PDA

View Full Version : 944S



latebrake
07-26-2006, 01:20 PM
Is anyone racing and having fun with the 944S this year? We will finish ours in about__ a week or a few months_ I will be in Dallas all next week so no work then. I havent been here or looked around racing for the past few months :( so I am a little out of touch. Just wondering.

Zneed4speed
07-26-2006, 02:03 PM
Just ran my 16V for the first time a couple of weeks ago at Roebling double SAARC. I still have quite a bit of development to do.

Andy Bettencourt
07-26-2006, 02:53 PM
They are proving to be excellent contenders here in the Northeast. Kip Vansteenburg (5 wins in 5 tries) and Chris Camadella (1 win and one 7th) have combined for 6 wins! These cars all have been prepped to the max.

JeffYoung
07-26-2006, 03:35 PM
We have at least one other in the SEDiv -- Mark Nasrallah.

Andy, Kip apparently had his car at Road Atlanta last weekend and was fast as stink. A buddy of mine noted
that he had sensors in the wheels to record tire temps while on track (outer/mid/inner). He would
watch the temps go up and down at various parts of the track.

So, yes, I would say prepped to the MAX.

And cool cars on top of that.

Team SSR
07-27-2006, 10:10 AM
Latebrake,
We will be at VIR for the National August 12,13 (for CCPS and Pro IT). We will be racing an 8V, but I also have an S that is a daily driver being set-up for a track car. Look us up if you get the chance.

Zneed4speed
07-27-2006, 10:44 AM
You're probably still on track running the 8V. With the new lower weight for the 8V I'm not sure the 16V was the right decision.
Like I said I have a lot of development left, and even though I was 4th out of 10 in ITS at Roebling a couple of weeks ago, I was 4 seconds behind the leaders.
Not so bad for a new car but I've ran faster times in my 8V than I did a couple of weeks ago in the 16V.

So I'm discouraged with the 16V at least at 2850 pounds....

JeffYoung
07-27-2006, 12:46 PM
RL, as you probably know, Roebling is pretty "track condition" dependent. I'm down into the high 25s in the TR8, but that is usually in the morning session. Afternoons when it is hot, 26s and low 27s is usually the best I can do (and I have a lot of development to do as well).

So, maybe the 16v hasn't hit Roebling at the right time yet? April in the spring is usually the best time for good laps there.

Those guys who run 23 an 24, or -- gasp-- 22, not sure how I am ever going to get there.

Jeff

wpspeedracer
07-27-2006, 12:47 PM
R.L.
so what did you run at Roebling? I ran a high 23 in quailfying and a 25.4 during the race - hot - late afternoon and greasy. Funny thing though, my best time there was in my old 8v 944 - a 22.9....(unofficial - hot lap time)... amazing what you can do in a 2600# car vs. a 2850# car. Wish they would give us a weight reduction like the N/A 944's for next year.

mark

Andy Bettencourt
07-27-2006, 01:12 PM
The 944S fits the process very well - using very 'Posrche' like IT gain numbers - ie: minimal. The results for top prep and top driven cars up here (oh ya - don't forget Russ Jones who has a win as well in the NARRC) fully support the current weight. All 3 have JME power. Actually, these 3 944S drivers have combined for 8 wins in 10 events this season...and the other 2 had wet conditions. Heck - if we used on track data as a primary driver of weights, you would be looking some 'gain' votes from NER players.

You won't see a reduction on that car - or any car that has been through the process...in theory, the 8V and the 16V should be equal on the track.

robits325is
07-27-2006, 01:57 PM
The 944S fits the process very well - using very 'Posrche' like IT gain numbers - ie: minimal. The results for top prep and top driven cars up here (oh ya - don't forget Russ Jones who has a win as well in the NARRC) fully support the current weight. All 3 have JME power. Actually, these 3 944S drivers have combined for 8 wins in 10 events this season...and the other 2 had wet conditions. Heck - if we used on track data as a primary driver of weights, you would be looking some 'gain' votes from NER players.

You won't see a reduction on that car - or any car that has been through the process...in theory, the 8V and the 16V should be equal on the track.
[/b]
Why does that car only achieve minimal gains according to the process?

Andy Bettencourt
07-27-2006, 02:42 PM
Why does that car only achieve minimal gains according to the process? [/b]

I am not sure you worded that correctly, but the process takes into account 'known' gains in IT prep. The 9448V and 16V do not respond to IT prep like average motors. Experts can chime in here and describe why.

Cars on the opposite end of the spectrum (12A, 13B, E36 2.5, 88-91 CRX 1.6, etc, etc, etc) that are known to make more than the standard 25% uplift are also taken into acount.

In all actuality, the 8V and 16V 944's have this taken into account but there is still some fudge factor in there that defends against overdog status. Anything out of the norm should be done cautiously. One of the most respected builders in the country quotes 185 crank hp in full IT prep for a 8V 944 - up from 157. 18%? The process uses 20% for that car to be fair to the drivers of these cars and the rest of the class.

wpspeedracer
07-27-2006, 03:06 PM
[quote]
I am not sure you worded that correctly, but the process takes into account 'known' gains in IT prep. The 9448V and 16V do not respond to IT prep like average motors. Experts can chime in here and describe why.

Not tha I would call myself an expert and not going the JME route by doing it mostly l on my own, here is what I have learned after 2 1/2 years of eeeeeking out every bit of hp from the S that I can:

#1 Cam Timing: is such in the head of a 944 S that you can not change it (inexpensievley). I've been told that you can play around with shims under the cam tower at 1/10,000 change per dyno run - disassemble, add or subtract, try again...very time consuming and $$$

#2 DME: Porsche has made the dme propriatory and diffficult at best to dynamically change. There are a few companies out there that make street chips, but none that I have found that makes them for our purpose. Once again, JME guts the dme and puts in a Motec - $$$$$ and minimal gains from what I have heard.

