PDA

View Full Version : PORSCHE 944



D Kicak
08-15-2004, 12:06 PM
New to this site.

What class would a Porsche 944 run in IT ? and is there many enduro's where it can compete ?

Thanks for all replys

lateapex911
08-15-2004, 03:28 PM
The 944 is in ITS, and frankly it is an uphill battle for the car. At the spec weight, many think the 944S has a much better chance in the same class.

Chris Camadella, and ITAC member who posts here on occassion, has a nicely prepped 944 and can shed a lot more light.

There are enduros to run in, the NESSCA series has enduros of 1 to 3 hours (I think) and there are others of 6, 12, and 13 hour duration.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

Banzai240
08-16-2004, 01:19 AM
Originally posted by lateapex911:
The 944 is in ITS, and frankly it is an uphill battle for the car. At the spec weight, many think the 944S has a much better chance in the same class.

I just don't know where you guys get this stuff about the 944, but aside from my personal experience running with them, Chris C. has told me that he never had a problem winning an ITS race with a 944...

Last weekend I ran against two of them, along with a well-prepped 240SX, and the 944s had NO PROBLEM keeping pace with the 240Z, winning one race, and nearly winning the second, before breaking a transmission...

The key doesn't appear to be power, because I was able to drag race with all of these cars in the straights, the edge going to the 240Z... However, in the twisty bits, and under braking, the 944 has a definate advantage...

Those of you having trouble getting your to perform may want to spend more time getting the handling right, because that appears to be where the gains make the most difference... They have to be driven well, but they definately don't appear to be the underdog that everyone seems to want them to be...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

lateapex911
08-16-2004, 03:39 AM
Maybe we can get Chris to Lime Rock for the NARCCs or even better, to the ARRCs...

I mention Lime Rock as it seems to be a "momentum" track that rewards good handling...

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

JLawton
08-16-2004, 07:12 AM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
I just don't know where you guys get this stuff about the 944, but aside from my personal experience running with them, Chris C. has told me that he never had a problem winning an ITS race with a 944...


Look at the HP of the 944 and BMW. And there is only one engine builder in the country that seems to be able to hit that max HP for a 944. (and that's not even taking into consideration how much money it takes to get there!!) Come to the Northeast in a 944 and see how they would get whooped up on......... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif


------------------
Jeff L
#74 ITB GTi

Geo
08-16-2004, 08:06 AM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
I just don't know where you guys get this stuff about the 944

Just look at the power to weight of the 944S vs the 944. Same bloody chassis. Same bloody class. Hugely different power to weight. HUGE. Do the math and tell me I'm wrong. That is where they are getting that.



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Banzai240
08-16-2004, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by Geo:
Just look at the power to weight of the 944S vs the 944. Same bloody chassis. Same bloody class. Hugely different power to weight. HUGE. Do the math and tell me I'm wrong. That is where they are getting that.

Sorry guys... but I'm just not convinced... I don't really care what kind of wt/pwr we can calculate... the REALLY fast 944 up here has a stock motor with 175,000 miles on it and it's STILL just as fast down the straights as a VERY well prepped 240Z... Even on a longer course, the 944s up here seem to hold their own, and certainly make up for lost time by out-braking and out-handling the 240Zs...

Of course, one of the cars I'm referring to is driven/engineered by Greg Fordahl, who has a little experience with Porsches.

Just telling you what I've experienced... Your mileage may vary...

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited August 16, 2004).]

Greg Amy
08-16-2004, 11:38 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Just telling you what I've experienced... Your mileage may vary...</font>

Bingo! Therein lies the issue with trying to provide a national set of rules when you have no national standard against which to compare it. Without some type of "standard" - be it performance or technical - it is impossible to expect any kind of national 'parity.'

Darin sees a Porsche 944 doing well in Oregon while Chris gets his 944 butt handed to him by RX-7s. The boys in Virginia don't understand the hoopla over RX-7s while they're getting beat by a BMW. George in Texas doesn't understand the problem with BMWs while he's getting his butt handed to him by Datsuns (and Greg is getting beat by all of them). And so forth until we get to a big circle.

Bottom line, unless you provide a national one-stop event where they can all be compared, or are willing to go with some kind of technical standard (e.g., power to weight), there's just no way that anybody will ever be satisfied. Should we be looking at implementing regional PCAs?

It's a thankless job, so don't expect any, and don't get mad when you don't get it...

JohnRW
08-16-2004, 11:41 AM
Dave -

Abandoning the Prod car world ? I can't offer words of wisdom on 944's re: sprint racing, but I have strong (and unpopular, among 944-philes) opinions re: 944's and enduros - email me at

eng1(at)whec.com

Knestis
08-16-2004, 12:31 PM
Fuel for the fire...

NONE of the on-track comparisons are valid without confirmation that the sample cars in question are even LEGAL.

There was a great duel at CMP yesterday between an RX7, a Bimmer, and a 240SX. Another RX would have been involved if he hadn't spun but at the end of the day, we have NO idea what the ports in the RX's looked like, what cam the Nissan was running, or whether the BMW had the right gearbox ratios...

We have - as a group - got to stop doing this kind of comparison or, worse yet, allowing our "understanding" of what is fast and what isn't be colored by what we each see at our respective tracks each weekend.

