944 weight reduction, any results
- Thread starter m33mcg
- Start date
I know this topic was already asked, but now that the season is coming to a close how did the weight reduction help the 944. Or is it still to soon to tell? 
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
I think it's too soon to tell but judging by the uproar some of the SM guys are making over an additional 25lbs, I think you will be a happy camper. Only downside? Big money to prep the engine to the level you need to to take full advantage.
ChrisCamadella
New member
I very highly doubt that any 944NA racers are able to come even close to the weight as it stands right now - I suspect that you could make the minimum weight 1,000 pounds and it wouldn't make any difference.
When I look at my lap times in my 944 8V, compared to the mylaps times for ITA - we would be a good solid mid-pack racer in ITA with the 8V 944 - I'm going to cite the times and write you guys a letter...
When I look at my lap times in my 944 8V, compared to the mylaps times for ITA - we would be a good solid mid-pack racer in ITA with the 8V 944 - I'm going to cite the times and write you guys a letter...
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Make sure you site them for the same year...and remember, you were ta 2715 on old technology with 3 years of missing development.
Lap times are not evidence appropriate to support reclassification or consideration under PCAs. Any letter moving forward from the proposition that this IS the case should be returned with a note indiciating as such.
Make a case based on the mechanical attributes of the car and ONLY the attributes of the car.
PLEASE make an effort to understand how the Production and GT categories got into their current state. We can learn from history.
K
Make a case based on the mechanical attributes of the car and ONLY the attributes of the car.
PLEASE make an effort to understand how the Production and GT categories got into their current state. We can learn from history.
K
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
The 944 8V is a tweener. 158 stock hp. Yes, we know an ultra-prepped motor with programmabe ECU can only make about 20% over stock.
So it's too light in ITS (at 2575) or around 2900 in ITA. Remember, the 2S13 140hp 240SX (same displacement, same config and 18 less stock hp) is 2630.
What to do?
So it's too light in ITS (at 2575) or around 2900 in ITA. Remember, the 2S13 140hp 240SX (same displacement, same config and 18 less stock hp) is 2630.
What to do?
ChrisCamadella
New member
I agree that the 9448V is sort of a 'tweener'. It's too light at 2575 for ITS. I couldn't have, even if I went on a 25lb diet (which I could use) made the car, with no fuel, weigh less than 2665, which is 90lbs heavy. So, as I said, you could set the weight at ANYTHING, and it wouldn't make any difference. And this was a car that was completely stripped to the bare body shell of all extra undercoating, etc.
I therefore think that there is no way for this car (the 8V version) to be competitive in ITS in any sort of trim. Although I understand your argument about the 3 or so years of development - I'm not sure how valid that is in our case. We haven't any chassis gains (that I know of) in that time, and we actually lost some gains by having to switch to the less adjustable shocks.
Also, I'm not sure why it's completely invalid to cite the lap times. They are a good representation of how fast a well-prepared version can go at various race tracks, and I have good reliable data from a large variety of race tracks.
One of the things I don't understand is how the RX-7s just go faster and faster - I understand why ITS is faster - we now have the BMW's, the 944 got a 16v engine, and the Corrado V6 has lots of power as well. Is there that much development available in the RX-7's that they just keep going faster and faster to keep up, with no changes to the cars or the rules? But now, I'm off topic...
Cheers
I therefore think that there is no way for this car (the 8V version) to be competitive in ITS in any sort of trim. Although I understand your argument about the 3 or so years of development - I'm not sure how valid that is in our case. We haven't any chassis gains (that I know of) in that time, and we actually lost some gains by having to switch to the less adjustable shocks.
Also, I'm not sure why it's completely invalid to cite the lap times. They are a good representation of how fast a well-prepared version can go at various race tracks, and I have good reliable data from a large variety of race tracks.
One of the things I don't understand is how the RX-7s just go faster and faster - I understand why ITS is faster - we now have the BMW's, the 944 got a 16v engine, and the Corrado V6 has lots of power as well. Is there that much development available in the RX-7's that they just keep going faster and faster to keep up, with no changes to the cars or the rules? But now, I'm off topic...
Cheers
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
I think you prove my point there. No additional allowances yet cars are going faster. Shocks, new tire compounds, continuous searces for every last hp and countless hours on the dyno, 5 test days a year - not just to 'drive around' but to maximize a shock/spring/bar/alignment package for EACH track...continous development.
I decided on the 944 for several season; first was the weight break it recieved; second was the diversity of clubs it can be raced in and the cool factor. I do not want to play follow the leader or have to race a mazda to be competitive in a cookie cutter class.
The Porsche 944 is a 20 + year old car with old technology(8v). The hp gains are there but the ITCS rules restrict it. My question is why? If you want more numbers open it up or dropt the 944 to ITA and add weight as needed. I know there are alot of PCA members that would jump in a heart beat. NASA leaders said that they want the 944Cup to have 60 cars for their next nationals.
