944S2 would be a good comparison for the E30 M3 (archive)

I've had both a 944 Turbo and a 944 Turbo-S and each could easily outrun our cars on backroads or the freeway. The 944 Turbo-S (without an aftermarket chip) did 0-60 in about 5.4 seconds (the turbo spooling up was such a rush).

At an autocross the E30 M3 would eat the 944 Turbo's lunch since the 951 (Porsches internal name for a 944 Turbo) is really more of a grand tourer than racecar. However, on a roadcourse there are many 951 owners that have modified their turbos & suspensions and these guys even give the 911's some serious competition. But, I'd still have to give the E30 M3 the nod as the better roadcourse car since it was a factory built racecar.

IMHO, the 951 is a great car but they stopped being produced in '89 and just seem to require more attention and repair $ as they just aren't quite as stout as the E30 M3. Besides, the Porsche crowd really seems to turn its nose up to those Porsche owners with front-engined cars as many seem to think only mid-engined or rear-engined Porsches are "real" Porsches.

The 944 S2 was a 16 valve twin cam 3.0 liter (I think) engine similar to the E30 M3's S14 engine. The 951 was an 8 valve single cam 2.5 liter engine with a KKK turbo. Horsepower for a 944 S2 was not much over 210 and really couldn't be increased, whereas the 951 was stock at 220 (or 250 for the "S" model) and I've seen modified turbo charged engines regularly put out over 300 horsepower and highly-modified engines put out well over 400 horsepower.

Hope this helps.
Drew

Similar balance, size, and technology. The turbo is a bit faster. The others, I think, are a little slower.

Purchase price (not necessarily maintenance price) is also quite similar to the E30 M3.

-Jon

Follow Ups:

[ Follow Ups ] [ E30 M3 Message Board ] [ Msg. Board FAQ ]

Questions, comments, or problems, please visit the Roadfly help desk.