K

Geo
08-16-2004, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
Sorry guys... but I'm just not convinced... I don't really care what kind of wt/pwr we can calculate...

Darin! You have two cars with the exact same bloody chassis in a single class and one is carrying 2lbs/hp more than the other and you just say "I don't care."

Sorry bud, I didn't start this one. You did.
The facts are the facts. Run the numbers. Does it make any bloody sense to you to have two cars with the same chassis at two different power to weight ratios in the same class? Does that really make sense to you? If so, why?

Keep in mind I'm making zero argument about how either car performs.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Geo
08-16-2004, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by Knestis:
Fuel for the fire...

NONE of the on-track comparisons are valid without confirmation that the sample cars in question are even LEGAL.

Kirk, this whole thing started with Jake mentioning the 944S would be a better car for the class than the 944. The facts are that the 944 and 944S have the same chassis and two different power to weight ratios.

On track performance is only an issue as a result of the difference in power to weight ratio.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Banzai240
08-16-2004, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by Geo:
Darin! You have two cars with the exact same bloody chassis in a single class and one is carrying 2lbs/hp more than the other and you just say "I don't care."

George... I'm not even talking about the 944S here... We all know that it is going to be a really FAST ITS car... I'm talking specifically about the 944 and the perception that it is NOT an ITS contender...

When I say "I don't care" about the wt/pwr we can calculate concerning this car... I say that because of the facts that you bring up yourself... You've mentioned before that the 944 has the same stock specs as the ITA 240SX, and have wanted to move the 944 to ITA... BUT, the 944, even with the aformentioned specs, is a heck of a lot 'Bloody' faster than the ITA 240SX, even at it's ITS weight... How can this be if it's so underpowered?

All I'm getting at is that this is one of those cases where the sum of the pieces may not add up to the whole picture... at least not on the surface... There is obviously something there that isn't being considered, because the 944, and more than ONE example of it, has shown out here to be quite capable in ITS...

As for the "they may not be legal" talk... You are right... they may not be... But neither might be the cars they are beating... How can you ever really know for sure, over such a large sample of cars...? The best we can do is use the information we have available... The information I have is that these cars were both VERY legal, even to the point of being underdeveloped...

If you remove the BMW and the 944S from the ITS picture, you would have about 4 or 5 cars that could be front runners in the class (240Z, RX-7, 944, Integra, and yes, the 240SX...), with a whole pack of cars very near this group...

That's what I'm seeing, anyhow... Based both on "speculative" calculations, AS WELL AS on-track performance...

By the way, for Kirk's benefit... the finishing results for this group of ITS cars (240Z, 944, RX-7, 240SX) have shown the same level of competitiveness on three disctintly different varieties of tracks around here... PIR, PR, and Bremerton... I'm sure you are familiar with at least the first two of these, and the third was shown on a video in another post recently on this site...

This is why the ITAC is made up of people from across the Nation... whatever I might come up with may likely be countered with info from the South, the Northeast, the Southeast, Central, etc... The results are almost always the balance of these opinions, and I think that most here would agree that this is about the best we are going to get, and that it's actually a good way to go about things...

So, have some comfort George in knowing that I am only offering you MY opinion of this matter... If there are 8 others against me, then I will logically conceed the point to them and will happily support the direction... I'm just telling you that, from my point of view, the 944 is definately, in the current climate of ITS (and ignoring the existance of the BMW), a GOOD ITS car...

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited August 16, 2004).]

Wayne
08-16-2004, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
Last weekend I ran against two of them, along with a well-prepped 240SX, and the 944s had NO PROBLEM keeping pace with the 240Z, winning one race, and nearly winning the second, before breaking a transmission...

Hmmm, small world. Me thinks Darin and I were at the same race a couple weeks ago. I was reading through this thread and noticed the picture in your sig. I'm thinking this you:
http://waynef.smugmug.com/gallery/179897

After my race I went track-side to play with my new digital camera... apparently your group was running. While I don't know much about the ITS cars, I will say that the 240z and the 944 in this particular race were at the front, and very evenly matched.

Wayne

Bill Miller
08-16-2004, 06:46 PM
Hey George,

Try this one on for size.

ITS VW Golf GTI 2.0 16v 2220#/135hp(stock value) = 16.44

ITS VW Corrado SLC 2.8 12v VR6 2680#/178hp = 15.06

ITS VW Jetta GLI 2.0 16v 2530#/135hp = 18.74

All of these cars a A2 chassis VWs, in the case of the Golf and the Jetta, they're the exact same power plant / drive line.

You talk about a difference of 2#/hp for the 944 and 944S, how about almost a 4#/hp difference for the Corrado and the Jetta? Same chassis, same class. Or a difference of over 2#/hp between the Golf and the Jetta. Same chassis, same motor, same trans, same class. Things that make you go Hmmm....

I'll throw some more into the mix, just for fun.

ITA VW Golf 1.8 16v 2220#/123hp = 18.05

This is also an A2 chassis, the same as the above listed ITS cars. Would seem to indicate that the 2.0 16v cars would fit better in ITA than ITS, maybe even drop some weight on the Jetta when you move it!

But Andy's gonna say that this was done by somebody else, and I should just let it die!



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

Geo
08-16-2004, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
George... I'm not even talking about the 944S here...

