3.2 conversion vs 951

[Nickalex86]

So here's the deal. I'm selling the '96 BMW 318i, which should bring in around 9-10k. With that money, I have played with the ideas of either converting my '70 2.2 to a 3.2 or investing in a 951 (944 turbo).

I love the way my car looks (yellow/black) and I love the way the flat six sounds. I admit that if I were to drive any other car I would miss the feel of the 911. But I also think it would be exciting to drive a modded 951.

Also, I'm afraid of my car. The other day I spun out of control in traffic when I tried to avoid a truck coming up in the lane I was merging into. There have been a couple occasions where I have lost the tail end of my car, and when it's wet, it's not hard to do at all. Besides, the 2.2 t engine just isn't doing it for me. It's time for more power. Should I opt for the conversion or the 951? How hard is it to do the conversion? My 911's body is in great shape, but the zenith carbs have been bugging me lately, It's a chore to tune them...

I realize I am posting this on the 911 board so most of you aren't 944 people but if anyone has compared the two please let me know what you think.

Thanks,
Nick

'70 911t

[Stuttgart951]

The 911 and the 951 are completely different cars. I suppose you need to ask yourself what you are looking to get out of the car. Im in the process of selling my 951 now, and Im looking to replace it with a nice 3.2L.

My reasoning is this: Quite frankly - the 951 is faster, handles better, and brakes better - its a track beast. But once you moddify it, its too fast for public roads (at least in my area). Hear me out here... the reason Im switching to a 3.2L is because A. Nothing feels quite like a 911 and B. Id like a car I can have a boatload of fun in at 70% of the limit on backroads without having to approach the sound barrier.

If you want a track car, its tough to beat a 951, but for a nice warm weather car, Id rather have a 911.

The 911 is more "fun" for me on backroads, but its nowhere near as capable as my 951 is - the acceleration is like a time warp.

It all comes down to what you want to do with the car. YMMV

[tshih]

Sounds to me you should take in some DE to learn how to drive a 911 well and safely before you go modifying your present car for more horsepower. If you are scaring yourself now what do you expect to do with more horses and the same wheels and brakes?

I've driven a 951 at the time I was trying to decide which new car to buy (1986) and it was a no brainer to pick the 1987 3.2 Carrera.

[cottonyzf]

I went from a modified 951 to a low mileage and completely stock 85 Carrera Targa. I do miss the power of the 951, but love the way the 911 handles, looks, sounds, and just enjoy the whole driving experience more. Plus the 911 is MUCH easier to work on IMO.

-Jeff

[racea911]

An early 911 with a 3.2, RS flares and some wider tires would be very tough for a 951 to outdo on a track. In the PCA and POC in California, the early 911's with 3.2's let the 951's know who their daddy is every race. It's interesting to hear that a 951 handles better and brakes better. I just watched the in car video of the POC V3 race at Laguna Seca from last year. There was a 951 with cockpit adjustable turbo boost that led a good part of the race. The 911's destroyed the 951 under braking and in the corners, where it appeared the 951 was trying to find a good parking space. Come the straightaways and the 951 driver would crank up the boost, disappear, and then get ready to park it in the next corner. The 2nd place (and 3rd and 4th) 911, finally got around the 951 and the 951 was never heard from again.

If you are comparing a modified 911 with a modified 951 that run in the same class, my money is on the 911. Lets not forget the heritage of Porsche's 911 racing program throughout the last 35 years. Lets compare that to the list of important races won by 944's and 951's.

Here is the list of important 944/951 motorsport victories:








Oh, by the way, this is definately written in fun ok?

[jhugh]

I think the perception that a stock 951 is quicker than a stock 3.2 is largely based on the feel of the turbo car... lag lag then BOOOOOST!! The 911 is smoother. Both are quick cars. A hot 3.2 in that light older 911 will certainly haul a$$. The 911 is much, much cooler!

If you stick with the 911 with more power, definitely get the car aligned, corner weighted and balanced. That made all the difference in mine. It's much more predictable and insanely grippy now.

