Theoretical engine combo - need input!
04-14-2005, 12:10 PM
#31
I think Cotton calls the GTP a 924 Carerra because it has the same chassis as the 2.0L 924 Carerras. All of the 924 Carerras were designated 937s and the 924/44 GTP was, IIRC, chassis number 937 005.
Originally Posted by jonnybgood
There is some confusion on the 944 Lemans car. Paragraph 3.10 Production and Import Figures in the 924/944/FAQ lists the 1981 car as 944 GTP/R Le Mans. Micheal Cotton makes the mistake of calling this car a 924 Carrera. All 924s had the earlier engine block. The 944 Lemans car had the 944 engine block. In the ads by Porsche from 1986 with this car next to the 944 Turbo Porsche's ad refers to it as the 944 GTP
944 GTR
I didn't know that this 1986 car was not campaigned by the factory.
944 GTR
I didn't know that this 1986 car was not campaigned by the factory.
04-14-2005, 12:28 PM
#33
Race Car
Still, the 951 pistons won't work due to not having the correct indentions on top. (did I spell that right??)
The next thing to consider, is that the 16V heads have a smaller head volume, not a lot, but it will affect the compression ratio, bringing it up from the normal turbo compression ratio (8.0:1?? or is it 8.5:1?), it will reduce the maximum boost you can run, so the best bet would be to buy custom pistons, and have them dished even deeper than the factory turbo pistons.
04-14-2005, 12:39 PM
#34
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting about the chassis numbers and perhaps the marketing department calling for a name change. I suppose we should all agree they are damn fine cars.
04-14-2005, 01:49 PM
#35
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Manning
I think Cotton calls the GTP a 924 Carerra because it has the same chassis as the 2.0L 924 Carerras. All of the 924 Carerras were designated 937s and the 924/44 GTP was, IIRC, chassis number 937 005.
04-14-2005, 01:50 PM
#36
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Lino Lakes MN
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just curiouse. The 16V head improves NA applications because you have a wider opening for "sucking" in air. On a turbo the air is compressed and forced into the cyliber. If you want more air, booste higher and more air will be forced in. It would seam that the benefits of 16v are negligable with forced air. I could see an advantage maybe on the exsast side. taking the 968 motor and adding a turbo makes sence because of the larger displacement.
04-14-2005, 05:22 PM
#37
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ttwirz
It would seam that the benefits of 16v are negligable with forced air.