944S results yet?

Hey RL!

They may be being BUILT but we just (barely) got our first open test day in yesterday. It has been so cold and we have had so much snow it just hasn't been possible!

I will keep you updated.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
The only results I have on our S is it looks great sitting in my garage. It is currently without the motor which is being rebuilt. It is stripped and the cage is done. Next is suspension and putting the motor back in. It will be soon...
Andy
 
Of course 200+ is possible. The car came with 189 h.p. or so stock. A little work and we should get quite a bit more. Our 2 valve heads limited air in and out of the motor, so the 4 valve will make a huge difference. It will still be hard to beat the RX7's in the SE region of SCCA since this has to be the most competitive area in the U.S. There has been a lot of development done on those cars and we have a lot of work to do to catch up.
Andy #2
 
It will still be hard to beat the RX7's in the SE region of SCCA since this has to be the most competitive area in the U.S. There has been a lot of development done on those cars and we have a lot of work to do to catch up.
Andy #2[/B]
Click to expand...

RX-7s and others.
Hmmm 200+HP and less weight would have helped my 944 effort at Barber Motorsports Park. We and the RX-7s there were bested by an E36 and a 280Z. Those two cars weren't at Roebling this past weekend(I didn't race either) so the RX-7s ruled there.

You're right there is work to do.

R.L. Mitchell
 
Originally posted by 944racer:
Of course 200+ is possible. The car came with 189 h.p. or so stock.
Click to expand...

Are you guys talking apples to apples here?? The factory quote is 189, at the crank. The E36s are putting 217 down at the wheels and they weigh 2850, for a p/w ratio of: 13.13. As the 944S will race at about the same weight, you will need to make the same power, all things being equal. (Which, of course, they're not!)

The 189 crank hp should convert to about 161 at the wheels, assuming standard driveline losses. Gulp! So, if I have the numbers right, thats a gain of 56 hp that will be needed. And Porsche didn't exactly build undeveloped cars in the first place! The same battle awaits those who will attempt to make the early 911 competitive, but those are even worse off, because they won't realize the gains the newer cars will see they ditch the catalyst!



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
I was going off of the base h.p. numbers for the E36 and 944 S. Both have close to the same h.p. in stock form. I want to keep up with the many RX7's in Central Florida, not the few if any BMW's. Why can the E36's gain so much when the S only gains a little. According to gossip, the E36 goes from 188 to 265 h.p. That is a huge increase.
Andy #2
 
That is a very good question. It was unforseen by the Comp Board, that's for sure!

James will be better able to fill us in, to some degree at least...(he's not going to spill all his trade secrets!)....but I would hazard a GUESS that it involves better breathing, and the ability to chase that better breathing electronically. I would also point out that this car is a double whammy of sorts. I beleive it was classed BEFORE the Comp Board opened up the ECU rule. The E36 just came up with three 7s and to make matters worse, it sits in the top class, AND they can actually get more power out of it, albeit in a semi-legal manner.

I do think that the HP rumour is a bit high. I think 217 at the wheels is the better number, which would convert (roughly) to a little under 250. Still high though!

James-Please enlighten us!

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Originally posted by lateapex911:
The factory quote is 189, at the crank. The E36s are putting 217 down

IMO BMW under rated the HP, maybe for insurance reasons.

I agree Jake, the E36 hit the jackpot when classed. Could have been Leithauser was still at SCCA and he and/or Kline helped the effort.(no slam intended)

Breathing and ECU may have helped but just like money talks and BS walks--Torque talks.

My guess is it's the torque not HP numbers that would astound us.

R.L. Mitchell
Click to expand...
 
R>L-

I agree absolutely. They get off the corners really well, due to torque and a great rear suspension.

But they do fly down the straights. I've listened to them and while I don't know for sure what the actual numbers are, it sure SOUNDS like they're twisting them!

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Andy #2,

Back several weeks ago when we were discussing the E36, James Clay said that they had gotten quite a bit of power out of the ECU mods. Seems like 250 - 265 CHP is right about where they're landing.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Andy #2,

Back several weeks ago when we were discussing the E36, James Clay said that they had gotten quite a bit of power out of the ECU mods. Seems like 250 - 265 CHP is right about where they're landing.
Click to expand...

