When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Once again I find myself looking around to check whether I'm in the right forum...
This is Rennlist, right. Not Ricelist.
Tell me what is remarkable about being one of the millions of other faceless nameless lemmings that will run out and buy a new equally faceless nameless econosh!tbox this year. What level of passion or commitment does owning one require, other than signing a bunch of paperwork and agreeing to make a monthly car payment. How many new cars will folks still be enthusiastic about in 30 years? Most of them are appliances, not sports cars. And, a CVT?? Hide the razor blades.
Okay, okay, I guess it's fair to make comparisons. When we start suggesting that newer cars are categorically "better" than these cars we're allegedly passionate about, is when I start getting concerned.
They might be able to outperfom our old transaxles in some respects, but they'll be otherwise unremarkable while doing so.
We should not think the 944 is better just because it's our tribe, there should be real reasons IMO. If I were looking at a 944, an Impreza 2.5RS, a Celica GTS and a Focus ZX-3 there should be some good reasons to pick the 944 (or one of the other options) and it should not be forbidden to talk about them on the 944 Forum. I've had 6 924/44/68 cars so obviously I like 'em OK.
I do not think people are saying the newer cars are "better" but faster in some cases, preferable in some cases. Better value? Depends, often not. Better looking? Nope.
lol, my 20 year old automatic Subaru will walk a stock 944 NA...
0-60 is measured on a calendar
Originally Posted by morghen
So where did you pull that from? Lets talk numbers eh?
A new good econobox has like 150hp today but weighs like 1.5 metric tons.
So thats 10kg/1hp in a peak hp machine that has a milion emission control things so power delivery is squinted until that redline max hp number.
The 944 on the other hand makes 150hp(in its ****ty early US trim) and weighs 1.25 metric tons.
So thats 8.3kg/1hp (7.6kg/1hp for european ones) from a larger engine with no emission control other than a catalisator.
I have driven a few econoboxes...a 150hp 1.4 turbocharged VW, some 150hp turbo diesel audis, and a 190hp 3 series bmw....all new cars...the bmw is actually not so much of an econobox.
I dont own a 944 nor i plan to, but i dont remember it being slow.
And my 931, not my GTS wannabe, my almost factory spec 931 with 170hp(back in 1980) will shame the 190hp bmw.
I actually did a small test...and the 190hp bmw wont reach the same speed the 931 does on the same road in the same conditions.
The diffefence is actually not small, its about 30kph less. The 931 does 230 in the same place where the bmw struggles to crawl to 200.
I immagine the 944 should be not too far behind the 931.
so...OD, you're part of the people who got sold into the new is good....so you're sort of brainwashed.
Not completely tho, the new engines could be phenomenal..if they were left to breathe....but they are not...so they are slow.
If you're like this now, I can't imagine what you'll be like after you get this so-called V8 running....
in the weeks that followed, i was able to back it up w/ my 2nd greatest ever:
The 7 Stages of Porsche 944T ownership;
Originally Posted by odurandina
despite the 928's high top end, i think the 944 Turbo Cup cars in full tune were measurably, superior to the 928S4, and their combination of speed and handling made them a true '80s supercar equal to the Ferrari 288GTO – exceeded only by the arrival of the 959 and F-40 (which blew the doors off everything, of course)....
the 944Ts were very good. and still are.
sadly, over time, many of the 944Ts have been neglected...
and if you get one that was*neglected, *(code word for run very hard) it can be one of the worst ****boxes ever.
luckily, most of the owners find the Parts Guy....
and after he cuts up a bunch of cars, a few can be saved....
otherwise, i'm not convinced these cars are aging well.
think about these things – and regain perspective.
for those who aren't so lucky....
the 7 stages of ownership usually goes something like this.....
1. uber enthusiasm. "i just got me a P O R S C H E !!" for pennies.
2. tuning envy. saving up to spend a few dozen thousand dollars and what
3. delusional.... "will absolutely become the greatest P-car ever...."
4. apologist; making a thousand excuses on behalf of Porsche (to any and all posting their latest calamities on RL), and saying, (endlessly), galactically stupid things like; 'hey, if you do the routine mantenance the cars are great....." "oh, you f_cked up somewhere..... that's the only reason why it could have broke..... (under poster's breath; explitive/dumbass."
5. fed up..... for f_ck's sake, i got $40 k invested, what's another $10 or 15 K ??..... even though you know full well that throwing more money into the pit might not solve anything.....
6. utterly, totally broke.... wife preparing divorce papers, "i coulda had a new Cayman, and been one of the beautiful people, instead of trying to beat the forces of nature and the illuminati/country club crowd..." etc....
7. throwing in the towel.... suffered yet another blow, or worse, BANG !! .... you were hoping to get a few thousand outa 'her' to pay for a room (see #6) but now you're broke and the car has become another scrap roller...
now the wall of shame on RL;
and the somber words that you've heard so DOZENS and DOZENS OF times before, despite that you always thought it would be the other guy;
"yeah, getting out.... got a kid on the way, bigger house, wifey want's a pool (for her new bf and the kids), lots of other plans now,"
—all included in your final post on the Turbo forum....
of course, you'll be back from time to time, making the odd appearance here and there..... maybe offer a bit of keen advice to the newbies and others (at various stages of their own 944T cataclysms), talking about the good times, broken knuckles and how fast the cars are once all the go-fast parts are in and tuning is all squared away....
but,
to be fair, there are similar stories with many Porsche's.
and a few success stories with the 4 cylinder platform *(video).
here's another of those: a very fast 944T (running Cup Car tune for the street).
it can be done, but the lifespan of a motor such as this, will likely be measured in hours......
