moorepower

I think the 944S is a great car. It's a nice step between the NA and the turbo. I just wish Porsche would have made a Clubsport version. Put the NA ratios in the trans, but keep the stronger R/P, take out all the power/luxury crap (about 2550 lbs. would be nice), delete the sunroof, put in M030 turbo suspension and sport seats, and call it a day.

V2Rocket

that 10,000 rpm isnt really a performance experiment, its probably just to see if it can be done at all.

i believe it is possible, and it probably yielded performance gains in the end. no telling how the engine will hold up to those speeds but with that much money im sure it could take a flogging.

tool, imagine if you could tune THAT puppy up.

maybe 1602 whp at 9800? lol

87_944s

I hear you man. Mine wasn't t-boned... someone backed out in front of me, but it is just about back from the dead... http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/inde...albumId=625394..... if anyone is interested. Started it up today finally after a year of body work and rebuilding the engine. It was one of those "while your in there" type deals haha

I love my S, I also owned an S2. No doubt the S2 pulls harder. The S2 though felt different compared to my S. The S2 was kinda heavy/floaty feeling. I have factory koni sport suspension on my S. Its all in what you want in the long run I guess you can always say that the S is better than the regular 44, or the 968 better than the S2....eventually you will wind up in a Carerra GT. As stated before when you get down to it its still a Porsche and its an awesome car.

Eon S.

rmconner80

The NA is fast enough to get you in plenty of trouble, and with some suspension upgrades to really do very competitive driving on a track if you have the skills to exploit the car. The same applies for the S but it's perhaps a bit quicker, perhaps a bit torque-y-er. Enjoy them for what they are - very well balanced, visceral feeling cars.

Just remember, the other alternative in this price range is a 90hp 914

harrisonrick

My 83 8 valve was a good car...peppy. my 88 16 valve S is far better...I love the way it comes alive up thru the revs. I've added a hi performance cat and K & N air filter, along with a slight airbox mod and it seems peppier even still. I'll likely add Russell's chip this year and a 2.5 exhaust from the cat back.

She was 188 HP from factory...now...? maybe 208?

Good bang for the buck, definitely better than an 8 valve NA.

I don't think the S is really any heavier by any real amount...my 83 had all the same options...as do most I suspect.

V2Rocket

id be surprised if your S had 208, that would put it exactly on par with the 3.0L.

jstand22

Even if his S did have 208hp at the crack (which is easily possible) the S does not have anywhere near the same torque the S2 makes, and it never will.
Torque is a weak spot in the S... the S2 has almost 40ft-lbs more stock than the S. (170 ft-lbs in the S and 207 i think for the S2) Even with his upgrades I would impressed if he gained 8lb-ft... Still leaving it about 30ft-lbs away from the S2...a HUGE difference.....man I wish I had an S2

sbyrne

From my vintage C&D collection - January, 1987 - according to the factory, '83 944: 143hp, 2778 lbs, 130 top speed - '87 944S: 188hp, 2866 lbs, 142 top speed, 0-60 6/10's quicker (no times for either car). I started keeping every January issue (the 10 Best issue) that year as a future point of reference, and had just pulled it for the first time in years a few weeks ago and found that 4 page ad. Very cool!

gtroth

I absolutely love it. Sure you have to rev it, but you get to rev it! A feast for the senses.

Plus, if you want to see what a regular NA feels like, you can always turn on the AC.

whalebird

I would go with a S2 anyday. The S is not that much over a 8v car - The S2 feels like a turbo w/out the turbo spike. A 924s is a bit more than a 944 8v in performance and comperable to a weighty S. Depending on your taste, a spartan 924s is a great buy in performance and wallet. An S2 is where it all comes together.

Jaay87S

Interesting topic...about a month and a half ago I sold my '87 S to for exactly 2/3 the cost of the '91 S2 I bought about one week later. Let me just say it was a great week. I loved my S, but the numbers just don't do justice to how much faster the S2 feels thanks to the torque being right there throughout the entire powerband.

931GT

Here is a compiled list of performance tests of 924/944/968s

http://www.weissach.net/924-944-968_...stSummary.html

Todd157k

According to those charts, my g-tech runs were EXACT. LOL.

People laugh at that thing on every board I'm on, but ya just can't laugh at the results.

ya otta hear the Dodge guys... omg! talk about whiners.

oh, BTW, I ran the g-tech in the Lexus... the times were right in the middle of the 944S. The truck was a tad faster, clicking off high 14s.
Just fyi.

Catfood

dude I totally agree with you and the G-Tech comment I got my dad one for his birthday and it is dead accurate. THough I cant agree with the 0-60 sometimes it does give extremely accurate quarter mile times. What did you get for your 944S in the quarter?

Catfood

The difference in time on the C&D and ROW and other magazines is ridiculous, sometimes I wonder if there drivin the damn things at half throttle or what. I typically add a couple tenths of a second to every time they post. But then again some of the results between magazines is like a second difference.