Why our cars are not made for drag racing...?
06-06-2006, 03:45 PM
#46
Heu, I think Legoland has something like 20 944!! Why don't you read in the forums a little, get to know the people, use the search engine, and then post helpfull and meaningfull information, not junk like you just did. .
Stephane
Stephane
Originally Posted by myskyon
ok for starters are you talking about the 951 witch most other people are talking about in this thread? if not do you even own a 951 or have you ever owned one? i bet not if you think it is slow as $hit. plus i would like to see a $700 74 camero even get to 60mph. come on why would you even think about posting somthing like that? i bet the 83 944 na i paid $500 for would beat a $700 74 camero in the 1/4 no problem. even in the long run. and i am positive my 951 will with out batting an eye.
i have draged my 951 plenty of time but i am also not "dumping" my clutch. i have really only been beat off the line by 4wd cars. most all of the other rwd cars and fwd cars that i have raced loose the line jump by dumping thier clutches and spinning the tires. i know there are weak spots in our cars but there are weak spots in all cars. it all depends on how you launch your car and how much time and money you would like to put into it IF it breaks. i have found the gearing is pretty good for a 1/4 mile.
944 Turbo
(1987 -1988)
1st 10:35 (3.500)
2nd 17:35 (2.059)
3rd 25:35 (1.400)
4th 29:30 (1.034)
5th 35:29 (0.829)
Rev 12:42 (3.500)
FDR 8:27 (3.375)
i have draged my 951 plenty of time but i am also not "dumping" my clutch. i have really only been beat off the line by 4wd cars. most all of the other rwd cars and fwd cars that i have raced loose the line jump by dumping thier clutches and spinning the tires. i know there are weak spots in our cars but there are weak spots in all cars. it all depends on how you launch your car and how much time and money you would like to put into it IF it breaks. i have found the gearing is pretty good for a 1/4 mile.
944 Turbo
(1987 -1988)
1st 10:35 (3.500)
2nd 17:35 (2.059)
3rd 25:35 (1.400)
4th 29:30 (1.034)
5th 35:29 (0.829)
Rev 12:42 (3.500)
FDR 8:27 (3.375)
06-06-2006, 04:15 PM
#47
Drifting
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must agree there is not a stock 74ish camero that will put down even a high 13 second run.
point is a 951 is a sad drag car.... If you are happy running 12-14 second quarter mile times then fine. At the dragstip, this makes you no hero in my book.
You want to lay down serious street car numbers, 10s, 11s, you would be far better served to loose the porsche mechanicals (engine/trans)
ADDED:
So I just can't help myself:
myskyon I gotta tell you, you are seriously mislead if you think a 951 launches harder than most cars. There are plenty of ordinary cars that will hook a lot harder. A mustang with soft front shocks and a posi hook much better and will walk away from your 951 at the launch. Sorry I am calling BULL****
point is a 951 is a sad drag car.... If you are happy running 12-14 second quarter mile times then fine. At the dragstip, this makes you no hero in my book.
You want to lay down serious street car numbers, 10s, 11s, you would be far better served to loose the porsche mechanicals (engine/trans)
ADDED:
So I just can't help myself:
myskyon I gotta tell you, you are seriously mislead if you think a 951 launches harder than most cars. There are plenty of ordinary cars that will hook a lot harder. A mustang with soft front shocks and a posi hook much better and will walk away from your 951 at the launch. Sorry I am calling BULL****
06-06-2006, 06:03 PM
#48
Race Car
Myskyon, my $700 camaro did 14.5s at 106 et all day long on crap street tires worn to crap. You said you drag your car often. What are your times? The only people who don't post their time is because their car is slow or they are STREET RACING, which needs no comments. My n/a 944 can't get anywhere within 2 seconds of that camaro, which is an eternity in drag racing terms (you would be very lucky to get sub 17). Heck, the camaro would be finished while the 944 is still at a little over 1/8 mile. If you think your $500 944 can take a 74 camaro, lets race for pinks. Put your money where your mouth is or shut up. A stock non S 944 turbo gets in the 15 second mark in real life, not in a magazine. The camaro of 3600 pounds with carbon fouled plugs will do 15s. Only a turbo S will probably beat that $700 camaro at the dragstrip. I would say real life numbers and magazine numbers are very different.
