sydneyman

john, how are the wheels treating you by the way? i miss those things... would look good on the 968...

and so im not completely off topic, i have to agree with racer. i am addicted to the boost experience but the n/a is far better for simplicity's sake and for power when you need it. of course you can learn to drive with the turbo strung out at all times but that takes practice...

now if you just want a "fun factor" i'd say the turbo is worth a test drive at least!

Potomac-Greg

The original question was not about 944s or 951s but turbos and n/as IN GENERAL. To me, all things otherwise being equal, I'd rather have the horsepower without artificial boost. But a modern car (2000+) is almost un-tunable unless it's got boost, and then it is easily tunable. I've owned 300+ hp cars with turbo (tuned Audi A6 2.7T, AWD), supercharged (Benz C32 AMG, RWD) and normally aspirated (G37, RWD).

The quickest (throttle response) was the supercharged car.

The turbo was most tunable ($400 chip gets you 50 HP).

The n/a car is frankly pretty boring, but that's not the engine.

The one that kept me up at night worrying about repairs was the turbo. There's a lot to break; and it frequently did.

Geldfalle 944

I chose the N/A simply because I love the balance.
By balance I mean the power to turn ratio.
It holds itself very well in the turns no matter when
you chose to dump the gas.

To qualify my answer I am a track guy. I prefer going
to the track and going fast through turns to the 1/4 mile.
The 944 was designed just for this kind of use. Hence, motor in front tranny in back.
My take on the 951's, they will do the same but with more
training and ability.

Bottom line, you looking for strait line speed? Pick a car designed for strait line speed.
These are balanced for a reason, turns.

odurandina

i'll leave my personal take on the N/A cars blank, except to say that my 87 944 S was a blast, and i miss it.


Porsche clearly, never finished this project. the turbo guys are now going way past what Porsche ever did.


from a technical point of view, building one is daunting... from the thread i posted about possibly turbocharging my 968 (944 turbo forum), the guys were very helpful posting the correct way to go about such a project, where to source the engine, and also, from the 3 pms i received, i now have a better idea of what something like this will cost...


maybe it could be said that the process of turbocharging compared to staying N/A is about the equivalent of what F1 is to Nascar.... not only do you need to weigh the decision carefully, and be willing to invest an epic cache of money - but, doing that guarentees very little...


if you try to navigate around the those who offer real knowledge - which quite fairly, will come at further expense - you are most-likely, making a big mistake.


nobody will ever agree on what the risks vs reward vs practicality ever will be.


to me, there's one constant: all the cars got "something" that other cars simply don't offer... i think they're the best all-around cars on earth... you can travel with tons of stuff, surfboards, coolers... the frigging cars are even good for tailgaiting at football games. and when you're done doing that you can race them !


i need to add to the choice list;


i like the idea of a Goodwrench motor, (an only-slightly, less-hazardous endeavor) because that context may offer less uncertainty, once the whole process is finished... but it can also result in the permanent banishment from the 944/968/Porsche tree of life.... from the point of view of the Porsche purists, i do see the point that under the surface, they may be trying to make (a V8 is cheating).



my N/A/Turbo/V8 favorite choices by ranking:



1. Aluminum, Chevrolet V8 ~ 450-500 hp,

2. have a 3.0 engine turbocharged by the best money can buy.

3. get help from the guys here, and do a moderate build for 300-350 hp, Lart's parts, etc...

4. try (building/turbocharging) yourself = (death by self-inflicted gunshot wound)

5. stay N/A... (okay, nice 944/968 you got there, what do you want, a medal ?)


6. some other Porsche.


7. some other car.



/

Dryslick13

I was able to leave a newer Mustang GT in my dust on a tight mountain road in my N/A. If you're going down hill you probably can't tell the difference between the N/A and T. N/A still pretty fast going uphill as long as it is while turning. The turbo boost would be very handy while trying to pass on the flat sections or uphill though. But I bet corner speeds would be reduced as you would have to be careful when getting back on the throttle coming off the turns. Especially where I drive. Tight s's with 500+ foot drop offs and no guard rails on the Million Dollar Highway! You go over the white line, you die!

Van

For the people that have used the "tossable" argument, I'd like to know how you define that. I have a hunch you're defining it as "less weight transfer on and off throttle" - meaning, if you're in a turn, and you change your mind about how much power you want to transfer to the road, the car can pretty much "absorb" that weight transfer while maintaining a reasonable amount of grip.

I think it's also important for everyone to remember that the turbo is an evolutionary step of the 944. It is more of everything: more grip, more power, more brakes, more parts, more money, more maintenance, etc. For daily street driving, very few people need any more than a 944 has to offer. But, if, for whatever reason, you want more, a turbo will deliver.

Giantviper

I have to say I love my N/A. She Handles like a dream but I would be lying if I said I did not want more power. But then again you can never have enough power.


(At least I thought that untill Dad let me drive his 2010 GT3 )

black944 turbo

there are so many factors that play into this. I can compare my car to an S2000, similar power similar weight. My car will blow by an S in a heart beat, that being said the s is an awesome and fun car. You can't compare the two. Modern turbo cars are not laggy and some modern high revving N/A s are more like turbos. My take.

Techno Duck

In my opinion from experience auto-x'ing both the n/a and 951. The n/a feels more tossable because you can do almost anything you want with the throttle and the car will stay in check. This is due to the lack of power and the way the power comes on fairly seamlessly. The 951 requires a little more finesse to throttle steer due to having to manage the turbo lag and can get you into trouble if your not expecting the boost to come on.

CPR

Hmmm....NA guys side with NA's and Turbo guys side with Turbos.

Who'da thunk it.

Potomac-Greg

What's funny is that everyone is misreading his question:

those of you that have driven both fast NA's and fast Turbos of any breed. If you would have exact 0-60 and 1/4 times( say 5.4 and 12.5 sec.), would you prefer to get there in an NA or Turbo engine?

Basically, if you get the same performance from an n/a or turbo car (of any type) would you prefer to do it in a turbo?

My answer was that I preferred n/a for simplicity and directness, but turbos are tunable.

Van

You're right - we've totally gone astray.

Then, if the 2 cars have the same 0-60 times, and the same quarter mile times, I'd vote for the NA, because it'll have more low-end torque. Presumably, the turbo will have a higher peak HP, but both cars would have the same "area under the curve".

krystar

stock for stock yea....

but the turbo car will be much more easily moddable. the ECU will already be set for boost from the factory. just gotta up the wastegate spring and reflash.

BlueRiver86

N/A for sure.

FRporscheman

I beg to differ. I don't know about the S2, but my 968 with the rebuild motor and tuned timing (all to spec, all stock) pins me back every time. I don't crave straight-line acceleration just for its own sake, but it is useful and I want a lot of it, and that 968 makes me grin.




NAs are like big dongs and turbos are like smaller dongs and you "know how to use it". Say what you will, but even if the big dong belongs to a retard, he's still the funner ride.