Cheers,

[CJ]

My last Porsche was a modified 951. I have a slightly modified 87' 911 now. The 951 is really fast, is perfectly balanced, easy and a thrill to drive. She's the wild one that you don't take home to mom. Sleazy appeal and power.

The 911 is touchy with classy good looks. Responsivness proportional to the skill of driver. Sexy, powerful, time tested and true. Learn how to drive this one right, and you won't need the 951-IMVHO

[jaxon]

stuttgard951:

QUOTE]My reasoning is this: Quite frankly - the 951 is faster, handles better, and brakes better - its a track beast. But once you modify it, its too fast for public roads (at least in my area).[/QUOTE]

We are on the same page. After my 951 was modified the first words out of my mouth were: I'll never use all of this power. If I do I'll get arrested. Gee I thought I wanted alot of power, now that I have it when will I use it?

Respectfully disagree with some of the statements regarding modified 951. A PROPERLY modified 951 has more raw power than a stock 3.2 or 3.6. If you live in my area, I'll be happy to take you out for a drive. That being said, it is hard to find one that has really been well modified. It is also becoming increasingly difficult to find a 951 mechanically up to par.

I posted a similar thread last week. "Keep 951 or purchase'86 911". It may be of help.

As for me, I haven't made the final plunge yet...but suspect that I will. Why? 1. Change 2. Raw feeling of the pre -'90 911's. I like things that are simple, basic, and well made 3. I like the nervous nature of the 911 handling, more of a challenge 4. Always wanted one. 5. Speed is only one factor in any decision. Speed at what? quarter mile, half mile, 24 hour endurance, breaking.

Good luck!

[ChrisBennet]

Later 911's with more rubber (SC's, Carrera's) are less likely to swap ends. I wouldn't upgrade an early 911 to a 3.2 without adding more rubber i.e. flares if you are worried about spinning. I would have to try really hard to swap ends in my '86 911.

I've had 951's and my "other" car is a 944S2. The S2 is way easier to drive on the track. It's actually slightly faster at the end of the back straight at Watkins Glen even though the 911 is set up for the track and the 944 is stock and on street tires.

A stock 951 is a little faster than a 911 of the same year and it is a lot easier to make a 951 faster. I don't think anyone thinks it is a concidence that 951 horsepower was exactly the same as 911's of the same vintage. Porsche couldn't allow it have more power than the flagship 911. One might conclude that the 951 is artificially detuned a little.

As for the race results mentioned earlier. Comparing a 951 to 911's driven by better drivers is not a fair comparison.

Oh yeah, what was the question?
I only drive the 944 when I absolutely can't drive the 911. What's that tell you?
-Chris

[Stuttgart951]

Originally posted by jaxon




As for me, I haven't made the final plunge yet...but suspect that I will. Why? 1. Change 2. Raw feeling of the pre -'90 911's. I like things that are simple, basic, and well made 3. I like the nervous nature of the 911 handling, more of a challenge 4. Always wanted one. 5. Speed is only one factor in any decision. Speed at what? quarter mile, half mile, 24 hour endurance, breaking.

Good luck!

We do indeed seem to be on the same page. I agree however that you cant compare two cars with drivers that are so different in skill level - if one car is perceived to be "parking" through the corners, well... nevermind.

That said. I can type in words everythng I love about the 951... but I cant quite explain what it is I like about the 911... I just know there's "something" thats been tugging at me since I was about 6 years old... kinda like the one girl in college that you wish you wouldnt have let get away.

If I tried to explain it, Id be able to blurt out something regarding the air cooled flat 6 engine note... but thats about it.

In any event, I promise to wave at every waterpumper I see after I find my black 3.2L that ISNT already beat to chit.

[racea911]

Originally posted by ChrisBennet

As for the race results mentioned earlier. Comparing a 951 to 911's driven by better drivers is not a fair comparison.-Chris

I don't rememebr anyone saying that the drivers in the 911's were better than the drivers in the 951? How did YOU decide that was the case in the race that I cited? HOW DID THE 951 GET OUT FRONT IN THE RACE TO BEGIN WITH?