#3 Headers: no one has made to date an 'engineered header' for the S. I built one out of pieces and parts from a 928 header, sent it off to MSDS Inc. who made a really nice header for the car. Then Irish Mike and I spent several days playing around with marrying up an exhaust and muffler combination that gave us the most significant power gains than all of the above. Now, other 944 S owners have purchased that header from MSDS only to have it not fit their car. There is no room between the chasis and the clutch housing so it fits some and not others.

Legally, we are not allowed to touch anything else on the motor so we have nowhere else to go but the suspension.

Other than that, there is really very little more to do to the car that it will respond to. Jim Higgs of JB Racing (a real expert amongst real racers) basically says that when PORSCHE originally brought the 944 S to market, they had already built one hell of a power plant that is about as close to 'race ready' as you can find in an off the show room floor back in 1987 with the technology at hand. With that in mind, I have found the 944 S to be a great track car. Most races I only have to torque the wheels, check the water, oil, and air pressure, and watch everyone else work on their cars. No complaints there.......I still would recommend an S for many reasons and I continue to race it in SCCA, PCA, PBOC, and any other venue I can run in.

Mark

Andy Bettencourt
07-27-2006, 03:19 PM
Doesn't cam timing have to remain stock (D.1.F page 5 of the ITCS) UNLESS you deck the head (D.1.L page 6 of the ITCS)? If you deck the head you MAY return cam timing to stock by the use of an offset key on the crankshaft...

Zneed4speed
07-27-2006, 03:21 PM
RL, as you probably know, Roebling is pretty "track condition" dependent. I'm down into the high 25s in the TR8, but that is usually in the morning session. Afternoons when it is hot, 26s and low 27s is usually the best I can do (and I have a lot of development to do as well)
Jeff
[/b]

Hey Jeff,
This was my first time running Roebling in the summer, and it was slick Mark, but it was slick for everybody. While I don't want to debate physics, I'd venture a guess that "slick" would affect my 2850(I'm over that) pounds more than say K.V.s 2375 pound Miata?.
I ran 1:26s to the leaders 1:22s. Mike Vansteenburg beat all the ITS cars Saturday in his ITA miata.

I left some time on the table and with more work and money I'll get to the front, the 16V weight just seems high.

wpspeedracer
07-27-2006, 03:37 PM
Doesn't cam timing have to remain stock (D.1.F page 5 of the ITCS) UNLESS you deck the head (D.1.L page 6 of the ITCS)? If you deck the head you MAY return cam timing to stock by the use of an offset key on the crankshaft...
[/b]


Good point, and lucky for me I've done neither.....I haven't decked the head or messed around with the timming. As a matter of fact, I'm still running on the same motor from the original street car with only a new set of bearings and a valve job we did 2 1/2 years and probably 30 races ago - she's getting tired.....time for a refresh this fall.
I have a new head from Higgs ready and the block has been on the engine stand now for over a year - new pistons, all kinds of stuff I've acquired over time. Just need to build the motor.

Mark

Zneed4speed
07-27-2006, 03:49 PM
The 944S fits the process very well - using very 'Posrche' like IT gain numbers - ie: minimal. The results for top prep and top driven cars up here (oh ya - don't forget Russ Jones who has a win as well in the NARRC) fully support the current weight. All 3 have JME power. Actually, these 3 944S drivers have combined for 8 wins in 10 events this season...and the other 2 had wet conditions. Heck - if we used on track data as a primary driver of weights, you would be looking some 'gain' votes from NER players.

You won't see a reduction on that car - or any car that has been through the process...in theory, the 8V and the 16V should be equal on the track.
[/b]

Don't forget Russ's 3rd the day before.
"On track data" probably isn't used because of the many variables, while the races you mention had good fields they didn't always have the same players. The earlier comment about Kip being fast at Road Atlanta while true he was still 5 seconds over the ITS record, and yes weather may have affected that.

Those guys aren't the only ones with JME products.
We are SEDIV players wanting a decrease.

Andy, I first thought your last sentence was a bit strong until I read it a couple of times.
The "...in theory." tones it down, but if the comma was before "...in theory," it changes it a great deal for me.



Doesn't cam timing have to remain stock (D.1.F page 5 of the ITCS) UNLESS you deck the head (D.1.L page 6 of the ITCS)? If you deck the head you MAY return cam timing to stock by the use of an offset key on the crankshaft...
[/b]

While I haven't played with this IIRC, the 16V has a stock range for adjustment of the cam timing making it legal.

Andy Bettencourt
07-27-2006, 04:10 PM
Andy, I first thought your last sentence was a bit strong until I read it a couple of times.
The "...in theory." tones it down, but if the comma was before "...in theory," it changes it a great deal for me.[/b]

Unfortunatley, I might have to change it back... :) That 'in theory was attached to teh 8V vs. 16V example. If a car has been through the 'process', there are NO plans to make a change (or comp adjustment) to it. Having said that, PCA's could be used provided there is someting drastically wrong - like a major tilt in the competitive balance of a class due to an ITAC/CRB screw up.


While I haven't played with this IIRC, the 16V has a stock range for adjustment of the cam timing making it legal. [/b] Lucky dog!

JeffYoung
07-27-2006, 04:27 PM
Seems to me the recent go around on weights really helped the 8v Porsche, which needed it, and the 16v is proving it is competitive at 2850. Glad to see a lot more 944s and 924s out this there. This is a direct benefit of the work the ITAC did to level the playing field in ITS.

RL, Mike V and Kip V in their Miatas have cleaned up at Roebling for years (and CMP). Mike V has won OVERALL races in his ITA Miata against very good ITS cars (Kent Thompson, et. al.). Roebling is a track made for Miatas -- total momentum track, very little up and down or start and stop (which requires torque) and gets slick and greasy and hurts FWD and high hp RWD cars a lot as the day goes on.

