Hey, don't the 928's have that type of sunroof?

 

I should know this, because I used to have one. I always went by this table, but I don't know how valid it is:

http://www.connact.com/~kgross/FAQ/944faq02.html

Also, I just found this page, which looks like it came directly from the owner's manual:

http://www.angelfire.com/ut2/derrickd99/924spec.htm

So I'm guessing it's either 2344 lbs or 2623 lbs.

 

It's 2344 lbs, the 2623 lb figure is for A/C equiped late model cars, which had a heavier transmission and more electrical crap. 77-79 were the lightest 924s, 79 being preferable because of the 5 speed and the light weight.

 

You can remove 'em and drive around with an open top - the space is huge! I do it all the time - I love the thing!

 

no head aches from trying to fix the power sunroof?!hahahah and what everyone else said

 

Nope. Works fine. No leaks either. Must be in everyone's head.

 

It's awsome for those fun canyon porsche runs!
~Eyal

 

I could do that, but the aero drag would be way too much. I'd get eaten alive at the end of the 130 mhp straight at TWS.

 

The quoted weights on those pages are always alittle off. It quotes my 83 as weighing 2675. In stock trim it weighed around 2800lbs. After a good deal of work, AC Delete, battery, exhaust, etc, I got it down to 2600.

 

I'm converting a lot of stuff in my car to manual, but now that I have a Redline roll bar, with padding on it there is no way I could operate the manual latch on a manual sunroof. So that is one thing that will stay power in my car .

 

Do you mean the flimsy fiberglass hardtop? If so, that really doesn't offer any extra protection to the driver in the event of a roll-over.

Dave: you disagree with my original statement, but consider this: a roof without a sunroof is as stiff without the reinforcements as a roof is with a sunroof + reinforcements. Therefore, you have a chassis that is as stiff without the extra weight, so stiffness is still a factor, IMHO.

-Z-man.

 

This is the statement with which I disagree.
I have heard from several sources that the sunroof car's roof is reinforced to the point that it is actually stiffer than the non-sunroof car, if this statement is true, than your's cannot be true. Not a big difference I'm sure, and the non-sunroof car is still plenty strong, but the main difference is weight and the location of that weight.
If one were to end up on one's roof, OTOH, that extra reinforcement might be a good thing.

[hijack]What happens when I show up at tech next week with the snow tires still on the car? [/hijack]

 

I once read this same comment from someone who worked for Porsche back in the 80's and now preps 944's for racing over in the Netherlands (? I think ?). I can't remember his name, I'll have to see if I can find that again and post the link. (not that that really proves anything, we would have to see quantitative testing results to prove it either way I guess. This will end up being as great of a debate as "less filling" verses "tastes great". )

 

I guess then you'll be running with snows at Lime rock!

Just throw one or two of your 'track' tires in the hatch and we'll check it out that way.

As for the sunroof debate: ok, you win. But I think that if you were to turbo an n/a, you're really better off with a non-sunroof car! Especially if you use NOS as well! hehe....

Let the hijacking continue....

-Z-man.

 

Another reason people like sunroof delete cars for the track is that they have more headroom for tall drivers with a helmet on.

As for chassis rigidity, having had a close encounter with a falling tree branch thicker across than my thigh and longer than my 83 944, I agree with Dave that the sunroof cars have an extremely stiff upper chassis. Had it not been that way, neither myself nor my passenger would have survived this incident.