Bill, FWIW I don't believe that for a nanosecond. I'm not disputing you. You're just repeating what James said, but this is insane. We're talking about 60-75 bhp left on the table by an OEM. We're also talking about getting that mostly through ECU mods. If the ECU were that far off the stock engines wouldn't even run.

Anybody who has ever tried to build a NA engine knows how hard it is to make hp. It's my belief (and has been for some time) that James was quoting wheel hp and through that whole conversation it was somehow getting confused with calculated crank hp.

Just do a gut check here without regard to the dominance of the Bimmerworld cars. Those kinds of performance increases are harder than hell to get with anything goes street cars with cams and porting.

I don't and won't believe those numbers for a legal engine and I don't believe the Bimmerworld guys would cheat. I just don't. The only thing I think could really come close to making those kinds of numbers legally is if the stock cams are sloppy and by grinding blueprinted cams from billet really makes them breath.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
I would expect that the output quoted would include all engine development work, not just slap a chip in it and go racing. I would expect that the dyno runs would be at the very end of a long, involved build and development process.

As far as an OEM leaving that much on the table, of course! Not all cars are Porsches. Not all manufacturers optimize their engine calibrations for power output. There are way too many other considerations for a passenger car. Porsche does do a very good job of optimizing everything from the factory. Compare with a Hword - numerous horsies just slapping an intake and an exhaust on them. You know as well as I do that the same mods will do virtually nothing for a P-car.

Take into account an overbore, compression, balancing, etc., completely blueprinted omney-no-object, it's not quite that out of hand to see an engine gain power like that. What percentage gain is that? I don't know the stock output #'s of the BMW. I do know that I _should_ be able to gain roughly 20-30% output in my motor in IT-legal trim if properly built. Apply those percentages to the 944S, you get somewhere from 225-245hp (crank). Maybe that's a bit optimistic. I know my numbers are - if I get 20% out, I'll be happy. How about the BMW's?
Just trying to keep things in perspective...

------------------
Vaughan Scott
'79 924 #77 ITA
Plymouth, MI
www.vaughanscott.com
 
George,

Part of 'leaving that much hp on the table' could come from understating the hp numbers for the car. Been a common trick for years w/ car mfg's to help w/ insurance rates. I remember back in the late 80's, a friend of mine bought a Mazda MX-6 GT w/ the turbo 4. IIRC, it was a 2.2 liter motor, and was only rated at 140 or 145 hp. If those numbers were correct, they were probably quoting WHP, not CHP. That car had way more than 140 CHP in stock trim.

And, I also agree w/ Vaughn, it's a complete engine development package. And, I don't think James got CHP and WHP mixed up. He even admited that based on some of those numbers, and the estimated drive line loss, 250 - 265 CHP was very possible.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608
 
Vaughan,

I agree that soem manufacturers leave some on the table, but this is BMW, not Dodge. And they are not under quoting for insurance purposes. I spend considerable time on the BMW boards with the normal owner/tuners, not James. If James can get those numbers he is an amazing man (or rather his builder Stickly is). THe other 99% wont come close. I think these are just exagerations that keep building with time. Next month I will come back and see 300 hp and so on, and so on. When will the madness stop!!!!

Ken
 
If you look at the performance of the factory cars, they routinely walk away from their competition in straight line tests. Dig out your old 'Car and Drivers', 'Motor Trends' and "Road and Tracks'. Check the comparo tests. Similar gears, weights and published hp and tq. The BMW's just deliver the goods. I believe they are SLIGHTLY underated from the factory.

The key to the hp in these cars (in IT form) is the extensive ECU tuning that can be done. Gut the factory ECU housing, throw in a MOTEC and you have a real HP bump in some cars - THESE CARS.

You just have to run side by side them in a straight line to understand - until you do, you just can't.

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
The key to the hp in these cars (in IT form) is the extensive ECU tuning that can be done. Gut the factory ECU housing, throw in a MOTEC and you have a real HP bump in some cars - THESE CARS.
Click to expand...

