Best Year and Best options for a 951
09-04-2002, 06:08 PM
#31
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeremey & Ahmet-
you may be right, but I've never seen that much dif- Jeremy said 2990 w/full tank (that tank size sounds right- LATER cars were 21.1 gal)- Doug had just mentioned his friend's as 3019 w/out belly pan (~5lbs?) 3/4tank (~35lbs?), and 3" down tube (I assume that save a couple lbs, since factory exhaust parts are usually heavy- I know nothing about that part though). Anyway, I've always seen 2998 or so (CURB)- if correct, actual (TEST) SHOULD be ~3150- example- R&T Road Test Annual shows 3000 & 3145 for '86- who knows? I'm sure there's a percentage of error in addition to some options and variables.
My Turbo S was 3155 and MT saays 3083 (actual), which is pretty much DEAD ON if they used 1/2 tank of gas. BUT, C&D listed it Turbo S as 3190 (CURB) and R&T said 3195 & 3355, so who the hell knows...
BTW- Ahmet- you said the Turbo S/89 didn't have a trans cooler (in your "good" & "bad" list)? Is that what you meant? I really thought mine had one- I may be mistaken, but I remember having a conversation w/my mechanic while he was changing the trans oil and him showing it to me- I also remember him saying it really wans't worht anything- other's have disagreed though- I COULD be thinking of the oil cooler though?
In any case, I like them ALL!
you may be right, but I've never seen that much dif- Jeremy said 2990 w/full tank (that tank size sounds right- LATER cars were 21.1 gal)- Doug had just mentioned his friend's as 3019 w/out belly pan (~5lbs?) 3/4tank (~35lbs?), and 3" down tube (I assume that save a couple lbs, since factory exhaust parts are usually heavy- I know nothing about that part though). Anyway, I've always seen 2998 or so (CURB)- if correct, actual (TEST) SHOULD be ~3150- example- R&T Road Test Annual shows 3000 & 3145 for '86- who knows? I'm sure there's a percentage of error in addition to some options and variables.
My Turbo S was 3155 and MT saays 3083 (actual), which is pretty much DEAD ON if they used 1/2 tank of gas. BUT, C&D listed it Turbo S as 3190 (CURB) and R&T said 3195 & 3355, so who the hell knows...
BTW- Ahmet- you said the Turbo S/89 didn't have a trans cooler (in your "good" & "bad" list)? Is that what you meant? I really thought mine had one- I may be mistaken, but I remember having a conversation w/my mechanic while he was changing the trans oil and him showing it to me- I also remember him saying it really wans't worht anything- other's have disagreed though- I COULD be thinking of the oil cooler though?
In any case, I like them ALL!
09-05-2002, 04:24 AM
#32
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Turku, Finland
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1985/86
22mm front/18mm rear anti roll bars.
4-piston aluminium fixed brake calipers with ram air cooling to fronts.
1987 (as above plus)
ABS brakes.
The engine belt tensioner.
Electrically adjustable seats.
Wheels have deeper offsets.
Front axle geometry features negative-scrub and strengthened stub axles. MacPherson struts have increased diameter piston rods.
1988 (as above plus)
Headlamp beam adjustment, rear wiper, electric windows, servo streering, central locking.
Adjustability for ride height, shocks and rear anti roll bar.
Rigid attachment on rear cross tube to body.
Steering geometry changes to more negative offset.
Larger brake discs and calipers.
1988 S (as above plus)
250hp DIN at 6000rpm and 350Nm at 4000rpm.
Strengthened transmission with external oil cooler.
Limited slip differential.
Stiffer spings, shocks and anti-roll bars (25.5mm f/20mm r).
Front brakes from 928, ram air cooling in rear brakes.
Tinted securiflex laminated windshield.
Heated front seats and split rear seat backrest.
1989 (as above plus)
Alarmsystem, air conditioning, the damn sun roof.
1990/91 (as above plus)
Wing-type rear spoiler.
Battery in the rear luggage compartment.
22mm front/18mm rear anti roll bars.
4-piston aluminium fixed brake calipers with ram air cooling to fronts.
1987 (as above plus)
ABS brakes.
The engine belt tensioner.
Electrically adjustable seats.
Wheels have deeper offsets.
Front axle geometry features negative-scrub and strengthened stub axles. MacPherson struts have increased diameter piston rods.
1988 (as above plus)
Headlamp beam adjustment, rear wiper, electric windows, servo streering, central locking.
Adjustability for ride height, shocks and rear anti roll bar.
Rigid attachment on rear cross tube to body.
Steering geometry changes to more negative offset.
Larger brake discs and calipers.
1988 S (as above plus)
250hp DIN at 6000rpm and 350Nm at 4000rpm.
Strengthened transmission with external oil cooler.
Limited slip differential.
Stiffer spings, shocks and anti-roll bars (25.5mm f/20mm r).
