1987 944T vs 1987 Corvette
03-02-2005 | 12:09 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,801
Likes: 3
From: Lebanon, OH
1987 944T vs 1987 Corvette
I know, I know, I know...
Usually, these type of post turn into a flame war in the very first page and I expect at some point in time this one will as well. However, I still think I could gain something from this thread and thats why I am posting it.
In 1987 the specs look something like this.
Chevy Corvette V8 5.7 NA TPI FR
$28,949
240 hp @ 4000 rpm
345 ft-lbs @ 3200 rpm
4-speed auto, 4speed manual
3230 lbs
16city / 25 hwy
vs
Porsche 944 Turbo I4 2.5 Turbo Intercooled FR
$33,905
217 hp @ 5800 rpm
248 ft-lbs @ 3500 rpm
5 speed only
2778 lbs (altho I thought it weighed more)
19city / 27 hwy
My question is what car will be quicker around a lap at most racing circuits. I have not found much data on laptimes in stock form for both cars on the same track. However, I thought the 944T would be the faster car due to its advantage under brakeing (125ft 60-0) vs The Corvettes (158ft 60-0) and thats a BIG diffrence and these are just figures I got from C&D. I also belive the 944 is the superior handling car and posted better lane change and skidpad numbers then the corvette. The acceleration numbers for both cars are similar but the corvette does have a slight advantage in the 1/4mile but post a similar trap speed. However somone said to me that the corvette was put into its own class because it was so dominating.
He used this Quote by the Director of SCCA racing in September of 1987.
"It is unfair for cars like the 944, 911, Toyota Supra, Mazda and Nissan Turbo's, Lotus Esprit Turbo's and the Italians to be forced to compete with a car that dominates every track event it enters. As such we will be forced to place the Vette in it's own class in both Club Racing events as well as Solo I and Solo II events for the racing year that will begin as fiscal 1988."
However was it in the same class as the 944turbo? or Maybe the regular 944? I have never been impressed with the vettes ability to handle or go around a racetrack so I found this interesting. Can anyone shead some light on it?
Usually, these type of post turn into a flame war in the very first page and I expect at some point in time this one will as well. However, I still think I could gain something from this thread and thats why I am posting it.
In 1987 the specs look something like this.
Chevy Corvette V8 5.7 NA TPI FR
$28,949
240 hp @ 4000 rpm
345 ft-lbs @ 3200 rpm
4-speed auto, 4speed manual
3230 lbs
16city / 25 hwy
vs
Porsche 944 Turbo I4 2.5 Turbo Intercooled FR
$33,905
217 hp @ 5800 rpm
248 ft-lbs @ 3500 rpm
5 speed only
2778 lbs (altho I thought it weighed more)
19city / 27 hwy
My question is what car will be quicker around a lap at most racing circuits. I have not found much data on laptimes in stock form for both cars on the same track. However, I thought the 944T would be the faster car due to its advantage under brakeing (125ft 60-0) vs The Corvettes (158ft 60-0) and thats a BIG diffrence and these are just figures I got from C&D. I also belive the 944 is the superior handling car and posted better lane change and skidpad numbers then the corvette. The acceleration numbers for both cars are similar but the corvette does have a slight advantage in the 1/4mile but post a similar trap speed. However somone said to me that the corvette was put into its own class because it was so dominating.
He used this Quote by the Director of SCCA racing in September of 1987.
"It is unfair for cars like the 944, 911, Toyota Supra, Mazda and Nissan Turbo's, Lotus Esprit Turbo's and the Italians to be forced to compete with a car that dominates every track event it enters. As such we will be forced to place the Vette in it's own class in both Club Racing events as well as Solo I and Solo II events for the racing year that will begin as fiscal 1988."
However was it in the same class as the 944turbo? or Maybe the regular 944? I have never been impressed with the vettes ability to handle or go around a racetrack so I found this interesting. Can anyone shead some light on it?
03-02-2005 | 12:12 PM
#2
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 10,227
Likes: 123
From: Mile High
The 944 is the best car ever made, plain and simple. 
Any comparison to a piece of junk GM product with their cheap interiors, primitive pushrod motors, and in some cases live rear axles is just a waste of time. The 944 is safer, better made, handles better, uses better materials for everything including the dash, has better resale, and all around is the best car ever made!
How Adrial did better in my solid axle, ill handling, overweight Z28 at an autocross than the 944s is a question for greater minds than mine.
Look at how low the primitive pushrod makes its maximum torque. it is almost linear. that and cheap tires from the factory are where your answer lies.
