Al P.

this is a cross post from the 924.org/924 racing today board

reading the rules as to what I would be able to do to the car should I decide to run SCCA they seemed fairly clear.

What I am confused about is why folks keep talking about their decision to run either LP or full Prep. Seems from what I was reading that the SCCA made that decision. The way I read it (and I'm probably wrong) there is no such thing as a separate LP or full Prep class there is only EP (in the case of the 944) and different cars are allowed to either be modified to the full extent that the rules allow OR are restricted (Limited) in what they can do. The 944 is heavily restricted (in my opinion) in their (SCCA's) attempt to create an even playing field.

Can anyone running SCCA clarify this?

Bill L Seifert

I run SCCA, but not production. The 944 in EP is extremely limited, too much I think. I run ITS, and get blown away by the Datsuns and Mazdas, and we are allowed no more than they are in EP, so I doubt a 944 would have a prayer in EP. You gotta remember SCCA hates Porsches, and will never let one dominate unlike Mazda. That is obviously a personal opinion.

Bill Seifert

1983 944 Race Car
1987 944S Race Car under const.

Al P.

Thanks Bill,

I've received one other response that confirms what you've said. I have to agree with your opinion on the SCCA

BartWorkman

Why would SCCA hate Porsche??? I assume there is some reasoning behind that observation.

Curious because I am considering building a car for EP.

Bart
'87 924S

Bill L Seifert

I guess hate is a strong word. All I know is that look at all the classes in SCCA, and you will never see a Porsche do really well, with possibly one exception. In my class ITS, first Datsun and then Mazda dominated for years, and now the BMW's are coming on strong, and I feel Porsches have very little chance. Where did they come up with our race weight of 2715 for 8v 944's and 2850 for the 944S. Look at the the weight of the Mazdas. The only class I can think of that Porsche does really well is GT2, where that 944S wins a lot. One thing that kills us is the prep rules. If you take a Z car, it puts out about 140-150 hp stock. When you blueprint it it puts out 210 hp. You take a 944 that puts out 157 and blue print it and it puts out 158 hp. The Porsche engine is built well at the factory, so there is not much you can do to squeeze out much more power.

Anyway, as Dennis Miller says "that's just my opinion, I could be wrong."

Bill Seifert

Geo

I don't believe that figure for a second.

I hate it when people say this.

Jon Milledge gets 183 bhp from a IT prepped 944 engine.

I think it's more a matter that most people who build 944 NA engines just don't know what they are doing. Jon obviously does.

Bill L Seifert

There was a Z car written up in Grassroots Motorsports a few years ago,annd that's what the article said. I remember Cris Camadella running against Randy Shedd in the ARRC in 2002, and Shedd was sure pulling him on the straight, and Randy is good but he aint a top fiver in the SE. Camadella is suppose to be a top dog in the NE, and he has a Milledge car. By the way have you priced a Milledge engine? I have, and they are $15,000. I knew my reply would get a rise out of you, how's it going Geo. Now that I have your attention, The 944S has dual overhead cams like the BMW 325is, and both are in ITS. But the BMW 325 (I can't remember the letters on this car.) with single overhead cam is in ITA. But, your 944 and my 83 944 is still in ITS. I know you will say there is a single overhead cam BMW in ITS, but there is a 325 in ITA, John Dean's I and II run them in FLA. and their specs are almost identical to 944 8v's. But SCCA won't lower the 944, even though the S puts out 189 hp to the 8v's 157.

By the way Geo, I have not gotten that Porsche Tech Bulletin from Marcus yet, I will call him tomorrow, I had forgotten about it.

Bill

Geo

I have a really hard time believing that for one of those engines in IT spec. That design is pre-war! I just found that out from a good friend who is a Nissan engineer. I have no doubts a 240Z engine can make that hp. Just not in IT spec.

Yeah, but the 240Z weighs in at a diminutive 2430 lbs vs our 2715 lbs. I suspect that has more to do with it. Make our cars weigh something similar and nobody will touch us.

Hehe. It's going well Bill. I don't doubt that price at all. Out of my league. But price was not the issue. The issue is what you can get out of them. It's not at all uncommong for a top IT engine to run 5 figures.

There is no mechanism for lowering the weight of the 8v 944 (or any car) per the current rules. Let me just say that I'm aware of the situation and so are others. What may happen? No idea.

Okie dokie. It'll have to be soon though. I think we have to get our comments back to the Club Racing Board pretty soon.

dmoffitt

SCCA is afraid Porsche will do to it's races what it did in the heady days of 'yesteryear' (absolutely dominating the world of road-racing, period)... and it's a valid fear. on the other hand, the "supposed" favoratism to other makes (ahem, mazda) isn't quite a fair accusation, but it's definately there, whether by their intent or just out of coincidence, i wouldn't dare say.

