Tom R.

924S for autocross yes. For track - depends. It is a momentum car, it is a ton of fun on the track. It is also half the HP of a base 1999 911 which is now a sub $20,000 used car and the power goes up from there. Prepare to mind your mirrors, and give the pass often.

ddombrowski

If you want to run a low powered car like a 924S or the 944 on the track, you'll have to be in the advanced group with all of the Miatas, 944s, and E30s 325is. I don't have nearly enough horsepower to be in the novice group.

neunfünfeins

I guess you were trying to be funny, but I'm not sure what your basis is for that remark.
Some of us have had (and still have) Sciroccos, and like them.

What they have going for them is light weight (as does a 924) and that makes them fun to toss around.
Sometimes it's more fun to drive a slow car fast, if you know what I mean.

951Dreams

no, I love the Scirocco. It was more a comment about how the early 924s was mostly VW and Audi than Porsche.

No Lag

I had a 924 turbo. Fun car, but had some issues and a little under powered. Has a 77 scirocco and that thing I couldn't kill. Beat it and it would'nt die. Light weight and loads of fun.

neunfünfeins

Glad to hear. Peace.
Given that even your 951 and mine still have a few Scirocco parts in them.

I don't consider that to be a bad thing. VW, Audi, and Porsche have all benefited greatly from their coexistence and partnering through the years - as have we end users.

Never understood the derision aimed at VW/Audi by Porsche 'elitists' throughout time (e.g., re: the 914 and 924); it's somewhat ludicrous given historical facts.
Reminds me of the expression, "don't crap where you eat."

951Dreams

I think the Porsche vs VW/Audi thing comes down to the difference between "generic off the shelf" stuff and in house "hand built" custom designed for the platform stuff.

I looked at some 924's when I was looking for my first 944, even looked at a 931 (924 turbo) and to be honest, I wasn't really impressed. It seemed under powered, and under engineered. Nothing against the Audi engine or VW suspension, but it wasn't like they were shooting for the stars here. I can honestly say the difference between the 924's I drove and my 87 944 is the same as the difference between my 87 and my 951. They are just the next level!

Without going into the story, I got to drive several tricked out Scirocco's back in the mid 90's. And to be honest, performance wise I'd put them on par with the 924 easy, and above it for the 16v versions. Handling was close enough to say they were pretty even. The 1.8l v16 even put it close to the 944. But with the same prep, I'm going to have to say the 944 was a much better car all around. And once Porsche got around to the S, it was all over.

Until Porsche and VW went their separate ways over the 924, Porsche had BEEN VWs sport R&D department. The 924 was the leftovers of a joint venture gone South. And it was too late for Porsche to reinvent the wheel at that point. Good thing too​, as likely the 924 saved Porsche. And VW came up with the Scirocco. The "cool" version of the Golf.

But back on track, purist will always be purist. There is nothing wrong in my opinion in using VW, or Audi parts... If they are better! But often they were used for cost savings reasons and not engineering reasons. I feel Porsche did a better job when they designed the whole thing themselves over trying to make already existing parts work.

I think that applies to everyone. Not just Porsche. But you have to admit, Porsche knows a thing or two about racing. It's kinda funny to me how the purist have almost killed Porsche several times! I've read recently how several execs at Porsche refused to even sit in a front engine car! But it's exactly that car that kept their asses in a job!!!

morghen

way off topic here but hey..

Its strange how some people hate on the 924 but love the scirocco.
Its even stranger to say that the 924 looks underengineered but the scirocco does not...I have never seen a vw with appropriate brakes by the way...but even the 924 has very good brakes for its power.
Its extremely strange to say that an unbalanced front wheel driven car handles as good as a 50:50 weight distributed transaxle.
I love sciroccos and I love vws but even though it uses some vw/audi? parts the 924 is a superior car in every way...just like the 944 is superior to the 924 by using a more powerful engine and better insulation for the later cars.

What i'm saying is that you guys don't know your **** and you're talking out of your asses.
You're as usual being snobs having the key of a 924 with a 2.5L half engine of the 928...you see...the 944 is also a cheap economically strategic project just like the 924....but you're too blind to see and admit that...keep talking down the 924 and feel rich about the 944 when actually the 944 was just the same car with a different engine.
Porsche went from using an existing turbo diesel engine block to cutting one of their own blocks in half. So the 924 may have earth mover and truck parts in it but its not half assed

Oh and if the 924 turbo felt underpowered to you but the 944 did not, there is clearly something wrong with your perception as the 944 NA engine had 50Nm less torque and about the same power as the first generation US model 2L 924 turbos.

That being said, my opinion is that for an autocross car it does not matter too much which is your start car as you will anyway buy new tires, bushings, springs, sway bars and brakes for it and modify it to your needs.
The only difference is that the 2L has considerably less power, but more improvement potential than the 2.5LNA since you're in the USA and you could bump up the 2L to ROW spec...you'd still be under the 944 power but you would pay a lot less for the car, for the pads, disks, timing belts and filters.

neunfünfeins

I think you need to clarify who your comments are directed to, because I certainly don't fit into this generalization of "you guys". I have never 'hated on' or 'talked down' the 924; if anything, I only defended it. No snob here!

Secondly, you can make whatever points you want to make without hurling insults at anyone. All that does is make you look like an arrogant little sh!&.

