Notices
944 Turbo and Turbo-S Forum 1982-1991
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Clore Automotive

951 vs. M3

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-21-2004 | 02:14 PM
  #46  
TurboTommy's Avatar
TurboTommy
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,589
Likes: 1
From: Ontario, Canada
Default

"17 psi M5'
He would have to do a whole big **** pot full of modifications for that to work properly.
Old 03-21-2004 | 08:39 PM
  #47  
eclou's Avatar
eclou
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,079
Likes: 1,241
From: Houston, TX
Default

I have both a heavily modded N/A E36M3 ~265 rwhp, and a mildly modded 951 ~260-270 rwhp. Both cars have powertrain and suspension mods, Hoosier track tires, and see lots of track time. I can turn similar lap times in both on the track, though the 951 will get about 10mph more at the end of a long straight (130 vs 140 mph). There are many nuances about the two:

E36M3 pros:

most neutral handling, most forgiving. An idiot can drive this car fast
good midrange torque
very reliable - bottom end will go 200k+ miles
self-adjusting timing chain

E36M3 cons:

costs an a$$load to get extra HP out of this car
tends to understeer
limited amount of rubber you can fit in the wheel wells (255/40/17 x 4 is about the most)


951 pros:

crazy cheap hp
lighter weight
lower initial investment
V8-like torque (I spin 275 hoosiers in 3rd on the track!)
lots of rubber to fit in the wells

951 cons:

less reliability
fire hazard issue
timing belts issue
rod bearings issue


I can hang with most E46 M3s at the track on the straight in my E36M3. It is partially stripped, has a 3.64 rear diff and 6spd. I have more torque but less Hp than the E46M3. The E46 has still major reliability problems with throwing rods. BMW has extended the engine warranty to 6yr/100k miles to counter this. My 951 with light mods can pull away easy from an E46 on the straight away at the track. The E46 is 3400-3700 lbs vs the 951's 2800-2900. My 951 has 300 ftlbs at the wheels vs 230ish for the E46M3. The E46 M3 will pull 290 rwhp on a dynojet, and you will not get more than that with any mods other than FI or NAWS.

Last edited by eclou; 03-22-2004 at 11:43 AM.
Old 03-21-2004 | 09:04 PM
  #48  
Matt H's Avatar
Matt H
Race Director
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 15,712
Likes: 3
Default

Where were you, looked for you at TWS.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Old 03-21-2004 | 09:06 PM
  #49  
eclou's Avatar
eclou
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,079
Likes: 1,241
From: Houston, TX
Default

Skiing in Steamboat. Would have rather been at TWS since the snow conditions were poor.
Old 03-22-2004 | 04:38 AM
  #50  
porshhhh951's Avatar
porshhhh951
Monkeys Removed by Request
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,713
Likes: 1
From: New York
Default

Originally posted by TurboTommy
"17 psi M5'
He would have to do a whole big **** pot full of modifications for that to work properly.
its not a m5 its a m3.


One thing you guy's have to remember is I live in dallas. We have a huge aftermarket modding community here. Everything you can think of. Yes I hear its a beast. I plan on running him whenever I see him next if the situation's permit us. I will video tape and report back.
Old 03-22-2004 | 11:27 AM
  #51  
eclou's Avatar
eclou
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,079
Likes: 1,241
From: Houston, TX
Default

17 psi? There are two companies that make turbo kits for the M3 - Activeautowerke and MechTech. Both kits run about 8.5# on high boost. That is with compression lowering mods like the headgasket shim. The stock compression ratio approaches 11:1. Not sure that I have heard of anyone running 17#, or even over 10# on the M3 ever in 4 years of following bimmerforums.com and dtmpower.com.

If he has gotten that much boost then he has done custom pistons, rods, and a stand-alone. That's alot of $$$.
Old 03-22-2004 | 11:34 AM
  #52  
Matt H's Avatar
Matt H
Race Director
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 15,712
Likes: 3
Default

ec - I think you hit the nail on the head with the BMWs it costs a ton to make them really fast. Yes, I am differentiating between quick and fast.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Old 03-22-2004 | 05:10 PM
  #53  
streckfu's's Avatar
streckfu's
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 77,321
Likes: 668
Default

Just read the Project cars section of the European Car website. Pablo has spent a boatload of $$ on that M3 to get the power he has. Now he's going to nearly eclipse with teh 951 for 1/4 of the price.
Old 03-23-2004 | 01:37 AM
  #54  
InterSpool's Avatar
InterSpool
Advanced
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Default

Pablo's M3 is out of control. Watch the videos @ www.boostjunky.com , he eventually overtakes a 996TT at 8 psi. Yes, his car is capable of more.