2bridges, you are right about launches. I have seen many 12 second flat late 80s mustangs at the strip, which is as fast as the 88 katana 600 I rode to a 12.01 finish at 126 ET 15 years ago. My 951S launches hard but its NOTHING like my bike, which is as fast as the mustangs. Though I have not drag raced my GSXR 1100, I am building a 944 drag car with a complete 700hp chevy drivetrain with wheelie bars. We are expecting to do 10 second 1/4s.
Here is a link if you want to find approximate 1/4 mile times. The 74 camaro stock is 15.4 while the stock n/a 1986 944 is 16.6. My $700 camaro came complete with aluminum manifold, headers, and a OEM Carter AFB 4 barrel carburetor.
2bridges, you are right about launches. I have seen many 12 second flat late 80s mustangs at the strip, which is as fast as the 88 katana 600 I rode to a 12.01 finish at 126 ET 15 years ago. My 951S launches hard but its NOTHING like my bike, which is as fast as the mustangs. Though I have not drag raced my GSXR 1100, I am building a 944 drag car with a complete 700hp chevy drivetrain with wheelie bars. We are expecting to do 10 second 1/4s.
Here is a link if you want to find approximate 1/4 mile times. The 74 camaro stock is 15.4 while the stock n/a 1986 944 is 16.6. My $700 camaro came complete with aluminum manifold, headers, and a OEM Carter AFB 4 barrel carburetor.
Last edited by Legoland951; 06-06-2006 at 06:29 PM.
06-06-2006, 06:24 PM
#49
Drifting
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear that!
951 pulls pretty freakin hard especially for the era it was designed, but reality is stiff suspension, big sway bars, low profile tire, and Independent rear susp are NOT things that help you at the strip.
I have run a variety of cars, and my realistic guess is that my 951would crck into the 14s. Of course everything feels a bit faster than it really is.
I'll bet my work truck would smoke a 944 NA
3/4 ton 4X4 pickup on 32" all terain tires
pretty hairy 406 and 4:10 locker rear axle. BRING IT!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd love to see some pics of the drag car. Did you see earlier post of morris minor with 500+HP sbc - SUPER YIKES. I don't get spooked by many cars. Tha one can spook me every time
951 pulls pretty freakin hard especially for the era it was designed, but reality is stiff suspension, big sway bars, low profile tire, and Independent rear susp are NOT things that help you at the strip.
I have run a variety of cars, and my realistic guess is that my 951would crck into the 14s. Of course everything feels a bit faster than it really is.
I'll bet my work truck would smoke a 944 NA
3/4 ton 4X4 pickup on 32" all terain tires
pretty hairy 406 and 4:10 locker rear axle. BRING IT!------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd love to see some pics of the drag car. Did you see earlier post of morris minor with 500+HP sbc - SUPER YIKES. I don't get spooked by many cars. Tha one can spook me every time
06-06-2006, 06:34 PM
#50
Race Car
The car is currently being built and not too pretty right now. Few of the S. Ca guys have seen it. It has a full cage in it and a fuel cell located where the tank is. The battery is also relocated to the rear. A Ford 9 inch is going in with 15x12 rear wheels along with a 350 engine/trans and nitrous. The engine builder recommended not going faster than 10 seconds as NHRA regulations are more strict for sub 10 second cars. It will be a while before its done but once its done, I will post pics.
06-06-2006, 06:42 PM
#51
Drifting
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
please do! I gotta say If you really planning to make that much power..... unless you have traction issues, you should expect easy 10s. You running a powerglide trans? save lots of weight
The Morris was just over 500HP ran a best of 10.1 before being "outlawed" by track. The competitors in class discoved that car was 1.5" too short on wheel base length. I think minimum was 90". Hit the wall with safety stuff too. under 10 and lots more stuff required.
