Paulyy

Thank you

Form - How it looks
Function - How it works

Function doesn't necessarily means performance/handeling. Car audio falls under the same category.. Some people will clap out their boot and get some ****ty sounds where others would have a very custom box made up and get more db and sq for the same money.

Cole

I didn't miss the point at all. My reply was in response to the people here saying they were ALL FUNCTION and didn't care about form!

Which simply can't be true by virtue of picking this particular car. (Or any sports car for that matter)

I was not the one that turned it into a debate. My example of the corvette was just that, an example. Not to be debated directly against the Porsche. But, if people want to debate it this is the forum for it.

This is after all a discussion forum

I honestly think some took the Corvette example a little too personally as some sort of insult against their beloved Porsche.

I've got 6 cars, 5 are German and one is a pickup. So obviously if I thought the Corvette was better in every way I would have picked one up by now

Dubai944

Some people picked this car simply because they are racing in a one make 944 series. Some people like myself, picked this car because it was the best available fit for a particular race category at the time. Hell, I don't even like the 944 that much..lol. Everything I do with my car is to try to get it to go quicker, if something works then I might paint it or smooth it out to make it less ugly, but Form never comes ahead of Function.

Maybe you are saying that anyone who chooses to involve themselves in any other form of motorsport other than maybe F1 simply can't truly be focused on Function? Heck even those guys worry about their paint schemes so even they don't qualify.

Maybe no one is truly focused 100% on function only, and in fact no one here said they were .... so what's the point?

Fara

I'm just going to weigh in on this conversation to throw a cat among the pidgeons:

This is a case of form before function leading to something truly amazing:

doc_

A coworker of mine has an 87 chevy pickup. ugly yellow/chipped/faded paintjob with rust eating the bed. BUT, he has a, built from the block 355 w/ tb injection, full msd ignition, custom headers going to a test pipe & muffler, fuel cell, and a built from the casing-tranny. Way more than that, but when I think of function over form, I think of a case like this rather than another coworker buying a rolling Cobra and sending it to paint before he even got it started.

I think this is what the poll was leaning towards IMHO

Cole

That pretty much describes the truck I built for cleaning up Colorado's trails. 6 seater crew cab, fully locked 37s/ beadlocks, rock rings, fully rewired, overdrive conversion, HD Rhino lined, 4'wheel disk conversion, dual winch, and a modded LS6 454

It was all about hauling crews and gear where other trucks couldn't to maintain the trails.

Cole

That's awesome! Now there is a guy that just wanted to go fast!

67King

I really have a hard time believing someone who claims to have been instructing for 25 years thinks of the 944 chassis as not a good choice given the context of price. It is one of the most popular chassis in racing. The next club race has 20, yes count them, 20 944 NA's in SP2 alone. SP2's are some of the most beat up, ugly race cars you will see. Those people are not buying those cars for form, period.

There are about 3 other track-type cars that, in my mind, are in the same realm as the base 944 for function within a budget. The E30, the Miata, and the Fox body Mustang (which is a stretch). The Miata is probably a superior choice from a value perspective.

4 piston calipers are superior in every way to 2 piston ones. You have more clamping force, and a whole lot more area in the caliper with which to dissipate heat. $10K is not only Turbo S realm, it in the realm of a nice Turbo S. Those came standard with LSD's. And adjustable suspensions for corner balancing.

Again, I think the biggest thing you are missing is where the market is. I've bought a 951, a 951S, and a 968 in the past 5 years. None of them cost $10K. My race car wasn't even $4K because of the paint. Otherwise, it was in solid shape. Until I upgraded from Ledas to MCS, I didn't even have $10K in it. That included M030 brakes, sways, all Racer's Edge spherical bearings bushings, a LSD, a full cage, etc. A competitive turn key race car. Granted, I did all fo the labor, and bought the Ledas used.

Dismissing 300 pounds as not that much is hard to believe coming from someone with any kind of track experience. 300 pounds can turn a pig into an antelope. And saying it would be easier to lose the weight in the Vette than in the 951 is at best debatable, more likely just plain wrong. I've gotten about 500 pounds out of my race car, and that is after adding a cage. That would include a whole bunch of it in sound deading material - the Corvette uses balsa wood, so that opportunity is gone. That would include fiberglass front end parts. The whole Corvette body is already fiberglass. I'd also like to know where you found the information on where the centers of gravity of the cars is. You may be right, I don't know.

Again, Corvettes are great cars. And having been an engineer in Detroit, I have lots of friends who have them, and I've worked on a few of them. There is no better bang for the buck being produced today outside of a Z06 and a Boss 302. Chevy could build Porsches all day long, but Porsche could never build a Corvette. Budget constraints are ALWAYS the biggest challenge to overcome, and having to deal with them is what makes American engineers the best in the world.