OK Darin. Crossed signals here. I read Jake saying the 944 has an uphill struggle and the 944S would be a better solution. You responded (without the subsequent clarity) that you didn't understand why people are saying that. Follow my point of confusion? I saw it as a comparison and you saw it as a single model. I'll stop the discussion now that I see where you are coming from.


Originally posted by Banzai240:
All I'm getting at is that this is one of those cases where the sum of the pieces may not add up to the whole picture... at least not on the surface... There is obviously something there that isn't being considered, because the 944, and more than ONE example of it, has shown out here to be quite capable in ITS...

<snip>

If you remove the BMW and the 944S from the ITS picture, you would have about 4 or 5 cars that could be front runners in the class (240Z, RX-7, 944, Integra, and yes, the 240SX...), with a whole pack of cars very near this group...

<snip>

I'm just telling you that, from my point of view, the 944 is definately, in the current climate of ITS (and ignoring the existance of the BMW), a GOOD ITS car...


OK, I'll agree that once you pull the E36, E46, and 944S out of the equation, ITS looks a whole lot better and certainly much more reasonable.

The E46 and 944S simply increase the "problems" in ITS and the 944S further makes it look silly that the same chassis (front to back, top to bottom) has two different power to weight ratios in the same class depending upon the engine in the chassis.

------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[This message has been edited by Geo (edited August 16, 2004).]

Geo
08-16-2004, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
But Andy's gonna say that this was done by somebody else, and I should just let it die!


There currently is no legal recourse to change any of this. So, nothing is going to happen in the very short-term future. What happens longer-term will take time to shake out. The ITAC is trying to take a big-picture look at IT, but in between other issues that come up, this takes some time. And for sure whatever comes of that (whatever that may or may not be) we will want to make sure we don't make things worse, so there is no rush to just to something. You may not like the answer, but that's the way it is.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Bill Miller
08-16-2004, 10:18 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">There currently is no legal recourse to change any of this.</font>

George,

Does that mean that the weight corrections that were done this year weren't legal? And since when is re-classifying a car illegal?

And yeah, I agree that it does look silly when multiple vehicles w/ the same chassis (and sometimes the same engine/drivetrain/suspension), in the same class, w/ different pwr/wt ratios, just because the body work is different.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

ITSRX7
08-16-2004, 10:39 PM
Originally posted by Bill Miller:


ITS VW Golf GTI 2.0 16v 2220#/135hp(stock value) = 16.44

ITS VW Jetta GLI 2.0 16v 2530#/135hp = 18.74

But Andy's gonna say that this was done by somebody else, and I should just let it die!


Ahhh, once again you are wrong! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

When we looked at the Neon and SE-R for moves to ITA, these 16V cars were on my list for a reclass as well. Look for more recommendations for 2300-2500lb cars with 130-140 hp to be 'fixed'. At least that is our hope if we can get this first batch through.

While we didn't class them and can't offer reasons why (which is what you usually want from us), we can identify issues and try and fix them.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

Bill Miller
08-16-2004, 10:57 PM
Ok Andy, then explain why one is worthy of fixing, and the other is not? In one case, you take the "hey, it wasn't us, let it die" position, and in another, you take the "hey, that's already on our list to fix" position.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

JeffYoung
08-16-2004, 11:03 PM
I sense another New Beetle thread coming....lock this one quick, QUICK!

Banzai240
08-16-2004, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by JeffYoung:
I sense another New Beetle thread coming....lock this one quick, QUICK!

No, don't worry... I'm going to end my part of this right now...

George... You are right... mixed signals, I should be clearer next time... we agree on everything else...

Bill... Give us a break... None of the reclassifications that require a weight change or not have been officially approved... That requires a BoD ruling, which doesn't come for two more weeks... The CRB and BoD don't necessarily agree with "My" take on the reclassification w/ weight adjustments, so that is a battle we haven't tried to fight much yet, pending the outcome of PCAs... If PCAs happen, a fight won't be needed... If they don't, then that is the road the ITAC is going to take to get some of these changes done...

Otherwise, all of the cars that are being bickered about here are going to be taken into consideration over the next several months as part of a Global IT analysis and potential reshuffling... again pending PCA approval...

For goodness sakes... give us a chance to get the work we've already started finished before you start ripping us for work we haven't even had a chance to begin yet...

That's it... I'll leave the rest of this thread to those who feel like continuing...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

Geo
08-16-2004, 11:16 PM
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Does that mean that the weight corrections that were done this year weren't legal?

You'll have to refresh my memory on this. I don't remember there being any weight changes this year. I could be wrong I guess.

Proposed reclassifications don't count.



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

lateapex911
08-17-2004, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
...... I'm just telling you that, from my point of view, the 944 is definately, in the current climate of ITS (and ignoring the existance of the BMW), a GOOD ITS car...



Does that mean I can ignore the CRX??

I didn't think so...nor can Mr Kicak ignore a well prepped and driven E36 putting 217 or more down at the wheels....

Tough to ignore cars doing some whoop ass on you....

(point being that the class is defined by the leading edge.....)



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

Banzai240
08-17-2004, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by lateapex911:
(point being that the class is defined by the leading edge.....)


No... the point being that we are trying to put tools in place to rectify a few outliers that have created a situation where the remaining cars in the sample can't possibly stack up... The point also being that it's simpler and a more prudent approach to fixing the problem to adjust those outliers to correct the problem, rather than adjust everything else around it...