Do you know if Kip is bringing to the 944s to the ARRC? Don't know if Wittel and KThomas will be there with teh orange BMW but that (944s v. orange 325is) is a battle I would LOVE to see.

By the way, Mark, THIRTY FIVE ITS cars at Daytona in two weeks. That is amazing. Near SM proportions.

DavidM
07-27-2006, 05:54 PM
All I know is that Kip won the ITS race at Road Atlanta last weekend by a mile. Tony Burdett in a BMW (yea, the same one that is now a couple feet shorter), Chris Newberry in a 240SX, and another car were in a train for second, but Kip was gone. I got passed by Kip going down the back straight and it was the next lap going into 10 before the other three caught me.

David

dspillrat
07-27-2006, 06:01 PM
Kip V. Was impressive at Road Atlanta....but wasn't really pushed by anyone.
That car is quite clean, and well kept. Looking at all that ballast was a worrisome in my mind 3stacks of 75-90 pounds chunks of lead in the floor...lotta weight.

John Williams had couple of 1:41s this past weekend, not bad for 95 degree weather.

Hope they both show for the ARRC in November, will be quite the show.

I think the 944s has more.....


David Spillman

robits325is
07-27-2006, 10:15 PM
According to the 'process', how much potential horsepower is the 944s supposed to make?

187 * 1.25 = 234hp Is that correct?

After being behind all 3 ( Kip, Chris and Russ) of the previously mentioned 944s at three different tracks I find that number extremely conservative. If I had to guess based on bumper to bumper competition I would put that number closer to 275-280 - just my opinion -

All three of those cars performed exactly the same from my perspective.

lateapex911
07-28-2006, 12:39 AM
According to the 'process', how much potential horsepower is the 944s supposed to make?

187 * 1.25 = 234hp Is that correct?

.....based on bumper to bumper competition.....I would put that number closer to 275-280 ....

[/b]

280??

Better get the protest paper out.........

....and while you're at it, write up Amy too, cuz he was 1 second off the ITS pace.....in his ITA car. Figure he's got what, 240?

wpspeedracer
07-28-2006, 07:38 AM
Daytona is always a big ITS race - one week to go.....
Hopefully the new motor this fall will bring me up to the Kip V level....at least car performance wise....Looking to debut new motor at the October SAARC at Sebring. Wish that hadn't flipped the October Regional with the traditional Turkey Trot SAARC weekend in November....

See you Saturday

Mark

BudMan
07-28-2006, 08:06 AM
If you want to see a 944S (please correct if I'm wrong in my car recognition) in motion, watch the last Heartland Park video.

http://www.nocoastracing.com/garage/BudMan...oad_7-16-06.wmv (http://www.nocoastracing.com/garage/BudMan/video/HPT_2ForTheRoad_7-16-06.wmv) (~143MB)

I had a heck of a time getting by him. On the ~9th lap, when I caught back up, his front suspension busted with 2 laps to go. It was a shame, as Bryan and I were having a ball running together.

This car was setup for Porsche Cup & we were both running in SCCA ITE.

wpspeedracer
07-28-2006, 08:15 AM
If that was running in ITE, it might have been a 944 S2 - big difference - 3 liter 16v. Or why would an S be in ITE when it's classed as an ITS car??? The only way to tell is open the hood - smae body style for all, no visible body changes other than the markings other on teh rear (944 S) and the sides (16 ventilator)

mark

ChrisCamadella
07-28-2006, 08:22 AM
According to the 'process', how much potential horsepower is the 944s supposed to make?

187 * 1.25 = 234hp Is that correct?

After being behind all 3 ( Kip, Chris and Russ) of the previously mentioned 944s at three different tracks I find that number extremely conservative. If I had to guess based on bumper to bumper competition I would put that number closer to 275-280 - just my opinion -

All three of those cars performed exactly the same from my perspective.
[/b]

Umm, 275 - yeah, right. Your first number is actually more than we make, and I have the dyno sheets to prove it. Kip's engine and mine are essentially identical, I think - Russ' was built by someone else.

Both you and Bill S were faster than I was up the straights. However, the 944 is a very well balanced and good handling car, and I was able to gain ground in braking and around the corners.

Cheers,

ChrisCamadella
07-28-2006, 08:41 AM
Looking at the above posts, I can say that is certainly a lot of (mostly wrong) speculation going on about the 944S.

Here's my $0.02:

1. The HP gains are actually less than you think, and we are making less HP than even the accepted 1.25 factor. The cams and the timing of them is stock, per the rules.
2. Yes, you're right, we do run MoTeC FI controllers inside the stock box, but the gains from this are pretty small - mostly just mapping the fuel to keep the engine happy and cool.


BUT, all of this stuff STILL doesn't make the HP that everyone thinks, as I said above. What you are overlooking is the fact that the REST of the car is prepped to the limit - we're not winning with HP, we're winning with ENOUGH hp (but not as much as some other cars), combined with good handling, good balance, good braking, good shocks, good setup, good tires, attention to detail and the data acquisition system, and at least OK driving. It's the whole package that wins races, not just the motor!!!

Besides, it's a Porsche - refer the the following chart:

Number of stock Chevrolet Camaro parts suitable for racing: ummm, maybe the clutch pedal?
Number of stock Porsche (any model) parts suitable for racing: nearly all of them!

Cheers,

wpspeedracer
07-28-2006, 08:56 AM
"Besides, it's a Porsche - refer the the following chart:

Number of stock Chevrolet Camaro parts suitable for racing: ummm, maybe the clutch pedal?
Number of stock Porsche (any model) parts suitable for racing: nearly all of them!"

As I said earlier.....It's a Porsche ...so easy to drive...so little parts to change...a great car. As far as HP, I don't have anywere near the numbers the others are saying.....my last dyno run showed 179 at the rear wheels....184 when we took off the air cleaner....and I have over 150 hours on the motor....NO COMPLAINTS, that's dependability which equates to a modest racing budget which I appreciates as we all do.

Mark

BudMan
07-28-2006, 10:59 AM
If that was running in ITE, it might have been a 944 S2 - big difference - 3 liter 16v. Or why would an S be in ITE when it's classed as an ITS car??? The only way to tell is open the hood - smae body style for all, no visible body changes other than the markings other on teh rear (944 S) and the sides (16 ventilator)

mark
[/b]

Hmm - good point. This was an S2. I didn't get a chance to look closely. Another race buddy had ridden in it during and HPDE. I guess I'll have to go look at the differences between S & S2 (I didn't realize there was an S only).

**I'm off to check out the S details :)

robits325is
07-28-2006, 11:18 AM
Looking at the above posts, I can say that is certainly a lot of (mostly wrong) speculation going on about the 944S.

Here's my $0.02:

1. The HP gains are actually less than you think, and we are making less HP than even the accepted 1.25 factor. The cams and the timing of them is stock, per the rules.
2. Yes, you're right, we do run MoTeC FI controllers inside the stock box, but the gains from this are pretty small - mostly just mapping the fuel to keep the engine happy and cool.
BUT, all of this stuff STILL doesn't make the HP that everyone thinks, as I said above. What you are overlooking is the fact that the REST of the car is prepped to the limit - we're not winning with HP, we're winning with ENOUGH hp (but not as much as some other cars), combined with good handling, good balance, good braking, good shocks, good setup, good tires, attention to detail and the data acquisition system, and at least OK driving. It's the whole package that wins races, not just the motor!!!

Besides, it's a Porsche - refer the the following chart:

Number of stock Chevrolet Camaro parts suitable for racing: ummm, maybe the clutch pedal?
Number of stock Porsche (any model) parts suitable for racing: nearly all of them!

Cheers,
[/b]

I honestly have no idea how much horsepower a fully prepped 944s makes in IT trim. I think the racing is close and the competition is good. I don't think it is the best handling or best braking car in ITS. It is my opinion that this car seems like it has substantially more than the 226 listed on the ITR proposal sheet. I have seen Kips car start in 7th or so position at NHIS and have a 7 car lead by the end of the front straight. That is all horsepower. I look forward to battling the 944s. It should be a fun challenge.

RussJones
07-28-2006, 11:23 AM
Rob, racing against you and Nicks old RX7, i can say with confidence the ITAC process is working. True I complained a lot last year about the car, but once the bugs were worked out and properly tuned (thanks to Milledge Engineering) its a good car. In the five races at NHIS, all nameplates have won a race (Tim Estes RX7, Autotechnic BMW 323, me and Kip 944S). Also, if you look at qualifing times and fastest lap per race Kip never had a thing on the competition, his execution was good starts, good racing and crew with data.

In regards to people reading this thread for 944 information. The reason its so expensive to build a good motor is the parts and process. You must bore, which means re-exposing silicon in the cylinders. You cant use bare aluminum pistons because of the aluminum block, so ferostan coated (or similar) must be found -not cheap.

The best resource is Milledge Engineering, Marshfield, MA he sells an orgainizer which helps with all parts.

Russ Jones 944S NE

PS- Rob I'll bring my dyno sheets to NH next month, will relax your mind......

robits325is
07-28-2006, 12:47 PM
Rob, racing against you and Nicks old RX7, i can say with confidence the ITAC process is working. True I complained a lot last year about the car, but once the bugs were worked out and properly tuned (thanks to Milledge Engineering) its a good car. In the five races at NHIS, all nameplates have won a race (Tim Estes RX7, Autotechnic BMW 323, me and Kip 944S). Also, if you look at qualifing times and fastest lap per race Kip never had a thing on the competition, his execution was good starts, good racing and crew with data.

In regards to people reading this thread for 944 information. The reason its so expensive to build a good motor is the parts and process. You must bore, which means re-exposing silicon in the cylinders. You cant use bare aluminum pistons because of the aluminum block, so ferostan coated (or similar) must be found -not cheap.

The best resource is Milledge Engineering, Marshfield, MA he sells an orgainizer which helps with all parts.

Russ Jones 944S NE

PS- Rob I'll bring my dyno sheets to NH next month, will relax your mind......
[/b]

I don't need to see dyno sheets - thats fine I am always relaxed. I have had great racing this year so far and I look forward to more.

dj10
07-28-2006, 03:09 PM
Besides, it's a Porsche - refer the the following chart:

Number of stock Chevrolet Camaro parts suitable for racing: ummm, maybe the clutch pedal?
Number of stock Porsche (any model) parts suitable for racing: nearly all of them!
Cheers,
[/b]



After racing a Porsche for some years I do agree with Chris and this is one of the biggest reasons I decided to stay with German cars.

Zneed4speed
07-28-2006, 09:39 PM
Kip V. Was impressive at Road Atlanta....but wasn't really pushed by anyone.
That car is quite clean, and well kept. Looking at all that ballast was a worrisome in my mind 3stacks of 75-90 pounds chunks of lead in the floor...lotta weight.

John Williams had couple of 1:41s this past weekend, not bad for 95 degree weather.

Hope they both show for the ARRC in November, will be quite the show.

I think the 944s has more.....
David Spillman
[/b]

Wish I could have ran there. That is an unbelievable amount of ballast-for safety alone the weight shoud be reduced :lol:
The not being pushed may account for the lap times more than weather.
The margins in the NE races were very close, too close to be just smart racing.

Good attitude about the great racing Rob. I haven't raced against them but I can't see getting 275 HP out of the 944S.


