Is the 968 REALLY better than a good 944S2?
02-09-2007, 07:47 PM
#31
Raj. Bob. Stop this BS now. You are both acting like children.
Now, as for the topic of this post...
I have extensive experience with both cars. The S2 is a fabulous car and I enjoyed both its style and the tremendous torque of the 3.0 engine. That said, the 968 is a better car, period. The engine both has more hp and torque, and feels stronger across the rev line. The thrust above 4000 rpm that comes from the Variocam is unmatched in the S2. The 6 speed shifts better and provides the ability to keep the car in the sweet spot of the rev band. Any discussion of styling is of course subjective, but I get far more questions and compliments about the 968 than I ever did with the S2.
Now, all of this opinion only counts if you are comparing cars with similar mileage and in similar condition. A nice low-miles S2 would be preferable to a 968 with high miles and in rough condition. However, if the cars are similar the 968 wins hands down. It is just a more modern and refined car. This is no knock on the S2 - it is a great car. But is is essentially a nice 944 with a bigger engine. The 968 is, as Porsche said when the car was released, 85% new.
And it is a lot cheaper to put in a new clutch...
Now, as for the topic of this post...
I have extensive experience with both cars. The S2 is a fabulous car and I enjoyed both its style and the tremendous torque of the 3.0 engine. That said, the 968 is a better car, period. The engine both has more hp and torque, and feels stronger across the rev line. The thrust above 4000 rpm that comes from the Variocam is unmatched in the S2. The 6 speed shifts better and provides the ability to keep the car in the sweet spot of the rev band. Any discussion of styling is of course subjective, but I get far more questions and compliments about the 968 than I ever did with the S2.
Now, all of this opinion only counts if you are comparing cars with similar mileage and in similar condition. A nice low-miles S2 would be preferable to a 968 with high miles and in rough condition. However, if the cars are similar the 968 wins hands down. It is just a more modern and refined car. This is no knock on the S2 - it is a great car. But is is essentially a nice 944 with a bigger engine. The 968 is, as Porsche said when the car was released, 85% new.
And it is a lot cheaper to put in a new clutch...
02-09-2007, 08:03 PM
#33
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by flash968
raj - i understand it just fine - where is the valve you say is there?
Raj
02-09-2007, 08:08 PM
#34
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ralph - i appreciate the efforts and position, but object to incinatuations that my behavior is anything but professional - please go back and reread my posts - they are direct inquiries and pointed responses
a claim was made, and an accusation that i made a mistake - this is unsubstantiated - i have shown that the manifolds are different, and further that it was a change made specific to the 968
further, i want to know where this valve is - sounds to me like we should make sure it is working - such a valve would surely be responsible for a lot of power loss if it failed - i find it difficult to believe that nobody else has the same desire to get to the bottom of this
does anyone know anything about this valve? - i have looked at a manifold, inside and out, and i can find no valve in there - somebody please show it to me - does anybody have the part number?
a claim was made, and an accusation that i made a mistake - this is unsubstantiated - i have shown that the manifolds are different, and further that it was a change made specific to the 968
further, i want to know where this valve is - sounds to me like we should make sure it is working - such a valve would surely be responsible for a lot of power loss if it failed - i find it difficult to believe that nobody else has the same desire to get to the bottom of this
does anyone know anything about this valve? - i have looked at a manifold, inside and out, and i can find no valve in there - somebody please show it to me - does anybody have the part number?
02-09-2007, 08:21 PM
#35
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by flash968
i have shown that the manifolds are different, and further that it was a change made specific to the 968
One cannot assume that just because the sales literature talks about using a technology, its unique or used for the 1st time on that model. Porsches still talks about DRIM in their Boxster S sales broshures.
Raj
02-09-2007, 08:34 PM
#36
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
they look different - the part numbers are different - the sales literature from both 92 and 93 say they are different - the announcement package says they are different - peter morgan says they are different - i could go on
moving on
where is that valve? surely you have a spare intake manifold lying around so that you can show us - this now has me quite concerned about yet another part that will need maintenance and attention
moving on
where is that valve? surely you have a spare intake manifold lying around so that you can show us - this now has me quite concerned about yet another part that will need maintenance and attention
02-09-2007, 08:45 PM
#37
Rennlist Member
Gotta love google...
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/4...2brochure.html
Ofcourse the part numbers are different. One has the tabs to mount the vanity cover and the other doesn't. Well, the brochure clearly proves that this technology was used on the S2 as well, so it was not used for the 1st time on a 968. You can go ahead and correct anyone that claims otherwise.
So there you go guys, there is no difference as far as resonance intake manifolds. They both have that technology.
Raj
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/4...2brochure.html
Ofcourse the part numbers are different. One has the tabs to mount the vanity cover and the other doesn't. Well, the brochure clearly proves that this technology was used on the S2 as well, so it was not used for the 1st time on a 968. You can go ahead and correct anyone that claims otherwise.
So there you go guys, there is no difference as far as resonance intake manifolds. They both have that technology.
Raj
02-09-2007, 08:53 PM
#38
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well alrighty then - based on the pic you posted, they are obviously different in size and shape, but both are resonant principle manifolds - cool - good info - i'll call peter morgan and let him know - thanks
now, where is that valve?
now, where is that valve?
