Are 944 Turbos at a Disadvantage in PCA Club Racing?
#181
Race Car
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
T
#182
#183
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Jeff
#184
Race Car
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Post # 136
T
#185
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
All I have said all along is that no set of rules can be expected to remain unchanged forever. And, the rules changes implemented by PCA seem reasonable to me. However, I don't think nearly enough advance notice was given.
Jeff
#186
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Just to be clear, Scott wrote the following in Post #56:
More from Scott's post #56:
Generally what I have said about what Scott wrote is that "If a reliable and PCA legal 400 rwhp is possible from a 3.4 liter, normally aspirated, 2 valve, air cooled 911 engine, then that is incredible!! I would like to meet the owners of these cars and their engine builders because I want one of those engines for my car!!"
Jeff
Assume a 400RWHP 3.4L 911 running against a 400RWHP 2.5L 944T - On the surface this seems like a good race, but consider that the 911 weighs the minimum allowable in GT3 for his PI and displacement (2040#) and the 944T weighs the minimum allowable in GT3 for his PI and displacement (2735#) - Well, it is blatantly clear at this point who has the ADVANTAGE.
Jeff
#187
Race Car
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
All I have said all along is that no set of rules can be expected to remain unchanged forever. And, the rules changes implemented by PCA seem reasonable to me. However, I don't think nearly enough advance notice was given.
951and944S, I would suggest that you back down the testosterone just a bit. I never provoked you.
T
#188
Race Car
#189
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Jeff
#190
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#191
Race Car
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Ha ha, I'll edit it away from the quote if you like.
I only asked you personally because you have remained level headed and even keeled throughout the "discussion" Jeff since nobody seemed to comment on the PCA results of Sebring-race 5 of the 2007 season except for A. Wayne chastising Scott for omitting a ghost driver from a qualifying session that I happened to know enough about to call BS on the lap time.
So....., do you care to answer....or...?
T
I only asked you personally because you have remained level headed and even keeled throughout the "discussion" Jeff since nobody seemed to comment on the PCA results of Sebring-race 5 of the 2007 season except for A. Wayne chastising Scott for omitting a ghost driver from a qualifying session that I happened to know enough about to call BS on the lap time.
So....., do you care to answer....or...?
T
#192
Race Car
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
![Smilie](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Post #154 - Under Pressure Performance - "By stating that I misquoted you "again" you imply that I misquoted you previously, which I do not feel as though I have, but to be on the safe side, I figured I would actually quote you post in my reply since it is primarily a response to your post.
That said, I admit, I responded to your post with an inaccuracy. You did write 475 BHP, and for some reason I responded as is you wrote 475 WHP - As such, please accept my sincerest apology."
T
#193
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Ha ha, I'll edit it away from the quote if you like.
I only asked you personally because you have remained level headed and even keeled throughout the "discussion" Jeff since nobody seemed to comment on the PCA results of Sebring-race 5 of the 2007 season except for A. Wayne chastising Scott for omitting a ghost driver from a qualifying session that I happened to know enough about to call BS on the lap time.
So....., do you care to answer....or...?
I only asked you personally because you have remained level headed and even keeled throughout the "discussion" Jeff since nobody seemed to comment on the PCA results of Sebring-race 5 of the 2007 season except for A. Wayne chastising Scott for omitting a ghost driver from a qualifying session that I happened to know enough about to call BS on the lap time.
So....., do you care to answer....or...?
At some point, I hope to be able to take some time to look back through the PCA race results for the past few years to see what turns up. Or, is there someone reading this debate who as already looked through all of the past club races for the past few years who is willing to share a factual summary?
I just won't comment on the past PCA club race records until a more thorough review is completed.
Jeff
#194
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Post #154 - Under Pressure Performance - "By stating that I misquoted you "again" you imply that I misquoted you previously, which I do not feel as though I have, but to be on the safe side, I figured I would actually quote you post in my reply since it is primarily a response to your post.
That said, I admit, I responded to your post with an inaccuracy. You did write 475 BHP, and for some reason I responded as is you wrote 475 WHP - As such, please accept my sincerest apology."
T
That said, I admit, I responded to your post with an inaccuracy. You did write 475 BHP, and for some reason I responded as is you wrote 475 WHP - As such, please accept my sincerest apology."
T
Jeff
#195
Formula One Spin Doctor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
To clarify:
scott claims 400 whp from 3.4L, that is 475 BHP my: position not possible
3.8 L RSR engines make 400-425 BHP , that is what i have seen from experience.
3.4L engines i would say tops maybe 380 bhp out of a sprint engine on the avg 365 bhp or 310 whp again this is top tier, not the avg.
Scott original claim was 400 whp , he never retracted , but started to use BHP instead of WHP , hence the muddyness. this is what we are now working with.
scott claims 400 whp from 3.4L, that is 475 BHP my: position not possible
3.8 L RSR engines make 400-425 BHP , that is what i have seen from experience.
3.4L engines i would say tops maybe 380 bhp out of a sprint engine on the avg 365 bhp or 310 whp again this is top tier, not the avg.
Scott original claim was 400 whp , he never retracted , but started to use BHP instead of WHP , hence the muddyness. this is what we are now working with.