You guys need to start thinking into the future a bit more, and stop dwelling on how things have been in the past... We've shown that changes are being worked on. YOu need to give us some time to put those changes in motion... We do envision that a majority of those involved in IT will feel it's a better place once some of these adjustments are in place. Give us some time to make it happen. (Also wouldn't hurt to contact your local Area Director and voice your support for the changes that have been proposed... preferrably BEFORE they get together to vote on them in two weeks... If you've already done it... do it again... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif )



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

lateapex911
08-17-2004, 02:23 AM
Well Darin, in my letters to you I have stressed many times that 90% of the issues in IT lie with 10% of the cars...the "outliers" as it were. So I am well aware of the best means to resolve issues and create more parity.

So, YES.....the simple answer to Mr Kicak is that the 944 is not a car that can be expected to run at the leading adge of ITS, and therefore he needs to decide if it is a "good" car for him or not. (Forewarned is forearmed)

If he is VERY lucky, the world of ITS will evolve and change in the future, and his car might have the leading edge brought back to him, but right now, the answer remains, that the car is not a leading edge car. That's not thinking in the past, as far as any of us know, that's the way it is right now.



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

Bill Miller
08-17-2004, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by Geo:
You'll have to refresh my memory on this. I don't remember there being any weight changes this year. I could be wrong I guess.

Proposed reclassifications don't count.




George,

I'll have to dig and see exactly which FasTrack it was in, but the weight on the ITS VR6 Golf and Jetta were both 'corrected'. Supposedly, the GTI was done w/in the 1 year of classification window, but the Jetta had been listed at least since the '02 GCR.

/edit/ And I don't know what you mean about proposed reclassifications. Right now, I don't believe there's a reclassification request on the table for any of those cars. Besides, you're the one that said there was no legal way to correct the problem. I was simply pointing out that you were wrong.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[This message has been edited by Bill Miller (edited August 17, 2004).]

Greg Amy
08-17-2004, 08:20 AM
No wonder you guys get irritable: you're up at ungodly hours of the night cruising the Internet!!!

Geo
08-17-2004, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
I'll have to dig and see exactly which FasTrack it was in, but the weight on the ITS VR6 Golf and Jetta were both 'corrected'. Supposedly, the GTI was done w/in the 1 year of classification window, but the Jetta had been listed at least since the '02 GCR.

Bill, that is ancient history IIRC. It didn't happen on the watch of the current ITAC so far as I recall.


Originally posted by Bill Miller:
/edit/ And I don't know what you mean about proposed reclassifications. Right now, I don't believe there's a reclassification request on the table for any of those cars. Besides, you're the one that said there was no legal way to correct the problem. I was simply pointing out that you were wrong.


I don't see where you've pointed out I was wrong. Also, you didn't mention any specific cars until this post. So, when you say "those cars" perhaps you should communicate "what cars" much better. If you're back to the VWs mentioned above, we're just going around in circles and I won't play that game.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

whenry
08-17-2004, 11:31 AM
Fo far y'all have spent a lot of effort describing why SCCA didnt want to get into comp adjustments for IT. There are large differences in the regional competitiveness of various models and unless the top cars compete head to head, there are no real comparisons. And we cannot expect that problem to be resolved.
I do believe that SCCA can do a better job in classification and reorganizing the IT classes. What worked in the 1990 environment ain't working now. Every grocery getter made, even the Korean stuff, has what were exotic parts back in the early days of IT. Hopefully the proposals in front of the BOD will help that process. It does appear that things have come a long way in the past yr or so.

Bill Miller
08-17-2004, 06:18 PM
Bill, that is ancient history IIRC. It didn't happen on the watch of the current ITAC so far as I recall.


Wrong again George. Maybe Darin can refresh your memory on this one.



I don't see where you've pointed out I was wrong. Also, you didn't mention any specific cars until this post. So, when you say "those cars" perhaps you should communicate "what cars" much better. If you're back to the VWs mentioned above, we're just going around in circles and I won't play that game.




George,

You said that there was no legal recourse to correct the #/hp ratios that I quoted for those VWs. Which by the way, was a few posts back, so I had mentioned a specific group of cars. Maybe you should pay more attention. Or perhaps that's why you don't recall the weight correction on those ITS VWs either.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

Geo
08-17-2004, 06:39 PM
.

[This message has been edited by Geo (edited August 17, 2004).]

lateapex911
08-18-2004, 01:57 AM
Hey Bill....I guess I'm slow, but how come every thread ends up being you asking Darin about some VW thing?? Isn't this about a 944?

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

Bill Miller
08-18-2004, 07:02 AM
Jake,

I don't believe I asked Darin anything in this thread. In fact, the only reference I made to Darin, was that maybe he could help refresh George's memory. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

wpspeedracer
08-18-2004, 08:01 AM
[quote]Originally posted by Banzai240:
[B] George... I'm not even talking about the 944S here... We all know that it is going to be a really FAST ITS car... I'm talking specifically about the 944 and the perception that it is NOT an ITS contender...

