JackOlsen

A couple of recent postings got me thinking about this. And since dreaming is cheap, let me solicit some ideas about putting together a 99%-track-use 911, where money would (mostly) not be an object, and neither would any racing group's classification system.

My idea of the ultimate 911 would be kind of an extrapolated version of my current car. It would have a lot in common with the 2.8-liter RSRs, especially in terms of appearance, but I'm not looking for any kind of faithful period reproduction, either. I just like the looks of the early cars, and I also appreciate their light weight, direct steering and braking, and over-all nimble handling.

So I'd start with an early body, but with fiberglass pieces all around, and flares that were at least Turbo-sized, and possibly closer to this yellow charmer:



Although I'd prefer the early Carrera 3.0 tail and chrome mirrors.

Kurt Starnes laid out an engine and suspension package that sounds hard to top, so I'll quote him (maybe quoting Steve Weiner):


Now, all of that sounds good to me. The goal would be something in the neighborhood of 330 hp and 2200 pounds.

But I'd be interested in opinions of things like: coil-overs vs. t-bars, PMOs vs. other fuel delivery systems, etc. Again, the goal would be the kind of 911 that would give the most quintessential driving experience -- the kind of thing the 10 Porsches in the EVO shoot-out were all judged against: the perfect track car that only exists in our imagination.

Let's hear some opinions.

Thom Fitzpatrick

If I had an extra $40k laying around, I'd probably buy that yellow RSR clone, then put a 3.6 in it and big brakes. I could sell off the S engine that it has for a little working capital.

Howard

Jack,

My "wish" vehicle would have a 3.6 with
Electromotive ignition, GE 80 cams, TWM throttle bodies and a Motec EFI fuel management system, along with the upgrades in your list with a 1974 RSR body style in Martini Racing colors......or Gulf ...I've always admired the RSR look. Someday......

Steve Weiner-Rennsport Systems

I certainly like Jack's concept for a outrageaously fun track car. Its a doozy, IMHO.

One can always accomplish the same thing in many different ways and everyone makes compromises, based on needs and a budget.

We've done some cars like this and the results are shattering, to say the least,.. Some of these have had Motronic, some have had PMO's, some have had various Engine Management Systems; all of these cars have had an excellent power-to-weight ratio.

I love high-technology as much (or more) than the next guy but the most satisfying versions had PMO's with really good heads and aggressive cams. These carbs, while not the thriftiest things on fuel, still make awesome power and throttle response and are LOTS less money than any of the EFI systems.

Camshaft selection is quite important here; Bear in mind that a real aggressive lumpy cam such as GE-100, RSR, and 120/104 used in a 2.7 to 3.2 engine will be a real pussycat in larger engines like the 3.6 or 3.8.

Those cams would present major drivability problems in those smaller-displacement powerplants but in the biggest sizes, drive almost like a stocker, provided that the induction & ignition systems are well executed and setup. Exhaust diameters and lengths are very critical, too.

Finally,... while torsion bar suspended cars do work very well, something like Jack's concept would really benefit from a true coilover setup with ERP suspension pieces. As you know, a roll cage is mandatory for such a thing. Even the biggest torsion bars (33mm) are way too soft for a high-powered, wide-tired cars like this and one simply cannot get enough roll stiffness, even with huge swaybars.

The lack of suspension friction in a car with spherical bearings/monoballs makes a quantum difference in ride quality, control and sensitivity. Aside from the N-V issues, its a no-brainer on track-only cars.

As our business is making these kinds of dreams a reality, I'd love to help make this "wish come true".

CamB

I just recently had a discussion with an engine builder who has rebuilt a c2 engine with GE80 cams and suitable pistons with MoTeC engine management.

This showed about 340hp at a relatively low 6200 RPM, strongly backing up Steve's statement on GE100 cams being suited to an engine of this capacity.

Cam

richard glickel.

This dreaming is great fun.

Question: other than possible weight considerations, and keeping in mind that this dream machine is not a "full race" car, why a 915 trans vs. G50/50?

Richard
'87 Carrera

Bill Verburg

$ no object? Something like these would be nice!

Stephen Masraum

Jack, I would only add/change/offer two things to your list. I think I would go with a look similar to the RSR you pictured except with the old IROC whaletail. If you go to the GT Racing website in the full catalog it's number 16A in the 911 parts listing. Very cool on a vintage style racer like you've got pictured. The other thing would be a G50 instead of the 915 for the ability to handle the additional torque even in a light car, that would have to add longevity. I spoke with Sam Shalala(sp) our local racer when I was having tranny troubles. He has a race team and shop and works on plenty of the local 911 racecars. He said the 915's don't last at all but that the G50's last forever even when being pounded by hi-powered racecars running slicks. He said the inevitable moments when the car is airborne and then hits the ground again full throttled really does a number on the 915's.
Either way what you've got listed sounds positively indecent. After reading your list I'll have good dreams tonight.