Explain this GT Magazine Discrep to me

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

03-10-2003, 05:20 PM

#16

Sami951

Drifting

Join Date: Jul 2002

Location: Espoo, Finland

Posts: 2,668

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Dan, read it again - '89 turbo is a 247 hp car as well

Reply Like

03-10-2003, 06:02 PM

#17

Z-man

Race Director

Join Date: Jan 2002

Location: North NJ, USA

Posts: 10,170

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PorscheG96:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Z-man:
most tuners are too afraid of the 16 valve head to offer anything really good for it.<hr /></blockquote>Afraid?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Z-man:
Thus, the only 4 valve per cyl. 924/944/968 cars are:
944S
944S2
968
968 Club Sport (Euro-spec only: Never avail in US)<hr /></blockquote>944 GTP had a 4 valve/cylinder turbocharged engine.<hr /></blockquote>Ok: the 944 GTP also had a 4 valve head. But that wasn't a production car per say.

Why are tuners afraid of touching the 4 vavle 944/968 head? As I said, there's a perception that these heads are fragile, with the cam chain guide/tensioner being what most people point out first, and then mentioning that it was Porsche first foray into the 4-valve heads.

-Z.

Reply Like

03-10-2003, 07:18 PM

#18

2+2

Pro

Join Date: Apr 2002

Location: N. Virginia

Posts: 549

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Thats interesting. The literature I have seen gives 0-60 for 88 to be 5.5 but was told that is with a shorter gearing. Porsche advertised the 89 0-60 as 5.7, BUT later found out that that was the time for 0-100kph which is approx. 62 mph, not 60 mph. So, 0.2 sec difference....likely attributable to shorter gearing and 2mph extra?!?
Car and driver variation is likely to more than offset time differential BUT I also read somewhere that the Turbo S engines were "picked" from the best of the regular turbo engines as well.
BTW, apparently, the 89 turbo had a slightly smaller diameter rear stabilizer bar as compared to the 88 turbo S. Otherwise, everything else was the same, exept for the ungly interior of the 88.......

Reply Like

03-10-2003, 07:28 PM

#19

Fishey

Nordschleife Master

Join Date: Feb 2003

Location: Lebanon, OH

Posts: 5,801

Likes: 0

Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts

dude the magazines are so freaking off. Like this arttical from grassroots motorsports (called 944vs911) its horrible. Most magizines reviewed my s2cabriolet as o-60 in 7.1 1/4 in 15.0 and 3100lbs (stock claims) but tiff needels reviewed the car and they claimed 0-60 in 5.9 1/4 14.6 and 2900lbs (since I ran a 14.6 I am guessing that the other reviews were just idiots.)

Reply Like

03-10-2003, 07:33 PM

#20

Tom

Pro

Join Date: Jun 2001

Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Posts: 721

Likes: 0

Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Extra valves are used to help a naturally aspirated engine breathe better (more area, higher rev limit). While that would be useful when using forced induction, for the most part the same result can be achieved by adjusting the boost, allowing the use of a simpler head.

As far as putting forced induction on a 16-valve motor, it could probably be done but it would be expensive (custom made or modified pistons to lower CR for one) and is it wothe the trouble to invest the time and money when you can get a 944 Turbo and enjoy it right away, without development risks (hole in block=should have reduced compression a bit more!) Besides the turbos have a bit better brakes and suspension to go with the power, and that would have to be added to your 944S project.

Reply Like

03-10-2003, 07:45 PM

#21

944S2NUT

Drifting

Join Date: Aug 2002

Location: Canada

Posts: 3,053

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Z-man:
While turbo charging or supercharing an S engine is possible, most tuners are too afraid of the 16 valve head to offer anything really good for it.

The perception is that the 16V 944/968 head is too fragile to handle a turbo or blower.

Heck, even the factory was afraid to turbo the 944/968 16v head: when they made the ultra rare 968 Club Sport Turbo, while they used a 968 bottom end, they grafted an 8 valve 944 turbo head to it!

Thus, the only 4 valve per cyl. 924/944/968 cars are:
944S
944S2
968
968 Club Sport (Euro-spec only: Never avail in US)

Just a bit of Porsche trivia for ya,
-Z.<hr /></blockquote>Are you sure porsche was afraid to turbo the 16v cars or afraid it would destroy the 930 sales. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Reply Like

03-10-2003, 07:50 PM

#22

user 8430

Banned

Join Date: May 2002

Posts: 1,388

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Z-man:
Thus, the only 4 valve per cyl. 924/944/968 cars are:
944S
944S2
968
968 Club Sport (Euro-spec only: Never avail in US)<hr /></blockquote>944 GTP had a 4 valve/cylinder turbocharged engine.<hr /></blockquote>So did the 968 "Sport" (:

Reply Like

03-10-2003, 10:11 PM

#23

Danno

Race Director

Join Date: Jul 2001

Location: Santa Barbara, CA

Posts: 14,075

Likes: 0

Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

"Are you sure porsche was afraid to turbo the 16v cars or afraid it would destroy the 930 sales. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> "

A 968 TurboRS w/16-valve heads would have completely creamed the 930! Actually, it already did, but the extra 60hp it would have gained from the 16v head would certainly have meant the end of the 911 line of cars...