A little late in this discussion, but what planet are you racing on.....Myself along with two other friends have the fastest 944's and 944 S in the Southeast Region and we don't even come close to the Bimmer World 325's, the SpeedSource RX'7's and Irish Mikes' 190 E....they are clearly 3 - 5 seconds faster at Sebring: 2:34 vs 2:39. Not that we don't have a blast racing 944's and I wouldn't change, but bring your car down here to a CFR-SCCA or an Atlanta Race and watch the bimmers and RX 7's go by. Our last race at Sebring out of 32 ITS cars, we were 9, 10, and 12 in qualifying. The race was in full rain and the 944, then, comes into it's own and Big Ricky pulled out a 3rd in class driving like a rally driver....best finish for a 944 down here in years....Go Rick


Mark
#54 944 S

JLawton
08-19-2004, 06:39 AM
Originally posted by wpspeedracer:
[quote]Originally posted by Banzai240:
[B] A little late in this discussion,


No, you're not late, you are one of the few to keep the discusion centered on the original question!!

but what planet are you racing on Same thing I was thinking!!



[This message has been edited by JLawton (edited August 19, 2004).]

Bildon
08-19-2004, 08:29 AM
Contact Jon Milledge "Mr 944" in the USA. He's made a living off building, developing, tweaking 944 race cars for many years.

http://www.jmengines.com/



------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport (http://www.bildon.com)
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2003 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##

ITSRX7
08-19-2004, 08:38 AM
Originally posted by JLawton:

Originally posted by wpspeedracer:
[quote][b]Originally posted by Banzai240:
[B] A little late in this discussion,


No, you're not late, you are one of the few to keep the discusion centered on the original question!!

but what planet are you racing on Same thing I was thinking!!

[This message has been edited by JLawton (edited August 19, 2004).]

Jeff,

Did you know a 944 was the 2002 NERRC Champ?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

Tom Donnelly
08-19-2004, 10:29 AM
This thread really demonstrates the regional differences with IT. The isn't a rats ass chance in hell a 944 could win at road atlanta unless nobody else showed up. Some really good professional drivers have tried. But at CMP, it happens, even against well prepared BMW's. And it seems to happen up north all the time. My guess it has alot to do with the type of track. CMP for example is full of twists and Road Atlanta is a hp track. These are things I hope the ITAC is looking at. I personally have my doubts that even a Milledge 944S will provide much competition for the BMW's in the southeast. They will be back with the 240z's and rx7's.

Tom

Banzai240
08-19-2004, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by Tom Donnelly:
These are things I hope the ITAC is looking at.

See above... I believe I've already said that this is why we have a diverse group of guys on the ITAC... Different parts of the country, different experiences...


Originally posted by Tom Donnelly:

I personally have my doubts that even a Milledge 944S will provide much competition for the BMW's in the southeast. They will be back with the 240z's and rx7's.

Tom

Which again illustrates what I said previously... I think most people would agree that the BMW is an overdog in ITS... If this car were brought in line or otherwise dealt with, the 944 would be "back with the 240z's and rx7's."

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited August 19, 2004).]

wpspeedracer
08-19-2004, 11:17 AM
Contact Jon Milledge "Mr 944" in the USA. He's made a living off building, developing, tweaking 944 race cars for many years.
http://www.jmengines.com/




My S motor that I have been developing over the past 15 months is a colaboration of Redbone Garage (recently placed third overall in the LeMans Historic last month with a 911 they built), Jim Higgs, whom is the engine builder for Alex Job Racing, and lots of Dyno time and we are finally aproaching (legally) 200 hp at the rear wheels. A Bimmer World 325 can easily get 240 rwhp and both a 944 S and a 325 race weight is 2850 lbs........Find me (us) 40 more hp and 944's (S) can then compete on equal ground.

Mark
944 S

[This message has been edited by wpspeedracer (edited August 19, 2004).]

Banzai240
08-19-2004, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by wpspeedracer:
...and we are finally aproaching (legally) 200 hp at the rear wheels. A Bimmer World 325 can easily get 240 rwhp and both a 944 S and a 325 race weight is 2850 lbs........Find me (us) 40 more hp and 944's (S) can then compete on equal ground.

Mark
944 S


Well... I doubt that Bimmerworld is "easily" getting 240rwhp... I'm pretty sure they are working as hard as anyone else would. Just because they've achieved it, that doesn't mean it was "easy"... I'd also like to see proof that this is the case...

And, to paraphrase Kirk... "how do you know they are legal"?? Has anyone every really looked into these cars? Are there any other E36s around the country that are tearing up the tracks like these cars? We don't have any around here, so I personally wouldn't know...

If the numbers you quote are accurate, and assuming a 15% driveline loss, I come up with about 230hp at the flywheel... If this is correct, then, by my calculations, without anything added for vehicle specific specs, the weight for the 944S is exactly right... Should be a good match for the 240Z, RX-7, etc... I applaud your efforts for at least seeing what you can do...

Hopefully you guys are getting the message here... If PCAs pass, then the CRB will have the tools to bring any overdogs back in line... Call your local Area Director and urge them to give their support to this rule change.

If one day all the cars in a class were actually classified using the same process (or, in other words, everyone had about the same wt/pwr ratios, with "adders" for brakes and other vehicle specific specs, etc), I wonder if the end result would change???


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited August 19, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited August 19, 2004).]

planet6racing
08-19-2004, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:

If one day all the cars in a class were actually classified using the same process (or, in other words, everyone had about the same wt/pwr ratios, with "adders" for brakes and other vehicle specific specs, etc), I wonder if the end result would change???



