Porsche 944S

[latebrake]

Originally posted by JeffYoung@Nov 10 2005, 05:35 AM
George, hope this isn't a thread hijack but I wanted to comment on 944 Cup. I ran a NASA race a few weeks back and I was shocked by the number (20+ maybe) of 944 race cars that were there. Not all were potential ITS cars, but a good chunk were.

How do we get those guys back to ITS? It seems to me that the 944 and 944s should in many ways be the quintessential ITS car, and here we are with most people taking their toys elsewhere.

What do these cars need to run up front in S? Is it just too much of a dollar investment getting power out of the motor (I've heard the quotes for Milledge motors and that scares me)? Or is it the weight?

I would hope that as part of the re-ordering of IT that is coming up, that the ITAC gives serious consideration to the 944 and to helping it out (and this is from a non-044 driver). Having all of those potential ITS cars over in NASA 944 Cup is a bad thing.

[snapback]65075[/snapback]

George,

Porsche has taken a beating from SCCA for some time now. NASA allows the front engine cars to race with each other. The 2.5 car in ITS skin wont run up front even with a good engine. They handle good but wont make the power. About 120 to 125 at the wheels ITS legal. I run a 944 E/P car and have two Milledge engines. Not cheap but needed to run up front. So I run my car with NASA when they run at VIR or CMP. Production is not cheap racing and if I had it to do all over again I would run the 944S or the 2.7 engine in ITS.

I have a friend who has not run his 1976 924 for several years and wants to sell it for 4k. I think it can run ITA with carbs (on the car now) It was a J-PCA car and held a couple track records somewhere. I dont like the 2L Audi engine much,just me.
Dont build a car!!!!! Buy one. Its 50 cent on the dollar cheaper. Buy Mine for 15k and run it in the NASA cup, it won the SE division in 04. I had a friend killed at at BMWCCA event the other week and the wife is hasing hell with me.

Lawrence

[Geo]

Originally posted by latebrake@Nov 10 2005, 11:16 AM
George,

Porsche has taken a beating from SCCA for some time now. NASA allows the front engine cars to race with each other. The 2.5 car in ITS skin wont run up front even with a good engine. They handle good but wont make the power. About 120 to 125 at the wheels ITS legal. I run a 944 E/P car and have two Milledge engines. Not cheap but needed to run up front. So I run my car with NASA when they run at VIR or CMP. Production is not cheap racing and if I had it to do all over again I would run the 944S or the 2.7 engine in ITS.

I have a friend who has not run his 1976 924 for several years and wants to sell it for 4k. I think it can run ITA with carbs (on the car now) It was a J-PCA car and held a couple track records somewhere. I dont like the 2L Audi engine much,just me.
Dont build a car!!!!! Buy one. Its 50 cent on the dollar cheaper. Buy Mine for 15k and run it in the NASA cup, it won the SE division in 04. I had a friend killed at at BMWCCA event the other week and the wife is hasing hell with me.

Lawrence

[snapback]65090[/snapback]

A truly all-out engine should put down well over 125 to the wheels. Milledge engines put out 185 at the crank. I cannot believe there are 30% driveline losses. I think the problem is a) nobody but Jon is doing serious development of these engines, and most people are not willing to go the distance to really get that level of development. I know in the 944 community there is a belief that there is little to nothing that can be done for these engines, but when Jon can get 185 for an IT legal engine I know most people just aren't putting in the effort. That said, I won't have a Milledge engine. I don't know everything that Jon does, but I do know the key ingredient that makes the difference between a good and a great engine. I won't tell because I bought Jon's $100 ITS primer and I believe that information is proprietary (it's not mine to give). Since you have Milledge engines, it might be worty a conversation with Jon about this.

The 2.7 does not make a good ITS engine. The weight premium that is paid for the displacement is way too much. A fully built 2.7 ITS engine only makes a few more hp than the 2.5. I also know what causes that difference, but again, I consider that info proprietary.

I'm sorry about Dave. Everything I've read about him as a person has been pretty stellar. I also heard he set a class lap record on his last race lap.

[latebrake]

Originally posted by Geo@Nov 10 2005, 03:39 PM
A truly all-out engine should put down well over 125 to the wheels. Milledge engines put out 185 at the crank. I cannot believe there are 30% driveline losses. I think the problem is a) nobody but Jon is doing serious development of these engines, and most people are not willing to go the distance to really get that level of development. I know in the 944 community there is a belief that there is little to nothing that can be done for these engines, but when Jon can get 185 for an IT legal engine I know most people just aren't putting in the effort. That said, I won't have a Milledge engine. I don't know everything that Jon does, but I do know the key ingredient that makes the difference between a good and a great engine. I won't tell because I bought Jon's $100 ITS primer and I believe that information is proprietary (it's not mine to give). Since you have Milledge engines, it might be worty a conversation with Jon about this.

