Senior Member
Hope you don't expect much in return......Originally posted by grega:
I'll trade away some of my experience and good looks for some torque *or* horsepower...
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]
Administrator
What, Jake, you don't think I have a lot of experience...?
Senior Member
I am well aware of that, but it will never happen again at that weight!!Originally posted by ITSRX7:
Jeff,
Did you know a 944 was the 2002 NERRC Champ?
AB
Don't get me wrong, I loved my 944!! But with only 143hp...............
------------------
Jeff L
#74 ITB GTi
Senior Member
Alright guys... which is it? Some say 143hp, some say 157 (158??)hp???Originally posted by JLawton:
I loved my 944!! But with only 143hp...............
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
Senior Member
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
Senior Member
It's both Darin. To be honest, I don't know exactly when that changed. Doesn't really matter actually.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...
Yes, update/backdate does apply.Originally posted by Banzai240:
Also, what accounts for the difference in HP??? Does update/backdate 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
Senior Member
And a correct one at that Bill.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...
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Senior Member
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.Originally posted by Banzai240:
[B] Alright guys... which is it? Some say 143hp, some say 157 (158??)hp???
/B]
Senior Member
The chip is removable. It just requires you to desolder it. There are people who do offer chips for the early DME (ECU).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.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Senior Member
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
Senior Member
I actually calculate about 2642lbs...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
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
Junior Member
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.
Member
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)
Member
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)
Senior Member
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.Originally posted by ChrisCamadella:
Up to 1987, they all make 150HP.
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
Member
The difference is that my numbers are DIN, and yours are SAE Net, probably.
How was the game?
Senior Member
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.Originally posted by ChrisCamadella:
The difference is that my numbers are DIN, and yours are SAE Net, probably.
How was the game?
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
Senior Member
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
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks