bad_monkey

My '89 engine is fairly sleepy below 2500 rpm, gets a bit angry toward 3000rpm, and then there seems to be a steeper power curve all the way to 5500rpm where it starts to flatten out. I have to be careful toward the fuel cut, because it feels like it will keep on revving higher despite a slight turndown in acceleration. I do all my overtaking in the 3000-5500 rpm happy place

I've discovered that it's a bit of a strange installation though, transplanted into the 84 car. It's running an '84 DME and AFM with a custom chip, the correct injectors for the '89, and a high performance fuel pump. I haven't tested fuel pressure, but I think the regulator is correct for the '89 too. I've yet to blag a run on a dyno - or get one of those GPS based meters.

The car has had 12 PO's, and spent time as a "parts car" for the Bridgestone Porsche series over here...so I'm always finding weird stuff.

Tenacious_G

My 86 NA is stagnant now, because the tranny is busted.


...BEFORE THAT, It felt relatively smooth and even in the power band, though admittedly things got more exciting between 3000-5000 rpms.

jstand22

crap

82-T/A

I'm kind of glad to hear this. I've only recently got my 1984 Porsche 944 running well in the past few months, so I haven't REALLY beaten on it, but it doesn't seem to have much power past the 4k range. And mine too also sounds like it's going to explode when I start to rev up around 4,000 rpms. It does seem to have decent oomph in the lower rpms, but like one of you guys said, it seems linear past that point.

One thing I've really noticed on this board, and I'm curious why, but there seems to be some major animosity towards even the slightest hint at trying to get more power out of the 8 Valve NA. It's like there's a pink elephant in the room, and everyone is yelling at him.

There has never been a production motor that couldn't be improved upon. It might be a Porsche motor, but it's still a production motor. A good exhaust header, a higher flowing catalytic converter, a ported / polished intake, a better cam, maybe some port & polish work on the cyl head are all things you can do that don't cost an arm and a leg.

At the very least, I'm sure there are some aftermarket cam followers that increase the stock ratio some.

I have a 4 cyl in my 2006 Pontiac Solstice. Stock it's rated at 177hp. Not an insane amount, but good for a solid mid 15 second quarter mile time. I've added a few bolt-on upgrades that have really awaken the car. A 500cfm catalytic converter (up from 325), a cold air intake, a ceramic coated tubular shorty header. The car screams now. I don't know what kind of horsepower I'm putting out, but I consistently get quarter mile times in the high 14s.

It's a VVT system as well. It really just doesn't have a lot of low-end torque. But around town driving can be done on the lower cam phase by keeping it under 3,200 rpms. Under NORMAL conservative driving, it doesn't have the same smooth off the line pull in day to day driving as my 944 appears to have, but as long as you keep it between 2,000-3,000 it seems pretty linear. When the cam phase happens, it really starts to pull hard though, and it'll continue to pull harder and harder all the way up to about 7,500 rpms. It's programmed to retard the timing and enrichen the fuel at 7,600 rpms, and then it cuts the fuel out a few hundred rpms past that.

It has 18" wheels with big fat wide tires that look like they belong on a 1998-2002 Pontiac Trans Am, but they'll break loose from the shift from 1st to 2nd, and a chirp from 2nd to 3rd.

Helping this motor breaths REALLY wakes it up. I'd imagine that the 16 valve 2.7 NA would really benefit from similar upgrades.

M758

But all those things were optimized by Porsche long ago. What we are left with is try to mod the internals of the head. It is not that you can't get hp from the motor is is just that there is no easy bolt on hp.

82-T/A

I'm sure you know the car better than I do, so I'm not necessarily arguing with you. But AS a production car, it has to "agree" with all of the standards that are put before it at production time. This includes fuel economy, emissions standards, and all the other things.

Really, a tubular exhuast header is always going to be better, in every aspect, than a stamped exhaust manifold. The difference is, a tubular exhaust header costs substantially more than a stamped exhaust header does. That said, they will make the car as great as they can, within reason, so long as they can still make a profit.

