Todd157k

I posted them earlier in this thread. It was 15.2 and 15.6. Both runs topping out near 90 mph.
The 1/4 mi times are extremely accurate out of that thing. ALL the other logged data "can" be accurate but you need to set up the car weight, rpm, etc. for it to be. I dialed all that garb in for the vette and it was pretty close in HP / Torque readings. The other cars I didn't bother.

harrisonrick

At 6000 RPM the 16 Valve S delivers 188 hp, and 170 ftpds of torque. 0-60 mph was reached in 6.8 seconds vs. 8.2 for the 8 valves. The later 8 valves were running @ 7.8 seconds IIRC. The S2 makes for 208 hp at 5800 rpm with 207 ftpds of torque. This data from the article in Excellence September 2007.

The stock paper air filter is very restrictive. The K & N element allows an improvemant of more than 50% CFM flow...(dyno proven over the years K & N have been produced) to add up to 10% hp. So, at worst case 5% or 9 hp...the hi performance cat doubles the cfm flow out of the engine with a marginal increase, say 2-4 hp...and the 2.5 stainless cat back system will be good for 5-10 hp depending on brand. I'd say these mods have got her up to 208 or thereabouts. I just ordered Russell's 944S Max chip which has dyno proven 5-6 rwhp gains, greater throttle response and higher redline. IIRC rwhp of 5-6 would come from 10-12 hp from the engine.

I think its possible to match the hp of an unmodified S2, although I'm not certain on the torque gains. Anyone know what say 20 hp would add to the torque curve?

Catfood

20 horses on an S would make about 5 ft lbs of torque. lol. However if you chip it I had games of 10whp, Im now waiting for a SFR exhaust piece from jgporsche. He claims 10 whp from that as well, so I have my fingers crossed.

DDP

I'm not going to read through all the crap tech guesses in this thread but I am going to call ST on out this one. Do you know this 10k rpm motor? You know the owner personally? Or did you hear something from someone you possibly bought an oil pan from and now you're saying what he said? Do you have a dyno to prove it? PROVE IT.

And a 100 hp on an NA! by switching to a 16v over an 8v...lol.

V2Rocket

out of the box it added about 45..

944CS

V2, i'm sorry but you don't know what the hell you're talking about. ever. all your knowledge comes from reading posts on rennlist. most of which are speculation or fiction. do you know that the 944S also has 10.9:1 compression ratio pistons and a knock sensor? Porsche didn't get 45 hp just by switching to the 16 valve head.

Harrisonrick, the stock filter is "very restrictive"? you know the air still has to travel through the head before it gets into the cylinder, and I can tell you that the paper filter will flow more air than the intake ports.

67rschev

+ 1 !!!!!

Even have to ask this forum , what color for a sway bar .........

harrisonrick

yes, all paper filters cfm flow vs a K & N cfm flow is quite different...the K & N improves this by more than 50% for the S engine. this knowledge has been tested and proven for some time for many cars. its a cheap way to increase some hp, improve fuel efficiency and they are guaranteed for something like 50 years with proper cleaning and maintenace. I suggest you visit the K & N site and do some reading.

moorepower

I think that 944CS's point was that no matter how much air flows through the filter, it doesn't help if the intake system (manifold, head ports, and other plumbing) is still flowing the same amount. On any properly designed engine, the air filter will be quite a bit larger than what is required to compensate for dirty filters, etc. As long as you have a clean filter, I don't think you'll gain much, if anything, from just a K&N filter.

harrisonrick

Dan, that's a good point you make, and I think that's the same point CS was making too. My point was the K & N element increases cfm flow into the engine, better than stock. Paper filters are made to function within certain parameters and they are meant to be replaced every tune up...something not required by a K & N. they simply need cleaning and oiling. the S engine will benefit from the K & N air filter, as does any engine for that matter. With the increased cfm flow there is a small gain in hp, but big gains cannot be gotten without further mods to the intake, etc, etc. K & N have dynoed their results for each car they make a filter for IIRC.

I hope I didn't come off snarky CS, and Dan, just that I've had several sportscars and sportbikes over the years, and EACH one of them received a K & N filter. I'm a bit prejudiced in this area I suppose.

moorepower

Rick, no snarky-ness at all. It's a good discussion. I've used K&N's on a few bikes and cars (mainly bikes) over the years, and I've seen definite gains on some older bikes where the airbox and filter is not big enough to supply unrestricted airflow at higher rpm's. They can be quite effective on engines that have been modified, and require more flow. But the 944 and the S has a fairly well designed airbox (from what I hear), so I don't think you would gain much. Maybe a hp or so from less turbulence at the filter? Maybe.

harrisonrick

Yea, could be so. My car sounds better that's for sure. I'll let you know after I install Russell's chip. From what I've heard and read from testimonials, I think I'll be quite happy.

Sorry for typos if any, I was having a few bevvies after my son's hockey tourney today. 1-1..not bad I guess.

First game went to a shoot out, we won, 2nd game was like they left, and we were spanked 15-1. Go figure, 8 yr olds are funny.

jeeper31

Had an N/A, had an S now have a Turbo S.

The "S" was faster than the N/A and and much better at Auto-x than the Turbo S. I was beating Turbos with my "S" and am not getting beaten by N/As in my Turbo S. NEITHER compare to the Turbo S on the track though

V2Rocket

Was it better because of no turbo lag?

V2Rocket

What's the topspeed on an S2?