9x8

Except it's more powerful (I think it's up to 40 more hp) - therefore somewhat faster than plain turbo.
That's what I meant - Carrera GT is way more likely to be the fastest production Porsche of that period.

Although now I'm pretty sure that it could only be Carrera GTS, not even the GT.

mj1pate

914s have always been liked by enough people. And they're simple to work on. The high-on-the-pecking-order 911 community has welcomed the 914 back into the family, after feeling collective guilt over unsocial treatment for decades. The same effect may win some sympathy for 924s as well. The 928 is the reviled, dethroned pretender. It may take a while before bad blood between the 911 community and the 928 is diluted.

linderpat

Take a look at the rec ent prices for 914's. Especially the 914-6. They are really appreciating in value.

mj1pate

Product of reminiscence I think. Middle age folk (a lot of us around) remember these as part of right of passage after graduating college. The sight of a young, rising star yuppie in his/her 914 was common. 928 owners were generally older and well into their careers, when these cars were both available new. 928 ownership was out of sight for me back in the 80's, but 914 ownership was something I could see happening. These days, I just hate rust....a personal thing.

cobalt

You have to be the first person who i have ever heard call the 924 engine bulletproof. This was the audi I4 engine originally used in the 100LS model and some AMC cars like the gremlin and pacer. The engine had to be known as the worlds most unreliable engine. They were always having issues and Porsche mechanics hated them. I owned a few 100LS's and never would they run right. I guess you were one of the lucky ones but part of the reason for dropping the 924 was because Porsche had such issues with the engine and decided to go with a Porsche designed engine in the 944 to eliminate mechanical issues.


The 924 started with 90 hp and worked its way up to 110 hp. The 924 GT cannot even be considered the same car as the 924. It was light weight with advanced suspension and engine, roll cage. They started in at 210hp the GTS at 280 and the racing versions GTR 375 and GTP 420. The GTR and GTP were very fast and I believe Derek Bell still owns one.

As a production car the GT was rare and is still highly desirable, they were not even close to being as fast as a 930 turbo at the time. I used to have a friend that had one back in the 80's and I tracked my 74 rs clone against his 924GT at the Glen. It was a close battle but normally I had the car on acceleration but he had some handling advantage. The turbos were by far faster on the track than both of us.

The 924 GT/GTS would be a car to have. I know of someone who purchased a pristine 5500 mile 924 for $3500 a few years back and proceeded to turn it into a track rat. The car is destroyed from all the modifications.

The same thing is happening with the 924 as what happened to the 914's. So many were trashed rotted out or destroyed that now there are only a few clean examples left. So when a clean example comes along it can command a premium. My 914 was sold a few years back for over $15k and it was just a 2.0l The 6's command much more. I am sure a clean 931 could bring upwards of $5k considering there are so few around.

As with any of these cars eventually the right ones will command bigger dollars than the average.

curt_928

[QUOTE=cobalt;7608922]You have to be the first person who i have ever heard call the 924 engine bulletproof. This was the audi I4 engine originally used in the 100LS model and some AMC cars like the gremlin and pacer. The engine had to be known as the worlds most unreliable engine. They were always having issues and Porsche mechanics hated them. I owned a few 100LS's and never would they run right. I guess you were one of the lucky ones but part of the reason for dropping the 924 was because Porsche had such issues with the engine and decided to go with a Porsche designed engine in the 944 to eliminate mechanical issues.

It must have been an anomaly. My life is filled with anomalies. Replaced head gasket and 12 years later no problems, no issues. Granted the car wouldn't go above 75 without revving "uncomfortably" (didn't like running at more than 3500 RPM). Otherwise really worked well. Battery tray rusted out and water dripped on the feet of women I took on dates. That was a tad of turnoff though..

taffelman

I paid $6200 for my 924. Low mileage 1982 with extensive history documentation. It's a users car in very good condition but not a show winner.

Cars are a bit more expensive over here, but you can get running 924's from around $3000 and project cars from $1500. 928 OB's are rarely obtainable below $10000 - $12000 and S4/GT/GTS from $25K to $50K+

Owning a 924 or 928 is not about what it's worth in cash, it's about what it's worth to you.

The ROW 924 NA have 125 HP, and Porsche gave it CIS, aluminum head, new intake and a new sump compared to the Audi 100 engine that had carburetor and 15 HP less. As for reliability the engine is solid as the bank, most running problems are related to fuel injection and electrical issues (grounds) just as on the 928.