The Morris was just over 500HP ran a best of 10.1 before being "outlawed" by track. The competitors in class discoved that car was 1.5" too short on wheel base length. I think minimum was 90". Hit the wall with safety stuff too. under 10 and lots more stuff required.
06-06-2006, 06:44 PM
#52
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Scales Bump, IlliNOIZE
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legoland951
The car is currently being built and not too pretty right now. Few of the S. Ca guys have seen it. It has a full cage in it and a fuel cell located where the tank is. The battery is also relocated to the rear. A Ford 9 inch is going in with 15x12 rear wheels along with a 350 engine/trans and nitrous. The engine builder recommended not going faster than 10 seconds as NHRA regulations are more strict for sub 10 second cars. It will be a while before its done but once its done, I will post pics.
As they say, real cars don't drive their front wheels, they lift em!I want to see that something terrible!
06-06-2006, 07:03 PM
#53
Drifting
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
terrible??? I wish I had a vid clip of a ride in that car..... It is hard to explain.... I have ridden in a few cars this fast, but this one.....
With such short wheelbase and so much power, Is like witnessing a well orchstrated dance: a flurry of elbows and audible throttle lifts and repoints as the car is crossed up and repointed, being forced against all the laws of nature to go straight.
Uncle Scotty is one of my all time heros! He cruzes this thing on weekends too. Street legal. Blows my mind. He re-geared and took it out to Bonniville one year, but they got rained out. Probably a good thing.
With such short wheelbase and so much power, Is like witnessing a well orchstrated dance: a flurry of elbows and audible throttle lifts and repoints as the car is crossed up and repointed, being forced against all the laws of nature to go straight.
Uncle Scotty is one of my all time heros! He cruzes this thing on weekends too. Street legal. Blows my mind. He re-geared and took it out to Bonniville one year, but they got rained out. Probably a good thing.
06-07-2006, 12:18 AM
#54
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Trucho-951
Also, consistency (repeatability) is very important. If you cannot control your 1/4 mile times to within +/- 0.01 sec., then your car will not be competitive.
So, out of the box? No, a 944 turbo is not competitive, but with enough $$ invested in it, yes one can turn in into quite a wild 1/4 mile ride. But then again, for a similar $$ investment it would be much easier to improve other cars like mustangs and corvettes.
So, out of the box? No, a 944 turbo is not competitive, but with enough $$ invested in it, yes one can turn in into quite a wild 1/4 mile ride. But then again, for a similar $$ investment it would be much easier to improve other cars like mustangs and corvettes.
I do agree with the 2nd half of your post. Instant response and gobs of torque are not in the 944's genetics.
06-07-2006, 01:33 AM
#55
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legoland951
.... My $700 camaro came complete with aluminum manifold, headers, and a OEM Carter AFB 4 barrel carburetor.
, and I admit I don't know a whole hell of a lot about Chevys, or anything outside the realm of VWs, but isn't the OEM carb for that Camaro a Rochestor Q-jet? 
06-07-2006, 02:45 AM
#56
Race Car
Quadrajet is a 4 barrel carburetor same as the Carter in design with the same CFM. I am not sure whether it came from the factory with that carb. The point is, its not a big holley and came all with the $700 car.
06-07-2006, 02:59 AM
#57
Pro
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Napa Valley, CA
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Perry 951
Keep your times within 100th of a second? Who are you kidding? Keeping your time within 1/2 second is more realistic for non-professional racers. Hell, pro-stock teams have a hard time keeping within a few hundreths from run to run.
I do agree with the 2nd half of your post. Instant response and gobs of torque are not in the 944's genetics.
I do agree with the 2nd half of your post. Instant response and gobs of torque are not in the 944's genetics.
