944 vs 968 motor which is better?
12-29-2007, 11:39 PM
#16
Rennlist Member
I guess not everyone who has a turbo'd car is going to track it. Also what's wrong with turbo'ing a 3.0L16v? Except for cost, nothing. Sure you can buy and turbo a Supra to get stupid power, but what do you do with that stupid power. Drag, Drift etc (at what cost?). How many Supras do you see at the track and what are their times? If you want to build a great car with buckloads of hp/tq and drive it on the track you can. You don't have to compete but I'm sure you can over there anyway. If you want to build a conforming car to race then you can still do 16v Porsche, just not 3.0L.
Anyway, I think the poster was talking about an N/A 968 so this is a redundant discussion.
Anyway, I think the poster was talking about an N/A 968 so this is a redundant discussion.
12-30-2007, 12:01 AM
#17
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I guess not everyone who has a turbo'd car is going to track it. Also what's wrong with turbo'ing a 3.0L16v? Except for cost, nothing. Sure you can buy and turbo a Supra to get stupid power, but what do you do with that stupid power. Drag, Drift etc (at what cost?). How many Supras do you see at the track and what are their times? If you want to build a great car with buckloads of hp/tq and drive it on the track you can. You don't have to compete but I'm sure you can over there anyway. If you want to build a conforming car to race then you can still do 16v Porsche, just not 3.0L.
Anyway, I think the poster was talking about an N/A 968 so this is a redundant discussion.
Anyway, I think the poster was talking about an N/A 968 so this is a redundant discussion.
...and ST never set out to build a race car...per se. He went down a road to find the maximum limit of the 2.5.
It isn't that hard to exceed the 968's power with a fit 951 engine, stock bottom end, bigger turbo, MAF, chips and exhaust.
That was the point I was making from the get go.
We don't know the OP's intentions for his car.
12-30-2007, 03:05 AM
#18
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
If you'll be content with 236 hp (I guess you could get up to 250-260 with a chip and exhaust) then use the 968 engine. It's got many advantages, ranging from subtle to obvious. The hydraulic belt tensioner is immeasurably better than the spring tensioner; oil thermostat gives heat quickly in the winter; it sounds great!
The books claim 236hp, but most 968s out there don't have that. Make sure the cams are timed right and the CC is clean of carbon, to yield proper compression - on that note, use 93 octane for full power. Here in CA we only get 91 so I have to mix in some expensive 100-octane race gas.
The books claim 236hp, but most 968s out there don't have that. Make sure the cams are timed right and the CC is clean of carbon, to yield proper compression - on that note, use 93 octane for full power. Here in CA we only get 91 so I have to mix in some expensive 100-octane race gas.
12-30-2007, 10:49 AM
#19
Nordschleife Master
yup.
...and ST never set out to build a race car...per se. He went down a road to find the maximum limit of the 2.5.
It isn't that hard to exceed the 968's power with a fit 951 engine, stock bottom end, bigger turbo, MAF, chips and exhaust.
That was the point I was making from the get go.
We don't know the OP's intentions for his car.
...and ST never set out to build a race car...per se. He went down a road to find the maximum limit of the 2.5.
It isn't that hard to exceed the 968's power with a fit 951 engine, stock bottom end, bigger turbo, MAF, chips and exhaust.
That was the point I was making from the get go.
We don't know the OP's intentions for his car.
12-30-2007, 12:20 PM
#20
Rennlist Member
Yeah, get the 968 engine, NOT. Just make sure you don't get into a drag race with a maxima 3.5, altima 3.5 or a honda accord v6, or else be ready to get smoked and humiliated.
In stock form, they are slow for today's times. They brake and handle with the best of them but the engine is very lethargic (massive dual mass flywheel, heavy crank). Drive a 968 and then get into a BMW, it will feel like the 968 engine has boat anchors attached to it.
Makes me wonder why no other manufacturer ever made a 3.0 liter 4 cylinder. Yeah, typical Porsche, keep adding weight to the rotating mass to "cover" for vibrations.
Raj
In stock form, they are slow for today's times. They brake and handle with the best of them but the engine is very lethargic (massive dual mass flywheel, heavy crank). Drive a 968 and then get into a BMW, it will feel like the 968 engine has boat anchors attached to it.
Makes me wonder why no other manufacturer ever made a 3.0 liter 4 cylinder. Yeah, typical Porsche, keep adding weight to the rotating mass to "cover" for vibrations.
Raj
Last edited by RajDatta; 01-01-2008 at 08:55 PM.
07-30-2020, 01:01 AM
#21
968 turbo cup
07-30-2020, 03:13 AM
#22
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor
07-31-2020, 12:00 AM
#23
Rennlist Member
