Porsche 944 in ITS

[seckerich]

What year would that be? Do not remember any S car going 19.XX

http://www.mylaps.com/en/events/604747

http://www.mylaps.com/en/classification/1342491

http://www.mylaps.com/en/classification/964841

http://www.mylaps.com/en/classification/662944

[TomL]

The listed ITS record is Mike Flynn at a 1:20.59 from 2008. I don't recall anything faster. A 20.8 today is really good. Particularly considering how the track has slowed down since the last repaving in 2006 (I set an IT7 record at 1:24.4 that year and I (and the rest of the fast 7s) usually run 26s or 27s now.)

[JeffYoung]

Not taking ANYTHING away from Jeff G and his setup and driving skills, but conditions were just about perfect Saturday a.m. Cool, slightly overcast. A 20.8 is flying though as the track has slowed.

In going back through those, it looks like Mike Flynn, Mike VS and John Williams have all run faster laps in S, with John at 1:20.3. Those were in qual in the morning and as we all know, Roebling is always faster in the cool of the morning.

[kipvan]

Hey- check out Q2 10/9/10. I have actually run in the 1.19s numerous times in ITS just never did it during the race. I was particularly happy with this qualifier as it was in the slower afternoon session. Let me know if you decide to build that 944s- I'd be glad to help you. I sure do miss dicing with you guys in ITS- what a GREAT class!

[kipvan]

Take that back- LOL. In 2010 I ran as ITR. The yellow ITS miata was the only ITS car that I ran in the 1.19s with and the best that I have recorded was a 1:19.8 and that was in a morning session. Still, a well prepared 944s can make a great ITS car. Best time that I recorded at Roebling in the 944s ITS was a 1:20.1(close but no cigar). If EP doesn't pan out you now have me thinking about converting back to ITS. Take care and I'll see ya at the track.

[benspeed]

Hey Kip - good to see you on the forum. Will give you a call - want to do the ecu this winter

Cheers

Ben

[924Guy]

Good luck in Prod, Kip... but I can't imagine it being as much fun as IT!

Maybe you need to go single-seater...

[JeffYoung]

C'mon back to ITS. Would love to have you back running with us again.

A 19 in an S car at Roebling is SMOKING.

[Ron Earp]

I do believe those 944s can get it done and clearly it has been proven that they can. When I had the S2 that Jake sold me I was heavily involved in research mode for the car with the goal being an ITR build. I learned a lot about them, but one thing I definitely took notice of is that there is a lot of Porsche "everybody knows" out there that needs to be critically evaluated.

A classic example is the exhaust manifold on the motors that "everyone knows is optimized from the factory. Upon inspection of the manifold, with knowledge of modern race exhaust systems in mind, it doesn't take long to see where gains can be had. But the Porsche faithful, some of them anyway, are convinced that individual components of the motors are so optimized that there are no improvements to be made. The VS crew have proved it can be done.

The two 944s in the spec lines are:

*2V 2.7L at 2635 lbs w/ 1 45mm intake valve, 162hp
*4V 2.5L at 2850 lbs w/ 2 37mm intake valves, 188 hp

I don't have cam specs for valve curtain area, but just based on valve sizes:

*2.7L has 1589 mm^2 intake valve area per cylinder
*2.5L has 2149 mm^2 intake valve area per cylinder

In comparison with my old 260Z, both cars have more favorable intake valve sizes by an appreciable margin, fuel injection, and undoubtedly a better head design than the non-crossflow L head fed by carbs. We were able to generate 176 rwhp out of the 260Z, maybe a bit more on a perfect day, so I think the 944S build taking advantage of all the rules can beat that by a favorable margin. A good deal of research would need to be done to select between these engine choices but it seems a 944 S car would be a lot of fun. If I were building a new car for S this one would be on my short list.

Not sure which I would pick. With no other data I’m in favor of finding the largest motor with the lowest specific output and build that engine, betting that it’ll have the most to gain and that theory would favor the 2.7L engine at 60hp/L. Plus that version weighs 215 lbs less than the other one, but real research would reveal the favorite.

[Andy Bettencourt]

All of that theory assumes that the air metering device isn't the restriction.

[Ron Earp]

All of that theory assumes that the air metering device isn't the restriction.

A good deal of research would need to be done to select between these engine choices

Yep.

[blueray]

I bought a built 84 944 about a year ago. Still trying to sort out the setup and get it handling like I want but it's a ton of fun to drive. I'm off the pace of the fast ITS cars but, I think with the time and car sorting, there's a lot to be gained. They did lower weight. Least in the GCR for mine, it's 2575 now - not an S though. I liked it for the 944 cup, PCA and NASA as well. Love the way it handles. I thought about a newer RX7 or BMW but have always wanted a 944. May not be able to win but, I enjoy it. That's what matters to me!