Oh, Oh! I know! I know!

The person who just put there car on the dyno has a switch on the PCM that retards fuel/turbo/rpm/spark/vtec/whatever and is giving a false HP output.

Hmm, oh wait, that's right, that's what I've read some of the NASA people saying...

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

Tom Donnelly
08-19-2004, 12:37 PM
Darin,

I guess what I was trying to relate was not so much that the ITAC members take into account the differences in tracks and regions. I suppose I went the long way around the barn to illustrate just how much of an overdog the BMW is in my opinion. An opinion was offered on another thread that some of the current BMW owner/drivers are 'holding back' on just how far they could go. I am of the same opinion, except that it is more bugetary 'holding back' than otherwise. I know of more than one 325 that ran 1:42's at Road Atlanta with junkyard motors (no blueprinting) and with the non-vanos head. (no variable cam timing and little or no computer mods). There is a certain orange BMW with a very fast, competent and honest driver who could run 1:39's or 1:38's at this or next years ARRC. These are EP times. He's already beaten the current lap records at VIR and RA this year in a not fully developed car. Since you post and other ITAC members lurk, I just want to add my response.

I really am a 944 fan and have repaired and driven them on the street for almost 20 years. I run a 240z and it is not much fun passing a 944 like its an ITB car. Its downright depressing.

Tom

And for what its worth Rebello and Sunbelt seem to get different results from a dyno for the same motor. Not casting apersions, just pointing this out.

JeffYoung
08-19-2004, 01:09 PM
For what it is worth, I have a mid to back of the pack S car, a 170 hp TR8. At 2560 (and I can make minimum), I've never had a problem running down a 944 (not an S) on the straights.

Jeff

Tom Donnelly
08-19-2004, 01:29 PM
I'd like to add that David Luney and his 924
did pass me at CMP.

But, other than that, all those who've passed a 944, please raise your hands!!

(I don't know how to do smileys)

And, all those that have passed a BMW, please raise your hands.

(still don't know how to do smileys)

Tom

Banzai240
08-19-2004, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by Tom Donnelly:
I run a 240z and it is not much fun passing a 944 like its an ITB car. Its downright depressing.

Tom

That's interesting, because we have a couple out here that, while not quite as fast as the 240Z in the straights, seem to hold their own as far as lap times go...

Oh, and for what it's worth, I DO believe that the 944 (not "S"] is a pig from a weight standpoint... I think it's classified a bit too heavy... I think it's about 100lbs overweight, based on it's advertised output (which, depending on who you talk to is between 140 and 157hp...). But this is just my sole opinion. I'm sure the ITAC will discuss such matters more as we move forward with our analysis of IT classifications...

Guess the other question that comes to mind concerning the 944 is IS it possible to get it below 2750lbs???

Anyone care to volunteer some real Dyno numbers for a well prepped version of this car?

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited August 19, 2004).]

Geo
08-19-2004, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
Oh, and for what it's worth, I DO believe that the 944 (not "S"] is a pig from a weight standpoint... I think it's classified a bit too heavy... I think it's about 100lbs overweight, based on it's advertised output (which, depending on who you talk to is between 140 and 157hp...). But this is just my sole opinion.

Not just your opinion. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

Actually, the early 944 came with 143 bhp. The late 944 came with 157 bhp. For those with a 944 who want to know the differences, the JME "ITS Organizer" is worth the $100.


Originally posted by Banzai240:
Guess the other question that comes to mind concerning the 944 is IS it possible to get it below 2750lbs???

Not only that, it can get below the legal 2715 lbs. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif While my car isn't finished, those with finished cars have indicated not only is it easy to make weight, but what's hard is to find creative, yet legal, ways of adding weight to reach minimum weight.


Originally posted by Banzai240:
Anyone care to volunteer some real Dyno numbers for a well prepped version of this car?

JME clearly states on his web site that 183 bhp (or 185 depending upon the page) is possible with a fully legal IT engine. That said, I don't have proof, and I've yet to come across making anywhere near that much hp with a 2.5 8v NA 944 engine, IT legal or not.

[edit to fix formatting]
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[This message has been edited by Geo (edited August 19, 2004).]

wpspeedracer
08-19-2004, 03:04 PM
As far as weight goes, my first car was an 83' 944 and I got it down to 2400 lbs. the up side was I could put weight where I needed to put it, the down was when I ran PCA club races, I was way past modified stock so you get stuck in GT4S and when Kevin Buckler passes you on the straights doing 180+ your ears disentegrate.

As far as getting more hp on a normal 944....put in a 2.7 crank from an 89' and add the add'l 150 lbs. to meet 89' weight. Now you get TORQUE with the 2.7l motor.

Mark
944 S

[This message has been edited by wpspeedracer (edited August 19, 2004).]

Geo
08-19-2004, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by wpspeedracer:
As far as getting more hp on a normal 944....put in a 2.7 crank from an 89' and add the add'l 150 lbs. to meet 89' weight. Now you get TORQUE with the 2.7l motor.

That of course would be highly illegal since you are not allowed to simply choose the best parts. You must take components as a whole. And of course, you cannot create a model, so unless you have an 89 to begin with, it simply is not legal.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Knestis
08-19-2004, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
That's interesting, because we have a couple out here that, while not quite as fast as the 240Z in the straights, seem to hold their own as far as lap times go...

