Making The Switch To Front-Engine Porsche

[psears]

Hello,

I've recently finished rebuilding a 911SC from
the ground up, & now that I'm done, I'm thinking
about making the switch to a 944. I've noticed
though that all the books & videos available
about hot rodding Porsches seem to be mostly
about 911's. I know exactly what needs to be
done/upgraded to an air cooled Porsche, but what
are the good references for 944's? Is there anything akin to Bruce Anderson's 911 Performance
andbook for 944's?
Here's what I'm thinking for a project car:

*1985.5 or later roller or thrasher(are there any
benefits to trying to get a Turbo roller
instead?)
*Brembo big brakes or equivalent
*16 valve engine custom built to my specs (3.0, supercharged,
turbo or nitrous, etc...)
*custom tranny (I really need help here)
*full crankfire, Motec programmable FI
*total disassembly of suspension and upgrade

This will be a daily driver.
Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

psears

[Blackfoot]

that's a real good way to waste money, imho. do it right, get a 944 turbo and go from there. you won't regret it.

[Mike B]

Ditto...start with a turbo...it already has the brembo brakes and better suspension...

...or pick a 944 at a great price and add Speed Force Racing's Supercharger kit...

[Mike B]

...and welcome back from the dark side

[perfectchoicemotorsports]

Psears:

I am going out on a limb here! but most forward thinkers are out on a limb anyways.

You sound like the kind of person who likes the drive better than the destination. Half the fun of a performance automobile is the building of it.

While the 951 is a superior platform from which to create a 944 hot rod, do not pass up the chance to buy its little brother that could. We have helped paved the way to adding turbo performance to the 944 N/A (See prior posts).

The performance potential of the 944 NA under turbo power is in the 200 to 250 range, while remaining reliable, higher if you reduce the compression to 8.5 to 1. There are companies on the net that make copper head gaskets to reduce compression, and bring the reliability factor up to stock 951 levels at least.

While my observations of ebay, autotrader, and others, you can have worn out 951 examples for $4000 to $5000, or great shape ones for $10,000. You can have low mileage pristene examples of the 944 for $4000 or less.

The upgrading of the 951's antiquated ECU and turbo system to monster specs can pick your pockets clean. To build one very fast 944 into a turbo is not that hard to do!

For example.

1. pristene low mileage w/maintance records 944 $3500
2. turbo $200 T3.60 used turbo and rebuild kit.
3. Exhaust and cross over pipe $150
4. Fuel/Ignition control $379
5. Intercooler $100
6. Copper head gasket to reduce compression $100 "optional"
7. JE forged pistons 8.5 to 1 $500 "optional"
8. 951 Head $350 "optional"
7. Miscellanous $400

Total $5000 or so, for one fast, reliable 944 turbo! One that uses a more industry standard turbo. One that allows you to pull a turbo in 10 mins. One that allows more turbo upgrade options, for spool or all out power. One that has a large Intercooler to start with.

What about the tranny? Yes the tranny is weaker, but just how much?

What about brakes? If it stops in 110' instead of 120' whats the difference? if 10' matters that much buy 4 Wilwood 4 piston calipers and build your own brackets to mount them with $500

What about the suspension? convert to a true coilover suspension, its 10 times better than a M030 option anyways. It allows corner weighting of the car and be done with it. $1000

Most of the people that say buy the 951 over the 944 turbo conversion are the same people who take their Porsche to someone else to have work done to it.

If you can turn a wrench the conversion is not beyond your scope. The key statement I saw in your post was "I just finished a restoration of a 911SC". If you can restore a 911, you can convert a 944 to turbo!!

Kevin "in the boat rowing by myself"
PCM
www.perfectchoicemotorsports.com

[1.2gees]

A one off car is going to have one off problems...

What you suggest CAN be done, what you end up with is not the 'better' car in my opinion. It's faster, for less money perhaps. Don't forget the 944 turbo would be stressed less with the same amount of power, and can be significantly upgraded above the stock form. A 951 has many improvements from control arms to strut mounts, from exaust hangers to aerodynamics, it's a different car. It has a stiffer chasis, heavier duty suspension/brakes, transaxle, torque tube, clutch, engine block, sodium filled valves, double walled headers etc.

BTW, I bought a 'worn out' 944 turbo for $3150, and it's fast.
Ahmet

[perfectchoicemotorsports]

Ahmet:

Let me address a few of these things you propose, from our veiw point.

"A 951 has many improvements from control arms to strut mounts" Who wants aluminum non re-buildable control arms anyway? Strut mounts should be replaced with camber plates.

"Don't forget the 944 turbo would be stressed less with the same amount of power" Totally incorrect, with forgrd pistons at 8.5 to 1 or a lower compression head gasket the stress level would be the same.