Note that to win a drag race you have cross the finish line first, so two cars can have identical times, e.g. 12.54 and 12.54; however, the winner will be decided by the driver with the best reaction time (that car crosses the finish line first). So the idea is to have the most consistent car, in order to "have an ace in your pocket". Then just work on having consistent reaction times. In fact I remember many a times winning with my 12.54 to a faster car, say a 12.53. Simply because my reaction time was better. As I'm sure you are well aware, reaction time is NOT part of the elapsed time, this is where it gets interesting.
By the way, the slower a car is, the easier it is to dial it in very, very consistent. I've seen Honda Civics run 20.00 sec. et's all day long. However, professional drag teams are playing with thousands of Horses and a wild ride like that is very difficult to tame, isn't it amazing they can actually get their cars dialed in to within a few hundreths of a second?
06-07-2006, 03:50 AM
#58
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do I always feel the need to jump in on these threads....? 
The weights being listed here seem a bit low- maybe earlier 924/944's were lighter than later...? A stock Turbo S weighs every bit of 3150+lbs- Mine was 3160 w/full tank, spare, full stereo, etc & no personal belongings or female leprechauns in the rear seat...
1987 R&T lists the following for 1986 Porsches...
944NA- 3060
951- 3145
924S - 2910
911cab- 2965
911 turbo- 3210
928S- 3680
These seem pretty consistent w/other tests from the era for 944/951's- TEST weight, not curb- normally ~100lb discrepancy- curb doesn't mean much...
As several have stated, 60ft times are very important- our low end TQ isn't the best & our cars are very UNresponsive. 968 has some of the worst gearing ever for a street car, but for 1/4 mile, probably the best of 924/944 series- it's the shortest- 951's sort of sucks- the guy who was quoted earlier wasn't 100% right. Real drag racers gear their cars specfically for the 1/4- to cross the line at a given speed right before next shift. A stock 951S traps ~101mph- will shift into 4th ~90mph or so- 3rd redlines 99mph & 4th, 134mph, so shifts into 5th ~125mph... You end up wasting more than half of 4th. It would ALMOST be faster w/a taller 1-3- best to shorten FD- shorter gears = faster.
Let's say your FD is 4.0 & 1st is 4.0 & 2nd is 3.0 & you have 200lbs/ft @ 2000rpm... Your OR (overall ratio) would be 16.0 in 1st & 12.0 in 2nd... SO, at 2000rpm in 1st, you'd put down 3200lbs/ft & only 2400lbs/ft in 2nd...
Let's say you shortened the FD- higher numerically- Just like 1st is higher numerically than 2nd. If you went to 5.0 FD, you'd have 4.0 (1st) X 5.0 (FD) = 20.0 (OR) X 200 (lbs/ft) = 4000lbs/ft @ 2000rpm & then 3.0 X 5.0 = 15.0 X 200 = 3000lbs/ft in 2nd. 2nd in this EX is ALMOST as strong a 1st in the 1st EX...
Shortening gears always helps leverage... Even w/some wheelspin- most people don't realize it, but, you NEED some wheel spin to prevent bogging...
You ALSO have to factor in the amount of HP/TQ of given car (turbos like taller gears). High HP Vettes & Vipers have tall as FU** gearing. GTSR's redlined 6th @ >300mph... 1st @ 60mph... best GTSR mod on the planet was a shorter FD, reducing all gears by ~20%... STILL, 1st redlined 50mph & 6th ~240mph...!!!
Shorter gearing's normally faster, so it's no surprise when the C&D tested 951S w/3.89FD (stock was 3.38) ran the 1/4 in 13.9- faster than any other stock 951 ever- Turbo S's ran ~14.2. Both ran 0-60 of 5.5 b/c of early shif into 3rd. MUCH more optimal gearing for dragging than stock 951S...
