Check the comparison between the 924/944 and the G series 911. The production numbers, performance, and tech may actually surprise you. One car was the car of the future, the other was end of life!
https://www.youtube.com/embed/EnrA57OppNQ
<iframe width="299" height="168" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EnrA57OppNQ" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Can't say my Porsche experience is vast, having owned only a 924 and a 911 (and a Cayenne not relevant to this discussion). However, i think what's most enduring about the 911 is that it has never succumbed to 'normality'. Its layout is an anachronism but one that has served to cement its 'specialness' for 50 years and counting.
I will say that the 924 is definitely one of the best/least-stupid car designs of the 1970s that i've encountered. I think the fact that the 944 continued to have premium performance and cachet over a decade later riding those old bones into an era that surpassed 924 performance so completely that the original car was almost irrelevant speaks to the strength and prescience of the original design.
They are extremely different cars. The 911 is a true Porsche and is more of a race car modified for the street. The 944 is derived from the 924 which is a conglomeration of va parts that was to be built by Audi. It's a very good car, but without extensive modification, it will die on the track. The 911 is a purists car. The 944 isn't.
I love them both and have had both, but currently have three ac 911s and one 914. I more than likely will have a 944 turbo again at some point, but personally enjoy the feel of the 911s more.
In reply to Vigo :
Very good points!
In reply to Cotton :
I drool every time I see a 914. The 911 is a special drive, no doubt. They are compromised which I think is a great thing, because they keep you focused on the task at hand and tantalize the sense but I just like to go hot into corners. Lol :) I wouldn't have one for long.
In reply to markwemple :
How will it die on the track? What modifications does it need? Remember the 944 was lighter, better balanced, better cooled than the 911. The engine was porsche develop, half of the 928 motor with a Mitsubishi developed balance shaft to smooth vibration.
jr10cross said:In reply to markwemple :
How will it die on the track? What modifications does it need? Remember the 944 was lighter, better balanced, better cooled than the 911. The engine was porsche develop, half of the 928 motor with a Mitsubishi developed balance shaft to smooth vibration.
'twas my question too
True the 944 is technically a better car - or at least a better platform, with more potential if not the out-of-the-box performance - than the 911, and I prefer the look of the 944. If someone offered me either a free 944 or a free 911 on the condition that I couldn't sell the car, I'd take the 944.
944's like to eat rod bearings and need an oil cooler for track work. Other than that, they're pretty good.
markwemple said:They are extremely different cars. The 911 is a true Porsche and is more of a race car modified for the street. The 944 is derived from the 924 which is a conglomeration of va parts that was to be built by Audi. It's a very good car, but without extensive modification, it will die on the track. The 911 is a purists car. The 944 isn't.
The whole "purist" argument is so dumb. You know what's a "true Porsche?" a VW Beetle. Without that car, Porsche wouldn't even exist as a car maker, more than likely. I mean, when you think about it, the air-cooled 911 is basically just an extreme evolution of the Beetle and the 356 anyhow. The 356 is seen as a "real Porsche," notwithstanding the fact that it was waaaaay more parts-bin VW stuff than the 924/944 ever was.
I've never been one to much care - I do love the 911 and pretty much every evolution of it (but I own a 924S) - but the whole Porsche snobbery from air-cooled guys (or 911 owners in general) is just lame. 924 isn't a real porsche because Audi engine. 928 isn't real porsche because V8. 944 isn't a real porsche because front engine. Boxster/Cayman not a real Porsche because not rear-engine. All the newer stuff not real porsche because "porsche doesn't make SUVs or sedans." Yawn.
The 924 had been described as the best handling Porsche out of the box at the time it was introduced and if you look at the other cars in the Porsche lineup leading up to and including that time frame you'd see why that was said.
The 924 was better than the parts it used and it did use a lot of VAG parts, but so did many 911's and 912's. The rear suspension is Super Beetle, the front is MK1 Golf both were slightly altered to work in the platform. Not surprising considering that it was originally slated to be sold by VW as a sporty runabout placed above the original Golf, the oil embargo of 73 scared them into making the Scirocco instead and Porsche bought the project from VW and produced it themselves.
Porsche at the time were nearly bankrupt and the 924/928 saved the company and plans were in place to replace the 911 with the 924/944 and 928 as the 911 chassis layout was terrible for the time as technology had progressed forward (many of their race cars had been mid-engined, so they knew the fundamental issues with a rear engined car and the 911 was just getting more and more bandaids to stay competitive).
Now, of course those "purists" that weren't buying 911 at the time decided to make a big deal about the 911 going away and forced Porsche to oust the President who was working towards dropping the 911 and actually started buying the 911 again. The sales of the 924 and its subsequent offspring, the 944 helped save Porsche so the 911 and 944 to become the status symbol they were in the 80's.