Geo

Personally, I think some of this is true. Porsches tend to perform better than other cars with similar specs. I'm having a discussion with some folks about this very issue right now. Is it fair? I guess that depends upon your point of view.

But, the other side of this I also believe to be true, probably equally as much as "the SCCA hates Porsches" is that a great many Porsche owners won't get out there and race against other makes unless the rules favor them, much like the factory today.

Despite have a poor power to weight ratio, the 944 is still a pretty reasonable car for ITS today. We can argue about the E36 BMW all we like, but pretty much everybody is annoyed with that classification (except those who drive one). Take the E36 out of the equation and the 944 is still viable in ITS, albeit not a consistent winner.

Now, the 944S OTOH looks like a serious contender on paper. Same weight as the E36 with other specs being pretty reasonably close. It's expensive, but so is the E36 if you want to win.

Back to "the SCCA hates Porsches" and "Porsche owners won't race unless the rules favor them" discussion. I was really shocked when I bought my car. I thought I'd have a ton of info available on building a 944 to ITS specs and that there would almost be a receipe for doing it. Not so. It made me wonder "why the hell don't people race this car?"

James Achard

The SCCA made no secrets of their dislike for Porsche in the '70s and 80's. While there are always two sides to the story, the SCCA makes everything about racing difficult, IMO. The rulebook is like reading legaleze. I couldn't even find my car classified or begin to figure out how. I e-mailed the local chapter and got a very rude response to the questions I asked. After that, I gave up :-(... I know this is probably just my luck of the draw but it was a pretty big turn off for me. I equate this to the good and bad regions we have in PCA, I guess we are lucky on the East Coast to have a very good local region that fully supports track events and Club Racing.

Cheers, James

M758

James I think you have answered Geo's question.

Why do Porsche guys not race SCCA? Because we can race PCA or POC (west coast) or just due PCA DE.

Porsche folks overall a blessed with many different places we CAN race our cars so why not chose the one with least red tape and more percieved advantage.

Of course I race some PCA, but mostly NASA?

Why? ... Well in my case, Less red tape, better rules classification in spec cars, & local events with other cars.

Geo,
There are alot of guys that want to race 944's Look at the growth of 944-cup and 944-spec. I know 95% of the spec cars a new race cars and 90% of drivers are new racers. I can only guess that 944-cup has greater percentage of existing cars and drivers, but they are growing too.

Back in the day there was only SCCA. Still is for most "other" car drivers. Now there are more and more choices. I think this will make all org better.

I do think SCCA has problem in ITS. Classing both the 8v and 16v 944 with only 100lbs or so weigth different makes it tough for any 8v car. Then again there are ALOT of cars in that situation. In some sense IT racing has become too popular for its own good. All the popularity brings in more intense racers with greater desire to win. Therefore prep levels increase as does the money.

In the racing world the 944 is in odd position. On one hand is not really a Porsche. It is not traditional racing 911 with all its factory derived parts and 40 years of racing development. So in some sence they are really underdeveloped cars especially from a Porsche perspective. Then again it is a Porsche and as such has qualities that can make it faster than power and weight numbers might suggest.

Its motor is not very responsive to simple power enhancement that other cars seem to benefit from. Porsche built the motors pretty good so there is little hp just waiting to be found. Then again since the car has had a limited racing carrer in factory support and private racing little has been done to find the limits.

Of course from sheer engine performance standpoint the biggest power limiter of the 944 NA is the 951. So many people just figure that if you want power just go with 951. The only people that want to make power with 944 NA are either stupid or in 2.5L NA racing class.

So go back the limited racing of the car and realization that you will need spend big money to get 20-30hp where as in an econobox you can spend 1/2 that since the factory left so much on the table or the engine is much later design. Remember the 944 motor is 70's vintage and really a design revision of the 928 V8. Maybe if they started fresh on an I-4 motor rather than using the 928 base their might be a little more power out there for the taking.

Even so the 944 does make an excellent racing platform. I believe in fact that it COULD have been far better than the 911 in racing if the Porsche has wanted to develop it further. Since the 911 has done so well however there was no need for Porsche to spend the effort to race develop the 944 platform. Of course we as 944 drivers and race prep shops are then left to make-up the gap.

