944 vs 924 vs Conquest

I had been looking for a cheap winter project for a while. I was looking for a classic to restore. Something like an MG, Triumph or 914. Then I came across a 924 which had me looking a 944 then turbos then Conquests.

I know the 944 will not be cheap to maintain but the initial price is lower than expected. They also have fewer rust issues than something from the 60's. How does the performance compare to more modern cars? Is it possible to improve performance on a budget?

Would there be a reason to buy a 924 over a 944? From what I read the 924 evolved into the 944.

Then I was thinking that it may be nice to find a Chrysler Conquest, I had one about 20 years ago.
Is it possible to find parts for them? I know it want easy when I sold mine in the mid 90's. Any idea what the performance numbers are for the Conquest?

924's are cheaper to run than 944's, with a cheaper buy-in and less weight. Not quite as 'cool' though. The internet has done wonders for Starquest parts availability; try www.starquestclub.com for some more info. I'd take one over either Porsche, personally, but that's mostly for the odd factor and badass 80's styling.

Yeah, I'd pick the conquest myself, then the 944, then a 912, then alot more cars, then the 924.

Yeah, I'd pick the conquest myself, then the 944, then a 912, then alot more cars, then the 924.

I don't know where you're located, but a co-worker of mine has a mid production starion he's willing to let go for 200$. Turbo, non flared fenders, fresh rebuild on the head, he claims it developed fueling problems shortly after the head rebuild, I went over and looked at it as a potential challenger, LOTS of work to bring the interior back, little to no rust, but the turbo is almost frozen, it takes a bit of effort to turn it with a finger my bet is it was running rich, due to the turbo going bad.

I am in MA but I have to have the flares.

I like the 912's but I have not seen a lot of them go up for sale.

The 924 is the low buck entry into Porsche fever. The engine is smaller, and I'd go so far as to call it buzzy. The interior is very spartan, but the car is very light. To me though ( a former 944 owner) the exterior is to plain. 944's are a step up in every regard. Including price. However, I think the 944 is worth every extra penny. You can get a great 8v 944 for 4-6k, and for less than that you can get good ones. The 16v (944 S) you'll be looking at 5-7k. The S is a little more powerful, but actually slower off the line due to having the turbo gear ratios. For the Turbos, and S2's (high HP N/A) you shouldn't spend less the 8k, or you will have an absolute dog.

These cars can be a huge pain. The timing belt needs to be changed every 30k, or less according to some people. If the timing belt goes, you are in for a world of hurt. Parts are expensive. But after all that, these cars are amazing! I can't wait to buy another one.

Star/Quests MUST have box flares.

944 trumps 924 every time.

Gearheadotaku wrote: 944 trumps 924 every time.

Unless it is an early 944 vs a 924S.

with modern timing belt construction why is it that an aftermarket belt can still snap on a Porsche after 30K?

SVO

Gotsol wrote: with modern timing belt construction why is it that an aftermarket belt can still snap on a Porsche after 30K?

Because the belts haven't been re-engineered. The parts manufacturers just recreate belts and parts to OEM specs as cheaply as possible.

I like my 924 (granted it has 944 styling added on to it) because it is so much more simple when compared to a 944. I do wish the motor was more powerful (I'm working on that a little at a time)

Aside from the engine, power steering, and clutch, the 924 and 944 part costs are repair times are essentially the same.

The difference in driving dynamics between the two are pretty startling. The 924 is more of a driver's car, very communicative and tossable. The 944 is slightly more of a cruiser. Much more comfy and needs to stretch its legs.

If you're really interested in the 924, had over to the 924.org site, do some reading and then hit up the message board at 924board.org.

not just the belt.. but the design on the belt, the design on the cam belt gears, and the tensioner design.

I am unsure about what system Porsche used.. but the fiat 124/125/132 engines all have short cam belt lives (but it was the first production timing belt in a regular production car.. disregarding some low built specials a number of manufactorers put out before hand) so the ramp angles on the cam gears and the shape of the teeth themselves all contribute to detroying belts in as little as 20,000 miles.

