CO951

I have an '89 951 the I drive on the track 1 to 3 times a year and maybe 2k miles a year on the street and the maintenance is killing me. I love the car, but I may need to sell it. I not ready to give up doing DEs in a Porsche. How much more reliable is an NA than a trubo?

MM951

In my case my 84 944 NA was infinitely more reliable and cheaper to run the my current 951. Unlike my 951, once I replaced the head\front end it started every time without fail and never left me stranded in about 60k miles.

What problems have you been having with your car? A 951 should be at least almost as reliable as a NA.. but sometimes they are not

Jfrahm

My rule of thumb is that a stock turbo car is about 2x the maintenance of a stock NA car. More heat, more abuse and a lot more stuff to replace. Hoses, oil lines, the turbo itself... then a modded turbo makes all that a bit worse, or a lot worse. And doing the maintenance/repairs is a lot more of a pain in the turbo cars.

In the case of a 951 vs NA, a track driven NA might need a trans but tires and brakes are probably going to last a lot longer. Both would need rod bearings. A Miata might be a better track toy on a budget, or maybe an E30? I'd probably go for an S2 or 968 myself. I like turbos but the maintenance on an S2 is a lot easier but you still get good power and the 951 chassis, plus a stout transmission.

-Joel.

Tom R.

Great, the day after i buy a 89 951 from 1800 miles away someone in the same zip code says he may sell his 89 951.

Before you do, try my S2. I felt power was adequate for my skill level at sea level. It just doesnt have the grunt up here.

Darwantae951

I like my modded 951 and maintenance doesn't kill me. I replace the oil at regular intervals and replace what need to be replaced when things start to leak, make noises, etc... Everyone says how these cars will break the bank but I have yet to experience it. :knocks on wood:

CO951

My problem is that I can do the easy stuff myself, but I end up paying for everything else. I would love to learn to do some of the bigger stuff myself, but so far my pleas for help have gone unanswered. I was told I need a new water pump and I just can't afford to pay for stuff like that anymore, especially considering how frequently I seem to have some problem.

Jay W

I like the n/a because it has less parts to get in the way when I am working on it. My cars seem to hold together pretty well. But that also may be because I do not drive them very hard either. I am in it for the gas mileage.

V2Rocket

i would think that a turbo when just cruising would get similar mileage numbers...maybe a little lower because of lower compression..

931guru

An NA is twice as reliable as a turbo, and it costs half as much to fix an NA as a turbo.

To extrapolate, a turbo costs four times as much to maintain as an NA.

ilikemy944

Are you running chips in your car?

Tom R.

Im going to need belts in the 951 as soon as it rolls (note i said rolls, not drives) off the transporter.

Perhaps a wrenching party is in order. Im in centennial.

ilikemy944

I will say, that after being scared poop-less on doing the belts and water pump, I finally tried myself.
I've done lots of other, lots, but I never did the belts.

In less than 4 hours, I had the 951's belts and water pump replaced and all was well.

Good luck

dillon410021

I don't think the maintenance is too bad
just depends on the condition of the 951 and how good the PO took care of it!!!

CO951

Yes, I do have Welt chips in it, but I don't think that has anything to do with my problems. They barely increase the boost, because they still use the KLR and cycling valve to control boost.
The problems have been more age and heat related. In the last 2 years I have spent several thousand diagnosing and fixing a bad DME, a wire with cracked insulation in the fuel injector harness that caused it to run very rich at high RPM, I need to replace at least on lifter, and now several coolant leaks including the water pump.

Rock

Except for the damn tranny, the N/a has the turbo on reliability.