And to paraphrase you paraphrasing me, how do you know they are legal? Are any of them Terry Flanagan's "color of money" car?

(nudge, nudge, wink, wink)

K

Banzai240
08-19-2004, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by Knestis:
And to paraphrase you paraphrasing me, how do you know they are legal?
(nudge, nudge, wink, wink)

K


Fair question! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

What did we just learn here... That none of us really know anything! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif ... errr, except that we don't know... one way or the other... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/confused.gif

http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

Tom Donnelly
08-19-2004, 03:46 PM
You know, I just realized that I should be trying to improve my own position, not help out Porsches.

Along those lines, I think the 240z should be allowed some breaks just because of its age. (ie safety) No computers means that we need RR shocks to balance things out. And better brakes. And allowances to change the rear suspension geometry (for safety's sake). Everybody else has 5-speeds, why can't we?
A weight break however would make it hard to keep the car in one piece and would therefore be unsafe.

And you'd open a door for a little old lady, why not just wave by an elderly 240z just out of politeness, the old girl is a little rusty you know?

I hope the dang ITAC is listening.

Tom

(how do you do smileys? oh I got it! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/tongue.gif )

wpspeedracer
08-19-2004, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by Geo:
That of course would be highly illegal since you are not allowed to simply choose the best parts. You must take components as a whole. And of course, you cannot create a model, so unless you have an 89 to begin with, it simply is not legal.





That's why I choose the 944 S....all you have to do is to get them to breathe and there's power (hp) to be found....just not much torque yet....I'm still sorting...and searching!

Mark
944 S
#54

Geo
08-19-2004, 04:08 PM
Mark, are you on Rennlist?

Bill Siefert is building a 944S right now as well. I know Chris Camadella is as well.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

its66
08-19-2004, 04:15 PM
[quote]Originally posted by wpspeedracer:
[B]
....just not much torque yet....


Welcome to our world. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Jim
ITS 66
RX7

JeffYoung
08-19-2004, 04:38 PM
I'll trade you guys some torque for some hp...........

Greg Amy
08-19-2004, 08:52 PM
Originally posted by JeffYoung:
I'll trade you guys some torque for some hp...........


I'll trade away some of my experience and good looks for some torque *or* horsepower...

JeffYoung
08-19-2004, 09:00 PM
Hey hey! Greg, you are now in ITA......you'll be able to start trading 1st Place trophies here shortly.......

Quickshoe
08-19-2004, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
If one day all the cars in a class were actually classified using the same process (or, in other words, everyone had about the same wt/pwr ratios, with "adders" for brakes and other vehicle specific specs, etc), I wonder if the end result would change???


The grid order will not change much. Those who are dedicated enough to spend the moeny and time to hone their skills and prepare the cars to the extent the rules will allow will continue to win races.

You will also continue to be asked to justify your actions. Will be constantly confronted with claims that "you added too much for these brakes" and "subtracted too much for a live axle", or a non-ecu car needs a bigger break, or this engine is more responsive to ecu tuning then that one, etc.

How will you know how much to adjust the hp/weight multiplier without trial and error? There are sooooo many variables, you'll never get it perfect. So you throw some weight at an apparent overdog, take some weight off an underdog. Stand back and see what happens. Deal with the heat. Know that most of us are happy that you are doing something to attempt to reign some cars in, but realize that the system will never be perfect. After all, you are starting with peak hp numbers (I am not suggesting that it is feasible to do otherwise). Those of us with data aq know how much time we spend near that rpm (not enough). That peak number might be much closer to reality on a car with a fairly broad power curve and close ratio box. While nowhere near real world performance indicator when the motor is peaky with a wide ratio box.

Again, I applaud your efforts and your courage.




------------------
Daryl DeArman

lateapex911
08-20-2004, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by grega:

I'll trade away some of my experience and good looks for some torque *or* horsepower...

Hope you don't expect much in return......

http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

sorry...you just can't toss one up like that without expecting a few swings at it Greg. [sarcsm mode on] ...Can't wait to have you in ITA too! [Sarcasm mode off..]



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

Greg Amy
08-20-2004, 02:16 AM
What, Jake, you don't think I have a lot of experience...?

http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

JLawton
08-20-2004, 08:34 AM
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Jeff,

Did you know a 944 was the 2002 NERRC Champ?

AB



I am well aware of that, but it will never happen again at that weight!! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/frown.gif
Don't get me wrong, I loved my 944!! But with only 143hp...............

------------------
Jeff L
#74 ITB GTi

Banzai240
08-20-2004, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by JLawton:
I loved my 944!! But with only 143hp...............



Alright guys... which is it? Some say 143hp, some say 157 (158??)hp???

Give me the breakdown in years, from '83-87 or whatever the classification range in for the 944, of which years had which hp...

Also, what accounts for the difference in HP??? Does update/backdate apply??

Thanks,



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

planet6racing
08-20-2004, 11:38 AM
If the years listed in the spec line cover the engines that output either 143 or 157 HP, wouldn't part of building the car to the full extent of the rules include updating the entire engine assembly to the 157 HP engine? That is allowed in the rules...

Just an observation...

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

Geo
08-20-2004, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
Alright guys... which is it? Some say 143hp, some say 157 (158??)hp???

