View Poll Results: Which car to get?
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 159. You may not vote on this poll
968 vs 944 vs 951 - Which one to buy?
09-03-2004, 04:32 PM
#31
Originally Posted by boffam
^You have to look at the torque curves, not just the rpm at which the torque peaks. My guess is that the 951 has much less torque than the 968 below 3000 rpm. And you have to be at 3000 rpm sometimes, at least on the street.
Perhaps someone has pics of the torque curves of these cars, just in case I am blowing it out my tailpipe??
Perhaps someone has pics of the torque curves of these cars, just in case I am blowing it out my tailpipe??
09-03-2004, 05:17 PM
#34
AutoX
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those curves don't look right at all. Are you sure that was a calibrated dyno or were they using some sort fudge factor adder for drive train loss? A true rwhp reading versus torque will absolutely converge at 5252 rpm. If it doesn't, something's amiss or someone's play playing with the laws of physics.
09-03-2004, 05:37 PM
#35
Race Director
Well,
Don't forget the need to be "on boost" get power from the 951. Normally Aspirated cars don't have this. I think that the part throttle sub-3000 rpm behavior of the S2 or 968 is far superior. In fact even the 944 NA is some what superior. Of course there is not much hp in the 2.5L na, but it never seems hard to access. In 951 I always seem like I have to "find the hp" rathan just getting it. Of couse when it comes in ...
Hang on 
Don't forget the need to be "on boost" get power from the 951. Normally Aspirated cars don't have this. I think that the part throttle sub-3000 rpm behavior of the S2 or 968 is far superior. In fact even the 944 NA is some what superior. Of course there is not much hp in the 2.5L na, but it never seems hard to access. In 951 I always seem like I have to "find the hp" rathan just getting it. Of couse when it comes in ...
Hang on
09-03-2004, 05:38 PM
#36
Originally Posted by gkinder951
Those curves don't look right at all. Are you sure that was a calibrated dyno or were they using some sort fudge factor adder for drive train loss? A true rwhp reading versus torque will absolutely converge at 5252 rpm. If it doesn't, something's amiss or someone's play playing with the laws of physics.
The HP scale is on the left while the TQ scale is on the right. there is a value of 25 difference........
All mods are listed in my sig.
09-03-2004, 06:41 PM
#39
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by streckfu's951
Yes, I do! 
I plan to buy the WG from Danno along with his Guru chips.
I plan to buy the WG from Danno along with his Guru chips.
Someone has to have dyno sheets for stock 951-944s-and a 968??? This is Rennlist after all.
09-03-2004, 06:53 PM
#42
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by jsonnen
Wouldn't your torque and horsepower numbers be alot better if you could hold boost? I know that when I installed my Tial my spool-up was quicker, thus resulting in better torque numbers down low.
Someone has to have dyno sheets for stock 951-944s-and a 968??? This is Rennlist after all.
Someone has to have dyno sheets for stock 951-944s-and a 968??? This is Rennlist after all.
09-03-2004, 06:59 PM
#44
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chester, NJ
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sweanders
Cabs will never do as well on a track since they are not as rigid as the coupe - there is a reason why Porsche didn't offer the M030 on the convertibles.
09-03-2004, 07:28 PM
#45
TRB0 GUY
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Daphne, AL
Posts: 3,769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I vote for the 951. I've driven many of each model listed (as well as others) and I choose the 951 hands-down for an all around car. The 968 is better for driving daily and overall quality simply because it's not as old as the S2 and 951. The S2 has throttle response (NOT torque benefits!) like the 968 with less price.
The 951 though, is top on my list for so many reasons though:
1) boost. If you haven't lived with it, try it. THEN try to live without it and see why drug addicts keep going back to their past habit. I call it "boost-withdrawl"
2) gobs of torque. HP wins dyno pull competitions, area under the torque curve wins races. The turbo gives the engine life after 3k. Turbo-lag is a moot point because a turbocharged car should never be outside of boost on the racetrack.
3) price. The 951s on the market can be had in good condition for under $8k. Try finding a good condition 968 for that price!.
4) availability. You will see more choices out there then both S2s and 968s.
As for the cab vs. coupe discussion, the cabrio has an inherent disadvantage on the track. Fishey, I saw the article you posted, and they even almost admitted it there: "so even a slight performance handicapt from the added weight or chassis flex is hard to argue." True, hard to argue by real-world, varied test figures I guess, but not from an engineering standpoint. If you want to see just how much chassis flex exists in Porsche from and before this era, go to your local Porsche shop and see if they have a targa or cabrio on a lift. Open the door and shut it. The body gap almost prevents shutting the door! As for their times on there, look in Motor Trend (and maybe even other mags as well, not sure). IIRC, the best performance figures they could get from a 'Vette were from an '01 Z06. The later Z06's could never get to that one car's test results, even though they had 20 more hp and no weight bias. That's just luck sometimes. No two cars are the same. Sometimes you get a ringer, thats all. Those monday-motor cars just beat the friday-motor cars
That being said, I will admit I'm a huge fan of the 951 droptop (Luis...same old gig
). I mean, you just can't argue against having a 951... with no friggin roof!! That just has to be wonderful.
The 951 though, is top on my list for so many reasons though:
1) boost. If you haven't lived with it, try it. THEN try to live without it and see why drug addicts keep going back to their past habit. I call it "boost-withdrawl"
2) gobs of torque. HP wins dyno pull competitions, area under the torque curve wins races. The turbo gives the engine life after 3k. Turbo-lag is a moot point because a turbocharged car should never be outside of boost on the racetrack.
3) price. The 951s on the market can be had in good condition for under $8k. Try finding a good condition 968 for that price!.
4) availability. You will see more choices out there then both S2s and 968s.
As for the cab vs. coupe discussion, the cabrio has an inherent disadvantage on the track. Fishey, I saw the article you posted, and they even almost admitted it there: "so even a slight performance handicapt from the added weight or chassis flex is hard to argue." True, hard to argue by real-world, varied test figures I guess, but not from an engineering standpoint. If you want to see just how much chassis flex exists in Porsche from and before this era, go to your local Porsche shop and see if they have a targa or cabrio on a lift. Open the door and shut it. The body gap almost prevents shutting the door! As for their times on there, look in Motor Trend (and maybe even other mags as well, not sure). IIRC, the best performance figures they could get from a 'Vette were from an '01 Z06. The later Z06's could never get to that one car's test results, even though they had 20 more hp and no weight bias. That's just luck sometimes. No two cars are the same. Sometimes you get a ringer, thats all. Those monday-motor cars just beat the friday-motor cars
That being said, I will admit I'm a huge fan of the 951 droptop (Luis...same old gig
). I mean, you just can't argue against having a 951... with no friggin roof!! That just has to be wonderful.