Rare (?) very early 89 944 Cab/S2?
#17
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
If you look at the early 944 cabriolet prototypes, the top of the rear fenders is "cut off" higher on the quarter panel. I'm not sure what the reasons were, but in the final design Porsche opted for a "lower cut" which resulted in a cleaner look but left some spaces over the rear wheel arches that were cleverly blended into the lines of the car by covering them with these panels.
#18
Unaffiliated
Thread Starter
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Thanks for the input, guys. Let's assume the guy who contacted me, Carl, is the new owner and not a seller trying to pass off a high dollar limited piece. He's just an owner trying to figure out what he's got. Ashton, sorry if it has been here before. How can we tell if it is a 2.7 or 3.0? Block VIN's or what?
Dave, If I understand you correctly, there were NO 2.7L 16 V engines, just 2.5? Obviously this is a 16V engine, so it has to be 2.5 or 3.0, probably the later?
Dave, If I understand you correctly, there were NO 2.7L 16 V engines, just 2.5? Obviously this is a 16V engine, so it has to be 2.5 or 3.0, probably the later?
#19
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
You can tell it's not a 2.7l 'cause 2.7's are all 8 valve, 1989 only. You can tell it's not a 2.5l 'S' motor 'cause it has the airbox under the nose where the turbo intercooler is generally located. The 87-88 'S' engine has an airbox aft of the hood latch with '16 Ventilier' in script.
Checking the engine code will tell for sure. M44/40 for a 2.5l 'S', M44/41 for a 3.0 S2.
It looks like an 89 S2 Cabrio. Quite uncommon.
-Joel.
Checking the engine code will tell for sure. M44/40 for a 2.5l 'S', M44/41 for a 3.0 S2.
It looks like an 89 S2 Cabrio. Quite uncommon.
-Joel.
#21
Three Wheelin'
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
If this car truly is a "one off" factory Porsche, it's not impossible that there was some special work done on the engine as well. Without pulling the head, we can't tell if it's 2.5, 2.7 or 3.0l. Just because the airbox is in the same location as an S2, and the valve cover looks the same, it doesn't make it an S2.
#22
Three Wheelin'
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
![](http://www.autoreview.ru/new_site/year2001/n16/lapin/800/porsche_17.jpg)
Thought this might be interesting to compare - AFAIK, a very early cabrio (from a ru website). Wes this an example of the higher belt-line you were talking about, Luis?
Micah
#23
Race Director
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Luis de Prat
The most obvious detail, however, are the phonedial wheels pictured, which are also indicative of an early chassis, and I'm not sure have the same offset as the Design90s that came stock on all 944S2 cabs. .
That just looks like an S2 cab with the proper motor, bad paint, and the wrong wheels. Although, in theory, someone could have specified that they wanted PD's when they ordered the car and the dealer or Porsche accomodated them.
#24
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Micah, that's a very interesting photo because that car appears to have the rear fender "covers" integrated (as in welded) into the rest of the bodywork.
The "belt line" I was referring to is the higher and shorter rear fender line you see here, where the convertible top attaches to the top of the rear fender:
![](http://www.porschete.com/porschete/944/fotos/944S2cabrio/944S2Cabrio-008.jpg)
![](http://www.porschete.com/porschete/944/fotos/944S2cabrio/944S2Cabrio-009.jpg)
Note the absence of door rubbing strips and the choice of wheels.
Looking at these pics, my guess is that the fender shape was changed to accommodate the rear seats, which I'm not sure the prototype had.
Like it or not, AFAIK this is a factory finish called "Rubinrot," or ruby red.
You can see it occasionally on cabs for sale in Germany, although I've never seen it on a coupé, or a U.S. car at all.
What's interesting about this car is that the factory finish is absent from the engine bay, which may indicate it was painted Rubinrot specifically for a car trade show, like the owner claims.
I should clarify that by "parts jumble" I wasn't questioning the owner's claims about it being an early version, but rather that personally I don't particularly like these "one off" examples.
The "belt line" I was referring to is the higher and shorter rear fender line you see here, where the convertible top attaches to the top of the rear fender:
![](http://www.porschete.com/porschete/944/fotos/944S2cabrio/944S2Cabrio-008.jpg)
![](http://www.porschete.com/porschete/944/fotos/944S2cabrio/944S2Cabrio-009.jpg)
Note the absence of door rubbing strips and the choice of wheels.
Looking at these pics, my guess is that the fender shape was changed to accommodate the rear seats, which I'm not sure the prototype had.
Originally Posted by tifosiman
bad paint
![Smilie](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
What's interesting about this car is that the factory finish is absent from the engine bay, which may indicate it was painted Rubinrot specifically for a car trade show, like the owner claims.
I should clarify that by "parts jumble" I wasn't questioning the owner's claims about it being an early version, but rather that personally I don't particularly like these "one off" examples.
#25
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Even if the car is some wild-*** factory 2.625 litre 6 valve prototype S1.75 Cab (sorry, I know, I know) does it make a difference in the value of the car?
#26
Budding Photographer
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: A Quiet Little Lake In The Middle of Nowhere
Posts: 7,007
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by alpenweissisnice
Even if the car is some wild-*** factory 2.625 litre 6 valve prototype S1.75 Cab (sorry, I know, I know) does it make a difference in the value of the car?
#27
Campeck Rulez
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
dan-haha...no sorrys neccessary I just find this kind of funny...plus It's kind of like playing detective![Stick Out Tongue](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
yeah...the late offset phodials tottally rule this car out as being a one off early model.
unless for some reason the PO went through the trouble to put spacers on...which I doubt.
that engine bay just looks funky....anyone notice the PS line going over the top of the water pump?
![Stick Out Tongue](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
yeah...the late offset phodials tottally rule this car out as being a one off early model.
unless for some reason the PO went through the trouble to put spacers on...which I doubt.
that engine bay just looks funky....anyone notice the PS line going over the top of the water pump?
#28
Unaffiliated
Thread Starter
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Campeck, The late offsets do NOT rule it out as the first cabs were sold in 89. A early cab prototype might have been made in 88 for display as claimed and then would have the late offset wheels. He claims a build date of Oct/1988, not 1986!
To me the engine is the proof, a serial # off the engine would tell a lot. The top mechanism needs inspected, If an outside company (ASC) did the top conversion instead of the factory it surely would be different in some way. I'd also expect some badging from that company... but then again maybe not if Porsche wanted to pass it off as their own. I've encouraged him to send for the certificate of authenticity, that would close the issue for sure.
To me the engine is the proof, a serial # off the engine would tell a lot. The top mechanism needs inspected, If an outside company (ASC) did the top conversion instead of the factory it surely would be different in some way. I'd also expect some badging from that company... but then again maybe not if Porsche wanted to pass it off as their own. I've encouraged him to send for the certificate of authenticity, that would close the issue for sure.
#29
Jane Bond 007
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by 944Fest (aka Dan P)
I've encouraged him to send for the certificate of authenticity, that would close the issue for sure.
![Big Grin](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
#30
Campeck Rulez
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by 944Fest (aka Dan P)
Campeck, The late offsets do NOT rule it out as the first cabs were sold in 89. A early cab prototype might have been made in 88 for display as claimed and then would have the late offset wheels. He claims a build date of Oct/1988, not 1986!
To me the engine is the proof, a serial # off the engine would tell a lot. The top mechanism needs inspected, If an outside company (ASC) did the top conversion instead of the factory it surely would be different in some way. I'd also expect some badging from that company... but then again maybe not if Porsche wanted to pass it off as their own. I've encouraged him to send for the certificate of authenticity, that would close the issue for sure.
To me the engine is the proof, a serial # off the engine would tell a lot. The top mechanism needs inspected, If an outside company (ASC) did the top conversion instead of the factory it surely would be different in some way. I'd also expect some badging from that company... but then again maybe not if Porsche wanted to pass it off as their own. I've encouraged him to send for the certificate of authenticity, that would close the issue for sure.
yes! lets see what that certificate says!