billatlanta

I have a 85.5 944 NA, and the car is a delight to drive. The car is almost used everyday and will in its first autocross in a few weeks. It is had a major service, new timing belt and waterpump. I am considering selling it and getting an older 911 - either an SC or Carrera.

All things being equal (cars of similar condition and milage) are the maintenance costs similar? The 944 has many belts, water cooling, and just seems like a whole lot more to go wrong with then a 911. I am out in left field on this?

GrantG

Bill - 911's (if very well maintained before you buy it) require less maintenance in general than the 944's. My 951S's were much more labor intensive than my 911s, but they'd be a bit more so than a 944NA too...

sschmerg

Bill:

I my experience, barring a catastrophic failure of some kind, the 80's 911s are the best Porsches in terms of maintenance costs.

We've had a 944, 951, and a 968 over the years, in addition to the two 911s. The n/a 944 was generally a bit more maintenance than either of the 911s, and the 951 was way more (not worth it IMO). The 968 had a few expensive things go wrong here and there, even though it was not that old and had low miles on it.

Overall the '88 911 has been the most reliable so far (hoping I'm not jinxing it). The SC required an overhaul of trans, clutch and motor a couple years ago at about 95k miles, but prior to that was fairly inexpensive, and has been trouble-free since then. Of course all that work was big $$$, but the car had been in the family a long time, and still looked good, so we figured it was worth it. That said, if we just bought the car and it needed that much work I might have pushed it off a cliff!

Really though, you can't go wrong with a well-sorted '78-'89 911.

-Sean

BeerBurner

My Porsche mechanics have said that the 911 tends to be more reliable than the 944, but also more expensive when maintenance and repairs are required. They said it tends to break even. And for whatever it's worth, that has held true with my 944 and the 911 that I've been babysitting for the past year.

BB.

zzopit_84_3.2

Been there - had a 83 944 then most recently a 84 Carrera. Maint costs are about the same (as long as you don't break anything !!). The Carrera has been quite trouble free with 204,000 miles. It is worth every penny that I paid for it.

Don't delay....

944ZEN

Interresteing topic.

I just sold my 1984 944 N/A to get my 1979 911 SC Targa. I figured from catalog prices that the cost off parts is aboout the same piece by piece. Clutch, fender, windshield, rubber seals, instruments. a.s.o. cost approx. the same. NOW the big question is how many part's will break on the 911 compared to the 944.

Maybe some off you have some experience off whitch part's is likely to go broke on middle years 911's.

jonjeffryes

Bill,

I run both, 1986 944S and 1979 911SC Targa sport (both UK models). Running costs are very similar. The SC uses rear tyres more often (about 6k on Pirelli's compared to the 944 on Bridgestones (10k miles) but is much quicker.

Fuel consumption on the 944 is better - over 32 compared to the 911 - av. 25 - 27 mpg UK. These are mainly long distance (over 350 mile) trip averages.

Both cars are superb and apart from minor niggles, reliable. That's mainly down to good maintainence.

Incidentally, insurance costs are lower for the 911 than the 944! That's completely the opposite of my expectations.

Regards

Jon J

Carrera51

Having both I found that last year, I spent less on the 911 than the 944. The 911 lives on the track with the occasional weekend drive. The 944 is a daily driver. Of course the major service on the 911 (valve adjustment) will probably come due this year so that will change.

porklover

All things being equal - i.e equal miliage on each car. The 911 would be much more expensive to run, especially if I wanted to keep fsh - 12k service on my 944 NA £210, 12k service on a equiv age 911 £245. Two more spark plugs :P I think that the real money difference for me here in engalnd, is tyres (freakishly expensive compared to the states) and insurance. I can't even get insurance on a 911 yet

sschmerg

James:

The 911 would not be more to run than a 944. The 944 would be about the same or more, trust me. This brings me to another point, which is a bit OT, but...

I suppose the 944 n/a and the 911 may have comparable running costs, but proportionally the 911 is cheaper to maintian. For example, a $1,000 repair on a 911 does not seem that bad because the car is worth, say, $20k. When the car is only worth $3k or 4k, as many 944s are these days, a $1,000 expense seems pretty excessive.

Just my 2 cents.

-Sean

MAS

So far, my 911 has been cheaper to maintain than my old 87 924S [same engine/drivetrain as a 944].

In the first year:

911:

*brake master cylinder (six months in)


924S:

*Brake master cylinder (about the same cost as 911 master cylinder)
*Right side CV joints (2 weeks after purchase)
*Left side CVs (5 months later)
*Gas tank pulled and fixed

Total cost for 911: approx $350
Total cost for 924S: approx $2,000

Also on the 924S year two, I spent about $1,200 on the belts, rollers and new water pump. And about $600 replacing both rear wheel bearings.

However, the gas mileage was definitely better on the 924S, and the 924S was generally an easier car to drive in stop and go traffic around town.

And the 924S had a complete pre-purchase inspection... all of the problems developed later

-MAS

k911sc

plus, 911's are just much cooler. cost be dammed

TaylorSea4

BB, what ever happen with that deal and your family, man? Currious to hear if things worked out...

I love it when this question comes up, just to see the loyalties fall into place. I think you guys who daily drive 944's with 911 weekenders/ track toys have got it right. One that's lithe and nimble and balanced and one that seperates the men from the boys.

My (amatuer) theory is that 944's have higher maintenance costs and take more cash to "get right" due to the fact that: 1. There are a LOT less of them out there on the streets and 2. a large portion of them are friggin' RATS. Try finding a 944NA with less than 50K miles on it. Sure, there are some 951's and a lot of S's, but how many NA's? The fact that there just aren't as many to pick from makes that even harder to do. It takes a lot of money to turn any rat into a fine example of the breed, 944 or 911.

markwemple

My experience has been that 911s are cheaper. Many of the basic maintenance parts are less and most of the work can be done with simple hand tools (here I refer to a timing belt change on a 944, ouch!). I will say that I do my own maintenance so if a mechanic was involved, that would likely change (once a year valve adjustment, ouch!!!). I have seen a few SCs with over 350k but never a 944 with over 250k if that means anything. My 2c.