Thermal efficency and volumetric efficency are 2 totaly different things. What do engine builders start to do when the volumetric effecency has reached its limit they turn to thermal, buy increasing the compression ratio. The 951 is OUT DATED!!!! in this respect, with modern tunnable ignition systems. The compression ratio of modern forced induction engines are reching the 10 to 1 range.

"it's a different car" Yes it is a different car, with so many simularitys that its not funny!

"It has a stiffer chasis, heavier duty suspension/brakes, transaxle" We address this in our prior post!

"engine block, sodium filled valves, double walled headers etc."
The blocks are the same, with a 951 head they are the same, Double walled headers are just to control heat, build your own cross over pipe larger to improve flow and turbo response time.

"BTW, I bought a 'worn out' 944 turbo for $3150, and it's fast. "
In 6 months to a year from now see how much it costs you fixing all the small problems or a major failure.

Kevin
PCM
www.perfectchoicemotorsports.com

[1.2gees]

I like the aluminum control arms, they do cost more, and you can't change the ball joints but they're also lighter, and stiffer.

When I say the 951 would be stressed less with the same amount of power, I do not mean just the engine (which I still think is true, more on that later), but rather the drivetrain, chasis, etc.

Yes indeed, the engine management system of a 951 is 15+ years old at this point. It was amongst the very best at it's time, I still think it can hold it's own against many designs years newer, not an off the shelf controller available today though, so you're right on that, but the same applies to the NA as well...

I own both, and have worked on both. They have many similarities that's correct, however keep in mind everything that gets stressed under more power on an NA has been upgraded (but yes, the NA was overbuilt to start with, and I do realize that).

Not everybody is in the game purely for speed vs. money. The 951 is well sorted out stock, with springs/shocks it's good enough for most people, coil overs are not for everyone.

This is a common misconception amongst the front engined crowd, the 951 and the 944 blocks are NOT the same. If you compare a late model NA block to a turbo block, you'll see a couple of improvements, such as thicker cylinder liners. If you compare a turbo block to an early NA block though, you'll see that many things are quite a bit improved on the turbo most major ones being associated with lubrication system, again don't overlook thicker cylinder liners here also.

We shall see how much it costs me to fix all the small problems or a small failure on the turbo indeed. I took a chanse, time will tell. BUT, in the end I will still have a more comfortable, faster car with all the big and the small improvements of a 951 over a 944. And don't forget we'll see how your car fares up also

I might pick up a really cheap 944 someday to do what you did. I will not deny it has potential to become a faster car than a 951 for cheaper, but that doesn't necessarily make it the better car. There's just so many items on a turbo that are better than a 944, specially compared to an early one. Besides everything that really 'matters' to the hardcore car nut, there's still a lot from the flush fit windscreen to the ram air brake/oil cooling, non exposed antenna, better wheels, standard headlight washers, less nois transmitting engine/tranny mounting, etc.

I think what you've done is remarkable, don't get me wrong I'm just defending my point of view. I fully support your efforts for the $2002 challange. I have nothing against what you did, or the idea behind it. I also agree the car you end up with is superb, and an absulutely great value. Heck, I might try super or turbo charging either a cheap 944 as I said earlier or an 80s bmw 325. However as I'm sure I've made abundantly clear, (IMO) to go faster than a certain level reliably, everyday, the 951 is the better car to start with.
Ahmet

[perfectchoicemotorsports]

Here is the point I am trying to make. If you had a 968 engine laying around. Their is not one person on this website, if given the chance, to drop a 968 3.0 ltr engine into a 944 or 951. They would not take it! It will decrease reliability! It will add stress to the chasis and drive train. It will not be as reliable.

So why is it not true for forced indution?

Kevin
PCM
www.perfectchoicemotorsports.com

[Rob-O]

All 944 chassis of the same year were identical. So that argument is out. We all know the suspension amd brakes are different, but not the chassis.

[fty]

hey perfectchoice....your my hero.....so for 1500 I can make my 944 turbo.....w/200+ power....hmmmmnnnn do you have a big kit that you sell yet? You should make one...and sell it for 1500 bucks......-chris

[psears]

Hello,

Hey everyone, thanks for the replies-you all seem to definetely know what you are talking about. But now you've got my curiosity peaked. What is the best/most reliable engine platform to start with as far as a monster motor goes? Are not the 16 valve 968 motors the best/most modern?

Thanks!

psears

[Bob's944]

Which platform to use would depend on the budget you have for this project, sounds to me like this is a 'sky is the limit' type build-up , and if you're going to go forced injection or not (if you have a more limited budget). 2.5L Turbo engines have those details already taken care of. They made more of the turbo cars than 968's, so there is a better availablity of parts. Stroker kits for 2.7L displacement and relatively simple turbo mods and chipping for over 300 HP is no big deal. $5,000 can make a nice engine i bet. I've heard stories of $5,000 968 heads, and very pricey upgrades to factory parts... and 400 HP also when you go all out and turbo that 16V variocam with the right electronics. Total engines packages installed for $20 grand or so when one of the tuner houses do it for you. When you blow it, you get a MONSTER repair bill. Very cool, if you can afford to do that sorta thing.

