lart951

my finger is on the camera, the guy in the green shirt is Special tool

Gator_86_951

How about we trade? I already told you I get first dibs on that 993 if you sell.

GOBOGIE

Click on my gallery - there are quite a few there as well. Love 2 see what you have as well.

BTW - My '89 951 Window Sticker is $48 + change. As far as I know the only option I didn't have was sport seats. I could be wrong on the options though, not good that stuff.

pcar964

Ask me again when your 951's transformation is complete, then I think we may have a deal

Gator_86_951

HA! That car has no idea what is coming after I put all that $$ into it. It thinks I beat on it now. Just wait till I get that rebuilt motor and some real suspension.

The 951 is a decently fast car. Even with ~ 250-70 bhp is still isn't that fast. The 911 motor being dry-sump doesn't hurt. I haven't had any major problems with my 951 on the track, but I will admit that I sometimes get nervous that I am going to spin a bearing. I've seen it happen in turn 17 @ sebring. Zooooommmm.....BOOM!

pcar964

I was also nervous tracking my 951 because of the wet sump - not that I ever had a problem, it was totally trouble-free - but I must admit the dry sump in the 911s are worry free, which is nice. That is, unless your mechanic messes up your wiring and fries your computer

Gator_86_951

The wet-sump-ness of the 951 engine is sort of a concern. But, if you are only doing 30-45 minutes maximum I think it isn't that big of a deal. Also, if you have your engine rebuilt by a good rebuilder, they can do some really trick things and their machining tolerances will be very close indeed.

One thing that can be a concern is the oil temperatures. The factor oil cooler is inadequate for extensive track use. Particularly in a warmer climate (ie Florida). My oil pressure was very very low during track events prior to intalled the additional cooler. But, my car promptly starting being stupid after that install, and is currently doing its penance under the car cover.

RajDatta

Ehall true, but the car was built to race the german ADAC championship which is based on some ratio, I think hp/weight. They were limited in the amount of bhp they could make but had no restrictions on how much torque the engine made. So the turbo RS makes approx 335hp but a killer 385lbs/ft of torque at around 2500rpm. I might be off by a little rpm wise but all in all the car was like a big block V8.
Case in point, Chris Cervalli sold the original turbo RS head from the shortblock I bought from him. He tried a NA 2.7 head and found 35rwhp and virtually no loss in torque. The point I am trying to make is that the car was clamped down from making power. The intake are smaller and exhaust ports are extremely small to produce more torque than hp. Unfortunately with the ceramic liners its almost impossible to do any port work. He ditched the head and was extremely pleased. Now if only I can find that head to complete my setup, lol.
I remember when he had the head for sale before he parted his race car. I asked him to be honest and tell me if it was worth it, in his exact words, "its a piece of crap! I picked up 35rwhp by just swapping to an NA head."
Oh well. Sorry for being a little off topic.
Regards.
Raj

ehall

All those things you said,many of which I know about, are basically defending the point I was trying to make. ie...If Porsche had it sights set on something like winning LeMAns in a 951/968 platform, than who knows just what they might have done/tried/created in the form of 16 va;ve delevopment in order to win. Porsche just wasn't really interested in trying to develop the 16 valve head to the X degree, so we are left with a lot of what ifs. Frankly, a 3.0 8 valve is more than enough, but WHAT IF? That was really my point.

turbinek

With any turbo engine there is no need for more than two valves each cylinder in order to make power. The only reason for four or even more valves is to reach those emmission targets.
Besides Porsche never ported/polished because with turbo engines there is not much of gain and it may be contraproductiv because the gas should twist.

toddk911

'Maybe if Porsche N.A. wasn't so snobbish and lost the "if-you-don't-have-$100k-to-spend-right-now-eff-you" attitude, I'd care more about upholding their marquee. I do love the entire line for the most part - 356 to 928 to 911 to Cayman, but I just wish there'd be more of the appreciation for their heritage out there than there is. "

Easiest way to fix that is for us to keep smoking 911/930/996 owners on the track so they are forced to go to the dealerships and say "I WANT ONE OF THOSE"

JDeitz951

You've been smoking something, that's fer sure!

FSAEracer03

Whoaaa there, haha. I'm guessing there is sarcasm abundant in that post?

Valve number doesn't have to do with emissions targets... it's flow area. Ever see or hear of the demonstration with a fishtank and rocks? A speaker places one large rock in the tank that reaches the top of the tank and asks the crowd "is this tank full?" Some reply "yes." The speaker process to dump a bucket of smaller rocks in there that fill the large gaps and asks the same question... well, you get the idea, I'm sure. More valves equals less unused space in the head for charge air flow and exhaust gas expendature.

ehall

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAHHAAAAAA!

let's hope there was sarcasm.

toddk911

he is correct in regards to port and polish. Also, not need for the intake side of the head to have work either, only the exhaust side.

What am I smoking??? I am smoking the power to weight ratio theory and seeing plenty of 911/993/996, etc. get beat on the track by 951.

Case in point, I was at an autocross event this weekend and a 996 with a good driver put a time of 54 seconds. A 944 NA, also a good driver, put a time of 57. I think.......a 951 might have done a smidge better.