tammons

A while back I became acquainted with a super high end Porsche tuner/shop in South Florida. I will skip the name. Everything is very tweaked that comes out of this shop. 350 hp turbo jap bikes. The owner had a 1200 hp twin turbo corvette (sweet), and one of the other guys had a 750 hp turbo 911 200 mph rocket. Also a jumbo power chevelle and one guy bought a 996 turbo new and sent it there straight from the dealer to build the fastest turbo 996 in the land.
Keep in mind that when these guys build a tricked out 911 engine it goes for 80G.

They helped me with a few odds and ends building a twin turbo 928, and also got me interested in Electromotive FI, which I have come to like a lot. Just really nice guys.

The question is, I strolled through the shop one day and one of the main guys was there working on his new car, a 750 hp 944. Now these guys are serious and I had no doubt he could do it, but I always wondered how they were going to handle the drive train. He had used a ceramic clutch in his 911 and had 40K miles on it so no big deal there, but I could never figure how you could get a drive shaft, transaxle and axles that would hold together under that much power, much less the engine.

I talked with him one day about the drive train and he would not give up too much info, but he did mention he had bought an entire drive train that could handle the power. I figured this either had to be out of a 944 turbo factory race car or a 968 turbo.

Just guessing, I also assumed he was going to start with a 968 twin cam motor, built up, with custom headers and a custom intake and a massive intercooler. Pretty much everything these guys do is top shelf and very custom and at a very high price.

He ended up dropping the project and selling everything. I never did find out why. Maybe his drive train purchase fell through, who knows.

Well this really got me going at the time. I ended up building another turbo 928, but always wanted to build a 600hp 944 to smoke some of the rice rockets.

I guess the question is, Is there a drive train or enough components out there to put together a 3.0L twin cam 600 hp car. I just cant see anything but a full race transmission when you are tripling the power.

RolexNJ

That is a great question! One person to ask on here is Rage2. Look him up. He has a 2.8L car. He runs a high amount of boost most of the time, and pushes his car harder then most too. If anyone might have some real "personal experience" with what you are asking, it may be him.

tammons

So I noticed you are building a 3L twin cam turbo ?? What kind of internals, head work and cams FI are you running. Are you running a T4 ??

RolexNJ

Yes I am. Click on my profile below. It will take you to my home page. Lots and lots of informtion there!

NZ951

Its only an 8V Tammons...

You need to chat to the 968guys about the 3.0 16V turbo. I believe some tuners have these over 700HP. The drive train on the 944 turbo hates launches. So you will get kicked off the line by rice rockets all day long. The rear trans makes this a hard car to launch well. And the drive train is not cheap!

You need to talk to the company that has produced the highest 944 turbo, and that Powerhaus. It has 560+BHP. They are the been there done that company with that car...

hosrom_951

That is incorrect, Area951 out down 530+whp on a 944 turbo IIRC

RolexNJ

Tammons:

I just sent you a very very long PM my friend. It should addres a lot of your questions. And yes I am having a 3.0L 8V built. It's is almost done, actually in a few weeks. But moreso, I am a former pro-level IMSA GTP & Lights racer. I am sure you knew of this series? Not many people on this board have that "real life racing experience" at that level for years, and with "BIG HP" prototypes to boot! And by the way, these cars made well over 700HP+ and weighted a mere 2,100 lbs. You can imagine the power to weight ratio too. Again, PM me if you have any questions.

RolexNJ

Hos:

You are the man pal!

Peace

hosrom_951

Just stating facts

RolexNJ

Thanks Hos. And yes it is "just the facts". By the way pal, just sent you an email. Check it. I would really, really appreciate it if you would help me out.

Thanks!

tammons

No racing experience here but I do remember those classes. Lucky you. I used to go to Miami every year for the grand Prix when they ran it in the streets in down town. My favorite was always the Imsa (I think) Jags. 200mph down Biscayne !

Way too cool. Sounds like a blast. 700hp and 2100#, Yikes.

RolexNJ

That's right my man, those were the days! I was ran against people like Geoff Brabham/Chip Robinson with Nissan. PJ Jones with Toyota. Any of these ring a bell? I hope so! How about watching the GTP cars on the front straight away hitting 200mph+ on the banks of the Rolex 24hr. of Daytona! God, I miss racing those cars back then. Anyway, check your PM box. I sent you that information you wanted. It may help.

hosrom_951

This is from Scott Gomes:






03-06-2003, 07:46 AM #46
Under Pressure Performance
Addict
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: MA
Posts: 107

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry to jump in this thread so late, but I have been real busy at the shop
lately and have had little time for replying to threads.

Throughout this thread I have read a few comments that I would like to
address...

Earlier in this thread someone mentioned that the horsepower from this
engine was not all that impressive because it comes from a 968 based engine
- Well, truth be told, while there are several differences in the two
engines, there are also MANY similarities. You cannot say that this car is
no longer a 951 because it has a 968 "based" engine in it, nor can you say a
968 is a 951 if you stuck a 2.5 in it.

Heck, for that matter, virtually ALL 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, & 3.2L 951's use a
968 crank, but I huess that is OK?

Truth be told, power is power - I don't care how it is made. While this
engine is impressive, it is not the end all be all of 968/951 engines.

Currently I am working on a turbo 968 "based" engine to "replace" its 2.8L
951 "based" engine. The 2.8L put down 520.5 RWHP @ 6600 RPM on 19 PSI - I
built that engine in August of 1999 and the date of the dyno run was
12/01/99 (not too far off the engine of topic)

Another example of a mighty 951 engine is one of our (several built)
hydraulic lifter 490 RWHP 2.8L engines.

As a fellow ultra-performance engine builder, I have a lot of respect for
Bob Norwood. He, like myself, is not afraid to push the absolute limits of
these engines.