Front brakes from 928, ram air cooling in rear brakes.
Tinted securiflex laminated windshield.
Heated front seats and split rear seat backrest.
1989 (as above plus)
Alarmsystem, air conditioning, the damn sun roof.
1990/91 (as above plus)
Wing-type rear spoiler.
Battery in the rear luggage compartment.
09-05-2002, 10:04 AM
#33
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Sorry about that, what I meant was the tranny cooler being an advantage over the 87 and 88(non S) cars. Indeed 88S and the later models have the cooler standard as well.
Ahmet
Ahmet
09-05-2002, 11:28 AM
#34
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcester, MA
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
robby: i'm sure you, and all those numbers, are probably right. even though i have the weight slip, i wouldnt argue that number against multiple others that say a higher weight just because the weight was done at a local truck scale and i have no idea how well it was calibrated... this car is bone stock and the only thing left in the car when it was weighed (that didnt come with the car) was a bottle of advil in the glove compartment.
Cheers,
Cheers,
09-05-2002, 07:26 PM
#35
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Newporsche Beach, California
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey you guys,
Just a little more info on '86 951 weight (again, my friend's car, 3019 lb. with 3/4 tank of fuel). It was weighed on a 4-pad Intercomp digital scale, so it's gotta be pretty accurate. Corner weights (diagonal sums) were within 5 lb. without driver. That's pretty good from the factory!
Another question: If '86 Turbos have the transmission cooler, does that mean that they alos have limited slip? Or said another way, did the open-diff cars come with the cooler?
Just a little more info on '86 951 weight (again, my friend's car, 3019 lb. with 3/4 tank of fuel). It was weighed on a 4-pad Intercomp digital scale, so it's gotta be pretty accurate. Corner weights (diagonal sums) were within 5 lb. without driver. That's pretty good from the factory!
Another question: If '86 Turbos have the transmission cooler, does that mean that they alos have limited slip? Or said another way, did the open-diff cars come with the cooler?
09-05-2002, 08:32 PM
#36
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahmet- thanks for info- now I understand...
Jeremey- Yeah, I'm not really sure about all of it either- as I said, my Turbo s weight was on a truck scale too- some people say they are VERY accurate- you know- lot's of $ since there are SOOO many trucks on the highways- other';s say they're not accurate at all- I DID weigh myself too- when subtracting the car from the overall weight (I got out and the lady working the counter wrote it all down), it brought me down to ~180, which was right on the $ when I got home to verify (bathroom scale). I HAVE seen a LOT of different #'s though, so the '86 may be a little lighter than I thought- but as I had said earlier, if you plan to add larger brakes, wheels/tires, etc, then SOME of that stuff wont matter anyway- just like if you plan to add a larger turbo and chips (even suspension etc)- then it would be pointless to pay extra for the extra power of a Turbo S
Doug- the '86 had an OPTIONAL LSD- not sure if open diffs had the cooler or not- the only prob (for SOME) is that ABS was NOT offered- I guess SOME people even want air bags though, which were also unavaiable...
Nico- the list you have there is pretty cool- it's not ALL 100% correct though- it shows heated seats for the Turbo S- those were just optional- it also shows a ("damn") sunroof for the '89- I like SR's, but just think the Porsche design SR is kind of silly- anyway, the Turbo S had it too- maybe I missed a few things Anyway, in the '87 list: "Rigid attachment on rear cross tube to body" What is this? Anyone? I'm sure the later cars had it too, but did the '86 Turbo really not have this? Also, the 90/91's had the battery in the rear? I thought this was only S2's in Europe or something like that(?). I would LOVE to get part #s for the parts to convert my battery to the rear like that- ANYONE?
Ahmet- did you ever re-mount your battery? I remember you asking about it a long time ago- did you ever look into it?
Jeremey- Yeah, I'm not really sure about all of it either- as I said, my Turbo s weight was on a truck scale too- some people say they are VERY accurate- you know- lot's of $ since there are SOOO many trucks on the highways- other';s say they're not accurate at all- I DID weigh myself too- when subtracting the car from the overall weight (I got out and the lady working the counter wrote it all down), it brought me down to ~180, which was right on the $ when I got home to verify (bathroom scale). I HAVE seen a LOT of different #'s though, so the '86 may be a little lighter than I thought- but as I had said earlier, if you plan to add larger brakes, wheels/tires, etc, then SOME of that stuff wont matter anyway- just like if you plan to add a larger turbo and chips (even suspension etc)- then it would be pointless to pay extra for the extra power of a Turbo S
Doug- the '86 had an OPTIONAL LSD- not sure if open diffs had the cooler or not- the only prob (for SOME) is that ABS was NOT offered- I guess SOME people even want air bags though, which were also unavaiable...
