'm wrong.

It doesn't really matter anyway, it's still a 944 - and it's the shape I fell in love with before worrying about performance!

I've got a square dash lux and an S

I could do with moving one of them on. I'm almost certainly keeping the S though both are lovely to drive. Both have had fortunes spent on them and they tick ever so slightly differant boxes to me.

Have on scanned the previous text.

But stay early! They arm simply amazing cars! I have played with an S2 enough to know the extra straight line speed doesn't make up for the lack or cornering ability. I absolutely love showing my a series of sweepers and just feeling like im stuck to the road. If you looking for a track car then maybe seek more power but for the UK roads and lux is great!

Hear hear, I voted with my choice of keeping the '84 and selling the motorway car.