Ye but that aint no econobox and i bet it has a turbo..if it does not, do a test and let us know the results.
Nope...
2.5L N/A, DOHC with a raging 165hp in 1997.
205,000 miles...
AWD, 4-speed auto and a 4.44 diff ratio.
I haven't actually tested against a stock 944 (though I could arrange that soon) but I wouldn't be surprised if it smoked the Porsche...
But the Subie tops out at 90mph
Nope...
2.5L N/A, DOHC with a raging 165hp in 1997.
205,000 miles...
AWD, 4-speed auto and a 4.44 diff ratio.
I haven't actually tested against a stock 944 (though I could arrange that soon) but I wouldn't be surprised if it smoked the Porsche...
But the Subie tops out at 90mph
We should not think the 944 is better just because it's our tribe, there should be real reasons IMO. If I were looking at a 944, an Impreza 2.5RS, a Celica GTS and a Focus ZX-3 there should be some good reasons to pick the 944 (or one of the other options) and it should not be forbidden to talk about them on the 944 Forum. I've had 6 924/44/68 cars so obviously I like 'em OK.
I do not think people are saying the newer cars are "better" but faster in some cases, preferable in some cases. Better value? Depends, often not. Better looking? Nope.
-Joel.
I agree, I think some people are too blinkered ...
If the question is how great do the Transaxles drive, feel, look, great to work on, and sound etc.. I can't think of anything better.
But this doesn't mean some modern cars are not faster, many other cars do drive quick on the road, and excel in some characteristics as the Porsche does, maybe not all but enough to make them quick road cars.
Over the last 16 years I've owned 9 transaxles and a 986 3.2S,+ 200bhp BMW Diesel's, Lotus Elan's, 928 V8, Honda CRX, Celica VVTi, etc..
I 've also driven loads of other Porsche's and also jumped in and out of M3's , 911's, Aston Martin's, Lotus, Audi RS6 and more...all this experience gives a good insight and comparison to any other car 40, 30 ,20 ,10 years old and also Brand new stuff...
Sure a lot of new stuff drives so isolated and numb, and modern electronics and drivers aids have taken away the Raw feelings like the 924 chassis transmits, which is why they are still loved..
There's nothing unmodern, unepic or turdy about a 944/968 running a proper v8. everyone who's attempted to run a 944 or 968 near full power is eventually left with a considerable amount of soul searching. there's no one here who'll tell you there's anything better than driving a 944/968 running big power. so then, why are there so many serious tuners from the past 7 or 8 years, GONE from the 944 platform and forum?
the rumble or any measurable "harshness" or "street-rodness" of a non-family v8 swap is nonexistent. it's less than any 968 motor running a performance exhaust.... You guys talk smack, about this thing being an unnatural thing that must transform the 968 into an unholy, big Camaro type of thing. it's nothing of the sort. the LS v8 adds about 25 lbs to the car... what are you doing when you go to a big turbo engine? ...my headlight mod removed most of that weight. the next logical step would be changing to a composite hood. it's just taking everything we love about our cars, adding big power over a long smooth curve, then tying it all together.
There's nothing bastard about, at least, the powe delivery it from a black box perspective; even a 924 S platform is perfect for this level of power! The key is staying away from an LT1, not stroking over the 3.622", and not skimping on anything.
i started with a 968, and began adding my touches. upon being in love with my car, the same as you all are with your particular rides, i looked into the cost/s and complexities of a 3.0 turbo 968 running at full power vs a decent swapped LSx. after consulting with many listers, including Turbo Guy #1, 2, 3, 4.... Tony G and XS Chop, the v8 seemed like the correct choice. i decided on the short stroke LS7 concept very early on. later on, i came to discover it was the combination used in the world record setting Ultimate Aero, built off the Lamborghini Diablo platform. (only i'm not running turbos).
Originally Posted by Highly Esteemed 944 Cup Car Guy
The LSx conversion is the way to go for sure. And anybody that says it's not a Porsche is full of it. The 924 runs an Audi engine and trans (almost all of them). The 944/968 runs an Audi trans. And there is a whole slews VW and Audi part numbers that cross reference all over the entire generation of the 924/944/968.
And if Porsche built a 944 engine worth a crap there would be a LOT more 944's racing and the need to put in a real engine would never exist in the first place.
You can knock it. But until you drive one you have no idea what you're missing.
I've raced a LSx 951 since 2006 and it's been the most reliable, most fun race car that I've ever driven. And I've beat a TON of new GT3's and Cup Cars in the process over the years in the GT classes.
That said, I ditched my street based LSx 951 race car (still street legal BTW) and built a full-tilt pro built 951 race car with a LSx engine. Built by none other than the builder of ORCA himself (which BTW was the car he built before ORCA, and then went back to him to take to the level necessary to beat new Cup Cars).
Last edited by odurandina; 10-31-2016 at 08:32 PM.
of dis-interest. ( watching paint dry on a fender, used oil drain in a pan .... much more rewarding. But I have been accused as a pedantic by others, so don't mind me, I'm just over here having a moment :
That was after the ride in my '89 - M030 about 30 minutes ago /-;}
and it was a ride in a proper Porsche
10-31-2016, 12:30 PM