I have seen Kips car start in 7th or so position at NHIS and have a 7 car lead by the end of the front straight. That is all horsepower. I look forward to battling the 944s. It should be a fun challenge.
[/b]

Gearing might help here too Rob, or jumping the green.
At Roebling I gained spots on the start because I was in the powerband when the green flew and I blew past the RX-7 that qualified in front of me.
If I'd been him I'd have thought "that guy had 30 or 40 more HP than me". Knowing my car, I know it was because I was in the best part of the gearing.

dspillrat
07-28-2006, 10:43 PM
Zneed4speed said:

"That is an unbelievable amount of ballast"

Mentioning the amount of ballast was just my visual observation....I don't know what the material was, it may not have been lead, or any metal for that matter. It looked real. I've been fooled before with silly stuff. I'm far too gullible at times.......

I think faster times would be recorded if something was banging on the rear bumper of Kips 944s...

Very nice car....
220 plus HP....not likely...

david

Andy Bettencourt
07-28-2006, 10:52 PM
Seems as if the real data from the Porsche guys validates the process. Many thanks.

robits325is
07-28-2006, 11:20 PM
Seems as if the real data from the Porsche guys validates the process. Many thanks.
[/b]

Wow - too bad you wern't that accecpting with 'other' horsepower claims over the past few years.

Andy Bettencourt
07-29-2006, 08:03 AM
Wow - too bad you wern't that accecpting with 'other' horsepower claims over the past few years.
[/b]

Actually Rob, what you fail to understand is that there was plenty of data (in which we pubished here) to support that the E36 could make 245 CRANK hp (or 200whp) in full IT trim. That is what the process WOULD have used should the CRB have decided to treat it like every other car. :bash_1_:

And you are estimating that Kip's car is making 275 crank - 30 MORE than an unrestricted 325? Oh boy.

latebrake
07-31-2006, 03:44 PM
Wow - too bad you wern't that accecpting with 'other' horsepower claims over the past few years.
[/b]
Hey BMW guy,its nice to see someone else bringing their own condoms just to be on the safe side trying to get a break form the board. :lol: While they are wearing your a$$ out they were leaving us alone for a change :rolleyes: No harm done I hope just kidding some. There is no way 275 comes from a 44S in ITS trim. A good stock engine with tricked exhaust and intake should do very nicely in ITS. The rest is set up,data and driving. Data is worth far more than given credit on any car. Its not cheap either. HP loss through the drive train on the 44S is 20%. a few tricks can cut some of that off and its ITS legal but hard on the parts and short life through the tube. Fooling with the rear end of the car to bring it into the US can be changed and the back end stays put better. Looks like fun to me. :cavallo:

Lawrence

Zneed4speed
07-31-2006, 06:02 PM
Seems as if the real data from the Porsche guys validates the process. Many thanks.
[/b]

OK Chris and Russ did how much did Andy pay you to throw in your 2 cents? :rolleyes:
Yes I'm kidding.

Andy, I did not intend to even hint that the ITAC process didn't work when I mentioned the S weight.
I appreciate what the ITAC does, but I wasn't even thinking of the ITAC when I posted.
I would like to think that the ITAC has open minds and that all input is given due consideration though.

robits325is
07-31-2006, 10:57 PM
Hey BMW guy,its nice to see someone else bringing their own condoms just to be on the safe side trying to get a break form the board. :lol: While they are wearing your a$$ out they were leaving us alone for a change :rolleyes: No harm done I hope just kidding some. There is no way 275 comes from a 44S in ITS trim. A good stock engine with tricked exhaust and intake should do very nicely in ITS. The rest is set up,data and driving. Data is worth far more than given credit on any car. Its not cheap either. HP loss through the drive train on the 44S is 20%. a few tricks can cut some of that off and its ITS legal but hard on the parts and short life through the tube. Fooling with the rear end of the car to bring it into the US can be changed and the back end stays put better. Looks like fun to me. :cavallo:

Lawrence
[/b]

My estimate of 275hp was based on previous on-track experience. When I ran my unrestricted E-36 a few years ago vs. other E-36 cars and some fast Mazdas the straight away speeds were about the same at Lime Rock and NHIS. Now in my E-46 the restricted E-36s are slower and the Mazdas are close but not quite as fast but the 944s are noticeably faster in the second half of the straights. Aero? not tangible according to the ITAC. Exit speed? None of the 944s handle as well as a RX-7 or either BMW. Power? that must be it by default. Since the unrestricted BMWs make 250hp+ according to the data sheets on file with the SCCA than the 944s must have at least 20hp more if it handles worse but accelerates better and weighs the same at 2,850. right? Seems logical to me.

Relax Andy - I am joking. Beating the 944s is a challenge and I look forward to it. So far this year the 944s has won every dry race in the NE Region this year except for the chicane/chicane course at NHIS (all handling track) I have another trip to the dyno planned next week for some hot weather tuning so maybe I'll find another 25hp - wouldn't that be nice.

lateapex911
08-01-2006, 01:24 AM
One thing to remeber about the 944 at the Glen. Thats a pretty well sorted effort, and Chris Camedella has like a gazillion laps there. He lives a half hour away.

Also, Kip V has been known to get nearly every cars he's sat in around the track faster than nearly anyone else in that car. He's no rookie.

I think you should make some side bets with those guys about who sets a faster lap at the ARRCs..;)

it7rx739
08-01-2006, 09:24 AM
Hey,guys I got 1 FOR SALE 88 944 S street car red very good shape
PH 770-720-2039 I'M in GA

wpspeedracer
08-01-2006, 09:26 AM
Not to dilute this conversation, but , I see that Kip V will be at Daytona this weekend - I am curious to see how a well prepared - sorted S will do on a High Horsepower track against Irish Mike, the Speed Source RX-7's, and the couple of Bimmers there.... It will give me something to work towards. I'm sure there is another second or two in my S with a better driver, however, I'll be looking at pull-away speed on the straights and banks where usually those cars out pull me and leave me in the dust just from shear horsepower (and power to weight ratio) which is what this thread originally was started on.....

mark

RussJones
08-01-2006, 10:52 AM
"So far this year the 944s has won every dry race in the NE Region this year except for the chicane/chicane course at NHIS" quote Rob.

