944S results yet?

Originally posted by JeffYoung:
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.
Click to expand...

Ok, then this could actually explain it. Understated stock hp (makes one question if the E36 325i should even be in IT then) and sloppiness from the factory. Find the best parts, blueprint the cams (grind new from billet), figure out optimal cam timing, improve the breathing. That could all add up. But again, it makes me quesiton if the E36 should be there at all then. Probably, but then the info the CB had at the time was probably not the greatest.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
 
Originally posted by Geo:
Ok, then this could actually explain it. Understated stock hp (makes one question if the E36 325i should even be in IT then) and sloppiness from the factory. Find the best parts, blueprint the cams (grind new from billet), figure out optimal cam timing, improve the breathing. That could all add up. But again, it makes me quesiton if the E36 should be there at all then. Probably, but then the info the CB had at the time was probably not the greatest.
Click to expand...

Funny, but am I the only one that sees this thread as having gone full circle??

James will laugh his ass off when he reads this!

So, some quick math.

1-Start with 10hp more...thats only 6% or so. 200 to be nice and round.

2- Now, ditch the cat and free up the (preety quiet) stock exhaust. Add a sweet well tuned header. Hmmm...20? 25?
3- Now degree the cams, grind to optimal tolerances, flow the head as allowed...Another 10. What are we up to? 235.
4- Oh...bump the compression up to the top of the spec range and add the .5 allowed...another 7?
5- Now do some electronic mumbo jumbo that can take advantage of all the changes. I've spoken with Speed World Challenge BMW builders and asked, "where does the power come from???" (Have you looked at a BMW in WC trim??) The answer was unanimous: Engine management. I don't think that 250 crank is that preposteroous at all. That converts to about 217 at the wheels.

Andy-what does a top flight RX-7 put down at the wheels? 190?? At 2690lbs, that's 14.10 lbs/hp. The E36 is, assuming 217, 13.13lbs/hp.

It all adds up.



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

You left out the 0.040 overbore to increase displacement and balancing and blueprinting the whole motor.

That's a 2.43% increase in displacement from 2494cc to 2555cc, or more than a 60cc increase in displacement (essentially going from a 2.5 to a 2.6). Interestingly enough, a 2.6l Porsche 944 gets less than a 50cc increase, or a 2.00% increase.

I've been doing this long enough to know that the hp gains from individual mods are not additive (I love the guys on the VW forum that think they get 32 more hp because the cam is good for 10, the exhaust is good for 10, the throttle body is good for 7, and the K&N is good for 5). It's all about how the things work together. For example, the above VW example is good for an honest 15-17 hp gain. But that's a 17% - 19% gain when you're talking about a 90hp motor. Disclaimer: Yep, I know that the cam and TB aren't legal in IT, just using it as an example.

For all the folks out there that say that these 250-265 CHP numbers from an IT E36 are fabricated, just remember that James Clay came on here and said that they were realistic and possible. He also said that they saw large gains w/ ECU (engine management) tuning. Based on his track record and experience, I'm inclined to think that he knows what he's talking about. I don't know if Turner even bothers w/ IT stuff (since they have such a strong WC program), but I might have to call them and see what they think realistic numbers for an IT-trim E36 2.5 motor are.

And, if I were the ITA guys, I'd be wondering when somebody's going to decide to build an E36 318is and push for it to be dropped down into ITA. After all, it's a 1.8 DOHC motor, and there are several other cars with 1.8 DOHC motors already in ITA. Not to mention that it's got to go against it's "big brother" in the same class. And since there are currently no comp. adjustments in IT, I'd love to hear the reasons why the car shouldn't be moved down. You can't tell me that a 250# weight difference makes up for 2 extra cylinders and ~700 cc extra displacement.

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

Top flight 2nd gen ITS RX-7's make around 170 -173 RWHP and 125 - 130 RWTQ and can come in at min weight no problem.

And to Geo: I understand how these BMW numbers may be hard to believe. Historically, the gains seem unreal. They are indeed very large. I again will say that you have to be on track with one of the top cars in order to UNDERSTAND the power difference. Kip's E36 is a feakin' bullet in a straight line. I do think the RX-7's out handle the E36, but that is a seperate issue.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[This message has been edited by ITSRX7 (edited April 19, 2003).]
 
Andy- Well if thats the case, then the P/W is 15.55, which is even uglier.

I've been on the press building at the end of the straight, and I've listened to those things enter Big Bend. They sound ptetty twisted. Any idea what they use as a redline?? WAG?

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Originally posted by lateapex911:
Funny, but am I the only one that sees this thread as having gone full circle??

Hey Jake,

You're not the only one. I was ready to post a flame that this is another 944S thread turned into an E36 thread.

R.L. Mitchell
(hoping that one day people will be wondering what are my HP numbers)
Click to expand...
 
Well, R.L., if your're discussing anything in ITS, you're discussing the E36 and the whole classing problem in general!

But, to get back on topic, the E36 is setting the bar at 13.13 lbs/hp. Can the 944S get close enough to make up the difference in handling and braking?? We'll see, but it IS a long road to hoe!

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Hey George,

I agree to an extent with what you're saying about lack of development.

It's not that no one has done it though, it's that no one wants to spend the time/$ to do it within IT rules. It's just business. Why develop unless you have demand?

You can build a 250HP 944 engine(not IT legal) but the practical P-car guys say "Why?" when you can buy a 944Turbo and tweek it to 400HP.

R.L. Mitchell
[email protected]
wwww.RPM4Performance.com
 
Originally posted by Fastfred92:
Bill

Correct me if i am wrong but the 318is ( e36 ) is already classed in ITA.....
Click to expand...

If it is, it got moved from ITS. Anybody w/ an '03 GCR that can comment?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608
 
you see Bill, that just makes good SCCA logic: E36 318, vastly superior chassis, suspension, afew more hp and tack on 100 lbs or so and in ITA it goes, E30 with a few less hp, less potential chassis wise and stick it it with the E36 325 in ITS ???? Kinda like the 944S and 944 in ITS and the Gen III non-vtec Integra....... I am statring to see this IT2 light
 
Well,

I stand corrected. I looked at the ITA 318 (E36) spec line, and I see that it's listed at 2840#, just 10# lighter than the 325 version. Come on now folks, I know a 2.5 liter 6 cyl. weighs more than 10# more than a 1.8 liter 4 cyl.!
eek.gif
And yes, please explain how the E30 version is in ITS and the E36 version is in ITA? Also, while I'm not a BMW guru, does the ITA line include the 318is? I know that there have been 318's, 318i's, 318is', and 318tii's. Are all of these included in that same spec line?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI
SCCA 279608
 
From what I remember, you really have to understand HOW these motors make their power to understand why they might be in different classes. The E30 318is ('91 vintage) was a feared Solo car in the mid 1990's. I was considered by most to be even better than the Neon ACR but seldom run because of it propensity to tip over when large mistakes where made and it's lack of contingency support.

Given the current make up of ITA (240SX, CRX, Miata), I would think it would make a nice addition to the class. At 136HP, what would YOU want it to weigh in ITA?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
I think the E30 318is could be a good ITA car, never in ITS. Also, the E36 318i could be a good ITA car, but is too heavy at this point. In E36, I would think 318i covers 318i (4 door), 318is (2 door), and 318 (general term. The 318ti has a different rear suspension and would not fit or really be desirable.

------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------
 
Originally posted by Geo:
Ok, then this could actually explain it. Understated stock hp (makes one question if the E36 325i should even be in IT then) and sloppiness from the factory. Find the best parts, blueprint the cams (grind new from billet), figure out optimal cam timing, improve the breathing. That could all add up.
Click to expand...

The cams don't need to be ground - the tolerances are tight. The biggest one-time change was the exhaust. When I built my first ITS car, I put on a set of aftermarket headers that were about the only ones available for a gain of a few HP. Now, as a spin-off of World Challenge development and having a fellow BMW racer with contacts, we have a computer generated exhaust that shows amazing gains.

I have quit arguing about Comp adjustments - not worth it. But, seemingly small attention to detail items like this can be worth more than you would think. Shouldn't be too difficult to build something similar for an RX-7, 240, Pcar, or anything else if someone is willing to do it.


------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------
 
Originally posted by lateapex911:
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!)
Click to expand...

E36 325 makes exactly 189 at the crank from the factory...

------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
James Clay
http://www.bimmerworld.com
Engineered BMW Performance
World Challenge/SCCA/BMWCCA Racecar Rental
Genuine OEM and Used BMW Parts
(540) 639-9648
-----------------------------------------------------------
 
I opened up this discussion thread to see if there are any results for 944 S's, and there are only several mentions with regard to the S, the other 30+ replies are about the BMW E36. What happened to the 944 S ? I'll hopefully be debuting mine in August at Daytona. DOes anyone have one on the track yet???
 
I'm building a 944s, probably won't be ready for a month or two. Anyone done any testing of eproms for the 16v motor?(I mean on a dyno). I don't believe Autothority numbers, 18hp at the wheels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top