Title is self explanatory. How fucked am I, Veeky Forums?
Also, should I just go for a 924 or is it worth saving up some more for the 944? The former is significantly cheaper to buy and repair since most parts are VW and Audi, but the latter seems to be more reliable and pleasant to drive (muh pure racing handling). I live in Portugal by the way, the version of the 924 that was sold here doesn't have 1/3rd of the HP cut down like the one sold in the United States.
You'll need at least 2 parts cars to keep one on the road, so whichever you can find 3 of would be ideal. Here in the USA 924s and 944s are typically sold in lots of 3-5 at a time by people who finally admit defeat, not sure about the situation in EU.
924's are sold in bulk by weight on local craigslist
It's been said so many times. Don't get a snowflake as a first car, it will be a nightmare
They aren't usually sold in bonds but parts for both are pretty much everywhere and they're usually pretty cheap.
944's are GOAT, but they will always be a project car for you. That's what owning it will be like.
If that's fine for you, having a car that can break down on your way to work, or while on a date, then by all means you should get one.
The 944 in my opinion is worth the extra money purely for those sexy boxed fenders
>If that's fine for you, having a car that can break down on your way to work, or while on a date, then by all means you should get one.
I'm totally fine with that tbqh. I prefer to have a somewhat unreliable jalopy with some historical value that I genuinely love over some generic econobox that I'd eventually get rid of in a few years.
What about an E24 or Cosworth 190E? Same era, about the same performance, not nearly as unreliable but still unreliable enough to make them dirt cheap
P O P U P S, general style, the 944 just has the looks, 80s incarnate
>50/50 weight distribution
>Sexy coupe looks
>Is a Porsche
>Has a hatchback
I've seen this exact thread for years.
It's a terrible idea. Buy yourself an FC if you really want just an unreliable sports car with pop ups. At least you can get parts for a rotary.
ausfag here i find this hilarous because Porsche's here are still treated as a exotic brand even these shitbuckets
This
You can actually find and afford parts for the FC when it does have problems. It will cost a lot less in the long run, is much easier to work on, a great tuner car, and so on.
Do keep in mind OP lives in Europe, where the parts argument is the other way around. Rotaries are much rarer than Porsches.
> is it worth saving up some more for the 944?
If you have to save up to afford one of those cheap as shit cars, you can't afford to run one. The parts are going to be expensive as hell for you. Just buy a cheap econobox until you have enough money to throw at a project car, and keep the econobox as a standby for when you do buy one of those shitbox 944s.
>is it worth saving up some more for the 944?
It's worth saving up for a decent one that won't need 5k in repairs alone.
A 944 is still less reliable than an FC.
With an FC, you'll occasionally have engine issues, and need a rebuild every 100k-200k miles. But not much else.
With a 944, everything with the car will go wrong. Everything.
What are good engine swaps for the 944? Will an SR20 fit?
Also, most Porsches are actually really reliable. How did they drop the ball so bad on these engines?
>What are good engine swaps for the 944?
Small block chevy, people have been doing it forever
>How did they drop the ball so bad on these engines?
Nikasil
>Nikasil
That's just engine cylinder linings. I've been told every component in the 944 won't last or they're badly designed, making it VW- tier unreliable.
How could Porsche fuck up this bad?
Boxsters are dirt cheap now days and are fairly reliable and easily daily drivable
VW Audi engines, 1.8T, 2.2T, 2.8 V6, 4.2 V8....
they probably halfassed it because the only people at porsche who actually thought the 911 *needed* to be replaced, were the marketers
>tfw there was a 97 boxster on my local craigslist for 5k
>i had just bought a miata when it got listed
Not really true in my personal experience, engine itself has been fairly reliable, it's just everything around it. The car does require a lot of preventive maintenance however, most notably a timing belt change every 30k miles. Neglect this and your engine will get fucked beyond hope
Swapping in one unreliable pile for another one kind of defeats the point
how is a timing belt change intensive maintenance? doing an inspection every 15-20k miles is standard when driving any porsche.
Don't forget it has TWO timing belts.
well memed, bravo
>I have no idea what I'm talking about: the post
Because on a 944 it takes a long time and a lot of work to change because >german engineering
I reckon you could change it every 5 years/60k and be fine. They don't use 80s spec materials on new belts.
>making it VW- tier unreliable.
Funny you mention VW, as the 944 is an evolution of the 924.
The 924 used an Audi engine (which is more reliable than the 944's but woefully underpowered) and was originally a VW-Porsche joint project.
Then the oil crisis happened and VW decided to build the Scirocco (pretty much a Golf with a sexy coupe body) instead and Porsche used the 924 to replace the 914.
American engineering is so good no one except poor Americans want American cars, and you need tariffs to stop people buying superior foreign products, kek
Then why do so many people swap LS engines into 944s, S13s, RX7s...?
Because they're easy to find, buy, and swap?
And light, compact, have huge aftermarket support and are incredibly easy to get power out of.
And on top of that they're stupidly reliable.
Some of them even get very good fuel efficiency, as well.
Power and fuel efficiency go hand in hand, in many ways.
The 944 is not really a flawed design.
The problem is that the cars are cheap so people buy them then don't look after them at all, leading to a reputation for unreliability. It's a vicious cycle