I DO buy that the civil war football game between the Ducks & The Beavers just might be a good one this year. ;)

I DON'T buy that a "proper" 2.4 S can go 165...nor do I buy that a "proper" 2.4 S engine can consistantly rev to an actual 8500 RPM and live very long...

Haven't been following what's up lately on this thread- it's getting so long in the tooth!
so... has $100 been gathered up to see if 8500 rpm at willow will occur on the 15th?
What's with the dyno deal? Has exec accepted for an appointment at a dyno as well?

Randy & I have each pledged $25 to help Dan Beyers pay track expenses. Can't recall if anybody else has pledged as well.

I'm on for the dyno run. Anything involving the old crappy tach is bs, and we all know that. Tell me where to send a check, or how to paypal funds!

I'm in for $25.00.

[1] if 'on' means willing to chip in $25, then we have $100 so far.

[2] Analogously... since I have degrees from both UO & OSU, I cannot lose in the civil war....

[3] I examine two equations quations (I recognize that X-ech does not like them) for hp required to overcome drag. They predict that about 165 to 170 hp will be required to overcome the drag of a 911 at 165 mph. 1st, that is hp at the rear wheels, and 2nd, one would have to add on about 8-10 hp for rolling resistance. So you'd need a fair amount of engine power, more than the motor, as advertised, would have - but not by a lot. The motor apparently is hot-rodded so 165 could thus be a question of gearing. I do not know whether these equations are semi-empirical or not. Surely they cannot be derived from first principles, since the general equations for fluid flow have never been analytically solved.

It would do 165 MPH if that engine was in a 914. I still have stock gears and I have big tall 16" tires. :D

So Randy, I take it you're going to root for the Ducks during one half, and the Beavers in the other? Maybe have a special jersey sewn up, green & yellow on one side, orange & black on the other. ;)

Keep in mind when figuring drag...this is a Targa, with lid off???

I did 130 today....(around 5500 rpm Not that this thread cares about speed vs rpm)....and then I remembered....I have my cheap around town tires on!......BACK IT ON DOWN BABY....

I was going to look at a new Porsches and got excited.

Maybe stripes...
I usually prefer that the Ducks win.


I don't have the data for a de-roofed targa so it's an estimate.

165/8500
 

After getting thru 26 pages I can add to this thread. I have been a passenger in Execmalibu's 911s and the first thing that struck me while we were driving down the PCH on our way to Ventura was the way it just whipped through the gears. Indeed, before I knew it we were up to 90 in 3rd. I believe there is something unusual with regard to the motor in this car.

When Tony (of TLG) kindly rebuilt the motor in my 70S (stroked 2.4 etc) I was thrilled with the performance and still am, however I can say that it just doesn't pull quite like Jeff's.

I'll be there at Willow Springs if it's still on and I'll have my money on Jeff's claims for anyone who wants to match me. It's remarkable to me that it takes such an effort to raise $100 after all this hyperbole. It still remains that from what I can see, there have been a few reputable members that can validate the initial claims.

See y'all at the track, Thomas

Re: 165/8500
 

I believe that is what everyone has said. No "stock motor" would do what the claims suggest.

Furthermore, I offered to take him up on the 930 bet waaaay back, though admittedly he would have to transport to Florida to win his $100.

Then it was clarified, the 8500 rpm is just "over the 8000" mark and only during gear changes (not running all day at 8500), the 165 mph was in a draft, and the 930's were stock - and probably pre-intercooler.SmileWavy

"clarified" isn't really the right term...

"I'll have my money on Jeff's claims..." -- one first has to figure out what they are. The ad is certainly more than a little misleading, if not fraudulent.

But -hey - if that's what it takes to get an executive house in Mali boo...

+1 Randy's legal mind speaks...

Some family and work issues have raised their ugly heads today that will keep me from attending this Wednesday. I am sorry I will not make this event but it is just not going to happen.

em - you have pm.

So.. i heard from execmalibu and he is ready to run this wednesday. Who is going to be there with the $100 ?

I'll try to make it. If I do, my $100 is going on execmalibu.

I've heard from far too many people - away from this miserable thread - talk about his car's potential. And the ones who have been talking, routinely build motors that rev to 8,500 RPM.

Would if I could.

165 mph...

Isn´t that almost early 993 territory ? Or at the very least 964 ? Or maybe I mixed up the numbers.

Looking forward to Wednesday.

Dan Byers..
 

Dan,

Just because I refused your very generous offer to pay my Track fees and a for tank of racing fuel does not let you worm out of the deal!






You still owe me the first round at Outback! :)

For the record I have dusted off my Helmet and Nomex racing suit but to date I have not had one person step up to my challenge!

I have cleared my schedule for the 15th and need to know the names of the people that are going to "NUT UP" the $100 each for my challenge. I had planned on making bank on the 15th...

I will not accept a bunch of you each putting in your lunch money against my $100. I stood up and said "LETS ROCK" and offered my $100 bill against anyones $100 (not $20 each) but so far out of 25,350 hits not even one of you guys has the balls to accept the challenge! Exactly what they told me would happen... This is put up or shut up time GIRLS!

To re-establish the bet! The rules are I get your $100 if the engine pulls well past the 8,00RPM mark on the factory tach during the first 3 shifts!. There will be no doubt about the 8,500 RPM being real because you will hear the scream of the engine!

Then again if there are no takers then why am I waisting my time to drive 6 hours to the track at Willow? The guys who are going (TLG Tony+Marco, TRE Dave and Thomas) have already seen the results in the past.

For the 2.4 Liter nay sayers. I CCed 2 barrels and got a reading of 390-395ML in 3 attempts.. 395ML X 6= 2,370ML/CC That means the engine is in fact a 2.4 liter!

So why did Porsche offer a 180MPH/300KPH speedo and a 10,000 RPM tach in 1973 if it was imposibble to attain those numbers?..

Maybe I missed this in the verbiage, but did he just weasel out of a dyno run?