PORSCHE 944
- Thread starter D Kicak
- Start date
lateapex911
Super Moderator
The 944 is in ITS, and frankly it is an uphill battle for the car. At the spec weight, many think the 944S has a much better chance in the same class.
Chris Camadella, and ITAC member who posts here on occassion, has a nicely prepped 944 and can shed a lot more light.
There are enduros to run in, the NESSCA series has enduros of 1 to 3 hours (I think) and there are others of 6, 12, and 13 hour duration.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
Chris Camadella, and ITAC member who posts here on occassion, has a nicely prepped 944 and can shed a lot more light.
There are enduros to run in, the NESSCA series has enduros of 1 to 3 hours (I think) and there are others of 6, 12, and 13 hour duration.
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
Banzai240
New member
I just don't know where you guys get this stuff about the 944, but aside from my personal experience running with them, Chris C. has told me that he never had a problem winning an ITS race with a 944...
Last weekend I ran against two of them, along with a well-prepped 240SX, and the 944s had NO PROBLEM keeping pace with the 240Z, winning one race, and nearly winning the second, before breaking a transmission...
The key doesn't appear to be power, because I was able to drag race with all of these cars in the straights, the edge going to the 240Z... However, in the twisty bits, and under braking, the 944 has a definate advantage...
Those of you having trouble getting your to perform may want to spend more time getting the handling right, because that appears to be where the gains make the most difference... They have to be driven well, but they definately don't appear to be the underdog that everyone seems to want them to be...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Maybe we can get Chris to Lime Rock for the NARCCs or even better, to the ARRCs...
I mention Lime Rock as it seems to be a "momentum" track that rewards good handling...
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
I mention Lime Rock as it seems to be a "momentum" track that rewards good handling...
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
JLawton
New member
Look at the HP of the 944 and BMW. And there is only one engine builder in the country that seems to be able to hit that max HP for a 944. (and that's not even taking into consideration how much money it takes to get there!!) Come to the Northeast in a 944 and see how they would get whooped up on.........
------------------
Jeff L
#74 ITB GTi
Just look at the power to weight of the 944S vs the 944. Same bloody chassis. Same bloody class. Hugely different power to weight. HUGE. Do the math and tell me I'm wrong. That is where they are getting that.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Banzai240
New member
Sorry guys... but I'm just not convinced... I don't really care what kind of wt/pwr we can calculate... the REALLY fast 944 up here has a stock motor with 175,000 miles on it and it's STILL just as fast down the straights as a VERY well prepped 240Z... Even on a longer course, the 944s up here seem to hold their own, and certainly make up for lost time by out-braking and out-handling the 240Zs...
Of course, one of the cars I'm referring to is driven/engineered by Greg Fordahl, who has a little experience with Porsches.
Just telling you what I've experienced... Your mileage may vary...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited August 16, 2004).]
Bingo! Therein lies the issue with trying to provide a national set of rules when you have no national standard against which to compare it. Without some type of "standard" - be it performance or technical - it is impossible to expect any kind of national 'parity.'
Darin sees a Porsche 944 doing well in Oregon while Chris gets his 944 butt handed to him by RX-7s. The boys in Virginia don't understand the hoopla over RX-7s while they're getting beat by a BMW. George in Texas doesn't understand the problem with BMWs while he's getting his butt handed to him by Datsuns (and Greg is getting beat by all of them). And so forth until we get to a big circle.
Bottom line, unless you provide a national one-stop event where they can all be compared, or are willing to go with some kind of technical standard (e.g., power to weight), there's just no way that anybody will ever be satisfied. Should we be looking at implementing regional PCAs?
It's a thankless job, so don't expect any, and don't get mad when you don't get it...
Fuel for the fire...
NONE of the on-track comparisons are valid without confirmation that the sample cars in question are even LEGAL.
There was a great duel at CMP yesterday between an RX7, a Bimmer, and a 240SX. Another RX would have been involved if he hadn't spun but at the end of the day, we have NO idea what the ports in the RX's looked like, what cam the Nissan was running, or whether the BMW had the right gearbox ratios...
We have - as a group - got to stop doing this kind of comparison or, worse yet, allowing our "understanding" of what is fast and what isn't be colored by what we each see at our respective tracks each weekend.
K
NONE of the on-track comparisons are valid without confirmation that the sample cars in question are even LEGAL.
There was a great duel at CMP yesterday between an RX7, a Bimmer, and a 240SX. Another RX would have been involved if he hadn't spun but at the end of the day, we have NO idea what the ports in the RX's looked like, what cam the Nissan was running, or whether the BMW had the right gearbox ratios...
We have - as a group - got to stop doing this kind of comparison or, worse yet, allowing our "understanding" of what is fast and what isn't be colored by what we each see at our respective tracks each weekend.
K
Darin! You have two cars with the exact same bloody chassis in a single class and one is carrying 2lbs/hp more than the other and you just say "I don't care."
Sorry bud, I didn't start this one. You did.
The facts are the facts. Run the numbers. Does it make any bloody sense to you to have two cars with the same chassis at two different power to weight ratios in the same class? Does that really make sense to you? If so, why?
Keep in mind I'm making zero argument about how either car performs.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Kirk, this whole thing started with Jake mentioning the 944S would be a better car for the class than the 944. The facts are that the 944 and 944S have the same chassis and two different power to weight ratios.
On track performance is only an issue as a result of the difference in power to weight ratio.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Banzai240
New member
George... I'm not even talking about the 944S here... We all know that it is going to be a really FAST ITS car... I'm talking specifically about the 944 and the perception that it is NOT an ITS contender...
When I say "I don't care" about the wt/pwr we can calculate concerning this car... I say that because of the facts that you bring up yourself... You've mentioned before that the 944 has the same stock specs as the ITA 240SX, and have wanted to move the 944 to ITA... BUT, the 944, even with the aformentioned specs, is a heck of a lot 'Bloody' faster than the ITA 240SX, even at it's ITS weight... How can this be if it's so underpowered?
All I'm getting at is that this is one of those cases where the sum of the pieces may not add up to the whole picture... at least not on the surface... There is obviously something there that isn't being considered, because the 944, and more than ONE example of it, has shown out here to be quite capable in ITS...
As for the "they may not be legal" talk... You are right... they may not be... But neither might be the cars they are beating... How can you ever really know for sure, over such a large sample of cars...? The best we can do is use the information we have available... The information I have is that these cars were both VERY legal, even to the point of being underdeveloped...
If you remove the BMW and the 944S from the ITS picture, you would have about 4 or 5 cars that could be front runners in the class (240Z, RX-7, 944, Integra, and yes, the 240SX...), with a whole pack of cars very near this group...
That's what I'm seeing, anyhow... Based both on "speculative" calculations, AS WELL AS on-track performance...
By the way, for Kirk's benefit... the finishing results for this group of ITS cars (240Z, 944, RX-7, 240SX) have shown the same level of competitiveness on three disctintly different varieties of tracks around here... PIR, PR, and Bremerton... I'm sure you are familiar with at least the first two of these, and the third was shown on a video in another post recently on this site...
This is why the ITAC is made up of people from across the Nation... whatever I might come up with may likely be countered with info from the South, the Northeast, the Southeast, Central, etc... The results are almost always the balance of these opinions, and I think that most here would agree that this is about the best we are going to get, and that it's actually a good way to go about things...
So, have some comfort George in knowing that I am only offering you MY opinion of this matter... If there are 8 others against me, then I will logically conceed the point to them and will happily support the direction... I'm just telling you that, from my point of view, the 944 is definately, in the current climate of ITS (and ignoring the existance of the BMW), a GOOD ITS car...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited August 16, 2004).]
Hmmm, small world. Me thinks Darin and I were at the same race a couple weeks ago. I was reading through this thread and noticed the picture in your sig. I'm thinking this you:
http://waynef.smugmug.com/gallery/179897
After my race I went track-side to play with my new digital camera... apparently your group was running. While I don't know much about the ITS cars, I will say that the 240z and the 944 in this particular race were at the front, and very evenly matched.
Wayne
Bill Miller
New member
Hey George,
Try this one on for size.
ITS VW Golf GTI 2.0 16v 2220#/135hp(stock value) = 16.44
ITS VW Corrado SLC 2.8 12v VR6 2680#/178hp = 15.06
ITS VW Jetta GLI 2.0 16v 2530#/135hp = 18.74
All of these cars a A2 chassis VWs, in the case of the Golf and the Jetta, they're the exact same power plant / drive line.
You talk about a difference of 2#/hp for the 944 and 944S, how about almost a 4#/hp difference for the Corrado and the Jetta? Same chassis, same class. Or a difference of over 2#/hp between the Golf and the Jetta. Same chassis, same motor, same trans, same class. Things that make you go Hmmm....
I'll throw some more into the mix, just for fun.
ITA VW Golf 1.8 16v 2220#/123hp = 18.05
This is also an A2 chassis, the same as the above listed ITS cars. Would seem to indicate that the 2.0 16v cars would fit better in ITA than ITS, maybe even drop some weight on the Jetta when you move it!
But Andy's gonna say that this was done by somebody else, and I should just let it die!
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Try this one on for size.
ITS VW Golf GTI 2.0 16v 2220#/135hp(stock value) = 16.44
ITS VW Corrado SLC 2.8 12v VR6 2680#/178hp = 15.06
ITS VW Jetta GLI 2.0 16v 2530#/135hp = 18.74
All of these cars a A2 chassis VWs, in the case of the Golf and the Jetta, they're the exact same power plant / drive line.
You talk about a difference of 2#/hp for the 944 and 944S, how about almost a 4#/hp difference for the Corrado and the Jetta? Same chassis, same class. Or a difference of over 2#/hp between the Golf and the Jetta. Same chassis, same motor, same trans, same class. Things that make you go Hmmm....
I'll throw some more into the mix, just for fun.
ITA VW Golf 1.8 16v 2220#/123hp = 18.05
This is also an A2 chassis, the same as the above listed ITS cars. Would seem to indicate that the 2.0 16v cars would fit better in ITA than ITS, maybe even drop some weight on the Jetta when you move it!
But Andy's gonna say that this was done by somebody else, and I should just let it die!
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
OK Darin. Crossed signals here. I read Jake saying the 944 has an uphill struggle and the 944S would be a better solution. You responded (without the subsequent clarity) that you didn't understand why people are saying that. Follow my point of confusion? I saw it as a comparison and you saw it as a single model. I'll stop the discussion now that I see where you are coming from.
OK, I'll agree that once you pull the E36, E46, and 944S out of the equation, ITS looks a whole lot better and certainly much more reasonable.
The E46 and 944S simply increase the "problems" in ITS and the 944S further makes it look silly that the same chassis (front to back, top to bottom) has two different power to weight ratios in the same class depending upon the engine in the chassis.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
[This message has been edited by Geo (edited August 16, 2004).]
There currently is no legal recourse to change any of this. So, nothing is going to happen in the very short-term future. What happens longer-term will take time to shake out. The ITAC is trying to take a big-picture look at IT, but in between other issues that come up, this takes some time. And for sure whatever comes of that (whatever that may or may not be) we will want to make sure we don't make things worse, so there is no rush to just to something. You may not like the answer, but that's the way it is.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Bill Miller
New member
George,
Does that mean that the weight corrections that were done this year weren't legal? And since when is re-classifying a car illegal?
And yeah, I agree that it does look silly when multiple vehicles w/ the same chassis (and sometimes the same engine/drivetrain/suspension), in the same class, w/ different pwr/wt ratios, just because the body work is different.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Ahhh, once again you are wrong!
When we looked at the Neon and SE-R for moves to ITA, these 16V cars were on my list for a reclass as well. Look for more recommendations for 2300-2500lb cars with 130-140 hp to be 'fixed'. At least that is our hope if we can get this first batch through.
While we didn't class them and can't offer reasons why (which is what you usually want from us), we can identify issues and try and fix them.
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
Bill Miller
New member
Ok Andy, then explain why one is worthy of fixing, and the other is not? In one case, you take the "hey, it wasn't us, let it die" position, and in another, you take the "hey, that's already on our list to fix" position.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608