I think Porsche failed with the 924 by not replacing the engine with either the 5-cylinder engine from Audi that used similar architecture to the Audi 4-cylinder that was already there, or used a VW based engine as used in the GTi. It would have helped their lineup and developed more enthusiasts who could have been motivated to move up in the lineup as their fortunes improved. This would have solved a lot of the issues with the 924 (namely the lack of power and reliability of the old 2.0L). By the time they circled back around to bring the 924 back as the 924S, it was just as expensive to maintain as the 944 and it was just to use the leftover 924 body parts they had. Instead they missed out on the chance to be a part of the GTi mania that occurred in the 80's and 90's.
Stefan said:I think Porsche failed with the 924 by not replacing the engine with either the 5-cylinder engine from Audi that used similar architecture to the Audi 4-cylinder that was already there, or used a VW based engine as used in the GTi.
Putting a NA 5-cyl in the 924 would have been awesome and could have lead to an epic 20V turbo 944.
I've only ever owned a 911 and never driven a 944 so I'm biased.... But I'd wager so is the 944 owner in the video. Also production numbers seemed like an odd thing to compare. If I am looking for a track car I'd want a larger number for cheap parts, but if I am looking for something different to drive on the streets then I'd want a lower production number.
Also, even though I am biased I'd like to have a 944, well really a 951, but still.
The 911 and 944 are two different cars from the same manufacturer. In my opinion, but a very similar comparison would be a air cooled VW vs VW rabbit/golf. Both were being produced at about the same time, mid 70s, but both appealed to different markets. VW continued production of the Golf and Porsche stuck with the 911.
In reply to Wiscocrashtest :
You know that Porsche worked with Audi later on to develop a version of the Audi 20V and it even had a Porsche branded intake manifold?
markwemple said:The 911 is a true Porsche
SNORRRRRE
I love both. I can afford a 944, but I can't afford a 911. Hell, I could buy a whole fleet of 944s for what a decent 911 would cost me.
That said, the 944 has a lot going for it, especially in the looks department. I certainly didn't buy it because of the badge on the nose, I bought it because it's a cheap, fun, cool-looking, good-handling sports coupe that I liked when I was a teenager. In fact, if it had been badged as an Audi or VW, I might like it better, because the parts would probably be cheaper. If it gives you any idea, when I was looking for this car, I was also cross-shopping early Fox bodies, Sciroccos, XR4Tis, and CRXs. Badges don't matter much to me.
But again, I do love 911s. It's a compromised design, but that's part of it's charm. If every sports car out there had the optimal layout, this hobby would be a lot less interesting.
In reply to Stefan :
Incredible explanation! Thanks Stefan!
octavious said:I've only ever owned a 911 and never driven a 944 so I'm biased.... But I'd wager so is the 944 owner in the video. Also production numbers seemed like an odd thing to compare. If I am looking for a track car I'd want a larger number for cheap parts, but if I am looking for something different to drive on the streets then I'd want a lower production number.
Also, even though I am biased I'd like to have a 944, well really a 951, but still.
The 911 and 944 are two different cars from the same manufacturer. In my opinion, but a very similar comparison would be a air cooled VW vs VW rabbit/golf. Both were being produced at about the same time, mid 70s, but both appealed to different markets. VW continued production of the Golf and Porsche stuck with the 911.
Yep I have owned a 911 yet. Im with on the lower production numbers and track point.
In reply to Stefan :
I <3 the RS2. It also had Porsche wheels and mirrors.
In reply to jr10cross :
Oiling is poor under side load on a 944. You need a baffle at least. Going towards a dry sump setup is better. You also need to do the bottom end bearings on a regular basis if you want to track it.
FWIW to everyone, I've owned 8 type 1 VWs, a 412, a KG, 2 bay window buses, 2 Vanagons, an 83 UrQ, an 84 4000s quattro, an 87 TQA (souped up to ~230 bhp), 1990 V8Q, 2 356s, a 1970 914, a 1968 912, a 1985.5 944 HPDE car, and 4 911s. I think I have a little experience with them. On track, I'll take a 911 all day. THe feel of the car on the limit is much better and I have a lot more faith in it mechanically. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the 944, and miss it, but I prefer the 911 over the 914 and the 914 over the 944. I've never understood the love of the 356 (excepr open ones which are just awesome). As a big guy, the type 1 is a better car to drive. Just my 2c.
In reply to Wiscocrashtest :
The RS2 is a dream car of mine!!!!!!!!
Drove a bone-stock 944 for the first time ever last year. It didn't exactly impress me. Never had the chance to drive a 911, but I hope its better than that.
In reply to markwemple :
I know we got off topic a bit with the track stuff, but the video was really geared toward daily driving. You know seat position, pedals, blindspots, shifter knob distance. I just think at the price it's a no brainer. It's hard to dog a 30k 911 daily. I like the regularness of the 924/944. It's the people's Porsche. It just dang honest and hard working. I have problems Lol
You'll need to log in to post.