At 2380 lb it's a lot lighter and much more "nimble" than the 928 and handles great on twisty roads. J. Pasha of Excellence magazine called it "the best handling Porsche in stock form"

931GT

I've been lurking for awhile while considering buying a 928 and stumbled on this thread. Its mostly civilized at least.

As far as the 924 2.0 goes its considered a VERY reliable engine. Not sure about the other configurations on the same block (Audi 100, Gremlin, VW LT van) but the only problems this engine tends to have in the Porsche config are related to CIS system.

With the turbo there were heat related problems with the early versions but these were ironed out in the S2. Also the US spec turbos were detuned slightly by running less boost, 7psi US vs 10psi in the euro. However US spec 931s can reliably handle the 10psi and will turn 170-180hp with only an addition of a boost controller and boost gauge. In a 2600lb car that will get you to 60 in just under 7 seconds. Damn good performance for a car from 1981.

The 924 Carrera GT shares almost all its parts with the 931, the only significant difference being the intercooler, so I wouldn't say it should be considered a completely different car.

As far as the fastest production car at the time goes. If you considered the 924 GTS CS a production car then with 275hp and only 2400lbs to move around I guess it could be called the fastest.

And yes there are a great number of folks who love these POS. The turbo in particular has a very loyal following, when properly tuned and maintained they are a very satisfying ride with easy upgrade paths as far as adding power goes.

taffelman

Over at the 924board a few guys have successfully added Turbo's to NA cars with stock internals by making a "crossover" pipe from the stock manifold outlet to mount the turbo on the "cold side" of the engine bay. These put out around 200 - 220 HP with EFI tuning. The engine could probably handle more power, but above 200 HP you have reached the limit of the stock drive-train.

cobalt

It must have been an anomaly. My life is filled with anomalies. Replaced head gasket and 12 years later no problems, no issues. Granted the car wouldn't go above 75 without revving "uncomfortably" (didn't like running at more than 3500 RPM). Otherwise really worked well. Battery tray rusted out and water dripped on the feet of women I took on dates. That was a tad of turnoff though..[/QUOTE]

Yep that sounds about right. I recall similar experiences with the 100LS's

Lizard928

While some of your information that you posted here is correct, some is incorrect.

The 924 did start with a 90 bhp motor, and end up going up to 110 bhp (slightly more for ROW market).

The 924 turbo had 170 US, 190 ROW.
The 924 Carrera GT had 210.

the Carrera GT was a regular road car with flairs on the back, 944 front fenders, and a single piece front bumper cover like the 928s. It also has a hood scoop to direct air into the air/air intercooler which sat a top of the engine (ala RX7 Turbo). It was also fitted with the very strong G31 gearbox.

The Carrera GTS was a much more radical car and from all reports yes Derek bell still has his. This one did get a full roll cage, along with a special 4 speed gearbox. It was said to have around 300 BHP.

The Carrera GTR received 375 bhp, and was a track only car. It used 1 928 fuel distributor with dual fuel injectors per cylinder to supply its fueling needs. It also had a MASSIVE air/air intercooler which sat in the front of the engine bay. Iirc it was between 6-8" thick!

The Carrera GTP did not use the original 2.0L audi van based engine. Instead it used a pre-production 944 engine. And again it was a complete race car that never saw the street.

But to classify all those under just the GT badge is like saying 928 GT encompasses the GTS as well. They were all vastly different models.

The 924 engine itself is very reliable. It takes a great deal to be able to kill one.
However they did have a number of electrical faults which would cause them to stop running, or starting. If you buy one, one of the first things to do is to purchase a new fuse panel for it. The other problem is that as has already been posted is that many of them have been seriously neglected, this turns the CIS system into garbage, and people cannot get them running properly at all RPMs due to incorrect fueling.
The 924 from 1977.5 right into the Carrera GT all used the same camshaft with 222 duration @ .050" and .475" lift. They were nearly a knife edge, with low duration. If you ever needed to have the cam reworked it would fail because it would make this peak even sharper. The best thing to do is to pull a little lift, and increase the duration to add durability, and power to the top end.
Also keep in mind that all turbocharged 924s received a different head which was FAR superior to the NA head. Though they both really are a pile of crap in terms of what could have been done.
There is also proof that they detuned the 924 to prevent it from being faster than the covented 911 of the time.

odurandina

the 924's/944s were never built very well... the design was good, but they still left a lot on the table from the point of view of many accessory engine parts that simply are CRAP...


i'll insert a quote here from a tech who's been working on Porsches for over 25 years...