By the way.......I've owned 3 freakin' Merkurs. Those are among the ugliest cars ever made. I switched from them to 944's because it is a whole lot easier to turn a 944 into a track car than it is a Merkur, though the Merkur was much less expensive. It actually was going to be a Grassroots Motorsports $200X Challenge car, but I liked it too much to limit myself.

In the stable - the 3 Porsches in the sig, plus a 535i, an R320, a 67 GTO, a 66 Bronco, and a Ram 2500 w/ Cummins. Gone are VW Rabbit; GM - Grand Am, SC2, 69 4-4-2; Ford - 2000 Mustang GT, F-150, 67 Continental, 2 XR4Ti's, Scorpio, and a V8 Explorer; Nissan - Sentra; Mazda - Millenia S and Speed6; Audi - A6 Avant. Off of memory, anyway. I'm no Porsche snob or anti-American car guy.

odurandina

i'm not sure i even understand what function or form is.... especially based your post;



seems this is crappy function being converted into hot rod function, with form never so much as stumbling into the diner.


in any case, that one is a prime example of where Top Gear has failed.

never seen nothing about viewer rides, 'hot rods, supercar conversions, or supercar kit projects.


not even once. thanks for sharing.

Cole

You still need to work on your reading skills. I never said it wasn't a good choice.

I just said on PURE function it's not the best choice. There are faster cheaper cars to run out there. Therefore we have ALL made some "form" over "function" decision.




It is very popular RIGHT NOW because there are a lot of places to run it in a lot of classes. Just a few years ago the first gen RX7 was the go to car for spec racing and other do it all fun. Where did all those go?

. This proves the point I've been trying to make all alone with my "example"

The sheer number of pistons alone does not make a brake caliper superior. It also does not dictate how much area there is to dissipate heat as a single factor!.

My Yamaha R1 has 6 piston calipers! Does that automatically make them better at stopping a Porsche or corvette ? Hell no!

So much more goes into a braking system from the actual size of the caliper, material, clamping force, rotor size, pad size, air flow, etc, etc etc.

Maybe you should be looking at the rotor size of a 951 compared to the Corvette as your starting point. Then maybe the clamping force of the system.



I know exactly where the market is and what it costs to run a SAFE and COMPETITIVE car, not just junk.


Where the weight is and how it is used is more important than just the weight itself. Of course I'm always a proponent of a lighter version of a car.

After running my 5200lb Cayenne Turbo around an autocross course and beating 27 of 49 "proper" Porsches with it (including all of the 944/951) I can say its more about how the weight is used than just the fact that it exists


Have you done any research on this or just spouting off? Have you seriously looked at what a few carbon bits cost for a Corvette compared to a 951?

Without cutting off major chunks of steel you will have a hard time getting the weight of the 951 lower!(not in value, but in height)

The mass of the Covette is already low since the major body components are already fiberglass.

curtisr

There is a great story/thread on a UK 924/4/8 site that profiles a bloke's efforts at restoring a 924 that puts the Q into proper perspective. You can follow the massive effort to strip down the body of a 924 and repaint in ways that would make Rembrandt call out for mercy only to discover that the car won't start when it's cold. Or hot. And the brakes are ****e. Best yet, the sunroof leaks. I'm sure that you're with me: sort out the function and then you can worry about the curb. After all, what good is curb appeal if you keep running into it?

odurandina

i truly believe these are the best production kit cars evaar.

you can keep going and going. even after you're divorced and penniless.



well, now they get outta my way.


.

67King

What you said was if we were all form over function, we'd all have Corvettes. Then said you can buy a C5 for $10,000. I merely said that $10K will get you a lot more car in a 951. And it will. It won't be as fast in the straights, but every other aspect of the car will be more suited to the track.

Cole

So just for the hell of it I just searched all of craigslist and ebay for 951s.

90% of the cars for sale are non LSD 1986 cars. Several between $5500 and $10k but ALL of them need work and NONE were track worthy or modded.

There was actually one 88 on ebay, not a a Turbo S though and currently priced at $11,500

Now, on Cars.com there are 13 of them priced above $10k up to $30k Cheapest Turbo was $6k at a dealer, bone stock and needs some TLC according to the ad. Again, no Turbo S models available.(or 89s)

On cars.com alone there were 257 sub $10k C5 Corvettes and 5500 corvettes for sale on that site alone!!

Paulyy

I really think some of you guys have the wrong impression. This thread has nothing to do with the car you own. Or what car is better then what in the function section. Simply asks if you're a "form" or "function" guy


Not sure how the C5 got brought into this? But i know i sure wouldn't want a car made out of plastic