Having owned a 83,944 lux previous to my 90,turbo i think i am
in a position to compare the two, first of all both are wonderful cars, the
main difference is that the turbo is obviously faster,and with added sound proofing
and better seats, more comfortable.............but to me the lux is still a
stunning looking car and for looks/ performance / kudos per £ is unbeatable.
With regards turbo/s2 comparison the s2 is the all round better drivers car
but for ultimate performance and tuning potential i choose a turbo. Mine is
a 250 bhp model, but again the 220 bhp model(Mike) is more user friendly due
to the smaller turbo which gives more response(less lag) . Hope i haven't started
something here as it is only my informed opinion, if i had the money i would
have one of each please! - .Jim F - 20th March, 2001
Really need someone who regularly drives an S2 and a Turbo. But here is my 2 pence worth as a 250 Turbo (ex Lux) driver There is a slight technique to getting high acceleration out of a Turbo in normal driving which is basically to initially use a rapid and wide opening of the throttle to get the boost up rapidly at lower revs and then to back off the throttle to get the desired level of acceleration as the boost comes on stream. This works because of the electronic control of the valve that feeds pressure to the wastegate. On rapid throttle openings the boost ECU is programmed to think that you are overtaking and hence want maximum power so it closes the valve in the pressure line to the wastegate for a short time and effectively allows a period of 'overboost' - hence the power hike which you are exploiting at low (2500 to 3250) rpm by doing this. For more spirited driving the turbo really wants to be above 3000 (3500 rpm is better) to get its response time down - if you are used to the normally aspirated S2 my guess is that you are tending to run at slightly too low rpm for the turbo to be 'on song'. Finally (and most seriously) the wastegate springs on turbos get cooked by the exhaust manifold over time and soften reducing the available boost as the wastegate starts to open too early. It is difficult to tell if the spring is soft unless you know what the car SHOULD feel like - the boost gauge on the dash is no good as, whilst this appears to measure pressure from SOMEWHERE, it is clearly NOT measuring it in the inlet manifold which is what you are interested in! You can connect a pressure gauge into the inlet manifold and check the pressure (15psi - 1bar gauge is all that is required). Run a flexible pipe out of the bonnet edge and in through the passenger window and put the pressure gauge on the passenger seat then accelerate up to 6500rpm in 3rd and see what maximum pressure you reach - it is easier to have an assistant sit in the passenger seat and take the readings for you as by now you are doing 105mph and you probably ought to be looking out of the front (or side if you are having a very wild ride) window - at least occasionally (it is even easier if you use a rolling road but I broke our local one doing this, hence the "DIY version" of the rolling road which I won't go into for obvious legal reasons). You should get around 0.72 bar (11psi) for a 220 turbo and 0.83 bar (13psi) for a 250 turbo. As a VERY rough rule of thumb assume that you are loosing about 12bhp for each 1 psi that the peak boost pressure is down. My car, when I did this, was only reaching 8psi, suggesting that I was struggling to make 200bhp - 11 less than your S2, hence it would feel slower. The good news is that you can do something about it cheaply, the 'boost enhancer' than Andrew S sells at £100 basically isolates the pressure feed to the wastegate below 10 psi removing the need to use the rapid throttle opening technique and guaranteeing at least 10psi of boost. Of course if you were negotiating you might want to do this test and then mention that it will cost you AT LEAST £500 to get the wastegate re-sprung at AMD and that needs to come off the price etc etc...... but only if you are buying from someone not on this forum!! All the best Dave G - 20th March, 2001
I have driven an S2 and it's a damn fine car, much more adjustable, razor sharp throttle response and not a gutless wodner under 2800 rpm like the turbo. The standard 250bhp turbo car is VERY lag prone but this can be almost eliminated - Dave S - 20th March, 2001
Just to stick my oar in here's my opinion for what its worth. I owned a '87 Lux for 2 years and found it a great car I did about 35K miles in with no real problems including 2 european Hols. I found the suspension on the Lux far more forgiving and more comfortable if not as fast as the S2. - more of a GT - dare I say it. My current S2 is alot faster holds the road better etc etc but ultimately in many ways the Lux was a better day to day car if not giving quiet the grin of the S2. For quiet a while I toyed with the idea of a 250 Turbo or a 968 sport but to be honest the lag on the Turbo was a bit of pain however the boooost was certainly fun once it arrived. The 968 actually felt slower than the S2 and certainly not worth twice the cost to get a car with no leather, no rear wiper etc If I owned a 944T with 300+ BHP my opinion I am sure would change but for the minute I'll stick to the S2 Happy 944ing - Ivan R - 21st March, 2001
I too used to have a 3.0S2 Cabriolet at the same time I originally
bought my Turbo. I purchased the 2 cars together in 1995 for GBP 23,250 (10,500
for the Turbo and 12,750 for the Cabriolet). I sold the S2 Cabriolet 7 months
later for GBP 15,500 when the summer months arrived - nice to get back more
than I paid (for a change!). When I had both cars, I used them alternately and
the comparison was interesting. My Turbo was a standard 250bhp car back then
and the S2 was standard too.
The S2 had a much more compliant ride and had a nice spread of torque. The S2
was easier to launch from a standing start. I used to live in High Wycombe back
then and the poor road surfaces were better absorbed by the S2 - the Turbo being
crashy and tram lining everywhere. In terms of performance, the Turbo was quite
a lot faster, but one had to keep the engine above 4,000 RPM to make that kind
of progress. Acceleration; top speed; cornering performance; braking and throttle
steer (not really achievable on the S2) were far better. As performance is my
main criteria with a performance car, the Turbo was my preference. However,
for everyday driving the S2 was the better compromise.
6 years on and my Turbo has cost me over GBP 45,000 (including purchase price
& all running costs, but excluding fuel) and I have done 90,000 miles. The car
has had a new cylinder head; rebuilt 2.8 engine; 2 clutches; 15 sets of brake
disks and more pads; 7 sets of tyres etc. About 25 track days obviously accelerate
wear a little - but never a 911 has passed me other than a full blown 911 GT2
and a very well driven 964 Carrera RS weighing 1100kg. For cheap performance,
I can't think of a more able car. A reasonable 944 Turbo with M030 can be had
for less than GBP 10,000. Add a Boost Enhancer; re-chip and some decent sticky
tyres and you have an excellent basis for an excellent track car.
An S2 can be had for much the same money and may suit the purpose of some drivers
better, it too is very useable at a circuit. Either way the 944 Turbo and S2
both provide an excellent choice for the performance orientated driver that's
wants either all out performance & power, or, great all round road usability
and driving flexibility. Regards, Andrew S - 21st March,
2001