Nico- the list you have there is pretty cool- it's not ALL 100% correct though- it shows heated seats for the Turbo S- those were just optional- it also shows a ("damn") sunroof
for the '89- I like SR's, but just think the Porsche design SR is kind of silly- anyway, the Turbo S had it too- maybe I missed a few things Anyway, in the '87 list: "Rigid attachment on rear cross tube to body" What is this? Anyone? I'm sure the later cars had it too, but did the '86 Turbo really not have this? Also, the 90/91's had the battery in the rear? I thought this was only S2's in Europe or something like that(?). I would LOVE to get part #s for the parts to convert my battery to the rear like that- ANYONE?Ahmet- did you ever re-mount your battery? I remember you asking about it a long time ago- did you ever look into it?
09-06-2002, 01:01 AM
#37
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Turku, Finland
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah Roby, my list is probably not accurate when it comes to the American export models. I only have the european list you know...
The list muchly explains the weight issue also. The 87 model had so many improvements compaired to the 86, definitely adding some weight also. And the later the model, the more the weight...
I know that (maybe) all the american 88 S models had the SR installed, but in Europe it was an option. That's why I did not put it to the list. Was it an option in the America too? Was it only that not a single car was delivered without it???
The list muchly explains the weight issue also. The 87 model had so many improvements compaired to the 86, definitely adding some weight also. And the later the model, the more the weight...
I know that (maybe) all the american 88 S models had the SR installed, but in Europe it was an option. That's why I did not put it to the list. Was it an option in the America too? Was it only that not a single car was delivered without it???
09-06-2002, 01:11 AM
#38
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
to add my .02
Only the turbo S 1988 had 26.8mm/18mm f/r sway bars.
The 89's had 26.8/16mm bars like all the later 951/s2/68 cars.
Of course, 968 M030's are great and negate all this!
Jason
Only the turbo S 1988 had 26.8mm/18mm f/r sway bars.
The 89's had 26.8/16mm bars like all the later 951/s2/68 cars.
Of course, 968 M030's are great and negate all this!
Jason
09-08-2002, 11:57 AM
#41
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Cary, NC USA
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote]- also, probably WITH SR, and then add a carbon fibre panel to close the hole- would probably be lighter overall than even a SR delete- <hr></blockquote>
Really? I find that hard to believe. What about all the sunroof mechanics and motor? Also I was told that Porsche did extensive strengthening to the roof area on the SR cars to make up for the huge hole - that has to weigh something. I've always figured the SR cars had a lot more weight up top than the SR delete cars - even with the top off!
Really? I find that hard to believe. What about all the sunroof mechanics and motor? Also I was told that Porsche did extensive strengthening to the roof area on the SR cars to make up for the huge hole - that has to weigh something. I've always figured the SR cars had a lot more weight up top than the SR delete cars - even with the top off!
09-11-2002, 08:31 PM
#42
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey jeremy my 1986 has the M030 option with LSD and Sport seats heated and power, headlight squirters, sunroof, but ugly phone dial wheels and it was sold in cherry hills new jersey as a leased car back in 1986 i got all records from all previous owners including origional lease paperwork and options lists, neat stuff if you never saw the origional sales records on these cars
09-12-2002, 03:39 AM
#43
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcester, MA
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tecart: nice, sounds like we have the same car except my car was canadian. i have all the records going back to the original owner, but i dont have the point of sale paperwork. *sigh*
09-13-2002, 12:06 AM
#45
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AutoXdriver-
Sorry, I forgot about this thread...
First off, when I said to close the hole w/a carbon fibre panel, I was assuming that the person would also eliminate the SR motor, and everything else to do w/the SR that they could get too-
BUT, I may be wrong- I HAVE heard about the extra bracing Porsche supposedly added to SR cars, and forgot about that- it may just add enough weight to offset the benefits, BUT, if one was using the car for track only, it STILL might be better- a carbon fibre panel would remove at LEAST 15lbs, plus, the rest of the junk from up there would be worth another pound or two, then, the motor, and anything else possible, maybe 20-25lbs total(?). I doubt the bracing weighs more than that, so even if it evened out, then the extra bracing would help stiffness(?)- I don't know though- I've never weighed any of these pieces, etc- purely speculation...
Sorry, I forgot about this thread...
First off, when I said to close the hole w/a carbon fibre panel, I was assuming that the person would also eliminate the SR motor, and everything else to do w/the SR that they could get too-
BUT, I may be wrong- I HAVE heard about the extra bracing Porsche supposedly added to SR cars, and forgot about that- it may just add enough weight to offset the benefits, BUT, if one was using the car for track only, it STILL might be better- a carbon fibre panel would remove at LEAST 15lbs, plus, the rest of the junk from up there would be worth another pound or two, then, the motor, and anything else possible, maybe 20-25lbs total(?). I doubt the bracing weighs more than that, so even if it evened out, then the extra bracing would help stiffness(?)- I don't know though- I've never weighed any of these pieces, etc- purely speculation...