Give me the breakdown in years, from '83-87 or whatever the classification range in for the 944, of which years had which hp...

It's both Darin. To be honest, I don't know exactly when that changed. Doesn't really matter actually.


Originally posted by Banzai240:
Also, what accounts for the difference in HP??? Does update/backdate apply??

Yes, update/backdate does apply.

The differences (that are worth talking about) are compression, head, cams, ECU mapping.

I suppose we could consider the different years with different factory hp. It's been done for other cars. I have a feeling at this point it would create more chaos than it would solve since many people have done the update/backdate already (I haven't yet and probably won't until next year - just posting this so folks don't think I'm just looking out for my own interests - I'm personally neutral on this).


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Geo
08-20-2004, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by planet6racing:
If the years listed in the spec line cover the engines that output either 143 or 157 HP, wouldn't part of building the car to the full extent of the rules include updating the entire engine assembly to the 157 HP engine? That is allowed in the rules...

Just an observation...



And a correct one at that Bill.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

JLawton
08-20-2004, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by Banzai240:
[B] Alright guys... which is it? Some say 143hp, some say 157 (158??)hp???
/B]

Don't hold me to this, but I think only the 83 (maybe the 84) had the 143hp. They also don't have a removable chip.

Geo
08-21-2004, 12:14 AM
Originally posted by JLawton:
Don't hold me to this, but I think only the 83 (maybe the 84) had the 143hp. They also don't have a removable chip.


The chip is removable. It just requires you to desolder it. There are people who do offer chips for the early DME (ECU).


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

ITSRX7
08-21-2004, 09:15 AM
The RX-7 is very similar in this respect. The 86-88 had 146hp and the 89-91 had 160.

I use the 185 crank hp number from Millege when I look at the cars potential. It would seem a weight more like the RX-7 (2680) would be better but in ITS - but it ain't no ITA car.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

Banzai240
08-21-2004, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
It would seem a weight more like the RX-7 (2680) would be better but in ITS - but it ain't no ITA car.

AB



I actually calculate about 2642lbs... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

sgraves
08-23-2004, 08:00 PM
I would jump for joy if I was allowed to run my 944 at 2642lbs. I would even be happy with 2680lbs as a start to getting some of the 2 seconds per lap that I always seem to be losing to the fast ITS cars. Then I could take out the passenger seat and rear seat back. The downside is that I would probably have to take out the radio too, no more music on the grid. Either weight would be achievable though. I agree that it should not be an ITA car but am crossing my fingers that someone will see that this car weighs too much to be competitive at 2715lbs.

ChrisCamadella
09-27-2004, 07:11 PM
Hi all,

I wish I had been on this topic earlier, but I've been travelling on business and haven't had time to tune in.

IMO, there is a huge disparity in the preparation level of lots of cars out there, both the 944's and otherwise. Although I haven't run this year, and there are a lot of very good BMW's out there now whom I'm sure would beat me easily, I formerly had a fair amount of success finishing in the top 5 or so with reasonable amount of regularity, depending on the race track. It's hard to win in a 944 at Road Atlanta or Pocono and it's a lot easier at Lime Rock or Watkins Glen, both of which are 'momentum tracks which favor braking and handling over sheer HP. I think that the 2V 944, even a very well prepared one, is outmatched by the BMW's at this point.

I'm going to be at the Glen for the October enduro with my new 944S car, and we'll see how it stacks up against the BMW's there.

Cheers,

Chris Camadella
ITS 944S (by Jon Milledge Engineering)

ChrisCamadella
09-27-2004, 08:18 PM
In answer to Darin's question on 2V 944's, here's the answer.

Refer to http://www.connactivity.com/~kgross/FAQ/944faq02.html for details.

Up to 1987, they all make 150HP. 1987 and 1988 are listed at 157HP.

I do know that you can make 185 or so with the right amount of development with the 2V motors.

Cheers,

Chris Camadella
ITS Porsche 944S (by Jon Milledge Engineering)

Geo
09-28-2004, 02:48 AM
Originally posted by ChrisCamadella:
Up to 1987, they all make 150HP.

That is ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT Chris. I have factory documents I can scan that list the hp of the early cars as 143 bhp SAE net.

My FSM (one source) was printed in 1985 and the Service Information Manual, printed in 1982 is another (I think I have more). Given the dates I cannot tell at this time when the change to higher hp occured.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

ChrisCamadella
09-28-2004, 06:29 AM
The difference is that my numbers are DIN, and yours are SAE Net, probably.

How was the game?

Geo
09-28-2004, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by ChrisCamadella:
The difference is that my numbers are DIN, and yours are SAE Net, probably.

How was the game?

It sucked. The Astros showed up in force and my beloved Cardinals were no where to be found. The coach had his head where it didn't belong either. They played and were coached like a basement dwelling team, not the best in baseball. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/frown.gif

BTW, you're probably right about the DIN vs SAE.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

924Guy
09-28-2004, 01:02 PM
Chris - you mean the Oct 16th enduro at the Glen? See you there, then! I'll be there, driving someone else's ITA 924 (#35)... we'll actually have 2 cars (#53 is the other)and a whole mess of drivers and crew...

------------------
Vaughan Scott
Detroit Region #280052
'79 924 #77 ITA/GTS1
www.vaughanscott.com