Thankfully replacing a fiat cam belt is a half hour job.. and that includes draining and refilling the radiator

I've been researching this one out pretty thoroughly. I've driven an early and late 944 (both 8V) and a Turbo widebody Starion. I can't bring myself to like the 924 (even the 44-powered S version) because the looks are so bleh to me. (I don't like the 928 either, I think it's the wheelwells and lack of flares). As far as the 944 goes, I felt no difference between the early and late suspensions. Both felt communicative and had great traction/handling. Neither felt anywhere as nimble as my RX-7. The Starion was underpowered and felt heavy (it was 100% stock). There's a turbo narrow-body Conquest running around town that I want to track down and try out.

As for repair costs, the 944 is vastly more expensive than a comparable sports car (1st or 2nd Gen RX-7) but still way cheaper than a 911, 914/6, or even some modern sports cars (S2000). The clutch is a shot in the wallet but lasts a good, long time. It's the timing belt part that blows pretty bad. After much researching I decided I would buy ze special tool and books so I can just do them myself for the price of the belt.

I dont know much about starquests, except the heads are a pain in the ass to change and have seen a bunch of them melt down, though none were mine. I do like the interiors though..very nice.

944's/924S- had a few, best was a 87 924s and i really enjoyed it. i also went through a full rebuild, followed by a full engine replacement((complete balance shaft failure, very rare, just my luck) in less than four years. overall the car allot of fun though, but costly. not rockets, and a little too refined sometimes.

924: still own two (have had at least 6, maybe more) one was my first and ive had it since the early 90's, though it rotted for 8 years and now its my challenge car project, ill actually get it to the challenge one of these years.. base, it is 115 hp (78 on) less for earlier years, so no rocket, and upping the output over 125hp by conventional means is difficult. However they are one of the best handling cars ever made. most later model parts can swap in easily provide a large array of potential set ups. did i say they are EASY to work on? and cheap? water pump is under $50, t-belt is $15 and an hours work tops.. the cis can be a challenge, but a good book on it will ease pain.

BUT, if you really want to rock and roll , get a 924 Turbo! a bit more finicky than a non turbo, but there's a long line of pissed off 944 AND 911 owners still trying to catch up with me... still easy to work on, and to update/upgrade. id say its less complicated than the 2.5ltr and has much more potential, many will disagree im sure, but i havent found a 944 2.5 that can keep up yet..

at least when the car is together... I do have to add that certain parts are getting difficult to find for the 924 and 931 (924 turbo) , and even parts for the 2.5 ltrs are getting expensive lately, but just about everything can be found if you look around enough..

and flares can be added...

How does the 924 engine differ from the 924 turbo engine? I.e - would it be possible to turn a regular 924 into a turbo, without spending exorbitant amounts of money?

What about a cheap 924 with an Audi 20v turbo engine swapped in???

The 924 uses a flat head with the combustion chamber in the pistons. The head was purposely hamstrung to flow poorly to make it stay slower than the 911 of the time (76/77) Note: this is straight from a lengthy discussion with a Porsche engineer involved with the 924 project. Gotta love those internal politics!

The 924 turbo is essentially the same motor with a little bit of a combustion chamber in the head and slightly better flow along with other improvements and drive line changes. The early turbo cars (S1) have issues with the exhaust manifold cracking, the (S2) cars had a stronger manifold made.

The biggest issue with converting a non-turbo to a turbo is dealing with the CIS and the lack of room on the exhaust side of the engine. For my car, I'm planning on running a turbo solution similar to the 951 where it is mounted on the driver's side and the exhaust runs around under the bell-housing. Not ideal, but it should be able to provide enough boost to have some fun. Combined with megasquirt it should be pretty straight forward.

On top of all of this, the folks that have supercharged or turbocharged their 924's have found the stock clutch starts to slip around 200-220hp and there aren't a lot of cheap upgrades available unless you upgrade to a clutch, flywheel, bell-housing, starter, torque tube and transmission from a 924 turbo or use a combination of parts from a 944 with a 924 turbo bell-housing.

An Audi 20V motor has been done and is a pretty good almost drop in. The non-crossflow Audi motors don't fit very well with the strut tower so close to the head, but anything is possible with enough welder and scrap steel. I'm partial to the V6 and V8 Audi motors myself, but no one's done one yet that I know of.

In case you didn't know, the chassis for the 924 and 944 were galvanized from the factory starting around 78, so rust isn't as big an issue as it is on other cars (stupid battery tray issues not withstanding)

I have a hard time recommending the 924 Turbo to anyone. It is not all that fast when stock and has some very expensive parts due the limited production.

