Trick 951's
11-22-2007, 12:57 PM
#196
Pro
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Under Pressure Performance
To be quite frank, I firmly believe that the spirit of PCA club racing has been raped. It is disgusting to think that folks that decide to build cars for a class decide that if they can;t be competitive, it must be because the rules don;t work - When in reality, they just can't step up to the plate and build something competitive.
* Many racing organizations don't know how to deal with turbo engines so they basically just ban them. One big example is SCCA. Another is Formula One. I think even the CART series has been having difficulty controlling the turbo engines and they either have banned or are considering banning the turbo engines. We don't want the PCA to go this route.
* I like the new Performance Index concept that has been implemented in PCA GT class racing. If the PCA wanted to somehow penalize the 944 series cars, they would have assigned the 944 engines higher HP/liter numbers than the 911 engines . . . but they didn't. Take a look at the facts -> A 944 2 valve water cooled turbo is assigned number of 200 HP/L, whereas, a 911 2 valve water cooled turbo is assigned a number of 240 HP/L. This larger number really penalizes the 911 crowd. How can anyone argue that PCA somehow doesn't like the 944 cars based on the new HP/L and weight classifications? I just don't get it.
Please remember, I love 944 Turbos. And, the new PI concept that the PCA has developed is very cool. Here are two fair 911 vs. 944 comparisons I would like to see:
1. Run a nice normally aspirated 944 to challenge the normally aspirated 911s where they run similar displacements.
2. Run a highly modified 944 Turbo against a highly modified 911 turbo of the same displacement.
Under the new PCA GT rules, it is clear to me that the 944s are given an advantage over the 911s (both normally aspirated AND turbo). The real debate is whether or not the delta of the HP/L numbers between normally aspirated engines and turbo engines is too large. The PCA had to start somewhere and I am sure these numbers will be tweaked if they turn out not to be quite right.
Jeff
Last edited by Jeff Lamb; 11-23-2007 at 12:11 AM.
11-22-2007, 02:25 PM
#197
Nordschleife Master
I don't think this car has been posted yet. I once heard it made over 700hp but that is obviously a rumor as it wouldn't be in gt3 with that power.
http://www.fairfieldcountymotorsport.com/racecars.htm
http://www.fairfieldcountymotorsport.com/racecars.htm
11-22-2007, 04:32 PM
#199
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor
The problem I have is that the performance index is based on some ‘absolute’ assumed outputs. Do I as a 944 guy have the benefit of decades of development and research? Nope, I have to do a lot of that myself. Can I make an engine that will rival a factory 962 motor….sure I would love to think so but that a bit unrealistic. Gee, come to think of it what was the per liter output of some of the exotic Porsche 6 cylinder turbo race motors – shouldn’t that be the basis for the factoring?
Can someone find the engine that was the basis for the 16v 4 cylinder 230hp per liter that would last for 24 hours…If I recall the highest power factory effort for Lemans 16v was around 400hp for a 2.5. That would be a 160 factor – not 230.
Lets take this a little further – PCA is only looking at the engines, how about transmissions? 911 based cars have a myriad of ratios available as well as many basic trans choices. What do 944 turbo guys have? Some, but not much. SCCA used to have weight modifiers based on transmissions too – but that would not be a benefit for the 911 based cars so I guess we don’t need that.
There may be some truth in this being an attempt to equalize the engines….while the 911 based vehicles can still retain their development and transmission advantages.
It just amazes me. Porsche and some 911 folks feel that the 944 is not a real Porsche and should be forgotten….until some odd ***** make them go fast. Then the rules should be changed so that the 911s will have an easier time.
Can someone find the engine that was the basis for the 16v 4 cylinder 230hp per liter that would last for 24 hours…If I recall the highest power factory effort for Lemans 16v was around 400hp for a 2.5. That would be a 160 factor – not 230.
Lets take this a little further – PCA is only looking at the engines, how about transmissions? 911 based cars have a myriad of ratios available as well as many basic trans choices. What do 944 turbo guys have? Some, but not much. SCCA used to have weight modifiers based on transmissions too – but that would not be a benefit for the 911 based cars so I guess we don’t need that.
There may be some truth in this being an attempt to equalize the engines….while the 911 based vehicles can still retain their development and transmission advantages.
It just amazes me. Porsche and some 911 folks feel that the 944 is not a real Porsche and should be forgotten….until some odd ***** make them go fast. Then the rules should be changed so that the 911s will have an easier time.
11-22-2007, 09:25 PM
#200
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chris, while it may not be common around your parts, there is a 16v motor running around here that can do that all day long. I feel they are spot on with that figure. I don't know where they got that HP figure but I feel its perfect.
11-22-2007, 11:08 PM
#201
Pro
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since the debate regarding whether or not 944s and 944 Turbos are treated fairly in the PCA Club Racing organization is very important and could turn out to be quite lengthy AND we don't want to ruin David's thread, I thought it would be good to create a thread for the debate here:
https://rennlist.com/forums/944-turbo-and-turbo-s-forum/393358-are-944-turbos-at-a-disadvantage-in-pca-club-racing.html
Jeff
https://rennlist.com/forums/944-turbo-and-turbo-s-forum/393358-are-944-turbos-at-a-disadvantage-in-pca-club-racing.html
Jeff
11-23-2007, 12:01 AM
#202
Formula One Spin Doctor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The current PCA 08 rule changes for GT3 was inevitable , the turbos enjoyed a PWR that was way out of wack compared to the Na cars. The current rules take some of this away , but with unrestricted turbos it still pushes the advantages towards them. FIA rules in some series dictate a 51 MM inlet restrictor on a 4 cylinder single turbo with a minium weight of 1200 lbs / litre. Even with this 51 MM restrictor 280 bhp /L is not unheard of , the PCA rules are still generous, the turbo's are still unrestricted, Enjoy!
In regards to the canon car , yes the intake is " unusual " and at first sight i was a bit taken aback by it , but it did not interfere with that engine making " decent Power" as seen at Daytona this month. I would assume it was done to retain the original 924 carrera reinforcement bars as used on the car at Lemans.
In regards to the canon car , yes the intake is " unusual " and at first sight i was a bit taken aback by it , but it did not interfere with that engine making " decent Power" as seen at Daytona this month. I would assume it was done to retain the original 924 carrera reinforcement bars as used on the car at Lemans.
11-23-2007, 08:11 AM
#203
The current PCA 08 rule changes for GT3 was inevitable , the turbos enjoyed a PWR that was way out of wack compared to the Na cars. The current rules take some of this away , but with unrestricted turbos it still pushes the advantages towards them. FIA rules in some series dictate a 51 MM inlet restrictor on a 4 cylinder single turbo with a minium weight of 1200 lbs / litre. Even with this 51 MM restrictor 280 bhp /L is not unheard of , the PCA rules are still generous, the turbo's are still unrestricted, Enjoy!
In regards to the canon car , yes the intake is " unusual " and at first sight i was a bit taken aback by it , but it did not interfere with that engine making " decent Power" as seen at Daytona this month. I would assume it was done to retain the original 924 carrera reinforcement bars as used on the car at Lemans.
In regards to the canon car , yes the intake is " unusual " and at first sight i was a bit taken aback by it , but it did not interfere with that engine making " decent Power" as seen at Daytona this month. I would assume it was done to retain the original 924 carrera reinforcement bars as used on the car at Lemans.
280/liter in endurance trim?
