2.8/3.0L 951
Don't blame ya.. 
05-27-2002, 06:03 AM
#38
Instructor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i know this is an old topic...but for street driving purposes only, would it be better to get a stand alone management system on the 2.5 and a new turbo and other goodies or to just rebuild to a 2.8, 3.0 with a maf and a new turbo. does the 2.8 really increase the low end grunt enough to justify the cost for better acceleration off the line. i still have a long way to go before i rebuild and spend money on my cat bypass and new turbo but what i really want to do is increase the low end, i hate having to abuse the clutch in order to get across the street when turning from a stop to make sure oncoming traffic doesn't hit me. 
and yes i've had this car since 1999 so i'm not that much of a newbie. oh and i've been here since we started and porschefans before that and porschelist before that so i'm not as stupid as i may sound. wink, wink. woohoo, my second post...i already feel like a web board ****...is that bad. 
j/k
and yes i've had this car since 1999 so i'm not that much of a newbie. oh and i've been here since we started and porschefans before that and porschelist before that so i'm not as stupid as i may sound. wink, wink. woohoo, my second post...i already feel like a web board ****...is that bad. j/k
05-27-2002, 07:47 PM
#39
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
and I was wondering why everybody speaks about HIGH HP numbers but nobody post his times from 60 to 100 mph or something similar. Then we can see how fast the 400 HP cars are:
It is the time that counts not the HP!!!!!!
A chiped car needs 7 sec.
How much time do a 400 HP 951 needs?
Konstantin
It is the time that counts not the HP!!!!!!
A chiped car needs 7 sec.
How much time do a 400 HP 951 needs?
Konstantin
05-28-2002, 05:21 AM
#40
Instructor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it seems to me the biggest problem with having that much horsepower would be achieving traction. i know on a really cold night with half bald and cold tires i can spin the tires in first and second when on boost, and all i have is a chip. so i was thinking that attempting to control the car with almost twice the horsepower when in third gear could be a real pain. anyone??
05-28-2002, 11:18 AM
#41
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously traction is a major problem w/higher HP cars, but, I have to agree w/Konstantine at least partly. I mean hell- a Viper weighing almost 3700lbs w/stock tires (maybe good ones) and a 1:8 power to weight ratio runs 12.4's @ 1/4 or better- why don't we see 951's under 3100lbs running similar times w/400RWHP? The power to weight on one of those puppies should be better than a 1:7- do the math. I, for one, would be EXTREMELY upset if I spent THAT kind of $, all at once, and got a car that could BARELY out run a normal chipped 951- I think this is happening more often than not too- I've heard a lot of negative things over the past year about going w/larger displacement motors. Maybe Tim & John will change some of this? I would really like to hear from some of you who are doing larger displpacement engines (either bore OR stroke) after they're completed- I've GOT to have something to envy 
05-28-2002, 01:57 PM
#42
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Once my engine is complete, installed, broke in and tuned. I will post results and I sure hope they are positive.
<img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[burnout]" /> <img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[burnout]" />
<img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[burnout]" /> <img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[burnout]" />
05-28-2002, 08:59 PM
#43
Instructor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
please do, i can't wait to hear another opinion with someone with a larger displacement engine. and i hope it's what you expect. that way i can decide which way i'm going to go. thanks.
05-28-2002, 09:51 PM
#44
Nordschleife Master
[quote]Originally posted by Konstantin:
<strong>and I was wondering why everybody speaks about HIGH HP numbers but nobody post his times from 60 to 100 mph or something similar. Then we can see how fast the 400 HP cars are:
It is the time that counts not the HP!!!!!!
A chiped car needs 7 sec.
How much time do a 400 HP 951 needs?
Konstantin</strong><hr></blockquote>
What was your method for testing 60-100?
I did start at 50 in 3rd, floor it, start the time when i pass 60mph...
I got 6.1-6.2 seconds consistently (4 runs).
Car was chipped and running 18psi in 3rd gear (not on purpose though)
<strong>and I was wondering why everybody speaks about HIGH HP numbers but nobody post his times from 60 to 100 mph or something similar. Then we can see how fast the 400 HP cars are:
It is the time that counts not the HP!!!!!!
A chiped car needs 7 sec.
How much time do a 400 HP 951 needs?
Konstantin</strong><hr></blockquote>
What was your method for testing 60-100?
I did start at 50 in 3rd, floor it, start the time when i pass 60mph...
I got 6.1-6.2 seconds consistently (4 runs).
Car was chipped and running 18psi in 3rd gear (not on purpose though)
05-29-2002, 10:50 AM
#45
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
this is right!
better check the rpm. start in third at 3000 rpm go on WOT and stop the time from 4000 to 6000 rpm for 150 km/h (or up to 6420 rpm for 100 mph)
the rpm do not lie as the speedo does.
chiped at 16 PSI (1.1 bar) would need 7 sec. Now you need 6.1 sec. this sounds right.
Konstantin
better check the rpm. start in third at 3000 rpm go on WOT and stop the time from 4000 to 6000 rpm for 150 km/h (or up to 6420 rpm for 100 mph)
the rpm do not lie as the speedo does.
chiped at 16 PSI (1.1 bar) would need 7 sec. Now you need 6.1 sec. this sounds right.
Konstantin