944 vs Boxster

I'd say they were about the same in terms of their market position.

The 944 was always a great handling car (used often in tire tests back in the day for its neutral handling traits), but the original did 0-60 in about 9.0 sec, which was within a VW GTI's striking distance by the mid-'80s. They finally got around to making a Turbo, which delivered the goods, and then the 968, which was the ultimate version of the 924 line and very nice to drive (and look at).

The biggest difference, IMHO, is that the 944 rescued the miserable parts-bin 924, but the cachet was already lost. The 911 and 928 battled for flagship status, and the 944 was the starter Porsche, under siege by a lot of Japanese 944 clones.

The Boxster was the right car from day one, and in 'S' form you could argue it's among the best real sports cars (two seats, convertible, rear wheel drive, low driving position) on the market today. It suffers only from being common on the secondhand market. The "chick car" tag is ridiculous -- it's a serious mid-engined car available with three pedals, and you would have to be a damned skilled driver to need more car. I can't think of a better car in which to learn how to really drive -- maybe the Elise/Exige, but those are pretty hardcore.

Today, I think the 944 is an interesting ride -- cheap to buy, and the styling has aged very well, IMHO. Most of them are kind of worn out by now, though, and there's no upside to restoring them, sadly.

 

Jason- One of my squadron mates had a 924 Turbo, and another a 944, and I got to drive both. They handled very well for their time, especially considering their strut suspension and big, booming, four cylinder engine, only tamed by licensing Mitsubishi's balance shafts.

I just sold a 2005 Boxster because of no garage space, and it was a really beautiful handling car. Plus it has a six cylinder engine, which is infinitely smoother than any four cylinder, balance shafts or not. Like Jon said, the S versions now are high 12 seconds in the quarter cars and the newest lightweight version performs about as well as a 436 hp Corvette, and handles way better. Pretty amazing, and the result of years of technology advancement.

At VW's insistence, Porsche is bringing our a new, entry-level mid-engine, four cylinder car. 944/968 successor or 914 successor? Only time will tell, but more likely the former than the latter.

One of the nice things about the 944s was that they were as tough as cockroaches. You can find the best one in the world for a reasonable price, and drive it for decades with nothing going wrong as long as it is well maintained. A friend of mine still drives one, and has had it 20 years. Boxsters tend to be that way too, but with more fiddly stuff to go wrong.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Terry have you driven a 968?

 

I had a 944 during early 90's.
Great daily driver. Fun to drive in the canyons.
I didn't have the chance to track it though.

I have a 1999 boxster now converted to full track-car for BSR - Boxster Spec Series.
The handling of the boxster is phenomenal for its class.

Both cars were great during its era.

The more modern boxster does dominate the 944, comparing them side by side now.

During the POC races here in SoCal, they group the Boxsters with the 944's during the racing session. They split the group by putting the Boxsters first then the 944's following behind.

At Willow Springs Big Track the Boxster can run 1:34 while the fastest 944 runs 1:37.
At Auto Club Speedway in Fontana the Boxster can run 1:57 while the 944 runs 2:03.

The development for the more modern cars is very evident.

The mid-engine boxster handles like a big go-kart, very nimble.
The 944 is a well handling car, but it is front engine. It handles like a GT, not as nimble but very driver friendly and predictable.

 

Chick Car??? Miatas do not keep up with me.

A 944 Turbo is a worthy car, because boost is always fun. If we are talking "in their day" they are both important cars for Porsche. By modern standards a normal 944 is underpowered, but very useful for learning handling at the limit.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I owned an 85.5 944 for nearly 17 years and currently have a 2008 Boxster RS60. The 944 was a great car in its day, especially the Turbo S. The early interiors (83-early 85) were pretty bad with the left over 924 based interior. However, once the updated interior and phone dials were added it really was a nice car that made for a great daily driver. It was fantastic on winding roads and a joy to shift row through the gears, but it was definitely a bit underpowered. The later versions such as the S2 and Turbo, Turbo S were vastly improved especially in acceleration. The Turbo & Turbo S were an absolute blast when the boost kicks in. I still love the looks of the 944s, and those flared fenders. But at the end of their production, the prices had become pretty steep for the base model normally aspirated 944. While your friend referred to the 944 as the "Poor man's Porsche," it was such a vast improvement over the 924 that your friend's comment is greatly misplaced. I think over time people look back fondly/nostalgically about cars of the past. At recent Porsche shows even 914s are getting a lot of good attention and I personally like seeing some of the survivors that are in great shape.