924 vs 944 the 944 is more modern in every way and the 944 is as fast as a stock 924 Turbo.

In most cases the 944 is a better buy over the 924. Now the 924S is an odd duck since it is really a narrow fender 944 rather than a 924.

Brief History. 924 - 76-82 2.0L Audi based motor. 110 ish hp. Every year changed a bit and the chassis improve as well. 924 Turbo - 78-82 2.0L Audi based motor 170hp 944 83-88 2.5L Porsche designed motor 150 hp - major series change in mid year 85 to drop the 924 based interior for a complete revision. Some changes to suspension parts too. 944 Turbo 86-89 - 2.5L Turbo 220-250 hp. Minor body work changes to front end, bigger brakes, diff gearbox, diff spring rates. Wheel offset change in 87 to allow ABS. 944S 88-89 - 2.5L with 16 Valves - 188hp. same chassis as the non turbo cars. Power added at top end mostly. 944 89 - 2.7L 8 valve. Same as 2.5L cars, but larger bore added bit more torquw 944S2 - 89-91 - 3.0L 16 valve motor 208 hp. Same chassis as 944 Turbo, diff gearbox ratios 968 92-95 - 3.0L 16 valve with varible induction 236 hp new body styling, but same chassis as 944S2 and turbo with revised 6 speed gearbox.

Forgot

924S 87-88, 2.5L 150 hp Same engine as 944 (8 valve), but narrow 924 body. early 944 interior with mixed early and later 944 suspension. 150

Uh no, the 924 turbo is faster than a 944 as it will out drag race one all day long.

I agree that the 924 turbo can be finicky, they are easily dealt with once you pitch the CIS into the trash and run a more modern EFI and ignition system. Plus you get your engine bay back and adding the necessary intercooler is no longer a PITA.

A friend has one, bought it off of eBay in Arizona, flew out and picked it up and drove it back to Portland. He's been using it for a DD and trackday car ever since with several upgrades being applied over the years. He's finally worn out a set of rings so he's building a new motor for it (with forged pistons, porting, various coatings, etc) but otherwise he's just been flogging it as usual with the stock CIS.

Once I get non-turbo running on MS, I'll convert his over as well.

If you want the 80's GT/hatchback, try the 82-85 Toyota Supra? No turbos and various head issues (except for the overheated BHG), no Porsche prices (or marque-related headaches), has flares, 6 cyl-inline goodness, and one of the best interiors I have seen (fit and finish, still better than most today.) Same hp/tq, a bit more weight, not much. Although a bit scant on aftermarket parts, MkII specific websites have all the answers and go fast goodies you need. I was so smitten by these cars, I have two.

Enjoy, but if you're thinking Starion/Conquest, do the right thing and get the Supra. ;)

Eric G

turboswede wrote: Uh no, the 924 turbo is faster than a 944 as it will out drag race one all day long. I agree that the 924 turbo can be finicky, they are easily dealt with once you pitch the CIS into the trash and run a more modern EFI and ignition system. Plus you get your engine bay back and adding the necessary intercooler is no longer a PITA.

Well that is the issue. Stock vs Stock the 924 Turbo is not that much faster than a 944. Nobody in their right mind will drag race a 924 or 944.

If you want cheap and simple get 944. If you want to tinker get the 944 Turbo. Faster than 924 Turbo to start with and lost of potential.

In the end this one the biggest issues with 924/944/968 line. Porsche did so many of the "upgrades" that it most of the time easier to trade up rather than mod up. 924 = good, but need more power.. 924 Turbo

924 Turbo good, but 924 Carrera GT flairs cooler and 2.0L motor too noisy. = 944. Same box flairs with a "smooth" 2.5L making nearly 924 Turbo power with nice torque

944 not enough power = 944 Turbo

944 not enough power and Turbo to expensive = 944S (16 valve head)

944S not enough torque = 944 S2 Turbo look with 3.0L motor for torque.

944 Turbo too expenive,and old not enough low end = 968 fresh body + Turbo power level 3.0L motor. It took Porsche 20 years to get there but every step was an upgrade. In fact the factoy went from 110 hp in early 924 to 305 hp in the rare 968 Turbo S. (3.0L 8valve turbo motor). Of couse once they did that they realized the car was too fast compare to the 911 and they had to end production.

StarQuest + BMW drive train.