I want a Turbo, Selling my 964 Cab?
#31
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Silverthorne, Colorado
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
3 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
No changes to any of the transmission was necessary. I have 70,000 + miles since the conversion and have no transmission issues, knock on wood. As i understand the 964 as is can handle double the HP that our cars came with. I am running abut 450hp with no issues other then trying not to get speeding tickets. I did stiffen the car as a lot of us have per suggestions from this forum, Adrian's book and others but nothing out of the norm. I also converted the suspension to the ROW M030 coils and HD dampeners but I suppose overall better handling as well as ride height options can be gained by moving to something like a pss9 or a pss10
#34
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: sta. clarita calif.
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
psiegel: Do those turbos act the same as a regular engine when starting out from a stop and then go all ***-out at a certain RPM, or do they give you much more gitty-up from the get go. And, is it mandatory to have the "whale-tail" lid, i.e., for clearance of the intercooler(?). Could you turbo a car with the stock rear engine lid? I.e., a "sleeper"?
#35
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Silverthorne, Colorado
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
3 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Spin up of the turbo depends on the configuration and cost of course. A single will spin up slower then a twin of course. The cost of the twin is again obviously more expensive. I went with a single (less expensive) large turbo. I live at 9700 feet altitude so it takes longer for any turbo to spin up here then it does at sea level. At sea level i could hear and feel the turbo coming on at about 2,000 rpm. Up at 9700' you feel it at about 3,000 rpm. This is fine for me as i drive in the snow half the year and i don't want it to come on to early or else the car would be always spinning out in the snow. So at 3000 rpm its easy and very driver friendly.
The wing is required if you want at least 1 bar. If you would settle for less HP, I don't know where the cut off is but my guess is under 400hp then you can do without the intercooler and use the existing wing and drive a sheep in wolfs clothing. That was my original plan but 1/2 way through the modification, i decided to opt for more HP (why not) but more so because I think the engine will have more longevity as it runs cooler. For me the goal of the modification was increase in power and fun while maintaining longevity and if there was a design trade off, longevity won.
Hey i just re- read your question. My guess is that because the compression is lowered that 0 to 10 may be a tad slower (although i really can't notice a difference) but after 10 forget about it, everything is in your rear view mirror.
The wing is required if you want at least 1 bar. If you would settle for less HP, I don't know where the cut off is but my guess is under 400hp then you can do without the intercooler and use the existing wing and drive a sheep in wolfs clothing. That was my original plan but 1/2 way through the modification, i decided to opt for more HP (why not) but more so because I think the engine will have more longevity as it runs cooler. For me the goal of the modification was increase in power and fun while maintaining longevity and if there was a design trade off, longevity won.
Hey i just re- read your question. My guess is that because the compression is lowered that 0 to 10 may be a tad slower (although i really can't notice a difference) but after 10 forget about it, everything is in your rear view mirror.
#39
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I have just been thru this moving from a C4 to a Turbo. When I went to check the Turbo out the C4 looked all plain Jane and on the drive home I was cursing how the C4 could possibly have been designed with such feeble hp. Now I have the Turbo which is pretty mint (and goes like a scolded ****) I feel like I am committing a crime against humanity whenever I cause the digits in the speedo to roll over. And the C4 which I've had for three years and driven alot, has really got under my skin. It seems to me such a very good car for driving the open road or town whereas the Turbo kinda needs to be driven hard to enjoy. I think maybe the turbo just isn't under my skin yet. It is going to be hard to part with the C4.
Good luck with the decision. You can always go back to a NA 964.
I'm sorry but I don't see how a Cayman even features in the equation. Great car, even much superior car, but that's not what it's about is it?
Good luck with the decision. You can always go back to a NA 964.
I'm sorry but I don't see how a Cayman even features in the equation. Great car, even much superior car, but that's not what it's about is it?
#40
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
psiegel: Do those turbos act the same as a regular engine when starting out from a stop and then go all ***-out at a certain RPM, or do they give you much more gitty-up from the get go. And, is it mandatory to have the "whale-tail" lid, i.e., for clearance of the intercooler(?). Could you turbo a car with the stock rear engine lid? I.e., a "sleeper"?
My 3.6T with slight mods produces roughly 380 rwhp and 390 rwtq when full boost comes on it goes from producing 200 rwtq at roughly 2000 rpms to 365 rwtq by 2300 rpms and gradually builds to max tq all the way to redline pulling like a freight train. No other car I have driven comes close to the feel of these cars when the power comes on and they are not for everyone.
In terms of acceleration with some bolt on mods a 3.6T is a tad slower than a modified 993TT, 993TTS and 996TT from a dead stop (0-20 lag kills it off the line) but what it looses off the line it more than gaines from 60-130mph compared to the others. With the new PDK and higher HP TT's made today it will take a full EFI conversion to make them as fast but if your going for that kind of power modding a 3.3 is far more economical.
The 964 turbo is by far the most raw and connected of these turbo models to the road and requires more driver skill to drive at speed making for a very exhilarating and exciting experience. You should definitely test drive one before committing to buying.
As far as the rear wing if you plan on driving any of these cars fast the wing is a must even a C2 at speed could use the help of a rear wing and front splitter when you approach speeds above 130mph.
#41
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: sta. clarita calif.
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So Cobalt, what is a "ballpark" $$ to single turbo a 964. I've got a age related aversion to the wings. So, Knowing I'd never approach the 130mph arena, is it possible to rig up a wingless "sleeper"?
#42
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Figure a nice protomotive turbo setup without I/C is going to run you $5-6K. Depending on how far you want to take it. A friend of mine has a carrera speedster he turbocharged without rear wing, he was featured in Excellence Magazine last month. Fun car and looks cool. Great ride for the occasional blast into hyperspace but not a high speed driver. If that is what you are looking for they are somewhat reasonable and offer a low boost less violent approach to speeding up a 3.6