Any comparison to a piece of junk GM product with their cheap interiors, primitive pushrod motors, and in some cases live rear axles is just a waste of time. The 944 is safer, better made, handles better, uses better materials for everything including the dash, has better resale, and all around is the best car ever made!
How Adrial did better in my solid axle, ill handling, overweight Z28 at an autocross than the 944s is a question for greater minds than mine.
Look at how low the primitive pushrod makes its maximum torque. it is almost linear. that and cheap tires from the factory are where your answer lies.
03-02-2005 | 12:21 PM
#3
Burning Brakes
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,152
Likes: 1
From: Toledo and Cleveland, Ohio
In 1987, the Vette still had the 4+3 manual; I don't think the 6-speed came along until maybe 89 or 90.
When I bought my first 944, it was among a handful of different makes/models I looked at, among which were a couple of examples of 85-87 Vettes. I had the opportunity do drive one of the Vettes on a hilly back road in Pennsylvania in the rain, and the grip in the rear was poor - it could hardly go up a hill without fishtailing (and the tires were good top-shelf Goodyears). When I drove another in the dry, it just felt way too nose-heavy. It might be a more capable car in the end, but the 944 just feels better, more competent.
I've heard 914 (-6) owners tell stories of running circles around 80s Vettes at Nelson's Ledges . . . but then, that may very well be because of the driver more than the car. . .
When I bought my first 944, it was among a handful of different makes/models I looked at, among which were a couple of examples of 85-87 Vettes. I had the opportunity do drive one of the Vettes on a hilly back road in Pennsylvania in the rain, and the grip in the rear was poor - it could hardly go up a hill without fishtailing (and the tires were good top-shelf Goodyears). When I drove another in the dry, it just felt way too nose-heavy. It might be a more capable car in the end, but the 944 just feels better, more competent.
I've heard 914 (-6) owners tell stories of running circles around 80s Vettes at Nelson's Ledges . . . but then, that may very well be because of the driver more than the car. . .
03-02-2005 | 12:30 PM
#6
Race Director
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 15,712
Likes: 3
They are both good cars at what they do. The 4+3 sucks ***** and if you think 944s have a lot of rattles you havent driven a C4 Corvette. I have lately, been thinking about a 96 Grand Sport though, there is one for sale that I drive by daily. If it would ever stop snowing, I might go drive it.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
03-02-2005 | 12:36 PM
#7
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 8,985
Likes: 3
From: Vancouver BC
He used this Quote by the Director of SCCA racing in September of 1987.
"It is unfair for cars like the 944, 911, Toyota Supra, Mazda and Nissan Turbo's, Lotus Esprit Turbo's and the Italians to be forced to compete with a car that dominates every track event it enters. As such we will be forced to place the Vette in it's own class in both Club Racing events as well as Solo I and Solo II events for the racing year that will begin as fiscal 1988."
"It is unfair for cars like the 944, 911, Toyota Supra, Mazda and Nissan Turbo's, Lotus Esprit Turbo's and the Italians to be forced to compete with a car that dominates every track event it enters. As such we will be forced to place the Vette in it's own class in both Club Racing events as well as Solo I and Solo II events for the racing year that will begin as fiscal 1988."
Road racing is a different story.
Trending Topics
03-02-2005 | 12:46 PM
#8
Race Director
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 15,712
Likes: 3
Vettes on a hilly back road in Pennsylvania in the rain, and the grip in the rear was poor - it could hardly go up a hill without fishtailing (and the tires were good top-shelf Goodyears).
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
03-02-2005 | 01:00 PM
#11
Three Wheelin'
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,604
Likes: 0
From: Macungie, PA
A push rod engine typically refers to an engine that utilizes push rods between the lifter and rocker arms to actuate the valves, as opposd to an overhead cam (OHC) engine that either directly opens the valve from the cam lobe or uses a "cam follower" (944) to open and close the valves.
Push Rod engine is also used by some to denigrate an engine design because it is considered to be ancient, overused technology that went out in the 70's. (Not my opinion, however)
Push Rod engine is also used by some to denigrate an engine design because it is considered to be ancient, overused technology that went out in the 70's. (Not my opinion, however)
03-02-2005 | 01:25 PM
#13
Unaffiliated
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,286
Likes: 209
From: Cleveland
Worth mentioning, when you do your lb/hp calculations the Vette's drivetrain consumes almost 25% of the power, while a 944T is more like 16%. I've seen guys dyno LT1 drivetrains and they used 22-25% for drivetrain losses to try to calculate flywheel HP. It has something to do with needing to spin both a tranny and a rear end vs. just a rear transaxle, that and beefy, heavy components. IIRC, in the showroom stock racing of the era, the 944Turbo did win a lot but the Vettes got the edge on a few outings, so they were decent advesaries. That may have changed a bit when the 951 got the TS goodies.
