How much more reliable is a NA than a Turbo?
09-06-2008 | 12:20 PM
#17
Race Director
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 17,643
Likes: 8
From: Phoenix, Az
Well,
I race an NA and street drive a Turbo.
The NA will be cheaper to run at the track for a number of reasons. Firstly stock vs stock the NA has around 100 less hp. Running through the same chassis and many similar components this means less stress per component.
Secondly on parts that do need to be replaced the NA usally has cheaper parts like for like and labor is easier since turbo cars have more plumbing to deal with to access most items.
As for actual reliablity more is dependant on the actual car. I have had to fix alot more stuff on my 944 NA race car than my 944 Turbo S street car. However alot of that has to do with buying a nice 951 and junker NA. I have probably replace just about every part on my 944 NA race car over the 8 years I have been build/driving it. However once all the lingering maintenace/worn out parts were replaced my NA has been a very very solid car. I pulled it out once a month a beat the stuffing out of it and park it. Then a month later I do it all over again.
Now one thing to consider about 951 track reliability is hp levels. More hp levels will cause more wear on all components. So many "unreliablie" 951's are a result of over boosting/under prepping the chassis for the hp levels.
I race an NA and street drive a Turbo.
The NA will be cheaper to run at the track for a number of reasons. Firstly stock vs stock the NA has around 100 less hp. Running through the same chassis and many similar components this means less stress per component.
Secondly on parts that do need to be replaced the NA usally has cheaper parts like for like and labor is easier since turbo cars have more plumbing to deal with to access most items.
As for actual reliablity more is dependant on the actual car. I have had to fix alot more stuff on my 944 NA race car than my 944 Turbo S street car. However alot of that has to do with buying a nice 951 and junker NA. I have probably replace just about every part on my 944 NA race car over the 8 years I have been build/driving it. However once all the lingering maintenace/worn out parts were replaced my NA has been a very very solid car. I pulled it out once a month a beat the stuffing out of it and park it. Then a month later I do it all over again.
Now one thing to consider about 951 track reliability is hp levels. More hp levels will cause more wear on all components. So many "unreliablie" 951's are a result of over boosting/under prepping the chassis for the hp levels.
09-06-2008 | 12:41 PM
#18
Thread Starter
Burning Brakes
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 772
Likes: 0
From: Littleton, CO
I was hoping it would get more reliable after we went through almost everything trying to figure out why it was running very rich at high RPM, but I'm still having problems. I really want to keep the car, but at this point the only way I can afford it would be to sell my other car and use the 951 as my daily driver. I'm just not sure it is reliable enough to do that with, not to mention snow.
09-06-2008 | 01:17 PM
#19
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,242
Likes: 3
From: Canada, Eh?
Depends on the car IMHO.
I always get a laugh out of the fact that my 951 has never actually left me stranded or needed a tow.... But my mountain bike has left me stranded two or three times.
I always get a laugh out of the fact that my 951 has never actually left me stranded or needed a tow.... But my mountain bike has left me stranded two or three times.