As for the Boxsters particularly the S series, the cars handle superbly, they have great acceleration, and the build quality is excellent. IMHO the Boxster has better build quality than my 85.5 944. The Boxster S has performance limits that most drivers will never exceed in real world driving. I think you really need to drive a Boxster to really comment appreciate it. I do agree with other posters that Boxsters have become so common that they do not seem like something special. When I first got my 944 there were very few on the road and even as the entry level Pcar it turned its fair share of heads. I was never much into the Boxster until I drove one, then my opion of the Boxster was completely changed! Driving one will really help you to see that it is superior to the 944 in most ways. In the end the Boxster and 944 are fantastic cars, but being fair to both the Boxster is the culmination of many years of advancements. That being said I still have fond memories of the 944s and wouldn't mind having another 944 (maybe an S2) if garage spaced allowed for it.

Best regards,
Dino

 

As for what is or is not a "chick car" there really are no boundaries these days. It used to be that fewer women than men drove manual shift cars, so cars like 930s, Ferraris, Lamborghinis etc were rarely seen being piloted by women. Now with so many cars available with some form of automatic or paddle shifters I see a lot more women driving Porsches (all models including 997s) and Ferraris than what used to be the case.

As for the Boxster not being a coupe version...there is a coupe, its called the Cayman. I think part of the reason the Boxster is as good as it is on the road, is because it was engineered as a convertible from the start rather than being a coupe that gets the roof chopped with a few afterthought steel plates added for reinforcement.

I think if you drive a current Boxster (particularly an S version), you will walk away with a tremendous appreciation for this car. You will also realize its a great sports car and not just boulevard cruiser. Still, I'm glad to hear your appreciation for the 944s runs so strong! They are still one of my favorite cars.

Best regards,
Dino

 

The most advanced racing cars in the world are open cars. From an engineering perspective, you don't want any unnecessary weight located above your head.

Sports cars going back to the 1920s were open cars, including the ones that Enzo Ferrari raced at Alfa and built during the early years of his own company. And, back to Porsches, more recently the Carrera GT was an open car, as is the 918 Spyder prototype.

Not that all of that matters in the Boxster/Cayman debate, because they're both road cars, but I wouldn't get hung up on coupes as being more sporting. They do offer better insurance rates, though, and having lived in Cleveland where the weather gets nasty very quickly I could see a Cayman being more comfortable.

Was it the manly Accord coupe or the grandmotherly Accord sedan?

Exactly.

 

Just as a data point.

The S package is very good no doubt, but please realize that the from 2003 forward the base Boxster adopted the previous gen Boxster S suspension. Meaning that the later model base Boxsters are essentially an "S" suspension car. Of course the later S versions were improved over that too, but all Boxster's from 2003 up are fantastic suspension/chassis set ups and offer unparalleled handling for the dollar. And that is coming from a guy with a 944, and two Boxsters.

 

Interesting you bring this up. I just sold my 03 Boxster S last week and am picking up an 87 944turbo in a week. Honestly, I wanted more power. The turbo makes it easy to get 400rwhp and still be streetable. I had the S for over a year and I really loved cruising around Panama City Beach with the top down, but it just didn't go the way I wanted.

 

So, not pulling the chicks in the Boxster?

 

There is a lot of difference between the original 986 Boxster and the 987 Boxster, introduced in 2005. Performance, brakes, interior, styling, etc.

Rob- Never got to drive a 968, but understand the larger engine provided considerably more power. Still as smooth?