Oddly I sometimes think that the 944 line would have been much faster race and street cars had they not been Porshce's. Reason is that 911 since the late 60's has been THE PORSCHE. When you say Porsche the 911 shape comes to mind. So the 944 line and 928 line have been in it shadows. Had another car company made the 944 or 928 they would have been company stars. They would have gotten all the factory attention and aftermarket enthusaist support. If for example you compare the 944 to the 240Z. The Z was the flagship Datsun/Nissan and therefore carry the company banner. The 944 was "entry level" eventhough it is pretty darn good entry. In fact in the mid 80 the 951 was arguablly the best Porsche track car of the day. The 928 was THE GT car of is day and still the 911 was the car the was the Porsche flagship. As flaghship it gathered all the attention from the racing factory and public. I'd bet 911 focused race shops out number 944 shops 10 to 1. Of course 911 shops out number 944 NA shops 50:1 since they only 944 car ever really raced was the 951.

So... In some we have what we have and we race where we race.

sorry for rambling......

924RACR

Ha. You think you got it bad, try finding a race shop that'll even TALK about racing 924's in anything less than full GT prep. I've got a short list of 2, and neither are "Porsche" shops.

But I agree with the general tack about the SCCA's history with P-cars; I've got a request in to see if that's changed at all...

Geo

Yeah, but why so few in SCCA. I understand that there are options, but you would think more folks would take up the challenge to race against other marques.

I think the emphasis is on the perceived advantage. OK, some of that is simple human nature and makes sense. But again, I would think there would be more people who would enjoy the challenge of racing against other marques. Then there is the fact that in a spec class there is theoretically no advantage. Why not race someplace where you can capitalize on the advantages your car has over others?

But this just emphasizes my point. Folks say the SCCA hates Porsches. Some folks would say Porsche drivers don't like the SCCA because they get no clear advantage.

As for my comment on why nobody races the cars, Spec 944 and 944 Cup have come about after I acquired my car. Prior to that I could find few racing 944s. And those two classes have more in commong with PCA and POC since there are no other marques to compete against.

Indeed. As I said when Spec 944 and 944 Cup were being developed, don't hold your breath that this won't happen in these classes. I heard the same things from the SE-R Cup drivers, yet this is already happening. In 944 Cup, ITS cars are allowed, so there is zero reason to expect that the same level of money won't eventually be spent there. Spec Miata is already running into cars with huge dollars spent. Sure you can race a car with less invested, but then you're probably still mid-pack, so what have you gained? Nothing.

I still don't see anything new here. So the factory didn't do all the development work? So what? Most factories don't. Most race car development is done by independents. So where is the 944 development?

This is old BS. It's just plain not true. The problem is, nobody is doing any meaningful development besides Jon Milledge. I was talking with a buddy of mine who is an aftermarket performance parts consultant (among other things) about headers. A header manufacturer we know is thinking about trying different markets and I suggested the 944 if they do so. Along the way he asked for cam specs and when I sent them, he said no wonder a header doesn't do anything. He thinks he could really breath new life into these things if he were to get invovled. I'm not holding my breath since he has way more work than he can handle.

Anyway, the point is this old line is garbage. If Jon Milledge can get 183 bhp out of an engine in IT spec (very mild) then this old line is pure BS. Nobody is willing to put up the money. This BS is a self fulfilling prophecy.

Again horsepucky. Why does the factory have to do all the work? Lots of cars get tremendous development without the factory's support.

Now this I buy. I agree. However, it's not the whole story either. I think that self fulfilling prophecy about how wonderful a job Porsche did with these engines plays into this big-time.

Again I don't buy it. Shoot, the Nissan SR20DE engine is a later engine, but the factory left less on the table with these engines than the 944 and we can get over 200 hp at the wheels NA and it came with 140 bhp stock. This is with 2 liters I might add.

As for having to spend a bundle of money to get the gains, that's the same everywhere, so that doesn't wash. I put $6k into my SR20DE engine to get the best that was available at the time (175 whp). How many people even have cams for their 944?

So what? The Nissan L24 engine in the 240Z is a pre-war design for God's sake and they are getting more out of them than people are getting out of the 944 engines. Or at least as much. And it's pre-war!

I'm not trying to diss Porsche or the 944. But some of the ideas and attitudes out there just keep the car from being developed further. That and a lack of willingness to spend the money.

James Achard

See my post above, The rulebook makes figuring out Taleban law easy. I would LOVE to race against other marques but when I get rude responses as to how my car would be classed, I get the sense I'm not wanted(I'm pretty easy going but this guy was a bit out of line, how does that speak to the rest of the local region?) I guess I should try again but I will need someone to translate the rulebook

Cheers, James