Sorry wrong, Tim Estes won in his RX7 memorial day weekend, and Jeff (Nicks old RX7)was winning with 2 laps to go (pig roast) when he made a mistake and spun, I was behind him and NOT catching up. No matter how you want to spin this, im sorry but the class (ITS) now in a well preparred car is any one's race. Its been proved and lap times are dead-nuts even.

Russ

JeffYoung
08-01-2006, 11:03 AM
323, 325, 240z, RX7, 944s, hell even a Corrado -- ITS is looking great this year.

Fastfred92
08-02-2006, 11:57 AM
323, 325, 240z, RX7, 944s, hell even a Corrado -- ITS is looking great this year.
[/b]

Sold my VR6 too soon.............. :(

Andy Bettencourt
08-03-2006, 11:58 AM
My estimate of 275hp was based on previous on-track experience. When I ran my unrestricted E-36 a few years ago vs. other E-36 cars and some fast Mazdas the straight away speeds were about the same at Lime Rock and NHIS. Now in my E-46 the restricted E-36s are slower and the Mazdas are close but not quite as fast but the 944s are noticeably faster in the second half of the straights. Aero? not tangible according to the ITAC. Exit speed? None of the 944s handle as well as a RX-7 or either BMW. Power? that must be it by default. Since the unrestricted BMWs make 250hp+ according to the data sheets on file with the SCCA than the 944s must have at least 20hp more if it handles worse but accelerates better and weighs the same at 2,850. right? Seems logical to me.

Relax Andy - I am joking. Beating the 944s is a challenge and I look forward to it. So far this year the 944s has won every dry race in the NE Region this year except for the chicane/chicane course at NHIS (all handling track) I have another trip to the dyno planned next week for some hot weather tuning so maybe I'll find another 25hp - wouldn't that be nice.
[/b]

Should have predicted a letter was coming from you... :)

JeffYoung
08-03-2006, 12:07 PM
Is this the Autotechnic guy who had the webpage with the subframe welds and seam welds on the 325is?

robits325is
08-03-2006, 12:15 PM
Should have predicted a letter was coming from you... :)
[/b]
I only requested that the weight for the E-46 323i in ITS be lowered slightly.

Andy Bettencourt
08-03-2006, 12:31 PM
I only requested that the weight for the E-46 323i in ITS be lowered slightly. [/b]

Care to share your definition of 'slightly'? :P

zracre
08-03-2006, 12:46 PM
Ok I have a friend with a 944 I think of 1987 vintage (S?) that would probably be a great donor car or race project. I know it drove to his house but is in need of lots of TLC...the body looks straight but the interior is a wreck. I didn't put it in classifieds because it is not mine but I know he desparately wants it out of his garage...he has a new GTO. PM me if inerested or with any questions...I will supply you with his number and answer as best as I can. I think he will take $1500 for it. my email is zracre at aol dot com

robits325is
08-03-2006, 01:10 PM
Care to share your definition of 'slightly'? :P
[/b]
100lbs would be nice

Andy Bettencourt
08-03-2006, 01:16 PM
100lbs would be nice
[/b]

You are killing me.

robits325is
08-03-2006, 01:19 PM
You are killing me.
[/b]
yeah yeah yeah you love it

dj10
08-03-2006, 02:13 PM
100lbs would be nice
[/b]



ROTFLMAO!!!!!! I bet it would

Andy Bettencourt
08-03-2006, 02:27 PM
ROTFLMAO!!!!!! I bet it would

[/b]

Except my boy Rob asked for 200lbs...at a minimum 100lbs...



:happy204: :happy204: :happy204:

It's all good, he is the best dressed in the paddock. :D

robits325is
08-03-2006, 03:29 PM
Except my boy Rob asked for 200lbs...at a minimum 100lbs...



:happy204: :happy204: :happy204:

It's all good, he is the best dressed in the paddock. :D
[/b]
I didn't think you noticed my Flatspot Motorsport colored stripped shirt...... (Bright Blue with orange and white)

I'll wear it again at Lime Rock later this month.

Andy Bettencourt
08-03-2006, 04:03 PM
It's the pennies in the loafers that drive the grid girls wild. :birra:

dj10
08-04-2006, 11:39 AM
Except my boy Rob asked for 200lbs...at a minimum 100lbs...



:happy204: :happy204: :happy204:

It's all good, he is the best dressed in the paddock. :D

[/b]



If he get's a 100#'s off, I want my SIR off............but I'll settle for a 3mm increase. For that I'll let Rob wear your underwear (if you wear them) over his head @ LRP.

robits325is
08-04-2006, 12:34 PM
If he get's a 100#'s off, I want my SIR off............but I'll settle for a 3mm increase. For that I'll let Rob wear your underwear (if you wear them) over his head @ LRP.
[/b]

170hp and 2,900lbs - sounds reasonable for ITS

most other cars are in the neighborhood of 190hp and 2,850lbs

I'll wear a Flatspot shirt but no underwear!

Andy Bettencourt
08-04-2006, 12:53 PM
170hp and 2,900lbs - sounds reasonable for ITS

most other cars are in the neighborhood of 190hp and 2,850lbs

I'll wear a Flatspot shirt but no underwear!


[/b]

Feel free to spit out some examples...I'll help:
188 hp 944S - weighted based on known 'lower than average' power output in IT.
189hp E36 - moot due to SIR. Would be 3200+ in unrestricted form.
200hp Supra - 3300lbs
195hp Prelude - 2905 and FWD!

What else do you see 190+ hp?

It's not all just about stock HP. If it was it would be the car-of-the month class.

robits325is
08-04-2006, 02:04 PM
What else do you see 190+ hp?