The 2.7 does not make a good ITS engine. The weight premium that is paid for the displacement is way too much. A fully built 2.7 ITS engine only makes a few more hp than the 2.5. I also know what causes that difference, but again, I consider that info proprietary.

I'm sorry about Dave. Everything I've read about him as a person has been pretty stellar. I also heard he set a class lap record on his last race lap.

[snapback]65110[/snapback]

Everything Jon has told me has been right on the money. No pum intended. A stock off the street engine will make about 125 at the wheels. Just a little intake and exhaust fixes a lot of that. The #2 bearing can be worked out if you take care of the right foot problem. Just like most engines. I have had friends race these cars for as long as 4 years with only oil changes , plugs, pads and tires.

It would bring a lot of them back if it ran in ITA or got some sort of weight break. Otherwise its going to take a lot of money to build a Milledge or Sunbelt power plant. There goes the cheap racing part. The 2.5 944 can run in SCCA,NASA,SVRA,HSR. you can race your brains out if you have time and money and there are a ton of them around cheap. I live 17 min from VIR and have cut my grass in the morning and raced that afternoon. I love to tell that one.

Lawrence

[JimLill]

Originally posted by Geo@Nov 10 2005, 03:39 PM
The 2.7 does not make a good ITS engine.

Are you speaking of the 89 4V2.7 or the "S" DOHC2.7 or both?

[Geo]

Originally posted by JimLill@Nov 25 2005, 01:08 PM
Are you speaking of the 89 4V2.7 or the "S" DOHC2.7 or both?

[snapback]66653[/snapback]

The 8v. According to Milledge they don't make much more hp than the 2.5 and certainly not enough to make up for the weight penalty.

[944-spec#94]

Originally posted by JimLill@Nov 25 2005, 01:08 PM
Are you speaking of the 89 4V2.7 or the "S" DOHC2.7 or both?

[snapback]66653[/snapback]

In 89 the only 944 engine was the 2.7L 8valve unit (SOHC)
From 83 to 88 the 944 engine was the 2.5L 8valve unit (SOHC)

The 944S only came in 87 and 88 in 2.5L 16valve (DOHC) versions.

[944-spec#94]

Originally posted by latebrake@Nov 10 2005, 09:16 AM
The 2.5 car in ITS skin wont run up front even with a good engine. They handle good but wont make the power. About 120 to 125 at the wheels ITS legal.

Well I have to disagree on one point.

My 944 motor puts out 134 rwhp as well as all the 60 or 70 west coast 944 spec race cars. Most of our cars run 129-135 rwhp. These are in motor prepared LESS than ITS allowables. (my motor is a stock 9.5:1 CR pistons, 140k mile block & rings, Stock header, test pipe stock muffler, aftermarket DME chip, freshish stock headwork). Of course this was done on purpose to keep the cars a little cheaper.

Supposedly Jon Millegdge can build a 183 bhp ITS legal motor. That should put down about 158 or so to the wheels. That the MOST Hp I figure you can get from a ITS legal motor. Jon knows his stuff and due limited piston supplies even that power may tough to get.

Still with 158 rwhp at 2715 lbs the cars are just too low on hp and have too much weight to be strong in ITS given the currnet cars out there.


Now on the west coast NASA 944-spec is popular for a few reason.

1) most folks are "Porsche" types so racing a Porsche is desire of theirs in general and this class offer this for about as low as you can. 10k gets you race winning car. (built or bought)

2) The rules in many way are more restrictive than IT on cost items, shocks, bushings, engine prep, and springs, but more flexiable on weight savings/low cost stuff. Weight removal is more liberal with lower weight (2600 lbs with driver), door glass can come out, lightweight batteries, drilled rotors and a few other things. Also we have spec wheel and tire Toyo RA-1.

3) It is a class philosophy that strong cars can be build in your backyard and don't need shop. Fancy engine builds are discouraged greatly. Yep as of this time you don't need a shop to build you class winning car. It can be done in your backyard with a junkyard motor or if you want a stock "build it at home" motor.

4) drivers in the class are all pretty friendly and help the new drivers get up to speed and with car prep. The biggest goal is to have fun and more drivers at speed means more fun.


For me racing in IT on the west coast is not a goal of mine. Most due to the motor work the car will need to be competitive. Hell even the weights were changed to allow a 183 bhp milledge motor car to be competitive I would not get in IT. Reaons being is the cost for that Milledge motor is extreme and simply there more 944 spec cars than IT cars in this area.