02-09-2007, 10:25 PM
#41
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it is indeed unsettling to find that every one of the sources i could find, including multiple ones from porsche, indicated clearly that it was new technology, and i could not find a single source to indicate it was present on the S2 - i searched everything i had on the S2, and not one single mention - so far, that sheet is the only one to say anything, and even it does not specify the manifold by name, unlike all of the 968 references, but rather the "system"
at any rate, it is always a good thing to get correct information
i reread all the posts - i still cannot find the valve - i have looked at it inside and out, specifically looking for it to no avail - fortunately there is a manifold on pete's floor - tomorrow we can do further investigation to locate this mystery valve - certainly it is something that would need service and maintenance, or at a bare minimum, some method of testing it to insure it is working - however, i can find no mention of it in the workshop manual
how about you just show us?
at any rate, it is always a good thing to get correct information
i reread all the posts - i still cannot find the valve - i have looked at it inside and out, specifically looking for it to no avail - fortunately there is a manifold on pete's floor - tomorrow we can do further investigation to locate this mystery valve - certainly it is something that would need service and maintenance, or at a bare minimum, some method of testing it to insure it is working - however, i can find no mention of it in the workshop manual
how about you just show us?
02-09-2007, 10:30 PM
#42
This entire, "I'm right, he's wrong" discourse over a bloody valve is what is childish.
Of course you both can claim to be saving the world from the other's apparent mis-information... "watch out! induction valves can cause cancer if you don't understand them as only I do..." but the bottom line is that this is just the latest in a long series of unfortunate and rancourous exchanges between two very passionate, and very intelligent individuals who refuse to play nice with one another.
I value both of your opinions and have learned much for the association. I hope that both of you make it to Hershey. I plan to bring a good bottle of Glenmorangie. I can only hope that a few pulls of Scotland's finest can finally put this nonsense to rest. And Damian, I'll pour a dram or two for you as well since the 968 you helped me find three years ago is still purring like a kitten - no doubt because of it's frickin' resonance intake manifold valve thingee (part number 944.045.XXXX - which may or may not have also come with the 944S2).
Goodnight gents!
Of course you both can claim to be saving the world from the other's apparent mis-information... "watch out! induction valves can cause cancer if you don't understand them as only I do..." but the bottom line is that this is just the latest in a long series of unfortunate and rancourous exchanges between two very passionate, and very intelligent individuals who refuse to play nice with one another.
I value both of your opinions and have learned much for the association. I hope that both of you make it to Hershey. I plan to bring a good bottle of Glenmorangie. I can only hope that a few pulls of Scotland's finest can finally put this nonsense to rest. And Damian, I'll pour a dram or two for you as well since the 968 you helped me find three years ago is still purring like a kitten - no doubt because of it's frickin' resonance intake manifold valve thingee (part number 944.045.XXXX - which may or may not have also come with the 944S2).
Goodnight gents!
02-09-2007, 10:49 PM
#43
Look guys...I have a car with a resonance intake system and yes it has a charge valve controlled by the dme. The resonance is in the design on the 968. There is not a valve per say but the design makes use of the resonating air. Now a car like the e28 and e34 M cars all have a very nice intake resonance system operating between 3250 and 6250 or so. Those motors (M5) have a max of 8k rpm from the factory. individual TB's etc
No mechanical resonance on the 968.
No mechanical resonance on the 968.
02-09-2007, 11:05 PM
#44
Happily Amused
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by rpm's S2
Of course you both can claim to be saving the world from the other's apparent mis-information... "watch out! induction valves can cause cancer if you don't understand them as only I do..."
02-11-2007, 07:52 PM
#45
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The 968's intake plenum is similar to that used in the 944S2 except for one key feature. I'll quote "Porsche: Excellence Was Expected" by Karl Ludvigsen, Volume 3, page 1113 because he phrases it well...
Instead of the usual solution of admitting fresh air to the pleunum at a single point, the Porsche engineers added a second "bypass" air-supply tube that curved under the ram pipes to enter the plenum at the other end. The length of this added pipe was such that it created additional pressure pulses in the plenum that were time to match the inlet strokes.
As regards a pneumatically operated "valve" in the intake plenum to route intake air though different passages depending on RPM, that feature was first introduced by Porsche in the Type M64/20 engine used in the 993 Carrera RS. The feature was later branded as VarioRam (not to be confused with VarioCam) and made available in a regular production model in the MY1996 NA 993.
It was not used in the 968.
Karl.
Instead of the usual solution of admitting fresh air to the pleunum at a single point, the Porsche engineers added a second "bypass" air-supply tube that curved under the ram pipes to enter the plenum at the other end. The length of this added pipe was such that it created additional pressure pulses in the plenum that were time to match the inlet strokes.
As regards a pneumatically operated "valve" in the intake plenum to route intake air though different passages depending on RPM, that feature was first introduced by Porsche in the Type M64/20 engine used in the 993 Carrera RS. The feature was later branded as VarioRam (not to be confused with VarioCam) and made available in a regular production model in the MY1996 NA 993.
It was not used in the 968.
Karl.