Last- many people like to think that 944's are faster at high speeds than low. This is utter BS!!! The car accelerates down low JUST AS WELL as up high... People consistently say "we can't hang off the line to ~60mph, but we'll blow his doors off >70mph or so..." It's BS. By basic math, you'll find that 0-60 & 1/4 mile #'s correlate VERY CLOSELY from car to car- you can get a very good idea of 1/4 mile times by seeing 0-60 times, just as 60ft times will predict the 1/4... Drag racers know this & always strive to improve their 60ft times moreso than anything else, just as several here have pointed out...
Just for arguments sake- a 951S runs 0-60 in 5.5, the 1/4 in 14.2, & 0-120 in ~22.0... Well, what SHOUD it run 0-60 in...??? It should be 5.5, & it does!!!! The E36 M3 ('96 & up) is a good example- very short gearing- runs 0-60 in 5.5 & 1/4 in 14.0 (some list 13.9) & then goes on to hit 130 in less than 25 seconds in some tests... It definately does better at higher speeds than even a stock Turbo S, whereas the Turbo S keeps up through 1st & 2nd...
As for parts being expensive, I have to agree about the tranny, etc... I mean, there are lot's of cars out there that are much cheaper... But, it can be done, despite that "not being what it's made for..." Oh well... to each their own... I, personally think it makes more sense than FWD Hondas being dragged, w/the exception of their much more plentiful, cheaper replacement parts, but they weren't made for dragging anymore than our cars & yet there are more of them running in the 8's than we have 924/944/968's running in the 12's...!
Matt H- you said something about live axel, etc... I might have misunderstood, but the way I read it was that the solid/live rear axle is not as good for dragging & therefore a 944/951 is not... But, we don't have live rear axle... We have independant susp (although NOT multi-link, unfortunately), which should allow us to hook up a little better, depending on choice of specifics... Again, I may have seriously misunderstood, but am just curious...
The weights being listed here seem a bit low- maybe earlier 924/944's were lighter than later...? A stock Turbo S weighs every bit of 3150+lbs- Mine was 3160 w/full tank, spare, full stereo, etc & no personal belongings or female leprechauns in the rear seat...
1987 R&T lists the following for 1986 Porsches...
944NA- 3060
951- 3145
924S - 2910
911cab- 2965
911 turbo- 3210
928S- 3680
These seem pretty consistent w/other tests from the era for 944/951's- TEST weight, not curb- normally ~100lb discrepancy- curb doesn't mean much...
As several have stated, 60ft times are very important- our low end TQ isn't the best & our cars are very UNresponsive. 968 has some of the worst gearing ever for a street car, but for 1/4 mile, probably the best of 924/944 series- it's the shortest- 951's sort of sucks- the guy who was quoted earlier wasn't 100% right. Real drag racers gear their cars specfically for the 1/4- to cross the line at a given speed right before next shift. A stock 951S traps ~101mph- will shift into 4th ~90mph or so- 3rd redlines 99mph & 4th, 134mph, so shifts into 5th ~125mph... You end up wasting more than half of 4th. It would ALMOST be faster w/a taller 1-3- best to shorten FD- shorter gears = faster.
Let's say your FD is 4.0 & 1st is 4.0 & 2nd is 3.0 & you have 200lbs/ft @ 2000rpm... Your OR (overall ratio) would be 16.0 in 1st & 12.0 in 2nd... SO, at 2000rpm in 1st, you'd put down 3200lbs/ft & only 2400lbs/ft in 2nd...
Let's say you shortened the FD- higher numerically- Just like 1st is higher numerically than 2nd. If you went to 5.0 FD, you'd have 4.0 (1st) X 5.0 (FD) = 20.0 (OR) X 200 (lbs/ft) = 4000lbs/ft @ 2000rpm & then 3.0 X 5.0 = 15.0 X 200 = 3000lbs/ft in 2nd. 2nd in this EX is ALMOST as strong a 1st in the 1st EX...
Shortening gears always helps leverage... Even w/some wheelspin- most people don't realize it, but, you NEED some wheel spin to prevent bogging...