The problem with the 951's is the weight and the toll that weight takes on tires and brakes as a session gets longer. Sure you can qualify it in the front but can you save enough brakes and tires when you are continually slowing down that porker turn after turn, lap after lap. The answer is most oftentimes, no.

[ChrisBennet]

Originally posted by racea911
I don't rememebr anyone saying that the drivers in the 911's were better than the drivers in the 951? How did YOU decide that was the case in the race that I cited? HOW DID THE 951 GET OUT FRONT IN THE RACE TO BEGIN WITH?

The problem with the 951's is the weight and the toll that weight takes on tires and brakes as a session gets longer. Sure you can qualify it in the front but can you save enough brakes and tires when you are continually slowing down that porker turn after turn, lap after lap. The answer is most oftentimes, no.

I'm sorry if I misunderstood you. The way you said the 951 was parked in the corner sounded like poor driving.
-Chris

[Stuttgart951]

Jeez - do you guys have any idea how many 944 owners that lust after 911's are turned off by the model Nazi attitude? Come on... youre killing my enthusiasm here.

[racea911]

Originally posted by Stuttgart951

My reasoning is this: Quite frankly - the 951 is faster, handles better, and brakes better - its a track beast.

If you want a track car, its tough to beat a 951, but for a nice warm weather car, Id rather have a 911.

The 911 is more "fun" for me on backroads, but its nowhere near as capable as my 951 is - the acceleration is like a time warp.
. YMMV

I'm sorry if I don't just accept your above statements as fact. You think that you are going to get agreement with those statements on THIS 911 message board?

I'm surprised that a 944 guy would be turned off or shocked by a 911 guy who defends 911's on a 911 message board. I'm not trying to start a flame war, AT ALL. I just read some opinions on the 951 being the "track beast" and the 911 was a nice "warm weather" car. How condescending is that? Like the 911 is some cute Miata or Benz convertible, and the 951 is some bad-a$$ race car that has won countless races and championships like say... I don't know, what's an incredibly successful race car, oh, how about the PORSCHE 911???!!!! Those are the kind of statements that will get a huge "wtf is he talking about?" from a 911 owner and, don't you think that those statements SHOULD be received that way from 911 owners? I had to respond with a differing opinion.

My opinion, based on my track experience is different than your opinion. If you are talking about which car is most dominant if you factor in the bang for the buck ratio, I surrender. The 951 rules in that area.

I liked this blanket statement too, "The 911 is more "fun" for me on backroads, but its nowhere near as capable as my 951 is - the acceleration is like a time warp."

The 911 is "NOWHERE NEAR" as capable? Which 911? A 1965? The GT-2? The GT3-RS, how about the 935? How about an RSR or a 993 Twin Turbo? How about an early 911 like the THREAD STARTER has with a massaged 3.2 in it? 2100 lbs and 250 hp isn't exactly some sunny day, beach cruiser. Do you know what 250 hp feels like in a 2100 lb car with lots of torque and no turbo lag? Do you know how easy it is to stop and turn a car that is that light?

If I am a "model nazi" because I think that the 911 is a better track car, and I don't just roll-over and accept your statements as gospel, then so be it. I'm goose-stepping as I type.

[Stuttgart951]

Wow. Im not quite sure what to say. Are you sure you dont suffer from some sort of inferiority complex? Here the majority of people posting on this thread are trying to help the thread starter make a decision regarding his next purchase - Im not quite sure what you bring to the conversation other than your blanket statements of 911 superiority and 951 inferiority.

We are discussing the various merits of the two cars, and in most cases, we are comparing similar year vehicles - a 951 and a 3.2L Carrera. We are not dicussing 935's and we are not dicussing GT2's, thats just silly.

If youre not keen enough to recognize that there are no less than 2 "soon to be 911 owners" posting in this thread alone, perhaps you wouldnt be so quick to point out the obvious deficiencies in our cars (such as: A. Engine is in the "wrong" place. B. Engine oil is cooled by the "wrong" thing. C. The last two numbers in the model designation are not 1 and 1.) There is a very big difference between me stating that the 3.2L 911 is a great warm weather/backroad car (which is EXACTLY what it is) and you stating that my car is a "pig." I am pointing out what I like about the car, you are just being an ass.

