944 weight reduction, any results

[Fastfred92]

Jeezz,,,,,, What am i doing wrong here???? The 3 people from Raleigh who post on IT.com a fair bit are Ron, Jeff and me

Ron is in Hawaii, Jeff is in Stockholm and i am in Raleigh ( well actually Cary )....... did I miss a meeting or something?


I got to find a new career path

[JeffYoung]

Stockholm was cool, although worked the whole time. 9 million Swedes, 4.5 million Swedish women, 1/2 of them supermodels. Amazing.

Back to the 9-Foh-Foh. So is the request to move it in, and then Joe has opposed it?

I got no dog in the fight, but interested in how it turns out. ITAC recommendation on this is?

[lateapex911]

work work work...Mike Rowe from "Dirty Jobs" probably has no sympathy for ye who mingle with the supermodels...

Anyway, the ITAC got a request to move to A due to inabilty to make anything close to weight...

!5 pages of discussion here....

Some opposition from one or two...

Some ITAC research...

and we'll discuss it on our next con call.

Holidays preempted our last call, sorry. Stay tuned.

[Banzai240]

Anyway, the ITAC got a request to move to A due to inabilty to make anything close to weight...[/b]

A PERCEIVED "inability to make anything close to weight"... There are those HERE who have said they can... AND who actually race the things...

[Greg Amy]

A PERCEIVED "inability to make anything close to weight"...[/b]

Ditto. Until I see a half-dozen serious attempts at making these cars light, I'll consider those claims to be self- perpetuating.

In my opinion, the Porsche 944 does not belong in ITA.

[lateapex911]

A PERCEIVED "inability to make anything close to weight"... There are those HERE who have said they can... AND who actually race the things...
[/b]

No, the ITAC got a request that it be moved due to a CLAIMED inability to make weight...

(THe letter writer being the one making the claim.....)

It's the ITACs job to research and verify the claim, and THEN to decide where to go with it.

[Greg Amy]

It's the ITACs job to research and verify the claim...[/b]

Right. And how can you possibly do that with any reasonableness of certainty? Is the ITAC meeting at George Roffe's house having a "let's lighten up the 944" party...? Or are you simply calling around to 944 builders (who have a built-in conflict of interest) asking them "can you do this otherwise we'll consider moving you to ITA"...?

As a result, you're about to get a rash of letters from competitors claiming that their cars cannot get down to their minimum weight; are you prepared to address each of those claims thoroughly and fairly as well? If not, why not? If so, how?

Oh Jake, Pandora's on the phone for you...

[lateapex911]

And her hair is full of snakes...

It's ok, I like snakes.....

Each of your examples has exceptions...the truth will out.

(upon rereading my quote Greg, i hope you weren't reading it as pre disposed to verify -only-.......perhaps I should have been more obvious...and added a "or deny"....)

[erlrich]

Interesting, I just went back an read the first few pages of this thread (sorry I came in late), and noticed these comments:

We race a 944 which does make weight.[/b]

I DO think that the earlier (pre-85.5) 944 chassis are lighter - you may even be able to make the ITS weight with one of those chassis, particularly with a light cage.[/b]

And yes I understand the part about the earlier cars being lighter; so does that mean we're going to split the '85.5 and later versions when we move the car to A, and leave the earlier cars in S?

[Fastfred92]

As a result, you're about to get a rash of letters from competitors claiming that their cars cannot get down to their minimum weight; are you prepared to address each of those claims thoroughly and fairly as well? If not, why not? If so, how?
[/b]

Well Greg, the big weight off of 06 happend early 06 and I am on record as early as 2/14/06 ( in IT.com post ) saying that 944 will not make weight. Where are all the others?

[Joe Harlan]

Well Greg, the big weight off of 06 happend early 06 and I am on record as early as 2/14/06 ( in IT.com post ) saying that 944 will not make weight. Where are all the others?
[/b]

There you go, The adjustment wasn't even dry before we are trying to readjust. That is not rarely or being conservative with adjustments. I have it from a top level Porcshe builder that the early cars can make it.

And the thought that I am the onloy one that is opposed is BS. I am vocal enough to point out that it would be a mistake to move a car in this short a period of time without seeing a full build effort of some sorts happen.

[Bill Miller]

I submit that the ITAC should use the same guideline that they did when they classified the New Beetle in ITC. What was the difference in the curb weight vs. the process weight for ITB?

[Fastfred92]

There you go, The adjustment wasn't even dry before we are trying to readjust. That is not rarely or being conservative with adjustments. I have it from a top level Porcshe builder that the early cars can make it.