03-02-2005 | 01:38 PM
#14
Instructor
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
From: South Lake Tahoe
A friend recently bought a 1987 Covette in absolutely pristine shape with around 46k miles. He let me drive it. The second you place yourself into the GM made car, all things are different, very different. It is one of the wierdest non-ergonomical digital dash layout and seating arangements I've ever been in. This alone turned me off. It felt like a cheap game? My early '85 944 isn't the best either, (with the steering wheel) but at least you feel like you become one with it.
Then I had to drive the Corvette. Eeacks! It rattled, bounced and felt like it was going to fall apart. The gear shift was very clunky and truck like feeling. On the positive note, it had torque (but I'm used to my 944 NA...and also my Audi //S6 with 258ft lbs of torque as well) and went down the road ok, not fine. I thought about getting into a crash in it and just imagined fiberglass splinters everywhere.
I drive a 22 mile round trip twisty frost heaved, mountain road everyday from my house in the country to my office even more in the country. During the winter, most of the time, it's covered in snow, salt, slush and or gravel - challenging rallye style. I've been driving this in my '96 Toyota Tacoma 4WD over the last couple of weeks and it has a full Bilstein HD shock set up with 3 lift, Hakki snows, warn M8000 winch and cap on the rear. It's set up suspension and weight wise as best as I can get. It SUCKS period. Every bump is felt and just doesn't drive very well. Not fun. It was even more horrible in stock form.
Then right after I got my Porsche back from being painted last week, I drove it one fine sunny dry road day (lucked out big on this) to work on the same road and was completely, utterly amazed at how well composed it drove, over the same bumps and the same speeds. It just blew me away. My suspension is original with only M404 sway bars. This could explain this softness. Even my '95 Audi //S6 isn't as composed as my 20 year old worn out suspension Porsche.
The Taco is generally nice, and my taste of the Vette that day was ok too, but neither are a Porsche - period. Just look at the factory videos of the Wiessach test track when the Porsches go over those big bumps so smoothly. Becoming one with the Porsche and being able to *feel* the road is what really counts, my vote is for the Porsche 944.
Then I had to drive the Corvette. Eeacks! It rattled, bounced and felt like it was going to fall apart. The gear shift was very clunky and truck like feeling. On the positive note, it had torque (but I'm used to my 944 NA...and also my Audi //S6 with 258ft lbs of torque as well) and went down the road ok, not fine. I thought about getting into a crash in it and just imagined fiberglass splinters everywhere.
I drive a 22 mile round trip twisty frost heaved, mountain road everyday from my house in the country to my office even more in the country. During the winter, most of the time, it's covered in snow, salt, slush and or gravel - challenging rallye style. I've been driving this in my '96 Toyota Tacoma 4WD over the last couple of weeks and it has a full Bilstein HD shock set up with 3 lift, Hakki snows, warn M8000 winch and cap on the rear. It's set up suspension and weight wise as best as I can get. It SUCKS period. Every bump is felt and just doesn't drive very well. Not fun. It was even more horrible in stock form.
Then right after I got my Porsche back from being painted last week, I drove it one fine sunny dry road day (lucked out big on this) to work on the same road and was completely, utterly amazed at how well composed it drove, over the same bumps and the same speeds. It just blew me away. My suspension is original with only M404 sway bars. This could explain this softness. Even my '95 Audi //S6 isn't as composed as my 20 year old worn out suspension Porsche.
The Taco is generally nice, and my taste of the Vette that day was ok too, but neither are a Porsche - period. Just look at the factory videos of the Wiessach test track when the Porsches go over those big bumps so smoothly. Becoming one with the Porsche and being able to *feel* the road is what really counts, my vote is for the Porsche 944.
03-02-2005 | 01:46 PM
#15
Race Director
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 15,712
Likes: 3
It is one of the wierdest non-ergonomical digital dash layout and seating arangements I've ever been in.
Then I had to drive the Corvette. Eeacks! It rattled, bounced and felt like it was going to fall apart. The gear shift was very clunky and truck like feeling. On the positive note, it had torque (but I'm used to my 944 NA...and also my Audi //S6 with 258ft lbs of torque as well) and went down the road ok, not fine.
I thought about getting into a crash in it and just imagined fiberglass splinters everywhere.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote