exc911ence

I'm looking at a 1987 944S for sale that's just had its chain/tensioner/waterpump done and is in mint condition. So tell me, are the 16 valve cars as scary and unreliable as the 8 valve owners say? Tell me your tales of woe (bad) or whoa (good)! Lastly, show me pics of yours just for the heck of it!

hacker-pschorr

Lets get this off to a good start:

The 8V owners are just jealous of the S and S2 owners because:

1. The S engine is the best of the series (S2 a close second)
2. Our motor is closer to the ultimate Porsche motor - 928 S4
3. Rev's like a ****** f*cker
4. Sounds awesome, the nice "whir" from the intake is reason enough to buy one.
5. We own the "rare" 944 that attracts all the women
6. Grandfather to the 968 (father being the S2)

I've owned my "S" since april 1996. I'd never own an 8V 944 unless it had a turbo. Yes I've driven a few of them. I prefer the free reving 16V motor. Not saying the 8V is bad, just not my cup-o-tea. My 928 is the first 2-valve engine I've ever owned.


Isn't this the 4th or 5th "why should I buy and S" thread this year? Lets make one a sticky.

7thStranger

I own both. Nothin wrong with S.

Besides the S sounds alot meaner then the 8 valve.

Robert D

Let's see. It really depends on the maintenance history. I bought my car at 120k, now it has 196k. Through this time I did have the bent valve fiasco due to chewed cam teeth (car has had mobil 1 since new, changed every 3k). Other than this the car has had the same maintenance issues as a normal 944 except for a strange idle problem (hope to cure with TPS I recently ordered). I've enjoyed the car much more than the 944 8V we have. It has a little more push to it, with a chip and test pipe the car is lots of fun.
I do spend more to keep the 944S running versus the 944. The only added costs for the 944S come from the chain tensioner replacement (and higher octane gasoline). Fortunately, you can replace one of the pads without replacing the tensioner. Which helps some. The rule of thumb before buying one of these cars is to have a local trusted P-car shop do a PPI, and once you buy it (if you do) open the valve cover and inspect the condition of the camshaft gear-teeth.
The reason I say this is, at 120k when I bought the car the tensioner had not been replaced. When I took it in for replacement, the chain had worn through both upper/lower pads and into the metal of the tensioner. I suspect the chain was not replaced when this tensioner was replaced and over the next ~60k miles chewed up the teeth. So my rule of thumb is to now on inspect the cam gears when the tensioner is replaced to prevent a possible 16 new paper weights .

If the site is still available, I had some pictures of my car at http://sssr.hypermart.net/cars1.htm and http://sssr.hypermart.net/cars2.htm

944 Hooligan

i loved my s. very similar in performance to the 8 valve 944, until you get to 4000 rpm and above. it's in that range that the engine really feels alive. it would spank my friend's 8 valver from there on out.

with all things porsche, stay on top of the maintenance items and you will be fine. if this one has had the t-belt items AND the cam tensioner done, it should be good to go.

nothing off the top of my head stands out as a problem...

and if you start itching for even more, put a mild super-charger on it!

Robert D

Oh, another thing. If I get into the 8v after the 16v, since the interiors look so much alike...I always get this sensation that the car is slower...the mph aren't as proportioned to the rpm's...if you get what I'm saying. They are both nice cars though and handle like beasts. Whats the ruling now, are 944S's in the same class as 944's for DE's?

Z-man

I disagree. The 968 3.0l 16v motor is the best of the series, the S2 is a close second, and the S motor is a distant third. (IMHO!)

While I own a 16-valve 944 (the S2), I really don't see the benefit of a 944S over an 8-valve n/a. Sure, it has a little more power over the 8-valve n/a's, but is it worth the extra $$ that one needs to spend on maintenance? Also: the maintenance costs between the 944S and 944S2 are virtually the same, but there is significantly more power and better torque from the S2 powerplant. And don't forget about the upgraded 951 brakes and body that came on the 944S2!

In my opinion, if you want a 944S, you should really consider a 1989 944 2.7l 8-valve n/a. The 2.7l 944 has 162hp, while the 944S offers up 188hp. With the basic mods (intake, exhaust, chip), the 2.7 liter engine can make close to the power of a 944S without the extra cost of maintenance. (Of course, you can go crazy and get euro-spec pistons, port&polish the head, up the compression...yadda yadda yadda... on a 2.7l and come close to a 944S2 in terms of power!)

If you really would like to get into a 16-valve 944, then go for a 944S2, if your budget allows.

THAT SAID, a properly maintained 944S should not be an issue, if you are really set on getting such a car. But like the 951, 951S, 944S2 and 968, the maintenance on a 944S must be kept up to date religiously.

Putting on my Nomex suit,
-Z-man.

hacker-pschorr

Yea, my post was a bit over the top.

The best motor is actually the 3.0 16V Turbo......ok, might not be a real production motor, but I bet a few people at Porsche wanted to do it.

Robert D

Z-man, what other extra maintenance costs can you come up with? All I know of spending on the 16v and not the 8v is the chain tensioner replacement. Other than that, it's been all the same.

jaibeiber

that is it, but i would have to say with experience that the 16 valve head is the most stupid thing porsche could have done. so many other ways of keeping the cams in time together and they chose a chain. what the heck were they thinking? however on the flipside if proparly maintained it can be very reliable. and yes the added horsepower is fun especially when a uneducated 944 owner wants to race.

elvisizer

the chain tensioner is the only difference for maintenance. since it's such an easy job to do (1 hour labor charge from a shop, took me an hour an a half to do it myself- all you do is take the vavle cover off, compress the tensioner, remove, and replace), and the part isn't too expensive, and you'll only have to do it once every 100,000, the maintenance costs shouldn't really be a factor between 16 valvers and 8 valvers.
The difference in costs is really more about how much it costs to repair the engine if the chain tensioner or timing belt breaks. Rebuilding a S engine from a catastrophic failure like that is more $$$ than an 8 valve that's had the t-belt break. so that's really where the difference is.

jaibeiber

heres mine

hacker-pschorr

It is still a mystery why the 928 S4 motor doesn't suffer from this problem. Same design, and part number if I remember correctly.

Z-man

Robert:
Based on the comments above, I concur: maintenance costs for a 944S are not much more than costs for a 944 8v na. As such, the maintenance costs are also similar to maintain a 944S2! The price difference between a 944S and a 944S2 is getting smaller and smaller, so why get a 944S when one can get a 944S2 instead? Or an '89 944 2.7 8v na?

Ducking quickly now.
-Z.

Sami951

The great thing about 944S is the powerband. At lower rpms it's on par with the 8-valve N/A (actually the power figures on the back of the owner's manual suggest there's more torque available at all revs compared to 8v - I really don't understand where those "they have no bottom end" comments come from), and between 4-6k there's a definite kick. The gearing matches this perfectly, making it a very fun car to drive quickly. It's no turbo, but it's not bad either! I would get one over an 8-valve car any given day.

Here's pic of my dear 944S the day I got it