You ALSO have to factor in the amount of HP/TQ of given car (turbos like taller gears). High HP Vettes & Vipers have tall as FU** gearing. GTSR's redlined 6th @ >300mph... 1st @ 60mph... best GTSR mod on the planet was a shorter FD, reducing all gears by ~20%... STILL, 1st redlined 50mph & 6th ~240mph...!!!
Shorter gearing's normally faster, so it's no surprise when the C&D tested 951S w/3.89FD (stock was 3.38) ran the 1/4 in 13.9- faster than any other stock 951 ever- Turbo S's ran ~14.2. Both ran 0-60 of 5.5 b/c of early shif into 3rd. MUCH more optimal gearing for dragging than stock 951S...
Last- many people like to think that 944's are faster at high speeds than low. This is utter BS!!! The car accelerates down low JUST AS WELL as up high... People consistently say "we can't hang off the line to ~60mph, but we'll blow his doors off >70mph or so..." It's BS. By basic math, you'll find that 0-60 & 1/4 mile #'s correlate VERY CLOSELY from car to car- you can get a very good idea of 1/4 mile times by seeing 0-60 times, just as 60ft times will predict the 1/4... Drag racers know this & always strive to improve their 60ft times moreso than anything else, just as several here have pointed out...
Just for arguments sake- a 951S runs 0-60 in 5.5, the 1/4 in 14.2, & 0-120 in ~22.0... Well, what SHOUD it run 0-60 in...??? It should be 5.5, & it does!!!! The E36 M3 ('96 & up) is a good example- very short gearing- runs 0-60 in 5.5 & 1/4 in 14.0 (some list 13.9) & then goes on to hit 130 in less than 25 seconds in some tests... It definately does better at higher speeds than even a stock Turbo S, whereas the Turbo S keeps up through 1st & 2nd...
As for parts being expensive, I have to agree about the tranny, etc... I mean, there are lot's of cars out there that are much cheaper... But, it can be done, despite that "not being what it's made for..." Oh well... to each their own... I, personally think it makes more sense than FWD Hondas being dragged, w/the exception of their much more plentiful, cheaper replacement parts, but they weren't made for dragging anymore than our cars & yet there are more of them running in the 8's than we have 924/944/968's running in the 12's...!
Matt H- you said something about live axel, etc... I might have misunderstood, but the way I read it was that the solid/live rear axle is not as good for dragging & therefore a 944/951 is not... But, we don't have live rear axle... We have independant susp (although NOT multi-link, unfortunately), which should allow us to hook up a little better, depending on choice of specifics... Again, I may have seriously misunderstood, but am just curious...
Last edited by Robby; 06-08-2006 at 06:01 AM.
06-07-2006, 03:55 AM
#59
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Perry 951
Keep your times within 100th of a second? Who are you kidding? Keeping your time within 1/2 second is more realistic for non-professional racers. Hell, pro-stock teams have a hard time keeping within a few hundreths from run to run.
I do agree with the 2nd half of your post. Instant response and gobs of torque are not in the 944's genetics.
I do agree with the 2nd half of your post. Instant response and gobs of torque are not in the 944's genetics.
BRIAN!!!!!! I thought you had dropped off the face of the EARTH!!!!
Glad I was wrong! You have PM....
Yes, consistency is important in 1/4's, etc, but you're right that down to the 1/100's is getting pretty competitive... I'll also throw in another vote for the non-responsiveness of ALL of our watercoolers... Unfortunately... This, just in case you skipped my book above....
06-07-2006, 04:41 AM
#60
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: East Bay, Ca
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Legoland951]Myskyon, my $700 camaro did 14.5s at 106 et all day long on crap street tires worn to crap. [QUOTE]
You must have the worst 60ft times of all time to have that E.T. with a 106mph trap speed...
P.S. C6 Covette uses the 6.0L LS2.
You must have the worst 60ft times of all time to have that E.T. with a 106mph trap speed...
P.S. C6 Covette uses the 6.0L LS2.