UDPride

If this is a commuter car, Id probably opt for the ZX.

I got behind a rare 300ZX 2+2 three days ago. Kind of like an Audi A8 stretch!

The Z is newer though, probably has a nice Bose stereo on it, and all the comfy goodies. Probably cheaper to fix and more reliable too.

monabaker

Just did my clutch last spring. Cost me $2700. My mechanic said the absolute worst clutch job on any Porsche ever made was the 1986 951. Go Figure. I want a 996.

Zen dude

For just a few grand more you could buy a Boxster, that is if you like them.
I love the looks of a 951 better then the 968. But the c-note burning thing has me afraid.
Good luck on your hunt, let us know.

Z-man

Here's my $0.42:
- If you like tinkering with motors and like playing with 'go fast' modifications, then get a 951.
- If you like turbopower, but don't want to modify anything, then get a 951S (944 Turbo S)
- If you like low end torque, and the 944 body style, get a 944S2
- If you like low end torque, and the newer 968 body style, get a 968.

It is becoming more and more difficult to find an unmolested 944 Turbo. Untouched, stock 944S2's and 968's are easier to find since most aftermarket folks didn't want to touch the 16-valve motors.

The going rate for a decent 968 coupe is around $15k and dropping. I've seen one that had a tired body sell for $11k. A 944S2 will run you about $7k to $8k. A stock-ish 944 Turbo runs about $10k these days, and a 951S will run you $15k, the same as a 968.

If you've got $15k to spend, I'd say find the best example 968 or 951S you can get for your money.

If you're looking into a 968 or 944S2, note when the cam chain guide/tensioner has been replaced. They last about 100,000 miles. If this little unit breaks, it can cause some significant damage to your head and valves. It isn't pretty.

I have a 944S2. Love the car - really enjoy the low end torque, especially coming out of corners on a race track. Of course, the 951's that I run with on the track leave me in the dust on the straights, but I live for the corners anyway!

Happy shopping!
-Z-man.

Boogalou

Thanks for all the information, I really appreciate it! You guys are scaring me though on maintenance upkeep & costs, maybe I should reconsider on the 300ZX.

Another question, if the car has been well cared for and all service records available, is mileage in the 100-150,000 range any cause for concern?


I never even thought about a Boxster......

bloodraven

mileage is not a question. 100k is just being broke in. We have some guys here at 300k on the original clutch and motor! And as far as a 300ZX goes...those are actually a little more as far as maintenence, and insurance is a lot higher. I have a friend with one, and he spends more on parts then I do.

And boxters, they are dropping in price. I have seen them as low as 13k for a 97-98 model. After a PPI the car was in great shape. So, you can find a good shape boxster (I think the one I found was more of a good deal than most) for around 15-17k

I still say 951. handles like an S2, but faster when boost comes on. And that low end torque thing...easily fixable in a turbo for under 100 bucks...

Z-man

Regarding high mileage:
My 944S2 has 150,000 miles on the clock. While it performs flawlessly on the track, I do need to maintain it regularly. These costs do add up. Unfortunately, the small (and not so small) stuff starts to show it's age with older cars. Rubber bushings, seals and gaskets start to dry out. Fatigue can set in.

I bought my car with about 115,000 on the odo. Car was meticulously maintained before I got it, and I've been maintaining it as meticulously or better since I bought it.

Let's face it: the 944's are getting old. Old, higher mileage Porsches need more attention than a brand new Toyota Corolla. There is no denying that. But at the end of the day, I'd rather be playing with my Porsche than a Toyo echonobox! My car puts a smile on my face becuase of what it can do: for me, it's worth the price I pay.

No way. I seriously doubt you can get the low end grunt from a 2.5 liter turbo as you can with a 3.0 liter na. In a 944S2, there's 207 lb-ft of torque on tap at a reasonable RPM. The 2.5 liter motor doesn't have the same pull, and the turbo needs higher rpm's to spool up and come on power. There's no way that a $100 mod is going to do it. Show me how this is possible.

-Z-man.

Fishey

The major problem with 944 turbo's is the lag and lets face it most of the lag on the 944 turbo is because of layout.

Z-man

So for $100 this layout can be changed? I doubt it.
-Z.

bloodraven

No, it won't give you teh same low end as an S2...but better than stock....

joseph mitro

are you referring to the lindsey "boost enhancer?" that thing sucks.

back on topic......i have an S and can easily say.....drop it from consideration. it's not enough power to make it worth the headache. i would easily get a 968 if i had $15K to spend.

Fishey

Joseph you need some N20... give it another 50whp

Scootin159

I'm assuming by layout you're refering to how the turbo is mounted on the intake side of the motor w/ the crossover pipe, and by blaming it on that, you feel the long xover pipe is causing the problems.

I'd be hesistant to jump right on that for being the primary problem. I've driven a camaro w/ the turbo mounted in place of the MUFFLER (i.e. ~10' of exhaust before the turbo and another 14' of intake after the turbo). Now this is an extreme case, so I would expect to see enormous amounts of turbo lag. While there was some, it was actually very minimal (comparable to most other turbo'd cars).

Why is this? I don't know. My theory is that air has such little mass it takes very little for pressure changes to travel the length of the pipe. I could even be wrong, but my point is that having a longer manifold before the turbo isn't nessesarily the largest contributer to the 951's turbo lag.

Z-man

And another whole new set of headaches as well.

-Z.

jonnybgood

That is the reason for my comment on the first page. The first generation 16v needed 3l to make it worthwhile.