[/b]

What else has 170hp and weighs 3,000lbs or more?

What was the potential for this car when is was classified?

25% increase over stock? 170 * 1.25 = 213
30%? 170 * 1.30 = 221
40%? 170 - 1.40 = 238
more?

Aero of a brick?
Big 4 door sedan vs. 2 door sports cars?
Every chassis produced had ABS standard? Any subtractor for that?

Where can I find the classification sheets?

Andy Bettencourt
08-04-2006, 02:09 PM
What else has 170hp and weighs 3,000lbs or more?

What was the potential for this car when is was classified?

25% increase over stock? 170 * 1.25 = 213
30%? 170 * 1.30 = 221
40%? 170 - 1.40 = 238
more?

Aero of a brick?
Big 4 door sedan vs. 2 door sports cars?
Every chassis produced had ABS standard? Any subtractor for that?

Where can I find the classification sheets?
[/b]

I might point out that you built this car KNOWING it was 3000lbs. Help me undertand what you mean by the ABS thing. I don't understand.

Let me see:
Huge brakes
1:1 5th gear
Balanced chassis
An estimated 30% increase in power
180 stock ft/lbs
10.5:1 compression (11:1 legal)
Electronically controlled cam timing...

You run on the podium with no aftermarket support after a year on track. Seems to me the results support the process.

robits325is
08-04-2006, 03:45 PM
I might point out that you built this car KNOWING it was 3000lbs. Help me undertand what you mean by the ABS thing. I don't understand.

Let me see:
Huge brakes
1:1 5th gear
Balanced chassis
An estimated 30% increase in power
180 stock ft/lbs
10.5:1 compression (11:1 legal)
Electronically controlled cam timing...

You run on the podium with no aftermarket support after a year on track. Seems to me the results support the process.
[/b]

A BMW chassis designed to run with ABS does not easily adapt to simply removing the ABS sensors.

Huge brakes? same as a E-36 with an extra 150lbs

I thought results didn't matter.

What else justifies the huge weight differential compared to other similiar cars?

Andy Bettencourt
08-04-2006, 03:58 PM
A BMW chassis designed to run with ABS does not easily adapt to simply removing the ABS sensors.

Huge brakes? same as a E-36 with an extra 150lbs

I thought results didn't matter.

What else justifies the huge weight differential compared to other similiar cars?

[/b]

So you want a weight break because someting isn't 'easily adaptable'?

E36 is an anomoly. Told you it should weigh 3200+lbs. CRB decided SIR was a better idea. Not a good example to hang your hat on.

You have to actually READ what people write Rob. Results are not the driving force behind any change. The process is an imperfect science that has seemingly created a ton of viable options in every class - as it was desinged to do. Some results support the process, like your competitivness as I stated.

What cars are you talking about - and what items on my list of characteristics of the 323 didn't you see? Your potential power output puts it within 5hp of the 944S (in theory given equal builds). It will never be perfect but you did do your research before you sold your E36...right?

robits325is
08-04-2006, 04:03 PM
Your potential power output puts it within 5hp of the 944S (in theory given equal builds).
[/b]

Then why are the weights different?

Andy Bettencourt
08-04-2006, 04:05 PM
If you have to ask that then you haven't be listening at all.
The feedings will stop.

Fastfred92
08-04-2006, 05:08 PM
My .02 is that the e46 will not yield as large of a gain as the e36 cars did, even with motec b/c the cam profiles are much milder in the 323 e46 car. I don't think the 30% you say can be found in the M50 engines can be duplicated in the e46.

The only aspect of a 944S that sucks is the rear torsion bars, everything else looks to be a nice package!

dj10
08-05-2006, 10:49 AM
My .02 is that the e46 will not yield as large of a gain as the e36 cars did, even with motec b/c the cam profiles are much milder in the 323 e46 car. I don't think the 30% you say can be found in the M50 engines can be duplicated in the e46.
[/b]



And your 2 cents is based on what?

Fastfred92
08-05-2006, 10:23 PM
And your 2 cents is based on what?
[/b]

Simple DJ, BMW had to put the e46 323 in a lower power market relative to the 328 which had similar power output of the old e36 325's in order not to compete with each other. The gurus gave the 2.5 unit milder cam profiles than the 2.8 had, so even with the dual vanos system you only get but so much cam lift and duration. Then the OBD II injection demands some aftermarket ( motec ) system to reach any maximum potential.

ChrisCamadella
08-06-2006, 07:54 PM
My .02 is that the e46 will not yield as large of a gain as the e36 cars did, even with motec b/c the cam profiles are much milder in the 323 e46 car. I don't think the 30% you say can be found in the M50 engines can be duplicated in the e46.

The only aspect of a 944S that sucks is the rear torsion bars, everything else looks to be a nice package!
[/b]

I'm not sure I understand what sucks about the rear torsion bars. They're just as effective as coil springs, they have a much lower unsprung mass, and they're much closer to the ground.

Hmmm...

lateapex911
08-06-2006, 10:33 PM
Chris, correct me if I'm wrong, as you are far more knowledgable in this area, but I think the issues with torsion bars in this form of racing are the difficulties in easy swapping. They are harder to swap than many coil spring setups, and corner weighting is more difficult as there is no adjuster. or am I (hopefully) incorrecct. I put Wevo SPSs on my 911 which make corner weighting a breeze, but thats not legal for IT, is it? (Or do the 944s have the limited adjustability found on certain year 911s as well?)