If you are truly looking at bang for the buck, the 944 Turbo will be on top of 99% of the cars out there (about equal to fixed up 240z's, because those rock ). But in the end, the E36 M3 has more potential if it went FI... 3.2L vs. 2.5L - cya 951.

As far E46 M3s go... there is some guy on bimmerforums that ran a 12.6 on street tires and a damn near bone stock setup (maybe exhaust, chip, intake). There will always be someone there to defy logic, so really it is almost impossible to argue "which car is faster". Good day sirs.
Old 03-23-2004 | 02:22 AM
  #55  
eclou's Avatar
eclou
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,079
Likes: 1,241
From: Houston, TX
Default

12.6? That is hard to believe. That would require almost 400 hp and drag radials. Most guys have problems hitting mid 13's in the stock E46M3 without experience. Maybe at 20 F and with a 20 mph tailwind. Who was it?
Old 03-23-2004 | 10:58 AM
  #56  
InterSpool's Avatar
InterSpool
Advanced
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Default

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...d.php?t=183313

Video for the skeptics. Huge debate on whether or not he was on drag radials or not, but the owner said he ran them on stock continental tires w/ just power pulleys installed for HP increase. He also launched at 5k and powershifted that mother. A few other people have ran high 12s too, it is all in the 60' time.
Old 03-23-2004 | 11:51 AM
  #57  
JohnCh's Avatar
JohnCh
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: Sammamish, WA
Default

Regarding M coupes, last year I bought a 2000 (240hp version) to replace my aging '86 951. The M was stock except for a Conforti cold air intake, versus some mods on the 951 (cyntex chips, cat bypass, 250lb front springs, 968 M030 front/Weltmeister rear bar). After 10 months of ownership I just couldn't get my head wrapped around the draw to the M coupe. Yes, the engine sounds great, makes torque all over the place, and gets out of the blocks very quickly, but it didn't pull as hard as the 951 when on boost in 2nd gear or above. It also had terrible rear grip (even with the standard LSD), numb steering, and felt like a much heavier car even though there is only 100lbs between the two vehicles. To me it felt like a very competent sports sedan, whereas the Porsche feels like...well, a Porsche. Given that I much preferred driving the 951, I kept that and sold the M this past fall. I haven't regretted the decision for a minute.

-John
Old 03-23-2004 | 01:42 PM
  #58  
B951S's Avatar
B951S
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 817
Likes: 19
From: on the edge
Default

Originally posted by JohnCh
Regarding M coupes, last year I bought a 2000 (240hp version) to replace my aging '86 951. The M was stock except for a Conforti cold air intake, versus some mods on the 951 (cyntex chips, cat bypass, 250lb front springs, 968 M030 front/Weltmeister rear bar). After 10 months of ownership I just couldn't get my head wrapped around the draw to the M coupe. Yes, the engine sounds great, makes torque all over the place, and gets out of the blocks very quickly, but it didn't pull as hard as the 951 when on boost in 2nd gear or above. It also had terrible rear grip (even with the standard LSD), numb steering, and felt like a much heavier car even though there is only 100lbs between the two vehicles. To me it felt like a very competent sports sedan, whereas the Porsche feels like...well, a Porsche. Given that I much preferred driving the 951, I kept that and sold the M this past fall. I haven't regretted the decision for a minute.

-John
My thoughts exactly. I had an E36 also.
Old 03-23-2004 | 04:17 PM
  #59  
porshhhh951's Avatar
porshhhh951
Monkeys Removed by Request
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,713
Likes: 1
From: New York
Default

I have no idea of the internal's. I was at a local dyno day with friends at Jotech MotorSport's and his car was outside. Lot's of people around looking at his engine bay and asking what was done to it. I did not speak to him personally so I guess technically this is all speculation. I did hear him say he was pushing 17psi of boost. I do know he is running a Motec. I do know that kenny was doing the tune on the car. I do know that he is running a to4r turbocharger. As far as everything else go's I am not sure. I will find out when I eventually race him(cause I will) if he pulls the crap outta me then we know he isint full of ****. If I beat him or he barely beat's me then we know he isint running 17psi of boost.
Old 03-23-2004 | 05:54 PM
  #60  
951 S's Avatar
951 S
Advanced
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 94
Likes: 2
From: DE
Default

Had a 95 E36 M3 stock. I think it had nothing on the 944's neutral handleing. Bought a 944 Turbo S and left the M3 in the garage. The Turbo S ran circles around the M3 in all departments. Sold the M3, now a 944T nut......


Quick Reply: 951 vs. M3



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 04:07 PM.