Whalebird from the off topic forums:


"I am a veteran Porsche factory tech.......... I can show you stacks of files over decades that show that any 944/924/951 is one of the most expensive cars to own. The average air-cooled car is much cheaper in the long run."




there exists the belief that the discounted prices of the detuned 924/944 cars at the dealership would be recouped in the parts/service house...


i share this belief. did the trend end with the 968 ? probably not that much.


as for these crappy old 924s, the cars take on so much water, rot out, and you will find stuff growing once you go in there to gut the interiors of the cars. i can't think of a single reason that anybody would want to bother. you can buy a wrx and have 10 times as much fun when compared to the grief you will suffer for 125 hp or "whatever" you're getting, (with the possible exception of an '87-'88 car....




i looked very hard at getting another 928, before deciding on my 968.


i've got 35 grand in this car, including about 22 grand on cosmetic (interior) and performance updates, wheels, tires, GTS brakes, (still haven't done suspension work) everything which is all fine by me, but i'm going to be doing another 35 grand on this car when the engine goes, by doing a transmission rebuild, change out gears 5 and 6, add LSD, Chevy Kit, Chevy LS2 and make it all work, new bushings, koni adj inserts on existing shocks...


hopefully it will all work without shattering the tt and input shaft...


as for the current, engine, how long will it last ?


after reading a report about variocam failure i realize that there is only so much i can do for my engine... replace everything, including cam chain + tensioner pads, belts, rollers, tensioners, H20 pump, seals repair leaking oil cooler, it's just endless $$$ for mid-level performance... ok, DONE.

ok, up next ROD BEARINGS... Jeez !!


it simply, never ends... the thing leaks too much ps fluid to make it worthwhile to change the rubber under the car... but we're not done yet - nope,


at some point, it becomes necessary to replace the entire variocam assembly...


http://www.cannell.co.uk/968_Worksho...0Camshafts.pdf


these cars are not BMWs, where you take care of them and they go half a million miles... i've pretty much done all i can do... when the variocam or the main bearings fail, i'm out...

not out of the car... Just out of Porsche.


GM spent a couple of billion dollars developing a pretty damn good engine.


you buy it, drop it in and change the oil and the spark plugs.


the day i purchased my 968, i should have simply sold the engine and done the chevy install and also done the transmission rebuild w/ LSD at that time.


i would have received 3 grand for the engine instead of spending 5 grand to keep it running.


the picture i have in my mind of something that works is this:


remodled 968 + LS2 w ("Fast" intake/headers = 470 hp at the flywheel) + transmission redo...


minus the TT and imput shaft possibly exploding, i believe i can drive a proper P-car for about 65-70 grand.


not saying this anybody else's solution. but this is what i'm planning to do.




.

VehiGAZ

All that, plus some really-great-condition examples (of any old car) are going to sell for significantly more than their beat-up brethren, no matter the market.

cobalt

obviously you are currently involved with these cars. i have not been around one in close to 30 years so my info might be slightly off. I never discussed 931 hp for the record.

So the version my friend had was a GTS, it has been a long time. I don't think it was close to 300hp. My 74 rs clone dynoed at 270 hp and weighed 2390 pounds I was able to pull on him at any track with a long straight and the turbos were faster by as much as 2-3 car lengths on a track like the glen. So although I don't have any hard evidence I would say experience tells me otherwise. For the record that car was sweet.
So I wasn't wrong about these numbers. I have a few posters and remember watching the Herman + Miller GTP car it was quite the scene especially since they raced on the Goodrich Comp TA's with fiberglass walls. Seeing the car in the showroom was always a highlight.
Well I guess my point was that these cars like the 914 1.8l cars were nightmares to deal with. The engine might have been solid as you say but they never ran right. I spent a lot of time at the Porsche dealerships back when these were new and they were lined up waiting to be serviced for one gremlin or another the same went with the audi. The mechanics would joke when another one came in for service and expressed a dislike for them.

It is possible the 931 could have been detuned but the 924 could never have been a 911 killer and there is no way the GTS was faster than a 930 of the time. I owned a 71 911 E and I can assure you that was a fast car. Faster than my 911SC's and even your 931 was not as fast, I had many first hand experiences that proved this. Hell they also said the 914-6 could have killed the 911, in actuality out of the box it all depends how the car is setup and any number of changes could make either faster. We used to have a 914 4cyl that was so heavily modified it would be faster around LRP than 930's if he could keep it running.

thanks for the corrections it has been a long time since I have talked or dealt with a 924. I wish I had my friends 924GTS that will always be one of my favorite cars for many reasons.

James Bailey

Porsche sold 924s to people who could not afford a 911 or a 928....somethings never change. Aircooled 911s are bringing big money these days so maybe the $4,000 924 seems like a deal.