I don't think anyone actually said that either. I wouldn't, myself.
Scirocco F/R weight distro is as bad as 62/38 (even worse with A/C)... on paper, cannot compare with near 50/50 and high polar moment of 924/944.
Weight distribution isn't the whole story however, and in spite of this disadvantage, Sciroccos can be made to handle damn fine with some suspension upgrades.

This we have in common, so I'm going to just stop there.

morghen

I am arrogant indeed, by no means little
I got frustration to get the best of me lets say but I don't care to personally insult anyone..i only care about facts...I do care about these cars and i'm not happy to know that people have false impressions and false information dictating their car choices.
Just like that fatty on YT said that the 944 turbo is just like a miata that triggered me lol

333pg333

Where you say it's funny how people look down on the 924 but not the Scirocco, I guess it's due the badge panel perceptions. The 924 being a released as a Porsche was always going to suffer scorn and derision. In reality all of the front engine Porsches still do to varying degrees. I've always said that the 951 would be looked at with much more respect had it been released as an Audi. People still revere the old Quattro's and a 951 would probably eat them on the track. Simply, the 924 being the lowest rung on the front engine Porsche Totem pole gets the least respect of any Porsche. Had it been released as a VW people would have only fond memories I'd bet.

951Dreams

I don't think anyone is "trash talking" the 924. I know I wasn't. I'd take one over many other cars. But I can't help the impression I got from the two NA's I drove and the one 931 I drove. My impression of these pre 80's 924s was of a under powered and under engineered machine. To be fair, all 3 were stock and tired old examples.

The two VW's I was using for comparison were tricked out auto-x machines. So not exactly apples and apples. I'm sure a equally tricked out 924 would have been a better handling machine. Just wasn't my experience.

Now that I think about it, I don't think the 924's I drove even had sways. The brakes WERE better than many of the other 70's cars I'd driven, but I guess I've driven too many auto-x cars to be a good judge, stock almost always seems weak to me. But I'd bet the ones I drove were on original lines, old fluid, and cheap pads/rotors. I've driven few cars with brakes as good as my two 944's. Porsche seems to have always done well with brakes. I'm sure a good 924 example is just the same.

Maybe it has to do with how they've been taken care of? I'd like to drive a well taken care of 924 to see. The ones I found were all ratted out. I'd really like to see what one with sways, good shocks, and tires was like!

morghen

Very good point, it would have been the best ever sports VW if they would have sold it as a VW but as we all know VW backed out due to financial risks were too high and the EA 425 project was just too much for a VW, too big engine too expensive...so Porsche revised it and made it into the 924. In 1980 the 924 that came out of the production line was much improved over the original 76 launch so unless you're a collector I always invite people to buy post 1980 924s as they feel more solid due to a couple of suspension improvements (that the 944 got from the start)



Bingo !
Unfortunately the 924 is a good car that was cheap enough to get in the hands of people who could not or did not know how to care about them and by now many of them are trash.
Its a matter of how much money you paid for the car..thats how much care you're going to take about it.

I had a friend visit from Canada and I drove him around in my euro 931.
Its a factory spec 931 except some lowering springs, it just has fresh bushings, well maintained engine and generally not an abused car so no rattling or missing trim.
I can tell you that he was surprised to learn of how a 924 should be like function wise.

When i'm saying you don't know your **** I mean most of you never have driven a proper 924, most of you have driven just one abused and m aybe "restored" 924 like the 924 Noah had. The PO did a lot of "restorations" on the car that drove Noah to selling the 924 since he would fix one thing and another would break. There's the root cause of people saying the 924 was under engineered..they have been abused and then patched cheaply by onwers.
I own my first 924 since 2003, my second one since 2007 and my third one since 2014.
The first one took me on countless long distance trips, the second one I bought off ebay in the other side of the continent and drove it back home.
And the third one I put new consumables in it and drove it 3000 miles in a week last year.

I just don't have the time and the money to throw yet but I do plan to get a 2L NA as I only have turbos now...but I want to take a 2L NA, refresh the bushings and upgrade the suspension with springs and sway bars, lower it a bit on some OZ wheels, get some really good tires on it, slap a hot cam, machine for lighter internals and have a go in it on track.

Noahs944

Okay, it's settled then. 924 with rear drum brakes & one of these:


Get er done!

Autocross is very competitive. So, maybe flames painted on the sides will also be needed.

Noahs944

In all seriousness, you are asking about the slowest Porsche (next to the 912 and older cars) being used in competition. Why not buy the fastest you can afford?

For what it's worth, I spent just a glimpse of time in the 924 world. What I noticed right away was the 924 n/a community compares there cars to the 944 n/a or the 924 turbo, like the 944 owner compares his car to the 16 v cars and the 16 v cars compared to the 944 turbo. (951 owners compare to the turbo S) and so on.

This said to me, the community in general has higher regard for the 944.
Personally I think 951 Dreams nailed the description very well. I personally couldn't believe the lack of quality in some areas. I would add there is a middle ground between the 924 and the late 944, and it's the early 944. It's very similar to the 924 S which shares similarities with the 924. The late 944 is better then early cars, and is the base for the 951 and S2. These cars got better with age simple & plain. Porsche improved on areas that where substandard with aging VW technology that was no longer competitive with the Japanese cars.

The 951/S2 chassis brought the car to a new level. And then the 968 improved upon that chassis... it's all in the Porsche history books.

I know some of my friends are going to hate me for these comments. Sorry, I generally keep these thoughts to myself because I don't want to offend.

In memory of "Gramps" here are pictures.