[/b]

Well Joe, for you, one more time. I built one of these several years back when the old weight was 2715 and the car was prepped ( weightwise ) damn near 100% and I was EXACTLY 2834 last time I went over the scales before selling the car. That was with appx. 4 gal of gas and me at 250...... If my math is correct that is 2736 with no gas and the magical 180 lb driver. I ran cookie cutters at about 14lbs each ( 15") and I am sure for $$$ you could find me some 8 lb wheels. Now we are at 2712 let figure another 10lbs worth of guages 2702, I will say there may have been 5 lbs of undercoating I did not scrape off somewhere 2697. Radiator is already aluminum but maybe another 3 for custom unit, another 8 for aluminum body shocks and 10 for your spoiler delete ( illegal?) 2676... still 100 lbs so lets see: titanium exhaust 10, carbon wheels 8, hand held fire bottle 2, carbon seat 4, titanium fasteners 5, cheap brand windshield 2 = 2645 What have I missed Joe? Wait that is only 70lbs, clearly within the close enough rule!

[Joe Harlan]

Well Joe, for you, one more time. I built one of these several years back when the old weight was 2715 and the car was prepped ( weightwise ) damn near 100% and I was EXACTLY 2834 last time I went over the scales before selling the car. That was with appx. 4 gal of gas and me at 250...... If my math is correct that is 2736 with no gas and the magical 180 lb driver. I ran cookie cutters at about 14lbs each ( 15") and I am sure for $$$ you could find me some 8 lb wheels. Now we are at 2712 let figure another 10lbs worth of guages 2702, I will say there may have been 5 lbs of undercoating I did not scrape off somewhere 2697. Radiator is already aluminum but maybe another 3 for custom unit, another 8 for aluminum body shocks and 10 for your spoiler delete ( illegal?) 2676... still 100 lbs so lets see: titanium exhaust 10, carbon wheels 8, hand held fire bottle 2, carbon seat 4, titanium fasteners 5, cheap brand windshield 2 = 2645 What have I missed Joe? Wait that is only 70lbs, clearly within the close enough rule!
[/b]

Fred, provide photos of the build and maybe I can give you some guidance on where to find that extra weight. I don’t see any mention of fuel cell in your list. Again not trying to be a jerk it is that I do this for a living every day in my shop. I know there is not 100 magic pounds that will come off in a clump I bet there’s a 100 lbs that will come off. -14 lbs with 2 gals less fuel....

[Fastfred92]

I don’t see any mention of fuel cell in your list.

-14 lbs with 2 gals less fuel....
[/b]

Joe, I have been racing since I was 18 years old ( now 42 ) so I think I know a little bit about prep. I also operate my own body shop and have handled most of my own fabrication over the years. I can tell you with certainty that a fuel cell and all its associated can, framework etc will not produce any savings. The oem tank on 944's is very light and compact and due to the nature of their layout it is a difficult car to install a cell in any way. There is a heavy metal shield under the tank which I removed anyway. As you mentioned in a earlier post the door glass and regulators are near 15lbs each side but as I have said the weight of adding the needed door bars to be able to ditch the glass is pretty much a wash. My old car had x bars.

The above post was with ZERO fuel so no 14 lbs there..

[lateapex911]

Fred what year was that chassis?

[Banzai240]

All very interesting...

When I spent an hour on the phone with Greg Fordahl a year or so ago about this topic as ITAC chair the last time the ITAC reviewed this issue, he told me he hadn't even bothered to remove the electric windows or any of several other IT legal removal items because he needed the extra weight to make 2715...

Odd... don't you think...

Oh... and he is always only a tad off a good 240Z pace at most tracks... (yes... even WAY out here in the NW, we have GOOD 240Zs with GOOD drivers...) and WAY faster than any ITA car...

[Joe Harlan]

Joe, I have been racing since I was 18 years old ( now 42 ) so I think I know a little bit about prep. I also operate my own body shop and have handled most of my own fabrication over the years. I can tell you with certainty that a fuel cell and all its associated can, framework etc will not produce any savings. The oem tank on 944's is very light and compact and due to the nature of their layout it is a difficult car to install a cell in any way. There is a heavy metal shield under the tank which I removed anyway. As you mentioned in a earlier post the door glass and regulators are near 15lbs each side but as I have said the weight of adding the needed door bars to be able to ditch the glass is pretty much a wash. My old car had x bars.

The above post was with ZERO fuel so no 14 lbs there..
[/b]

Fred, your attitude is showing. I was offering help. I have installed a lot of fuel cells and there is a weight savings every time I have done it. The 14 lbs was the fact that you had 4 gals left in the stock tank which likely you needed to finish (pickup) so if you could finish with 2 gals less (cell picks up better) you save roughly 14 lbs.
I would still love to see photos of the car you built and Jake asks a good question what year was the tub?

[Fastfred92]

Fred what year was that chassis?
[/b]

1986

And I owned that car before I owned a digital camera, I have on track pics (prints) but nothing else..

[Banzai240]

1986

[/b]

IIRC... the 1983-1985.5 model years are 100lbs lighter due to a lighter chasses/body structure... In 86 and up they were heavier, according to several 944 sources...

So, these suffer from the same issue as any number of other cars...

You might claim that this puts an unfair premium on the earlier cars, and a move to ITA would make ALL 944s able to make weight, but this premium would be pronounced in ITA as well, because the lighter/earlier cars would have the advantage of being able to add weight back more strategically in the allowed ballast area and get even better balance than these alread have...