Despite the claims and wild claims by those who program chips and reprogram ECUs, etc., You are just not going to get wild numbers out of a modern NA car by dinking around with maps. The OEMs just don't leave that much on the table. They fatten up the mixtures because that is safe.

The bottom line is maps are maps. It doesn't matter if the maps are in a MOTEC or an OEM box. Most reasonably modern cars have 3D maps and can alter mixture and spark advance. MOTECS don't have any voodoo magic that distorts physics and allows them to make more power. They only let the average monkey (OK, a monkey with enough cash burning a hole in their pocket and willing to risk blowing up and expensive engine) adjust thier maps. Period. They don't reconfigure physics or chemistry.

I still don't believe for one second the gains claimed on the E36 Bimmers. The only explanation that is plausable is understated ratings from the factory which I have a bit of a hard time with.

I think there's monkey poo in the air. Duck.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
I posted it on the wrong thread, but BMW DOES understate hp. Their literature says the hp rating is a minimum, and you may have as much as 10% (!!!!) more than advertised. Dyno runs I've seen on M Coupes and Roadsters (I have a 00 M Coupe) prove this out. There are 20 hp differences, stock, between motors. I'm not kidding.
 
Originally posted by 924Guy:
I would expect that the output quoted would include all engine development work, not just slap a chip in it and go racing.
Click to expand...

I know that. Even with a full development program, the quoted gains seem far fetched from where I sit. I only mentioned the ECU bit because that has been credited for the big gains. I don't believe it makes that big a gain. See previous post. If the stock ECU were that bad, Dinan, Hartge, Hamann, et al, would be selling some serious kick-ass chips. They sell chips, but nothing I've heard of that is absolutely must have, and I'm now a Bimmer owner (E46 road car) so I'm reading the on-line resources as well as conventional sources. I'd have heard this by now.

Originally posted by 924Guy:
As far as an OEM leaving that much on the table, of course! Not all cars are Porsches.
Click to expand...

I hate it when the P-car guys say that crap. Yes, Porsche does more to tune their cars for performance and generally don't leave as much on the table as some other manufacturers. But, I think half the problem with finding power in P-cars is the usual "tuners." The conventional "wisdom" on Rennlist is that you can't make more than a few more hp on a NA 944 engine, yet Jon Milledge seems to find and additional 40 hp, even with restrictive IT rules. The problem is, most P-car owners buy that crap and don't look much further - especially 944 owners who just mostly decide to buy a 951 instead when looking for more power. For crying out loud, not only does no one make a proper cold air intake for a 944, but no one even seems interested in trying. Tomorrow I'm taking some measurements and will be sending a design to my machinist for a prototype AFM adapter. I know they work. I also know why they work and it's very little to do with cold air.
smile.gif


Originally posted by 924Guy:
Compare with a Hword - numerous horsies just slapping an intake and an exhaust on them. You know as well as I do that the same mods will do virtually nothing for a P-car.
Click to expand...

How many have really tried and actually undertaken development? Hell, I have more friends actually doing good development for for the Sentra SE-R than I know of folks working on the 944. How many 944 owners even own a Stahl header? How many shops have actually dyno tested several different header designs? Lack of real development is the the problem. Someone who does real development is able to get results (Milledge). Jon doesn't rewrite the laws of phyics and chemistry. He just works within those law systematically and finds what works.

Originally posted by 924Guy:
Take into account an overbore, compression, balancing, etc., completely blueprinted omney-no-object, it's not quite that out of hand to see an engine gain power like that. What percentage gain is that? I don't know the stock output #'s of the BMW. I do know that I _should_ be able to gain roughly 20-30% output in my motor in IT-legal trim if properly built.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. And perhaps those gains for the Bimmer are staggering simply because the starting number is so high, so any percentage increase creates an larger actual increase in hp compared with the average car. That could be true. I'm still having a really hard time with a 50-60 hp increase for an IT engine for a Bimmer.

I could be wrong Vaughn. Certainly wouldn't be the first time and you can bet heavily it wouldn't be the last. But if those gains are really being made, then the factory rating is most likely understated or something is really sloppy with the factory engine and I cannot believe that in a BMW. The only major gains will come through breathing. The rest is freeing up hp from taking out slop from the factory.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top