RE: SOTW: Porsche 944 track car
Discussion
angusc43 said:
Or is it just too far gone
You'd have to look at the sills, but generally if the outer has gone the inner has gone and replacing both properly costs about £1,000 per side(? I think) if you pay a specialist to do it. Looks like just the outer Sill has had a ropey repair in the photo, so you'd have to wonder how strong the car is structurally.angusc43 said:
Don't understand the negativity.
A mate of mine has built up a 944 track car and absolutely loves it. He says he carries massive cornering speed. He needed to do something after he spanked his 964 RS one time too many and decided to cosset it.
As a cheap track slag, surely this makes sense?
Or is it just too far gone
Track slag makes sense but this one seems very ropey for a grand. Ebay's full of cheap ones and it wouldn't be difficult to match this guys 'track modifications' yourself. If it had a cage etc or it looked like a good one things would be different.A mate of mine has built up a 944 track car and absolutely loves it. He says he carries massive cornering speed. He needed to do something after he spanked his 964 RS one time too many and decided to cosset it.
As a cheap track slag, surely this makes sense?
Or is it just too far gone
That isnt a 'track car', its a tatty old early 944 which failed its MOT. There are scores of these cars, which are worn out and have ragged interiors, kicking about and touted as something theyre not.
Taking out the shredded and smelly trim does not a track car make.
It is a shed, but not in the way that you intended!
Taking out the shredded and smelly trim does not a track car make.
It is a shed, but not in the way that you intended!
Riggers said:
My information tells me that before '88 2.5s had 150hp, but looking at it again I think that might be American-market figures. Curses.
Most 'information' uses American market figures. Try looking up the figures for a 1989 2.7l 8v 944 - you probably cant, because the model wasnt exported to America. Unfortunately these incorrect American specifications seem to have permeated to the extent that buying parts in England for a 2.7l can be difficult as it doesnt appear on anyone fitment lists...Garlick said:
Garlick will you please stop posting that. I have been having unhealthy thoughts about investing in a tracktoy and that particular one looks sooo good but I need to save money for a house move right now and you aren't helping in the slightest. 
braddo said:
You get the impression that the sills look terminally bad.
But, early 944s appeal to me because of their lower weight. How easy (or not) would it be to drop the 3.0 from a S2 into an early 944? It ought to make for a pretty rapid little car.
Far from easy and the additional weight (which isnt a great deal) comes principally from their electric seats. Having weighed many 944s I can tell you that the lighter earlier figures were for poverty spec German cars too, making the weight difference far less than people expect.But, early 944s appeal to me because of their lower weight. How easy (or not) would it be to drop the 3.0 from a S2 into an early 944? It ought to make for a pretty rapid little car.
I weighed a lightweight sunroofless (with light seat, no other seats, no radio or speakers, fixed windows, no sound deadening, plastic windows inc hatch, GRP panels) 944 a few years ago and it came to well over 1,100kgs. I weighed my fully optioned 944 Turbo on the same bridge last week and it came to 1,400kgs exactly.
The series one car that everyone lauds as lightweight was only a few tens of kilos lighter than the 951!
Hammerhead said:
<bobble hat twitches>
The 137mph max is (presumably) gearing, so my point holds. The aerodynamic efficiency of the 924 body (more of an advantage at higher speeds) gives the advantage getting to the ton, as you say the weight difference is largely academic. One second quicker (0.9s if you are going to be pedantic) would be quite noticeable in a drag race. Rumblestripe said:
and were consequently quicker than the fatter (heavier and less aerodynamically slippery) 944.
Eh-eeeeer! I've just consulted the bible of frontrunner performance figures ('Porsche 924,944 & 968: A Collectors Guide' ISBN 1899870474) and the 924S and 944 (2.5) both completed the 0-60 dash in 7.4 secs. The 924S was marginally quicker to 100mph, recording 20.1 secs vs 21.0 for the 944. Both reached a maximum of 137mph. 924S weighed 1164kg vs 1195kg for the 944, so not a lot in it overall.Rumblestripe said:
Raises collar on anorak and exits discussion...
You need to iron those creases in your Farahs a bit sharper And as both the 944 and 924S got the 160bhp 2.5 (detuned from 163) the differentiation had gone. I think this was the runout model for the 924 and was more about economical production than model differentiation?
GC8 said:
Far from easy and the additional weight (which isnt a great deal) comes principally from their electric seats. Having weighed many 944s I can tell you that the lighter earlier figures were for poverty spec German cars too, making the weight difference far less than people expect.
I weighed a lightweight sunroofless (with light seat, no other seats, no radio or speakers, fixed windows, no sound deadening, plastic windows inc hatch, GRP panels) 944 a few years ago and it came to well over 1,100kgs. I weighed my fully optioned 944 Turbo on the same bridge last week and it came to 1,400kgs exactly.
The series one car that everyone lauds as lightweight was only a few tens of kilos lighter than the 951!
Useful, thanks. I weighed a lightweight sunroofless (with light seat, no other seats, no radio or speakers, fixed windows, no sound deadening, plastic windows inc hatch, GRP panels) 944 a few years ago and it came to well over 1,100kgs. I weighed my fully optioned 944 Turbo on the same bridge last week and it came to 1,400kgs exactly.
The series one car that everyone lauds as lightweight was only a few tens of kilos lighter than the 951!
This looks a bit of a dog TBH. Mine will be up for sale shortly. Mine has had the sills rebuilt inners & out. The sunroof works etc. It also comes with spare bonnet, doors, badge panel, front PU. New 968 Castor bushes & a box of other misc. parts. It is on S2 brakes & legs & comes with a spare set of s2 brakes. Depending on what it sells for I'll chuck in a complete belt, seals & top hat kit which is £300!
ajprice said:
Hammerhead said:
150 horses? 
All 2.5 na's were churning out 163 horses from the factory (165 for the later 2.7)
Porsche facts matter
As to the above, I'm oooot.
How many of those 150/163/165 horses will have escaped in the last 28 years though? All 2.5 na's were churning out 163 horses from the factory (165 for the later 2.7)Porsche facts matter
As to the above, I'm oooot.
More stupid uses of Top Gear'isms. So based on the results of three knackered supercars everyone now thinks that all engines must lose loads of power over their life. This simply isn't true and I've tested engines with 200,000 miles on them that come within 1hp of a factory figure on two different rolling roads.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff