Joe Anstett

My other car is a 2000 Trans Am convertible which I have tracked at Pocono and autocrossed for a few years. I have stiffened it with subframe connectors and a roll bar, it's pretty tight for a convertible.

Everything I've read about the 944/968 cabs says they were comparatively rigid for the late 80s but suffer extreme body flex.

Verts are fun, but if you're going to race or your top priority is handling, you just gotta remember you are at a disadvantage -- the body isn't as stiff, the car weighs more, etc. Not to mention the safety requirements which mandate you get a roll bar/cage to play on the track. A rollover in a vert is a death sentence. That's one of the reasons I ended up with the 951.

Joe Anstett

The 86 turbo brakes are different than the 87s. In fact they are completely unique (not used in any other model year nor on any other Porsche application). They are 4 piston calipers (front and back if I'm not mistaken) but the brakes got bigger in 87.

Robby

Very nice input Duke & Joe... Duke- evertime you post I think about your rainforest green turbo- I WANT THAT CAR! you're lucky you're not on this continent.... Why don't you add similar suspension to the convertible? IT IS a Turbo S isn't it- I mean- w/M030 suspension? Did you not lower IT like the other turbo S? I'm wondering- IF you DID add stiffer springs & sways to one, you COULD do it to the other too, right? IF you added 968 M030 (not 951 M030) sways to the convertible, I wonder how much it would help...? IF you ever do anything suspensionwise to it, please let me know...

Joe- subframe connectors? What is this- how do they connect, etc....? Could such a thing be done to a 951? Did it add a lot of weight- approx how much? I'm sure a 2000 Trans Am convertible/coupe has a stiffer chassis than any 944 varaint convertible/coupe- wouldn't be surprised if the TA convertible chassis were as stiff as the 951 coupe chassis... although that's not a slam, it's just that it's outdated technology.... that's one of my main points here- I really wonder how much dif the stiffer frame makes- I mean, IF Porsche were to REmanufacture the 951- I'm sure they would change the chassis & it would be much stiffer- IF they did this, BUT, made EVERYTHING else ENTIRELY the same- engine, susp, etc... I wonder how much dif it would make lap to lap....? I ALSO wonder how much dif there would be b/t a Turbo S convertible & a regular Turbo S, bone stock....? obviously there would be a slight dif, but, mostly a big deal only on the track, but, I just wonder how much of a big deal it would really be... I ALSO think that once we got to cars w/a chassis the level of cara like the E36M3, I really have to wonder how much more dif could be made by going even better...? I'm sure there is some point where the law of diminishing returns rears it's head..... oh well.... only so much we can do....

tifosiman

(cross-post from my post on the 951 forum)

Here is a shot of a 951 (prototype) racing at Nelson Ledges in 1984..

Fishey

I don't know about bodyflex or bad handling. The 944cab does make a diffrent noise when it goes over on-road debris and it also has a diffrent feel when you are driving. However the 944cab does not suffer from scuttleshake or bad handling. Actually in many reviews I have found that it actually beat the 944coupe (S2) in latteral grip/slalom/braking distance. The 944S2 cabriolet also won the Porsche club GB title in 1990 beating out many coupes. The engineers for the team claimed that the lower center of gravity allows better latteral performance. I am not making a claim that is the better handling car but it can certainly hold its own.

Robby

Fishey- that's good to know- as for my chassis questions, I never tried to imply that a weak chassis made for bad handling neccessarily... I know the 944 convertibles handle just fine- I was just wondering about the subtle dif's b/t the coupes & convertibles... Is Lebanon close to Cinci?

nize

wasn't the 944cab converted by a company down in california? i thought they were all originally built by porsche as coupes, and shipped to some american conversion factory in california for the cabriolet conversion. i remember reading this a long time ago because it made me wonder why porsche didn't make the cabriolet in-house.

Luis de Prat

Porsche commissioned the Bauer Group, a German automotive engineering firm to develop the 941 or 944 Cabriolet. When the prototype was practically developed, Porsche senior management asked CEO Peter Schutz what the cost would be and Schutz bid it out to the American Sunroof Company who ended up getting the project for coming in below Bauer's proposal costwise. ASC did the conversion work at a facility in Germany, not in the U.S., though.

The extra 140 lbs for the cabrio over the coupe are not just dead weight, but rather structural reinforcements that render it a considerably rigid chassis. Granted, it's not a coupe, but it's no Alfa Spyder, either.

Duke

Hehe tanks Robby

There's no doubt the 944 cab can be a handling champion, take a look at this S2 cab. It's an auto-x winner and very fast at the track. At a quite slow and technical track it lapped within 2 sec from a fast 993 RS who had a more experienced driver.




The lateral G's are probably not the "problem" with a stock cab, it's the body flex during fast directional changes.

lleroyb

I was told by someone who should know that the Cab torque tubes have openings in them. I would guess they were there to accomodate chassis flex. Possibly weight reduction? I it was for weight, then why not all cars??

Lou

Fishey

Yes, it is only 30min from cinnci.

P.S. My 944 is alot better then my fathers 993 when it comes to bodyflex/stiffness. I mean its night and day better then his 993 cab.

Oddjob

Standard 87 Turbos used the same sized calipers as the 86 turbos. The piston size in the front calipers changed (I think 38/36 in 86, 40/36 in 87+), but the calipers are the same size.

The front brakes didnt get any bigger until the 928S4 calipers were introduced on the 87 Turbo Cup/Escort Cars and the 88 Turbo S cars for the street.

Matt H

I was referring to his question about the early (pre 1986 cars). I have seen plenty of the 86/87 variants.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

Robby

Duke- do you have any more pics of that cab? I'd kind of like to see all that from a few dif angles... ALSO- the rainforest green- where did that color come from? I'm going to repaint my car eventually, &, thus far am planning zermatt silver, since it is stock that way, but, your car really is about the most beautiful 951 I've ever seen- would LOVE to have a cab that color w/linen interior- not sure what I'd do w/my 968 panels though, since they never made the 968's w/the linen interior- a**holes.... :-) It's funny... I Love all the blue 944 variants too, but, have never liked many other cars in that color- I DO like a lot of dark green cars, but, these cars are just unique- I bitch about them a lot, but, one thing you'll never hear me say is that these cars are ugly...

Fishey- If I make a trip up north any time soon, would you mind if I got in touch w/you to go for a quick drive? I would LOVE to see how that thing feels... I absolutely LOVE thse cars in convertible form- Do you ever get down to this area? OR- how about Atlanta?

Joe Anstett

Yeah, you're right about the calipers, my bad. The rotors, at least, are completely unique (I believe they had to be changed in 87 to accommodate the ABS components). Try finding rotors for an 86 Turbo sometime, it's not fun!