Jason- Next time you talk to your "friend", tell him most enthusiasts can tell the difference between a 924, assembled by VW, and a 944, assembled by Porsche. If he cannot, he really should refrain from commenting about cars, because his credibility count is lower than an ant's navel.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Hey Taz,

I agree with all that you have said. There is a world of difference between a 924 that used an engine that also powered some VWs and Audis, and the 944 which was described as essentially using 1/2 of a 928 engine. That being said, both the 924 and 944s were all assembled by Audi at their factory in Neckarsulm. Supposedly a total of more than 310,000 cars were assembled for Porsche between 1976 and 1991. In contrast all 968s were assembled by Porsche at the Porsche factory.

Just a small technicality.
Best regards,
Dino

 

Modifying cars really changes what the OP was discussing. Anyone can mod a car, but that doesn't answer the question about Boxsters vs. 944s. To be honest, I'd rather have a 944Turbo or a 987 Boxster over your O3 Boxster S, just based on the interior alone.


I'm not into modded cars, but I recently heard of a turbocharged & intercooled Cayman that was producing 475hp, has a body kit and other mods. The guy was selling it for a huge loss, and no buyers. It brought out a key issue that many people don't trust modded cars. There are maybe a handful of companies people trust such as Ruf or maybe Andial. So anyone modding these cars is probably throwing away a lot of money that they will never see when they sell or trade (vs just leaving it stock, but hey its their car and their $$$). To be honest the people I've known that modded cars were so hard on their cars that I'd never want a car they owned.

As Taz pointed out there are huge differences between the 986 you owned and the 987s.

Best regards,
Dino

 

Dino- Had no clue. Thanks. Just knew there was a huge difference between a 924 and a 944 and made a bad assumption. Filed in memory now.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Lol, not quite what I meant. I do understand about how modifying it changes the original intent, but I was pointing out that there are many mods to the 944 and not that much for the Boxster. And I also agree that the 987 is worlds different from my 986 in terms of interior and power.

 

I'm sure you will enjoy your 944 Turbo, its a fantastic car. As for interiors, I much prefer the interior of the 85.5 and later 944s to that of the 986. The Later 944 interiors are still quite attractive, well thought out, and a comfortable place to be even today. Compare its interior to that of its competitors of the day and you will be amazed. I recently rode in a late 80's Toyota Supra and the interior (particularly the dash and console) resembled a bad combination of mating an old atari game system with a microwave oven display...it was so cheesy and junky. It helped remind me of how well thought out and engineered my 944 interior was back in the late 80s.

Best regards,
Dino

 

Yeah I'm getting an 87+ because the wife wants airbags in all our cars. Dave Smith at SmithMotorworks in Panama City Beach is finding it for me. He races 944t's and builds them at his shop.

 

Oh, it's much worse than that. The 924 engine powered American Motors products. From Wikipedia:

Audi/VW 121

The 121 cu in (2 L) was an advanced design overhead camshaft four-cylinder engine bought from Audi/Volkswagen 1977 through 1979. Though a small engine, its advanced design created reasonable power for its size and due to being an OHC engine, it had a high redline. This engine was also used in the Audi 100, Volkswagen LT van, and Porsche 924. The engine was built to AMC specs, which are different from Audi/VW/Porshe specifications. AMC used a carburetor and standard points ignition as well as slightly larger clearances.

The original deal was for AMC to buy the design, eventually moving manufacturing to the United States. American Motors bought a plant specifically to build the engine, but never sold enough to move complete manufacturing. The AMC engines were assembled in the U.S. from major castings supplied by VW, hence the different assembly clearances. As part of the agreement, AMC was not to use the VW or Audi names when referring to the engine. Everyone familiar with the design knew they were virtually identical, and the automotive press commonly referred to them as Audi or VW engines, just as we do in this article. VW/Audi/Porsche U.S. spec engines produced 110 hp (82 kW) in mid-1977; earlier models produced 95 hp (71 kW) -- 15 hp (11 kW) to 30 hp (22 kW)less than the AMC version.

 

Maybe it's because I was in high school during the 80's but I've always loved the 944. I remember ditching afternoon classes and going to Stoddard Porsche with my best friend to look at them all the time.

The Boxster never lived up to the show car I fell in love with. That thing was absolutely incredible.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I'll have a better comparison this weekend. Sold the Boxster S a couple of weeks ago and am picking up the 951 this weekend.