Reply Like

03-10-2003, 10:38 PM

#24

bader$

Burning Brakes

Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: Marietta GA

Posts: 851

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Huntley makes both a supercharger or a turbo for the S2 and the 968 but not the S. Although I think they recommend using turbo rods and pistons for the turbo option.

Reply Like

03-11-2003, 11:12 AM

#25

Z-man

Race Director

Join Date: Jan 2002

Location: North NJ, USA

Posts: 10,170

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by 944S2NUT:
Are you sure porsche was afraid to turbo the 16v cars or afraid it would destroy the 930 sales. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>True that! That's probably a part of why they didn't do a 16v Turbo-charged engine. The 951S was able to keep up with the 911 Turbo of the same vintage: any more tweaks to the 951 (or 968 Turbo), and the Porsche flagship would have been flying at half-mast!

But I still believe there was a bit of apprehenion in turbo charging a 4valve head: that was pretty new technology for Porsche back then. I think they may have had the attitude: "We got it to work, now let's leave it alone!"

-Z.

Reply Like

03-11-2003, 11:27 AM

#26

Luis de Prat

Rennlist Member

Join Date: Jun 2001

Location: Barcelona

Posts: 9,714

Likes: 2

Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Sami944S:
Dan, read it again - '89 turbo is a 247 hp car as well

<hr /></blockquote>IIRC, the apparent variations in official horsepower ratings for identical models are due to the different DOT specification measurement methods applied to cars in Europe vs. in the U.S.

I believe the U.S. method measures the car's power while all the accessories are operating (headlights, A/C, etc.) which results in a lower horsepower reading, whereas the Euro method measures only the engine power per se.

Hence, the Euro rating for the 944 S2 is 211 versus the U.S. 208, the Euro rating for the 951S is 250 HP versus the U.S. 247, etc., but the difference is actually the method by which they were measured.

Reply Like

03-11-2003, 11:43 AM

#27

mideastmafia

Three Wheelin'

Join Date: Mar 2002

Location: San Diego, Ca

Posts: 1,250

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

On the contrary to what has been posted in this thread...

John Anderson from Anderson Motorworks recently completed both a SUPERCHARGED 944S2 and a TURBO 944S2 on a customers car.

Not only is the car reliable, it is SCARY FAST. If anyone with a 16V engine is interested in more power that will be durable, and FAST, checking into one of Anderson Motorworks conversions is the way to go.

<img src="http://www.andersonmotorworks.com/images/S2turbo2.jpg" alt=" - " />
<img src="http://www.andersonmotorworks.com/images/turbodone.jpg" alt=" - " />

SUPERCHARGER

<img src="http://www.andersonmotorworks.com/images/ashengine.JPG" alt=" - " />

SHAUN

Reply Like

03-11-2003, 12:58 PM

#28

Z-man

Race Director

Join Date: Jan 2002

Location: North NJ, USA

Posts: 10,170

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Shaun,
I'm not saying that the 16v engine is fragile, I'm just saying that MOST tuners have that perception.

As with any engine, a turbo can be effective in a 944S, S2, or 968, it just has to be done right. And it seems that John Anderson has done it right.
To do it right means that one needs to start with a solid engine with all 'fragile' components replaced. To do it right also means it's gonna cost a little more than a typical turbo swap in say, a honduh.

But for me, my stock 944S2 is plenty powerful enough.

Just my $0.42
-Z.

Reply Like

03-11-2003, 01:16 PM

#29

pete944

Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member

Join Date: Nov 2001

Location: Dayton, Ohio

Posts: 7,262

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

SHAUN, that S2 turbo is sweet! How about some more details on it like price, parts, and power.
Don't post any more pics of it though, that thing is gonna give me a woody!

Reply Like

03-11-2003, 05:03 PM

#30

Jeff928S4

Drifting

Join Date: Dec 2001

Location: Sackville, Nova Scotia

Posts: 2,362

Likes: 0

Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts

Jeeeeeeeesus!!!!

SHAUN - did you drive or go for a drive with someone in any of those cars???

I'm guessing a Super-charged regular "S" would kick a Turbo's ***, no? HP-wise, I mean....cause the S doesn't have the extra goodies (brakes, etc.).

Those cars above make Baby Jesus cry!

944S Boyeee

Reply Like

Reply Share

First
Prev
2 / 3
Next
Last

Forum Jump