In regard to Woody's car...

Woody has spent a small fortune on his car. Without question it is an
extensively developed vehicle with LOTS of time, effort, and money invested
- Woody's money! - So why should he allow folks to sponge up the ideas he
spends so much money to R&D? Sure you may get an odd feeling in your stomach
when he closes the hood on your prying eyes, but if you want the same
technology he has under the hood of his car, all you have to do is buy it.
He forked out the money to do it wrong, test, do it a little better, test,
do it even better, test, then finally get it right - Why should he give that
away?

While I can understand folks wanting to know what is under the hood, or how
things were fabricated, or how his turbo is mounted, or how certain things
were done, I will say that I FULLY understand Woody's wish to keep as much a
secret as possible.

For one, he club races, so ANY competitive edge must be protected. Second,
he is fast, so naturally people will gather around to see what they can see,
and I am sure that gets old REAL FAST. Third, he paid the money to build the
car, so he is certainly entitled to protect his investment.

In regard to balance shafts and crank lightening...

Well, I have a lot to say about each of these subjects, but I will spare you
the long winded explination of each and just touch on each in the following
paragraphs.

Balance shafts: True, inline four cylinder engines have inherent harmonics,
however, most mass produced engines are not zero balanced either. Does that
mean that a zero balanced four cylinder engine will not have harmonics? No,
BUT a HEAVILY modified four cylinder engine (lighter pistons, rods, crank
work, wrist pins) that originally HAD balance shafts in stock trim, can
actually develop "worse" harmonics if the balance shafts are retained after
the modifications.

We have been building fully prepared engines for years and eliminate the
balance shafts in virtually ALL these engines. We were the FIRST to develop
a direct bolt-in balance shaft delete kit, and we have been advocates of
balance shaft removal for quite a long time. Keep in mind, our prepared
engines have lightweight rotating assemblies and are zero balanced -
Retaining the balance shafts in this scenario has the EXACT opposite effect
of their designed use.

How much power do you gain by removing the balance shafts? Depends. Not the
answer you were looking for? Well, that is the truth. Depending on the
output of the engine, RPM, grade of oil, and the condition of idler and
tensioner bearings, the gain from deleting the balance shafts will vary. OK,
so some of the criteria I listed may have a very small imapact on the actual
gain, but I bet there are a couple of facotrs you may not have taken into
consideration either - Right or wrong?

Lightening the crank...

There are several schools of thought here, and I will not dismiss any view
that contradicts my own, but will state that my views are based on MY
experience, and my experience dictates that, depending on the application,
you may or may not want to lighten the crank and/or other rotating
assemblies.

Without giving away any trade secrets, I will give you a couple of scenarios
and let you make your own decisions.

Four cylinder engines generally have less rotating mass than larger V6's and
V8's - I say generally because you would be surprised at how much heavier
the stock 951/968 cranks are when compared to some of the V6 and V8 cranks.

Generally speaking, our engines use heavy counterweights, heavy clutch
assemblies and other hefty rotating parts to smooth out the idle, smooth
engine acceleration, and mask balancing tolerances.

The flywheel, clutch disc, pressure plate, ring gear, balance shaft pulley,
alternator pulley, power steering pulley, and several other parts add
significant weight to this already hefty crank. But how does that affect
engine performance?

From a consumer standpoint, you would not want your $50,000.00 car to idle
like crap and for its acceleration to feel any less refined than your 1988
Yugo - Would you?

OK, now on to when a heavy driveline and rotating assembly can HELP
performance...

Say you wanted to drag race your 1988 Yugo. Well, it has little HP and TQ,
but the car is relatively light. Well, if you lighten the crank, rods,
pistons, and so on, BUT you do not increase the HP an/or TQ, then you will
have a car that will not want to accelerate out of the hole, BUT once it
gets moving, the "engine" will "want" to accelerate rather quickly, but its
acceleration will be limited to its ability to push the car forward and
overcome rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag.

In drag racing, small displacement engines that make very little HP rely on
VERY heavy rotating assemblies. The spinning mass is used to create inertia
which will launch the car quite effectively out of the hole. Although the
"engine" will "want" to accelerate a little slower, the car will actually
accelerate a LOT faster as it will have inertia.

A good example is an old Toyota Starlet with an old rotary transplant. The
car with engine and driver weighs about 1700 pounds when stripped, and the
rotary has all of 130 HP, yet these cars regularly pull mid to high ten
second quarter mile times at UNDER or just above 100 miles per hour. What
does that mean? - It means the car is maing all the time up in the first few
hundred feet while the intertia is still unleashing. A typical 60 foot time
will be around 1.2 - 1.3 seconds. At the three hundred foot mark the car is
still accelerating pretty strong, but then the car's acceleration will begin
to slow down because the engine does not make enough power to keep
accelerating the car. The result, a GREAT 1/4 mile time, BUT a VERY low trap
speed.

In contrast, take a fully prepared engine that makes some power. Take it on
a road course where you need to accelerate quickly out of a turn and get to
your shift point as fast as possible.

What makes more sense to you?

OK, I will make it easier - Take two IDENTICALLY prepared 500 RWHP cars. The
ONLY difference, one has a lightened rotating assembly - You and I are going
to race for $1,000.00 - Which car do you want?

Again, there are two schools of thought, mine is based on MY experience - I
want the car with the lightened rotating assembly! - After I win the race
(and the $1,000.00) I will gladly pay for drinks for all in attendance.

Thanks for reading, I hope you enjoyed it!
__________________
Scott Gomes
Under Pressure Performance
Build it once - Build it right!
Tel: 508-989-3970
www.Area951.com

RolexNJ

Hos!

hosrom_951

You know, there is a reason for that "search" featuer on the top-right of the webpage


PS: I didn't get the e-mail??