Things like catalytic converters, even though Porsche used honeycomb ceramic cats back in the 80s (which were much better than the charcoal style ones that many cars were coming with back then), improvements HAVE still been made over and above what Porsche came with originally.

With respect to the intake. It's an all aluminum 2-piece design. They stamped two pieces and welded them together. Technology today would allow for a "composite" plastic intake that was heat resistant, and completely smooth inside. Porsche did a great job designing the intake on the 944, but the intake still isn't really that smooth inside, and like with everything else, they have to weigh cost vs performance. They certainly did a better job than most companies did back then, but a new, composite intake WOULD be an improvement. 1) because it doesn't transmit heat, and it would remain ambient temperature regardless of how hot the motor was. 2) It would be 100% smooth inside for better air flow. 3) you could make one with slightly enlarged interior diameter to help flow on a slightly modified head.

The same goes for the intake configuration forward of the throttle body. They had to make the car meet noise regulations as best they could.

Bottom line, any car short of a Bugatti Veyron has room for improvement. The NA Porsche 944 was their cash cow...

I would just like to see a few companies come out with some improvements.

944CS

you won't make much hp with a 9.5:1 comp ratio n/a motor
people always forget - the USA versions were de-tuned from what porsche originally had in mind for these cars!

nh7cy

For some reason my power band seems to be between 3.5k and 4.5k RPMs.

knfeparty

BAN HIM!!!

j/k...

Modifications are a no go for stock class. Just wanted to know if anything needed "tuning up," but it sounds like it would be kind of pointless.

TedA

Note to self.....Hit the pedal in the middle no more than absolutely required, when not pressing the pedal in the middle fully compress the pedal on the right. If not on a long straight you can leave an impression. Trust me on this. Momentum is your friend.

DVC

You're mistaking animosity with "been there done that". Porsche tuned this motor to the nth degree. Look at the spec racers and what they put down after completely going through the motor. And contrary to what you believe, a tubular header gains you nil on a 2.5 N/A, stock cam/head.

ClassJ

idk....mine pulls hard (for a 944) right to red line. Certainly harder up top than at the bottom. I have a chip in mine which helped quite a bit up top.

ccaarmerciill

i'd say... non existant.. "power" and "944" in the same sentence!!!!? how dare you?!

Alxx Nova

I have a 1989 n/a with the 2.7 also. Now I'm the 5th owner so I don't know everything that has been done to her. There was a stack of receipts but there are gaps in the history. Especially the early years. That being said ...

She's pretty good from 2,000 to Around 3,500 but I get a nice rush from just from there on up. Respectable for her age and engine. She definitely likes the mid to upper rpm range. Anything that's been done to her as been by the four other owners and from what I see there is ...

A basic Brusch muffler. The receipts looks like Midias installed it and did the pipe from the cat back to the muffler.
I forget the brand but she has those 4 prong spark plugs, they were new when I got the car so I Ieft them on for now.
The spark plug wires are Magnecor KV85 Comp which were also already on and new when I bought her.
I have taken the cover off the intake filter and have straps holding the filter in place. I'm going to test the temp while driving and see for myself how it is while driving as opposed to not moving on a dyno.
Also there's one of those throttle cams which is a feel quicker rather then go quicker thing. Though reaction time is important in going faster also like when your shifting gears.
I don't know if she still has the stock chip or not. Haven't checked yet.

Maybe a chip along with the exhaust and an open intake might make it feel nicer in a full throttle high rpm situation. I don't drag race her but for what it's worth, from a rolling start, I have no problem running against my wife's 1999 300M which has a 240hp V6 but it weighs as much as a whale and it's an automatic. I understand what the base 944 was made for and that's why I bought it and I drive it accordingly But I never have a problem passing a minivan, ever.

I've had some thoughts about getting a S2 or 968 crank and rods to bump her up to 3.0 and then maybe, maybe adding a cam.

-----------------------------------------------------
Alex Portanova
1989 944 N/A
1999 Chrysler 300M
1992 Harley FXSTC

ccaarmerciill

aww cmon I miss my 89.. keep your good experiences to yourself!

sorry i'm getting cranky