I would like to think most, if not everyone on this BBS would try to offer advice in this situation, regardless of what the BBS title says. If the gentleman cant get a realistic opinion beyond "my car is better than yours and my dad can beat up your dad" why would he even bother posting?

Based on the huge numbers of people flowing into this thread to defend your rediculous statements, I can only assume that I am correct in what I'd like to think.

Cheers!

(The "not a real Porsche" Porsche owner.)

In my opinion:

944 Turbo: Much faster, better balanced, more modern. Fantastic car, but lacks the exotic feel of a 911. "Cheap" to optimize.

911: Charisma, sound, feel, looks, scares you to death sometimes. Huge potential, but it'll cost a lot of money to reach the potential. Engine/gearbox, suspension, brakes, wheels etc.

[jaxon]

How did YOU decide that was the case in the race that I cited? HOW DID THE 951 GET OUT FRONT IN THE RACE TO BEGIN WITH?

Sounds Aggressive....looks aggressive....

And it seems unfriendly in its tone. Perhaps that was your intention.

If so, you succeeded. If it was intended to be aggressive and you succeeded, I would ask why and to what end?

If, you did not intend to be aggressive, then perhaps it is simply my interpretation that you were.

Other comments in the thread aren't aggressive....simply an exchange of thoughts and viewpoints discussed in a lively and intelligent manner.

I can't speak for stuttgart951 or ChrisBennett, and frankly I don't think they would want me to. But, I can speak for myself. Let me be specific. I know that when I go from my modified 951 to a stock 3.2 or 3.6 911 I am going to significantly decrease my acceleration and braking ability. Why? I've driven them both...many times. How does it handle in comparison? Can't really say. I'm not skilled at driving 911's on the curves. That would be one of the attractions to going to a 911, in addition to the others I listed in my previous post. I did neglect to mention the racing heritage of the 911 in my post, and that is an attraction as well.

If the entire 911 board were aggressive, I would not pursue my interest in the 911. Why?... Comaraderie is a large part of ownership, and I'm interested in friendly camaraderie. The overwhelming majority of the board has been helpfull, supportive, and informative in my decision to look into a 911.

Nick...whatever does it for you. If you are ever in my area feel free to look me up and you can drive my modified 951 if it will help you decide what to do. You may disagree with my assessment after your drive. However several stock 911 owners who have driven this modified 951 have agreed with me. How would it compare with a light 911 with a 3.2 on the track...Jack Olsen could probably answer this question.

stuttgart951...good luck in your decision, I see no reason to change direction on the basis of one or two posts.

racea911... have you ever driven a well modified 951?

_____________________________________________

Enjoy the drive....this isn't a rehearsal!

[tshih]

Wow, love the passionate debate....

One thing that factors huge in my decision is the costs of maintenance for the 951 will be much higher than that of the 911 3.2 (stock or modified). The timing and balance belt changes as well as a clutch job for the 951 is much more expensive and more often requirements than those for the no maintenace chain and easy weekend replacement in the case of the clutch (for a 911). Overall the 911 is the better design to own and have fun with... it definitely teaches or force the owners to become better drivers before they can be appreciated. The 951 is way too easy to drive fast and let's people get into bad habits of braking in the middle of a turn (or just plain lifting off the gas!).

[jaxon]

One thing that factors huge in my decision is the costs of maintenance for the 951 will be much higher than that of the 911 3.2 (stock or modified). The timing and balance belt changes as well as a clutch job for the 951 is much more expensive and more often requirements than those for the no maintenace chain and easy weekend replacement in the case of the clutch (for a 911).

100% Agreement. The 951 is the most expensive car to maintain I have ever owned. I've owned over 35 cars. Perhaps others have faired better.

[thrown_hammer]

Boys Boys, break it up!
I can tell you an early 911 with a 3.2 is a fast car.
I have never owned a 951 or ridden in one. I think if you want a fast car you wouldn't be dissappointed with either one. The 951 would be easier to drive fast and the 911 would take more concentration from the driver.
Breathe in...Breathe out...Count to ten...