Eyal 951

my turbo runs way out of steam by redline. and I dont get full boost until around 2900-3100 depending on the gear, and thats a few hundred lower then stock. Thats not an efficient turbo system to me. I'm probably almost 50 hp less then i am at around 4000 rpm.
~Eyal

L8 APEKS

No **** it's not effiecient compared to today's designs...it's a design dating back 20 years! But in it's day, it had the speed of an exotic. It couldn't be compared to anything VW or Honda or Toyota offered...the 951 was in a league of it's own. So if you're so unhappy with it, tell you what...I'll get you your VTEC Honda motor so you can do your swap, and you give me the 951 engine. Sound like a deal? Just let me know.

Try comparing Hondas and VW's from 1985 to the 944 of the same year. Or try comparing current Porsches to the Honda's and VW's of today.

I've always been a VW guy, and I've messed with Hondas too. I'm in NO way a Porsche elitist. But for all of this crooning over Hondas, why don't you sell the 951 and get a Honda if it's so much better in every way?

You are comparing modern day twin cam, multi-valve designs with variable valve timing and lift control to a basic single cam 2-valve engine? Apples to bricks if you ask me.

As for the VW's...it sounded like you were talking about A2's. The A2 GTi 8v motors made ~105hp at the crank. It's possible to get those up to about ~145hp (again, at the crank) by using an ABA 2.0L block, hogging out the head and getting a decent cam, and supporting it with all the trimmings (intake/header/exhaust/chip/etc). But look at the cost involved. There were FAR more A2 VW's produced. Headwork on one of those is $400, a cam is $99 bucks, exhaust is $289, chip is $99 bucks...if parts for 944's were this inexpensive, we'd all have them.

I've seen a Scirocco 16V make 170hp...with individual throttle bodies (Badger-5 intake setup from England) and TEC-II engine management. Certainly not any more cost-effective than building an N/A 944.

It has nothing to do with Porsche having inferior technology. Certainly that's an incorrect statement...one look at the C-GT proves that. What's Honda's offering, the NSX? Anyway...it's about two different markets, and two different time periods with different technologies available.

Eyal 951

modern day? that motor is from 94... thats 5 years after the end of the NA, and thats more then a decade old.
~Eyal

Mongo

Eyal has a point on the modding. I'm sure it's very possible to get 200+ HP out of an NA motor by knocking up compression (let's say to 10.5:1), have a cam reground to support that compression, port and polish the head, increase fuel pressure to balance out air flow, if needed you could go to an ARC2 type MAF which will help balance the A/F ratios properly. Oh! Lets not forget the S2 crankshaft to raise up that compression up.

More power you say? you could always sleve it to a 3.0 motor, how's that for 8v NA power? Trouble is many people don't wanna do this because the mahine work and labor alone to do this may cost over $4,000 respectively, not to mention dynotime and MAF calibration. I say we all put our heads together and start finding better ways to get more power if we're so inclined to need it.

To conclude this, I'd like to say that the 944 is old compared to today's standards yes. In the 1980s it was fairly ahead of it's time with only few competitors like the Mazda RX-7, Nissan 300ZX, BMW M3 and a few others I didn't mention. Look at the purpose this car was designed for; Porsche obviously didn't want to compromise the sales of the flagship models 911 and 928, so they built the car as a base model entry level car that turned out to be a huge hit and one of the most understated, underestimated cars in the world; the 944 can even out handle some of today's modern sports cars due it's weight distribution and setup.

It may only be 150hp and have 8 valves, it's still the damn best investment I ever made.

Campeck

danno.
If you could do that It would be awesome.
but first I want a setup done in 3 in and a setup done in 2-3/4 in.
problem with that is that 2-3/4 in seems to be VERY rare.
i also need less extreme bends in the pipes and less connections. serge is right on that one.
I also want a smaller filter. should be easy to find or make.
now im off to find a moldable thingy to place under the filter to protect it.
later.

Campeck

lol.
kinda what Im doing now huh?

Mongo

yes Ashton, like what you're doing now. You've taken over where I have failed when it comes to intake. Keeping your setup and adding ARC2 would be a great way to increase the amount of air into the motor. Next do some work on the throttlebody and do some P&P on the head and polish the intake manifolds and you have successfully added about 12 HP to the flywheel, if not more.

88BlueTSiQuest

delete

Campeck

WOOOO!
FG resin and sheets and stuff.....this will will be fun.
any pointers?

Russian Rocket

In 1984 Rabbit GTI was just as fast as the 944, if not faster. The original VW 8V is 1970's technology. I used a dual outlet exhaust manifold to gain power on my rabbit from a 1975 car! ABA conversions do gain a lot of power but there are stroker kits for the original 1.8s that bump the power to a 120whp range(same in torque department).
Of course if i ever thought about upgrading my S2's power i'd go forced induction ONLY. Way too little NA aftermarket and way too pricey. For my VW however i can double the NA HP for pocket change in comparison.

FSAEracer03

It will respond to more work better? Says who? The extra displacement of the S2 motor will allow it to still have an edge over the smaller NA motor. What it comes down to is cost effectiveness... 944 NA motors are not cost effective motors to try to squeeze power out of. Perion. Who's up for making a VTEC conversion? That's thousands in development cost and thousands to sell/market. There really isn't a market for that. We still have 'Tegs in displacement, but they have is in 15 years of head development as well as the benefit of lower thermal losses.

...you're joking, Eyal... right??

...no it wasn't. Quarter mile times were over a second slower (low 16's compared to high 17's).

Intake runner lengths, as was said, are what effect resonance responses from the motor, not the intake piping... and yes, fluid mechanics dictates head losses from pipe bends.

Either way... cool deal, Ashton. Now for the real deal... bump up the compression and just enjoy the thing

jc22

Just to correct some misinformation--- MR2's do not stop boosting at 5500rpm. My MR2 achieved full boost by 3000rpm and held it to the 7000rpm cutout. My 951 on the other hand doesn't get full boost until 3300rpm and drops down as it approaches the redline.

The Mr2 had more low end torque due to the quicker spool but it ran out of steam up top due to lack of displacement. But it was 300 lbs. lighter and had a much stiffer chassis.

944CS

you want to compare porsche engineering to hondas? look at the 968, developed in late 80's early 90's, had continuously variable valve control that wasn't night and day like honda's vtec system, only with the recent introduction of i-vtec does honda have a system as good as varioram....also my 944 makes more power down low than any honda motor will stock to stock...and if you are going to compare engines and power, you must use the european higher compression as a comparison because the usa motor is a detuned version of what porsche really engineered

Serge944

My friend is an mr2 guru. With the stop US spec turbo, the CT26, boost would go down from 11 psi to 7 psi after 5500-5800. He installed the Jap-spec Toyota turbo (CT20B), which has a larger exhaust housing, to achieve full boost in the upper RPM ranges. I drove the car before and after, and it is in flawless condition.

If you car boosted well to 7000 rpm, it was NOT stock.

Turbocharges are not without compromise. If there was an ideal setup people would not need to upgrade them. Same goes for intakes, exhaust, variocam, varioram, etc. Compromise.

As for weight, my friends mr2 weighs in a tad over 3000 lbs. Are wet 951's really that heavy?

jc22

I don't really expect you to take my word over your friends but, my car was 100% stock in the motor and with a homemade boost regulator I could hit the fuel cut (14psi I believe) at any rpm. I had 2000 miles of track time on that car and an aftermarket boost gauge so I know what it did. In fact, I had never even heard of boost dropping at redline until I started researching 951s.