When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
For a 2.5 family guy you're quite into the 924.
Very nice car indeed, for serious collectors only though.
Everything was designed so well, but on a tight budget !
Once Porsche could get all the Audi & VW Engine out & change and upgrade many other parts as we know it this car evolved over nearly 20 years....
If the 44 and 68 had never been made & Evolved the 924 would of been known as a classic car first produced in 1976 and it's reputation and desirability
would be nothing without the 44 & 68's.
So yeah I'm into the design, shape, and engineering but I don't lust or desire to own or try an Audi 2.0 Engined car, or even the 924 turbo I think the engine and gearbox would annoy me now I've been spoilt with my Evolution car.
Surely the later cars are much more refined and more efficient from most points of view.
But I don't agree with the 924 reputation being nothing without the 944 and 968...if anything, the 944 and 968 make the 924 reputation worse because most people will prefer more power and a wider body even though this comes to the expense of more complicated maintenance, more expensive parts and many other aspects...so most people deny the 924 simply because there is a close into the price range brother of the 924 that's more powerful and looks more aggressive/muscular.
As an example the 914 is doing just fine without any evolutions...
Surely the later cars are much more refined and more efficient from most points of view.
But I don't agree with the 924 reputation being nothing without the 944 and 968...if anything, the 944 and 968 make the 924 reputation worse because most people will prefer more power and a wider body even though this comes to the expense of more complicated maintenance, more expensive parts and many other aspects...so most people deny the 924 simply because there is a close into the price range brother of the 924 that's more powerful and looks more aggressive/muscular.
As an example the 914 is doing just fine without any evolutions...
I wouldn't describe the later cars as more refined, higher spring rates and more weight as they were loaded with extra features and this if anything is ok but not as good to drive as the original 924 wheelbase & Track but with the 2.5 Engine. (924S) this is why having owned (5) 944's and (1) 924S and (1) 968 I choose the best car (weight / Width / Engine / Handling) to be modified.
The 924 would be nothing without the success of the 944 & 968, both of which have always had a good reputation and I'd say only over the last 5 years has the 924 now begun to be recognised as the start of the 944 & 968 an it's this and it's age that's helped push up values.
The 944 or 968 are NOT complicated cars to run at all, there's so many parts available new now with the internet and replica parts, if anything compared to modern machinery they are very simple to fix and service.
The 914 was another VW / Porsche joint venture but they didnlt sell that many and it didn't get evolved much at all, so it's a much rarer car which is why the values have gone up like all classics.
That CGT or even a standard turbo 2.0 with no IC will stomp the 2.5..
The standard 2.0 turbos can be taken to the power level of the 951 turbo S with just the addition of a good intercooler..
Put in 924 2.0 NA pistons, good HG and studs, upgrade turbo, and standalone EFI, is proven to 450HP..
These builds have mostly blown from trying to rev past 7k..
But it would be nothing without the 944 that it completely dominates?
VS
Looks like much added complexity in the hope of achieving increased refinement..
I have to disagree with you, compared to the 924, any 944 and certainly any 968 is much more refined. Starting with the balanced engine, to the engine mounts, gearbox mounts, more and better sound proofing, better wind noise management and so on.
The 924 was a success, you just cant see it, they sold like fresh bread.
They made approx. 120.000 924s and they all sold.
The 2.0L NA received and still does receive critique about its humble power, which to be fair, in US trim is slow(in ROW form 125hp on a light car is not too slow though)...but the 1978 911s did not have much more power anyway so even if the engine was capable of ~140hp if they didn't detune it they still pulled the power down because it cant get anywhere close to the 911 since the 911 was much more expensive.
The 944s and 968 are MUCH more complicated to maintain compared to the 924(see pictures from Eddie above). Also MUCH more expensive. To do a proper front end service on a 924 you need ~10% of the money you'd spend on doing the same job on a 944 or 968 if you went to a professional shop. If you do it in the back yard its cheaper but still a lot more expensive than the 924 and more complicated.
They produced approx. 118.000 914s and they produced approx. 120.000 924s. The only reason why TODAY the 914 is a rare car is because they rusted away. But, don't forget the 924 turbo with 12k cars made in total, 3k in 5k for the US, 1k for japan and the rest in Europe and other countries.
Bottom line is that the 924 was a Porsche project designed for VW, using VW parts for cost effectiveness. At the end Porsche revised the 924 and the result is a fun, reliable, great looking but elegant sports car.
It was a success and now its getting appreciation because the narrow minded people have either passed away or opened their eyes to what is a very well balanced car, I'm not talking about the weight here, I'm talking about how much money you put in it for the fun you get out of it.
Don't get me started on the 924 turbo...for me that's the supreme street 924...just like for me the 944S2 is the supreme street 944.
Originally Posted by 924srr27l
I wouldn't describe the later cars as more refined, higher spring rates and more weight as they were loaded with extra features and this if anything is ok but not as good to drive as the original 924 wheelbase & Track but with the 2.5 Engine. (924S) this is why having owned (5) 944's and (1) 924S and (1) 968 I choose the best car (weight / Width / Engine / Handling) to be modified.
The 924 would be nothing without the success of the 944 & 968, both of which have always had a good reputation and I'd say only over the last 5 years has the 924 now begun to be recognised as the start of the 944 & 968 an it's this and it's age that's helped push up values.
The 944 or 968 are NOT complicated cars to run at all, there's so many parts available new now with the internet and replica parts, if anything compared to modern machinery they are very simple to fix and service.
The 914 was another VW / Porsche joint venture but they didnlt sell that many and it didn't get evolved much at all, so it's a much rarer car which is why the values have gone up like all classics.
That CGT or even a standard turbo 2.0 with no IC will stomp the 2.5..
The standard 2.0 turbos can be taken to the power level of the 951 turbo S with just the addition of a good intercooler..
Put in 924 2.0 NA pistons, good HG and studs, upgrade turbo, and standalone EFI, is proven to 450HP..
These builds have mostly blown from trying to rev past 7k..
But it would be nothing without the 944 that it completely dominates?
Stomping ? without opening a 924T v 944 2.5 n/a comparison which is better etc..
Many Tests and articles have been done and recorded where there was nothing much in the two cars, and if anything the N/A motor was seen as the better Road car. Which only follows the same comparison as the 951 v 944 3.0 S2 where the N/A again is seen as the better Road car but each lover of both cars will no doubt declare the same that one car will stomp the other !
There's no point either in going down to route of how a Modified 2.0 is as good as, or better, or whatever as a 2.5 turbo engine...
My 2.7 N/A is faster than all of the Production cars (924 / 944 & 968 all models inc Turbo's but Excluding the 968 turbo & S) but it's been extensively modified so it's hardly a fair comparison, but it was something i wanted to try and do and see how it pans out, rather than buy a 951 and keep it stock or even modify it to 450+bhp which of course would be far faster than my 2.7 N/A but then there can be a limit of high BHP cars on what's achievable fun on public streets. So i do believe there's a set point where an equal measure of weight and power and suspension & brake mods make for a great Street drivable street car that does a 10 minute dash and a 4 hour journey both very well.
The 924 Dominates the 944 ? Really not in the UK.
Yes on reflection I see what you mean with it's simple cambelt layout and the IRON block which is not as vulnerable as the all aluminum Alusil Porsche blocks
I have to disagree with you, compared to the 924, any 944 and certainly any 968 is much more refined. Starting with the balanced engine, to the engine mounts, gearbox mounts, more and better sound proofing, better wind noise management and so on.
The 924 was a success, you just cant see it, they sold like fresh bread.
They made approx. 120.000 924s and they all sold.
The 2.0L NA received and still does receive critique about its humble power, which to be fair, in US trim is slow(in ROW form 125hp on a light car is not too slow though)...but the 1978 911s did not have much more power anyway so even if the engine was capable of ~140hp if they didn't detune it they still pulled the power down because it cant get anywhere close to the 911 since the 911 was much more expensive.
The 944s and 968 are MUCH more complicated to maintain compared to the 924(see pictures from Eddie above). Also MUCH more expensive. To do a proper front end service on a 924 you need ~10% of the money you'd spend on doing the same job on a 944 or 968 if you went to a professional shop. If you do it in the back yard its cheaper but still a lot more expensive than the 924 and more complicated.
They produced approx. 118.000 914s and they produced approx. 120.000 924s. The only reason why TODAY the 914 is a rare car is because they rusted away. But, don't forget the 924 turbo with 12k cars made in total, 3k in 5k for the US, 1k for japan and the rest in Europe and other countries.
Bottom line is that the 924 was a Porsche project designed for VW, using VW parts for cost effectiveness. At the end Porsche revised the 924 and the result is a fun, reliable, great looking but elegant sports car.
It was a success and now its getting appreciation because the narrow minded people have either passed away or opened their eyes to what is a very well balanced car, I'm not talking about the weight here, I'm talking about how much money you put in it for the fun you get out of it.
Don't get me started on the 924 turbo...for me that's the supreme street 924...just like for me the 944S2 is the supreme street 944.
Sure Porsche luckily sold loads of 924's from 1976 and it saved their (Financial) bacon, of course without it the 44 and 68 would never of existed.
Yes I can see what your refined definition is, more like comfort where as mine is more drivable and better feel.
The 924 2.0 n/a & turbo is very agricultural compared to a 944 but the 924S is best of both worlds and fitting a Short Stroke S2 3.0 Engine as my build even better with many 944 & 968 parts has created a good n/a with plenty of Fun street driving.
Yes I agree now, the average owner would and does get a bigger bill for servicing , it's just I do all my own and / or have so many contacts in the motorsport and automotive industry I never see such large bills or issues.
The 924 will always be the "Runt" of the litter , it will always have some degree of abuse from the "Van engine" and "Poor mans Porsche" etc.. and to fair it was the base model made up with so many budget parts, so every model after as we know was extensively chopped and changed and got better, faster and more refined!
I never like the 924 shape compared to the fat arched 944 when I was in my twenties, I owned (4) 944's before I picked up a rough 924S and only then did I think this is nimble and pulls like a train and feels faster than a 2.5 944 !
I then owned another 944 and another 924S the current car which was in such good condition i've never had any bodywork done to it for rust etc.. and it's 30 years old this year.
So this for me was the one to modify. Mostly because now in my Fourties I like the fact it's the skinny original 924 shape, to the point where my ethos of the project was to make the "Poor mans Porsche" and what some people think is the car with the "LT Van" engine as exactly that if that's what they think but underneath it will be extensively lightened and modified More power through weight loss and more power with a 2.7. A Sleeper
A recent 997 3.8 C4S owner tested my car and was to quite shocked and surprised how it drives to how he thought, and how it looks and also how much closer it compared to the performance of his 4WD flat 6 3.8L 911
See? We are on the same page.
I go one further though, I love the van / agricultural engine for its simplicity and raw nature, I also love the level of abuse it can take and like you I enjoy it when even though its a Porsche on a budget it still performs sufficiently enough to put a smile on my face and to actually be in the same ballpark of more expensive or newer sports cars.
If you're into winning and racing then its another story, but driving fast on the country/mountain twisty roads is a thing the 924 does well in all its forms.
To be honest I cant wait to get my hands on a 2L NA again.
I want an iron lump for daily abuse.
See? We are on the same page.
I go one further though, I love the van / agricultural engine for its simplicity and raw nature, I also love the level of abuse it can take and like you I enjoy it when even though its a Porsche on a budget it still performs sufficiently enough to put a smile on my face and to actually be in the same ballpark of more expensive or newer sports cars.
If you're into winning and racing then its another story, but driving fast on the country/mountain twisty roads is a thing the 924 does well in all its forms.
To be honest I cant wait to get my hands on a 2L NA again.
I want an iron lump for daily abuse.
Maybe we are, probably also why I preferred a tuned N/A and not the complexity of setting up a Turbo engine, especially having seen on here and the UK forums so much hassle trying to get them working in all conditions and rpm ranges etc..
I'm sure there are some modified car's that work well but also the way they drive having owned petrol and Diesel turbo car's is a different style which I prefer the way an N/A does this.
I also like my 2.0 16v Focus because it gets abused Daily and is comfortable and easy to drive, but also handles good for a hatch.
Getting out of the 924 though and into the Ford is a Huge dramatic difference which really highlights how good the porsche is, for example when I bury the throttle pedal to the carpet @ 80mph in 5th gear nothing happens for 2 seconds! And even when it does "pick up" then it seems to gain speed @ 2mph more per second !
^^but Porsche sells the BEST all-around SUV there is...
Cayenne stops, goes, steers well, nice interior, comfortable, HUGE towing capacity for a unibody car, adjustable height suspension for offroading, competent 4wd system for tricky terrain...they really think things through!
...except when designing a transaxle clutch location
^^but Porsche sells the BEST all-around SUV there is...
Cayenne stops, goes, steers well, nice interior, comfortable, HUGE towing capacity for a unibody car, adjustable height suspension for offroading, competent 4wd system for tricky terrain...they really think things through!
...except when designing a transaxle clutch location
Yes, I think they really wanted to show the Japs and it's rival BMW X series how it's done !
01-31-2017, 02:52 PM
924 Carrera GT Pre-Prototype For Sale (1979)
