Talk:Porsche 924

message: is it me or the Mazda RX-7 "SA" and "FC" types are a shameless rippoff of the 924????
Seems worthy to be mentioned in the article. Paris By Night 19:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A Japanese 924 ripoff

message: A line of text has been been vandalised and restored
PaulHereNow 22:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism on this page

message: Any reason why these are rounded up, e.g. is this a Wikipedia convention or similar? Xyster (talk) 11:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting point.   I don't know if there is a convention, but I suspect it's down to cultural differences between contributors.   If you ask someone the time in the street in Germany or Switzerland they will most likely answer you to the nearest minute.   If a train arrives one minute late in Zuerich it is late.   Try asking the time in the street in London or Chicago, and you'll be given (by Japanese or German standards) an approximation.   If a train arrives within five minutes of schedule in a London station at a busy time of day you celebrate.   I've seen it suggested that engineering tolerances used to vary, too, so that with a car built in England in the 1960s there could easily have been differences of several cc between different engines of the same type: it has been suggested that when assembling the main engine components, if a con rod didn't want to fit round the crankshaft, you tried fitting it round another crankshaft.   I've no idea if that's true or not, but the fact that it gets reported says something about the engineering tolerances applied to engine assembly at some of the more old fashioned UK auto-plants fifty years ago.   No doubt these days tolerances are much tighter:  the robots will insist on it.   And no doubt the folks at Porsche were always meticulous.   I'm not sure this directly answers your question, but it does indicate why it might be difficult obtaining a wiki consensus on whether a 1,098 cc engine should be called a 1,098 cc engine or an 1,100 cc engine or a 1.1 litre engine.   Happy day. Charles01 (talk) 11:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  All true, it's just that Porsche invariably quote the engine capacities for these vehicles at 1984cc and 2479cc (as do insurance websites etc here in the UK) - though of course we still refer to them as 2L and 2.5L in conversation, otherwise I suspect it would seem a bit geeky! 82.36.75.208 (talk) 12:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

text: This is down to taxation issues in certain countries where cars are classified according to engine capacity, and the manufacturers try to make the engines as large as they can without going into a higher tax bracket. So although a 1984cc engine, to all intents and purposes, has a capacity of 2 litres it would not fall into a "2 litres and over" bracket for taxation purposes. Finbarr 13:49, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Engine capacities

message: The 924 bar in the Porsche timelines I have seen are incomplete.  After the 1985 model year the 924 with the original drivetrain and suspension was discontinued because the Audi-sourced motors were no longer available.  Model years 1986-88 were rebadged as 924S.  This was not just an improved tuning specification like the difference between the 911 and 911S was.  The 1986-88 924S motors were the Porsche designed and manufactured motors from the 944 models, slightly detuned.  Additionally, improved suspension components from the 944 were installed.  The result is a "hybrid" combination of the 924 and 944.  The process was most like the earlier installation of the interior and 6 cylinder engine of a 911 into the 914 body which became the 914/6.  The 1986-88 changes resulted in a car with performance comparable to the 944 since the slightly detuned 944 motor was installed in the lighter, narrower, more aerodynamic body of the 924.
The 924 timeline bar should be divided after 1985 and labeled as 924S for 1986 through 1988.  The Porsche 924 and Porsche 968 pages contain the timeline errors.  Other Porsche model pages may have the same errors.
Pegasus51 (talk) 05:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Porsche Timeline Omission requires edit 

message: since they are basically the same car  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.183.199 (talk) 05:14, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 924, 944 and 968 should be merged into one article 

message: I just added this  as an interior picture for the 924 but I wanted to ask other editors whether they prefer that image or one of these two  . I went with the first one because it seemed relatively stock (with the possible exception of the silver radio surround) and it didn't have the distracting windshield banner and floor mats of the second one. But what does everyone else think? TKOIII (talk) 18:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interior picture