Okay, I love my 944 (when it runs), and I'll be spending the next few months getting it shipshape. I tend not to own cars more than a couple of years, and while I'm thinking my 944 might be an exception to that rule, it also occurs to me that I've always dreamed of owning a 911.

My question then, in case anyone here can help me, is to ask for a comparison of owning and maintaining a 944 versus a 911 (let's say pre-87 or so). Should I expect the same level of upkeep and repairs? Are the costs (and difficulties) similar? Are there similar vulnerabilities -- clutch issues, timing belt -- or what? Are 911s easier or harder to work on?

I'm not about to run out and buy one (it'll be next year at the earliest) ... I'm just wondering. Thanks!

 

I've heard 911s are more reliable but I don't really know much in comparing the two.

 

you should post this on the 911 board

 

Hm, good idea.

 

Mid-eighties 911's are built like tanks. But IMHO, they were also a bit crude when compared to the late 944's. I never was fond of them from a driving or mechanical standpoint.

We had a 930 turbo (86 I think) in the family ( very close uncles car) from new till a few years back. It was a very nice car and a looker for sure, but maintenance was nothing short of a nightmare.

I am sure the fact that it was a turbo complicated matters. But call me nuts, I never yearned to own one or wanted a 911.

Lately I have been getting a bug to get a boxter that is a few years old with all the heavy depreciation zonked out of it.

Or I might start looking for a cayman S in another year or two. It seems like the depreciation factor on new porsche's is getting worse, not better for some reason.

 

Actually I think Caymans are gorgeous, but I'd prefer something older ... I figure it's cheaper to fix 'em, being simpler and with lots of wrecker-type parts floating around. And anyway I assume Caymans are way out of my price range.

 

From what I gather 944s are less trouble and cheaper to maintain. I know someone who had an '86 911 and he said everytime he took it to the shop it was at least a $1000 bill. He said it seemed more like a toy than a car.

I would think a 944 would be a better daily driver than an 80s 911.

 

Well I've been very pleased at how cheap most of the parts seem to have been so far -- in most cases cheaper than my (former) 95 Mazda.

The guy at the Porsche salvage yard I frequent told me once that 911 parts are plentiful and benefit from a lot of commonality over many production runs. But he might not be entirely unbiased ...

 

A 911 SC or newer car will be faster and more reliable than most 944 NA's. There is less preventative maintenance (valve adjustments), and they tend to be a little easier to work on. The major downside is that the AC and head will suck, and they are quite a bit more crude than the 944.

 

Crude is good! Crude is simple, crude is more trouble free.

What do you mean by AC and head? Air-con? I don't have that now!

 

hahahah, sorry I meant "heat", AC and heat.

Crude is good, but not for everyone!

 

That's good, a lack of head is a definite deal-breaker. Hee hee!

As for crude, I suspect I'm okay with it. Anyway, I'll file your thoughts away in my memory bank. For now it's 944 all the way, baby!

 

The A/C systems on 911's didn't get really good until the 964 series came out (1989 for C4, 1990 for C2). Pre- 964 A/C was mediocre at best when it was functioning. You can upgrade the A/C on an earlier 911 if you've got some coin to throw at it. In terms of performance, the 911 continued to improve and gain more power and better handling through the 964 and, many would say, reached its pinnacle of evolution with the 993 series (1995-1998). But old school 911 SC's and Carreras are a blast too! Definitely a different animal than a 944. If you go pre-964, try to at least get an 88 or 89 with a G50 transmission. That was a huge improvement over the earlier gearbox.

 

If you get an oil cooled 911, be prepared for it to leak oil, all the time, from one place or another. Last that I heard, Porsche considered this a 'normal'. Any water cooled 911 wouldn't have this problem.

I've heard it said that a 911 will cost you 30% more in parts and 30% more in labor over a 944, above and beyond the cost of aquisition difference, which I think would be huge.

A 928 is 30% more parts and 30% more labor over a 911. But this I'm not so sure about.

 

928's are definatly a trip. Timing belt jobs on those things are borderline torture compared to the 944.