It's a slame that one of the oldest sports cars manufactures isn't currently competitive in the largest SPORTS CAR CLUB.
The Porsche 944 is a 20 + year old car with old technology(8v). The hp gains are there but the ITCS rules restrict it. My question is why? If you want more numbers open it up or dropt the 944 to ITA and add weight as needed. I know there are alot of PCA members that would jump in a heart beat. NASA leaders said that they want the 944Cup to have 60 cars for their next nationals.
It's a slame that one of the oldest sports cars manufactures isn't currently competitive in the largest SPORTS CAR CLUB.
It's not about the 944 particularly but there's just no way to isolate the make/model/weight of the car, as a factor contributing to lap time. I could complain that the MkIII Golf needs a break based on my lap times but I'll bet my case would go out the window if a Cunningham or Pobst drove it at the ARRC.
Testing and tire budgets, engineering skill and other factors contribute more than the basics of the platform. How about legality? Unless all of the subjects in the study get a thorough teardown, there's no way to know that we're comparing top-notch but legal cars.
Sorry. It's never going to make sound methodological sense to compare lap times, even if people have strong feelings about them as "proof" that a car needs a break. Or more lead.
K
EDIT - re: "it's a shame," there's absolutely no reason that one of the Porsche options in ITR, if a full-boat example were built, can't be competitive there. Part of the problem is that the level of performance of the Porsche product line is out of line with the whole IT category structure. Until now.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
It's a shame (edit sp - Athat one of the oldest sports cars manufactures isn't currently competitive in the largest SPORTS CAR CLUB. [/b]
Well ITR has plenty of good Por-sha choices, ITS has the 944 (untested at it's new weight) the 944S which has won plenty of races...and the 924 which has won in ITB...
Throw some weight on it and let it run in ITA, seems the logical choice to me. I'd rather drop down a class to be competitive with ballast than stay in a higher class, unable to shed weight, and lucky to just stay on the same lap as Moser... oh, wait, that is me!!! 
PS - hate to have to remind a fellow P-car guy of this, but I'm a whole more likely to listen when Chris C or others who've spent a long time working with their cars expressing concern about being competitive, vs. someone who's just starting a build... Spend 5 years building it to the hilt and debugging it, then we'll have something to talk about. BTDT.
PS - hate to have to remind a fellow P-car guy of this, but I'm a whole more likely to listen when Chris C or others who've spent a long time working with their cars expressing concern about being competitive, vs. someone who's just starting a build... Spend 5 years building it to the hilt and debugging it, then we'll have something to talk about. BTDT.
I think if the car could make minimum weight you would have a good fight on your hands. 2575lbs with 175-185 hp is quite nice, I just have no idea how anybody will get there. My old 8v looked like it was left out on the Cross Bronx Expressway for a night and I was still at 2720 with no fuel ( i do weigh 200lbs). Maybe a female driver at 98lbs, with a bare minumum roll cage, no accusump, smallest fire ex ......could do it. Looking forward to seeing somebody try. Russ
JeffYoung
New member
Russ is that wheel or crank hp?
I'm at 160 whp and 2560, and other than aero issues above 100 mph do not feel down on power to the fast cars. I would think 175-180 at the crank at 2575 with that handling and those brakes should be pretty stout, especially on momentum tracks.
I'm at 160 whp and 2560, and other than aero issues above 100 mph do not feel down on power to the fast cars. I would think 175-180 at the crank at 2575 with that handling and those brakes should be pretty stout, especially on momentum tracks.
With a 20% drop from the fly wheel to the road thats a 200 hp engine to put down 160 hp. thats a little high form all the dyno talk i have heard from guys building LP production engines with milledge heads and valves work. 185hp build in ITS is more like what you will get most of the time and thats about 148 to the drive wheels. thats a good fresh engine with the choise of a few good heads. the 44 in IT trim has to make it work with something other than HP.
Look at all race goups with the best times and its almost always the best of everything. best set up, best data on bars shocks and ties,best alinement equipment at the track and scale right at hand there too. its the cubic dollar thats fast. drop a 40k 944 with all the best off the truck with everthing needed to make changes for the track/conditions and they will win most of the time. the 6k 944 is always somewhere in the rear and there just for the fun.
Look at all race goups with the best times and its almost always the best of everything. best set up, best data on bars shocks and ties,best alinement equipment at the track and scale right at hand there too. its the cubic dollar thats fast. drop a 40k 944 with all the best off the truck with everthing needed to make changes for the track/conditions and they will win most of the time. the 6k 944 is always somewhere in the rear and there just for the fun.
Team SSR
New member
We race a 944 which does make weight. It's closer to a 6K car than a 40K car. We chose the 944 because it is designed closer to a 'real' race car than most street cars. I have no intention of spending 5 years and 50K in IT. The way I see it, if we want to win we have to either be lucky, do the cubic dollar thing, cheat, or move on. We will probably be moving on in '08. In the mean time we're going to go as fast as our budget and a lot of hard work allows in '07.