I have been racing only 944 based cars since 2000 and have won at several Eastern tracks. I'm not trying to say 'I'm the best' but at least I'm reasonably competitive. I think our 944spec car can and will be faster with fine adjustments to the suspension, etc.

In no particular order here are some points to consider:
1. I class is very competitive on the East coast and in PCA(read lax enforcement), some cars are more equal than others. Hence my desire to run 944spec
2. Until we have enough 944spec cars and drivers pushing each other to the max, we don't know how they will ultimately compare to I class car.
3.The 944 I class car that I have won with uses 8" & 9" Fuchs with 225 &245 Hoosiers. One new set for the start of qualifying and used to race on. It will be interesting to see this cars times this year versus my times in the spec car.

Is it February yet! Sebring....

Bill

 

I will be very interested to see how lap times improve as more cars are built and raced. Close competition breeds faster drivers. May times I have been driving as fast as I though I could only to pressed either by cars going faster or by cars catching up to my speed that have caused me to push even harder. Once you think you simply can't go faster use less brakes and see if you stay on the road. You will see a gain. Then adjust the line a couple feet here and there to optimize for the car. You will see a gain. Then tweak the chassis a bit more and you will see another gain. Before you know it that effort of push push push will net one more second that you though possible.

 

Richard,

Coilovers are PCA legal in the rear of all 944 to 968 cars, so double your moton budget. The I class cars have some advantages as previously listed, wheels and tires, but can also use Upper front stress bar, fiberglass aerodynamic front Turbo style bumpers with no parking lights etc.(a big advantage at Daytona), fiberglass short Euro rear bumper. The use of a 2.7 does have a weight penalty but the added torque out of the corners and Hp to overcome aerodynamic drag are beneficial.

Bill

 

Joe, a definitive statement, well said!

Bill

 

Bill,

My brother and I have been running an 87 944T on street tires at Brainerd for the last couple of years and have been running an 89 Turbo with around 280 rwh and street tires in Phoenix for the past year. Then two weeks ago I bought a Spec 944 and ran it at Phx International last weekend with Joe and the other 944 Spec guys giving me lots of advice. I can tell you that I was turning faster laps right off the bat in the Spec car and felt more comfortable and stable in it than I ever did in the Turbo. Also, at Brainerd you will never have enough horsepower to be the fastest car there unless you have an unlimited budget. With that one-mile front straight and the 1/2 mile back straight the high horsepower cars are going to get you no matter what unless you are driving a very high dollar car. I think you made a great decision with going with the Spec 944 and that will be more than happy with it when you get it on the track. You will still arrive at turn #1 at 125 or so and if yo uare on Toyos or Hoosiers you won't be lifting for the turn in. And from the time you start braking that Spec 944 into turn #3 until you squirt out of turn 9 on the back you will have a very big grin on your face! Have fun with the Spec car and I'll look for you at Brainerd next summer and let you tell me how you like it.

 

Bill,

I'm all for it. But, the PCA stock class rule specifies that: "D. Spring type must remain as supplied by the factory".

If a 924/944 "I" car utilized rear torsion bars (and no rear springs) when manufactured, how is it legal to run coil overs and remain in the stock class?

 

You tell me, there are ALOT of F and E class 944s running rear coilovers as a "supplement" to the torsion bar

 

Well an F class 944 with suspension and brake prep would move up a class and become an "E" car, no?

The 968 M030 utilized "helper" springs over the rear shocks with torsion bars. So, you could run rear coilovers with zero (?) indexed torsion bars (viz., the bars are just extra weight - they're non-functional). I don't know whether in certain years the M030 option on the 944 also incorporated "helper" springs. If they did, then coilovers would be legal on those cars as well.

You're certainly correct, that a lot of 944/951s run with coilovers. So, they must be legal on some (if not all) of those cars. I don't know enough about the 944/951 options to know what's allowed (per the PCA stock class rules) for those cars to remain in their original class.

 

Rear "helper" coil springs are allowed on all PCA stock class 944 series cars, as long as the torsion bars are still used. Keeping the t-bars has been interpreted by PCA to meet the "Spring type must remain as supplied by the factory" requirement.

 

I have been informed that rear coilovers are permitted as there was a 944 factory "tow package" option that included rear coil helper springs.

 

Of course I doubt anyone has even seen the "factory tow package", but still it has been long established that the 944 chassis can run rear coil overs, but must keep the t-bars. Seems that the t-bars can be machined down to virtually not spring rate, but they need to be there.

SP1 (944 spec) does not allow rear coilovers and limits rear t-bars to 30 mm maximum rate. This inturn limits the overall spring rates on the car and thus make it possible to run a stock Koni shock. These limits were put in place because you get 90% of the performance full up race suspension at a fraction of the cost. The same idea goes for the tires and limit on small wheels (15x7) and 225/50 toyos.

Remember PCA stock class rules are not primailry focused on cost containment. The basic idea in PCA Club Racing is costs are limited by the class you chose. IE.. I stock should be cheaper to run than B stock and the GT classes have no limits. However once in a particular stock class the mods are based on preserving the basic car and some semblence of streetability.

944-spec (SP1) rules however are focused on cost containment and equality of equipment. The idea is to keep the parts on the cars the same as much as possible, thus keeping the cars equal and to limit modifications to ensure the the best balance between cars that are fun to drive and race yet have low build and operating costs.

Those different ideals are the primary reasons the rules and prep are different between I-stock and SP1. There was no direct intent to make 944 spec cars faster than I cars, but more of a what are the cheapest ways we can make the cars fast, equal, and reliable. The rules for 944 spec were then created around those ideals.

 

Dave,

That explains it. My understanding is that if a feature was available as an option - even a euro or ROW option,(excluding, of course, factory prepared race cars), you can use it for the stock classes.

So, assuming rear springs comprised part of that 924/944 "tow package" option, there's your PCA legal coilovers.

Which raises another question. Given the fiction of retaining the rear torsion bars (they're there, but they don't do nothin'), wouldn't a logical PCA rule change for the 924/944/968 be to allow full coilovers AND permit deleting the t-bars? I understand that it's too late for this year, but such a rule would make sense, no?

 

2007 rules changes for the 944 Cup and SP2 and 3 will reflect such a change. We found it to be one of those fairly meaningnless rules that would be unrealistic to determine complaince at the track and served primarily to aggravate racers in car prep.

 

Dave,

Am I correct in my reading of PCA's statement on SP-3, (and SP-1 & 2, I suppose), that the specs for club racing are the 944cup specs? In other words, were I to elect to compete in SP-3 instead of "F" class, my 968 would have to conform to the 944 "Supercup" specs? (e.g., a little lighter weight [3200lbs w/driver vs. 3100lbs sans driver], no passenger's seat, chip allowed)??

Thanks.

 

Yes, that is correct, SP 2 and 3 are the exact same rules as the 944 Cup and Super Cup.