slvr993

How comparable are the running costs / trouble factor for say an S2 versus a 951. Lets assume both start out in very good condition at about 75K miles all necessary service up to date. The s2 would have no engine mods, the turbo lets assume has the basics, Chips,boost controller, wastegate shim putting out 275hp.

The cars would see 7,000 miles per year and 8 days of DE.

I'm assuming the Turbo would be more, but how much??

Jeff

pjburges

I havnt owned a Turbo or an S2, but from all that I have heard the 8 valve system is a little more reliable than any of the 16 valves. However, with the turbo you have increased stress, heat, and vacuum lines everywhere. Not to mention the extra electronics to run it too. All those things could break. The turbo is definetly more fun though, as I have ridden in an S2 and a Turbo.

Keithr726

If you keep up with proper up keep it should be about the same. Make sure you have some spare cash for an OOPS. Also keep in mind 951s really should only run on premium fuel.

Van

A regular turbo and an S2 are going to be about the same -- same brakes, same rotor, etc. The 16 valve head will ballance out the turbo's plumbing.

A turbo S with the bigger brakes will run a little more to maintain.

FWIW, after seeing some of the threads here, it really comes down to the car's condition. I see people putting more money in an '84 N/A that's been around the block than I've put in my turbo S that's fully documented and only had 1 other owner.

useth4z

Karl Gylnn has a site where he documents true cost of ownership for an S2.

Link here. http://www.weissach.net/WP0AB294XMN410197-History.html

Jfrahm

Generally the rule of thumb is to double the engine maintenance / trouble on a turbo car. The underhood heat, intake plumbing, extra oil and coolant lines, that sort of thing adds up. Not to mention the turbo itself. The 16v head on the S2 means you gotta put a $20 plastic pad in there at 100-120K miles and... hmm... that's about it. I suppose the S2's clutch center might blow before a 951 stock clutch might need replacement too.

An S2 downside is a scarcity of (stock) LSD's, but you could put in a Turbo LSD trans which might be a better match (and swap the clutch while you are at it.)

-Joel.

jmporsche944

I dont even want to talk about what my car is costing me right now, and it was very well maintained.

slvr993

Man Karls site is outstanding. I asked the question because I bought a 1991 S2 with 54000 miles from a Rennlister - Geoffrey Ring "Geoffrey". He said the car was in great condition. I got it home and went all through the car and it turns out it's in PERFECT condition, I mean like new. ( Great guy to deal with by the way) The intent was to track it with some weekend driving. So I lined up a suspension, seats, harnesses etc. Right now I'm struggling with bastardizing a completely original 944s2 with low miles in great condition. So I thought about selling it and getting into a turbo since all the parts I bought so far for the S2 will work fine on a 951 and the added power is always nice.

My concern is that this is supposed to be my low cost car. I have a 993 that I already plow way too much money into. I think I'll stick with the S2 and make sure that all mods can be reversed.

Thanks
Jeff

MPD47

Uh, no. You replace a chain and tensioner in the S2 head, maybe every 50k miles? At the earliest. The turbo car will cost SIGNIFICANTLY more to maintain.

Oddjob

Probably too many factors/variables to say with any certainty. It is extremely dependent on the condition of the individual cars, and your intended use.

I put more maintenance money into my 944S than has been put into my two 89 Turbos, 87T, and the 964 combined (and one of the 89s I have owned for 14 years, the other I owned for 7 years).

I have had very good luck with good condition 951s on the street, but have had a lot of maintenance problems with the high mileage track 951.

With all things being equal/indentical, the 944S2 will probably be cheaper to maintain as a dedicated track car. For the turbocharged system over time/mileage, the higher heat, and higher pressure on the intake/vacuum system, exhaust, and associated mechanical and electronic controls will cost more to maintain.

How much more? I dont really know. Maybe budget $1000-$1500 more a year for a 951, and it may average out over time, or you may end up with a nice savings account... hard to say.

Van

What needs replacing on a stock turbo every 50k miles?

Fishey

Chain/Tensioner/Ramp every like 150,000 not to mention when it comes to working on the car the S2 is just leaps and bounds easier (even easier then a 8v N/A). I mean when it comes to mainance there is absolutely no comparison between the two.

Oddjob

?.....there is no comparison between a 911 and a 944, but a 944T and a 944S2 are 90% identical.

Fishey

There is nothing wrong with the Brakes/Suspension..
The cars are very sound in that department.

I would like to note I am talking about someone who is going to be doing the maintance themselves. It is also less expensive repair times at the shop as well but even that doesn't reflect the extreme diffrence between the two.

The main diffrence and the biggest one is in the enginebay and that 10% makes it 70% diffrence between the two in maintance. I will save the 30% since they both have timing, balance belts, Waterpump and balance shafts However, The motors beyond that are very diffrent. They have diffrent blocks and diffrent heads, diffrent layout in the enginebay. There isn't a single job on the S2 that I would consider to be a pain. However, The Turbo is a pain in almost everything you do to it. Its numerous shields and lines are always in your way and the placement of stuff is just horrible like the heater control valve and it really is very badly placed. I spend more time trying not to brake the rusted shield bolts (I think its called the Starter shield but could be wrong) on a clutch job on a turbo as I do getting to that point. Since afterall they are all rusted into place since no one ever takes the time to anti seize anything. Lets not mention the cracks in crossover pipe that just makes you want to end your life. I mean even the dumb dizzy cap is a pain on the turbo compared to the S2. Anyone who doesn't think that the S2 maintance is far far easier is a fool plain and simple. I am not nocking the turbo's performance but when it comes to a comparison of maintance with a S2 you where done before the topic was even mentioned.