924Guy
08-07-2006, 07:48 AM
A BMW chassis designed to run with ABS does not easily adapt to simply removing the ABS sensors.
[/b]

LOL... as an ABS engineer, not just a Porsche driver, I'd love to hear your reasoning behind this... :happy204:

Yes, the t-bars are adjustable for ride height as mentioned on 911's. Only very early 924's are not so adjustable, but that's ITB and parts are swappable (legally). The T-bars are a royal PITA to swap, but who really swaps out springs on their cars on a regular basis? The real PITA, IMO, of the rear suspension is the difficulty in setting camber and toe properly. NOT easy.

robits325is
08-07-2006, 08:30 AM
LOL... as an ABS engineer, not just a Porsche driver, I'd love to hear your reasoning behind this... :happy204:

[/b]

No engineering degree here - just real world experience. It took years to make my E-36 brake well. dozens of flatspotted tires and lots of frustration is my only reasoning. In the end it was good but it took a lot of work and a lot of effort.

dj10
08-07-2006, 08:40 AM
No engineering degree here - just real world experience. It took years to make my E-36 brake well. dozens of flatspotted tires and lots of frustration is my only reasoning. In the end it was good but it took a lot of work and a lot of effort.
[/b]



No engineering degree here either. It took me 1 test day and 30 seconds to figure how to make my E36 brake well.

robits325is
08-07-2006, 08:47 AM
No engineering degree here either. It took me 1 test day and 30 seconds to figure how to make my E36 brake well.
[/b]
Maybe I should hire a professional driver.

I should have given more background - the car was fine on smooth tracks but the bumpy tracks were the challenge - i.e. Lime Rock

JeffYoung
08-07-2006, 08:59 AM
Vaughan, I would consider that a disadvantage (inability to quickly change rear springs). Perhaps teh ONLY advantage of a live rear axle like that in my car is that I can change rears in 3 minutes. For a test day, in roughing in the stiffness of the rear -- which is key, given that it's where RWD cars put the power done -- this is huge.

You guys can overcome it, it just takes far more time.

Rob -- ABS farked up E36 brakes? 275 hp Porsches 944s? 200 lb reduction to the 323? website advertising CLEARLY illegal E36 subframe bracing and seam welding?

I'm losing ya man, I really am. What planet were you from again?

ChrisCamadella
08-07-2006, 09:24 AM
Chris, correct me if I'm wrong, as you are far more knowledgable in this area, but I think the issues with torsion bars in this form of racing are the difficulties in easy swapping. They are harder to swap than many coil spring setups, and corner weighting is more difficult as there is no adjuster. or am I (hopefully) incorrecct. I put Wevo SPSs on my 911 which make corner weighting a breeze, but thats not legal for IT, is it? (Or do the 944s have the limited adjustability found on certain year 911s as well?)
[/b]

The suspension arrangement in the rear of a 944 is adjustable for ride height, camber, and toe. It does take some experience and a few tricks to get them all right at the same time, but once you've done it a few times, it's really no problem.

It IS a total pain to swap them out - you have to remove the entire rear suspension from the car, so in that way, they are a pain. Fortunately, we don't do that too often!

Cheers,

latebrake
08-07-2006, 11:30 AM
The suspension arrangement in the rear of a 944 is adjustable for ride height, camber, and toe. It does take some experience and a few tricks to get them all right at the same time, but once you've done it a few times, it's really no problem.

It IS a total pain to swap them out - you have to remove the entire rear suspension from the car, so in that way, they are a pain. Fortunately, we don't do that too often!

Cheers,
[/b]

After changing my torsion bars out the hard way once I asked an old 924 racer from back in the day. Now I can pull mine out of the car and juggle them and put them back in under 30 min. Thats a lie ,I cant juggle. :lol: The D production cars had camber boxes on the the torsion bar carrier to afford more neg camber on the rear wheels. Cant do this in IT but properly made eccentric bushings on the trailing arms on the torsion bar carrier will give you 4 degrees of neg camber. You wont need that much. On my production car I could change the torision bars for ride height faster than doing it with the eccentric bolts.
Lawrence

Fastfred92
08-07-2006, 01:18 PM
I'm not sure I understand what sucks about the rear torsion bars. They're just as effective as coil springs, they have a much lower unsprung mass, and they're much closer to the ground.

Hmmm...
[/b]

The part that sucks is that they are more difficult to change and the spring rates are limited by the bar diameter or by whats on the market vs. a $50 coil spring( which should be allowed in IT, but that is a different story.) Hey I am all for the 944S, it will be a great car when in the hands of you guys that know what you are doing with them, good luck.

RickyBobby
08-07-2006, 02:02 PM
The 944S fits the process very well - using very 'Posrche' like IT gain numbers - ie: minimal.
[/b]


Rhetorically speaking (love those big words), why is BMW the only major manufacturer to leave significant amounts of horsepower on the table to be exploited for IT purposes? :huh:

WoooooooHooooooo.......

Ricky

Andy Bettencourt
08-07-2006, 02:04 PM
It's not.
Damit, there I go feeding the troll.

dj10
08-07-2006, 02:13 PM
Maybe I should hire a professional driver.

I should have given more background - the car was fine on smooth tracks but the bumpy tracks were the challenge - i.e. Lime Rock
[/b]



Rob,

This doesn't sound like a brake problem as much as it may be a suspension problem.

lateapex911
08-07-2006, 04:09 PM
Maybe I should hire a professional driver.

I should have given more background - the car was fine on smooth tracks but the bumpy tracks were the challenge - i.e. Lime Rock
[/b]

Shocks are a big deal at Lime Rock esp under trail braking into Big bend...where trail braking was invented. It's the trail braking poster child corner!




It's not.
Damit, there I go feeding the troll.
[/b]

Right! you maroon! HE even said it was rhetorical!!!! LOL ;)




LOL... as an ABS engineer, not just a Porsche driver, I'd love to hear your reasoning behind this... :happy204:
The real PITA, IMO, of the rear suspension is the difficulty in setting camber and toe properly. NOT easy.
[/b]

Bingo...my 911 (very similar to the 944 in concept) is at the limits of the eccentrics, with new trailing arms, new Wevo SPS spring plates and new monoballs, and the thing still has toe out and too little camber! Grrrr...............