[Moneyguy1]

Gee, guys....

For the kind of $$$ you are willing (at least on paper) to throw around, it sounds like you could go the Chevy convesion route and eliminate all the problems of overstressed 2.5 literland......
After all, the 944/951 engine was a compromise from the getgo. There is only so much that can be done with small displacement engines. Look how the 911 engine grew over the years until thermal efficiency dictated that it could no longer be air cooled. Even Porsche learns over time, but they seem to be quite stubborn. An engine design with interference between pistons and valves, a quirky timing belt, heat expansion problems, lubrication problems (remember the infamous #2 connecting rod problem?) and a number of other shortcomings too long to list. Porsche kept hanging additional fixes on it rather than address the basic problems.

I have an NA. I like it fine. I don't need the added power for day to day driving. After all, hardly anyone this side of another owner knows what kind of engine I have; to most people it's a Porsche and that means that it must be quick. Sure, my ego would be boosted by a boosted engine, but even an NA can cruise all day at speeds well into the low three figures, even with its anemic original engine.

I have rebuilt engines from 356s to 944s. I have owned turbo charged cars, even back to a Corvair Corsa that had one of the most bulletproff horizontal sixes I have ever seen(without waste gates or boost limiters either).

The 944 in all its iterations is a good handling car and even the base cars have brakes that are far above industry standards for the average car, even for vehicles approaching 20 years of age. In all models of similar years, the chassis are identical, with different front ends and drive trains. Period. None is stiffer or better built than the others when it comes to the basic shell.

We all own a car that was not a favorite of the Porsche set. Ask the vast majority of 911 owners. We are all in the same boat in that respect. At the very least let's show a little respect for each other. I used to take my 944 to a weekly "car show" at a local hamburger joint. There were restored American oldies, radically modified cars of all kinds and no one ridiculed another person's ride. We all enjoyed the amount of work that went into the restorations or one-off efforts.

Just the ravings of an old timer with very old grease under the fingernails.

Nomex skivvies engaged

Bob S.

[1.2gees]

I use the term 'chasis' to refer to the body shell of the car + the suspension. If this isn't how some of you don't use the word, I apologize for the confusion.

The early 944 and the late 944/968 'chasis' are different, same year chasis for any 944 is the same aside from the suspension/running gear. I compare an early chasis to a turbo chasis because the only feasible way to end up with a turbo-ed 944 for the price range we're talking about is to start with an early example.

I think the 944 engines are way over built (along with the rest of the car), and can handle quite a bit more power without much of a problem, so in my honest opinion there's nothing wrong with tuning a 944 engine for more power, but again that's my opinion.
Ahmet

[Blackfoot]

i always thought of the chassis and suspension as being two separate, distinct animals. the suspension connects to the chassis, but isn't part of it.

Well, since the sky is still the limit on this budget, I will tell you what I would do with the things youre asking for. First, as your base car, buy either a 951 or a 944S2, you get the much better looking front and the best brakes. You will really need to add a TON of horsepower to run out of the brakes on these cars, if you do, the big red upgrade kits are only for the later cars (87 and later) If you buy a 951, you have a ton of aftermarket parts and companies that could eventually get your car into the 500 rwhp club, if you are working on a budget, the 951 has the most hp for the cheapest and adding more power is MUCH cheaper on a 951 than on a naturally aspirated car. Since you said you wanted 16valves and a 3.0 liter engine, the S2 would be a better choice, I would avoid the 968 engine, because the variocam actually is problematic if you are turbo charging (the factory 968 turbo S didnt have vario cam) Speedforce Racing now curently offers a supercharger kit for the S2, the stage 4 kit would put you in the high 300-low 400 rwhp range. This is very impressive and can be had for 6-7K dollars, not too bad. They are working on a 968 super charger kit, which I am certain will make at least as much power if not more , you should talk to them, Tim and his partner post here and on rennlist often and are fantastic to work with, there parts are awesome! As for suspension, put Koni adjustable red shocks on all four corners, 250# springs up front and 27-29mm torsion bars on the back, this will lower your car about and inch maybe an inch and a half. It would allow you to adjust how hard you want the ride to be (if you change from street to track) and would just be an awesome handling car. Of course you would have to put on widder wheels to put that power down, you can squeeze 10 inch wide tires on the back of these cars. As for transmissions, the 951S transmission with LSD and the oil cooler can handle a ton of power, if you can find one, I would put the 6-speed 968 tranny with LSD in the car, takes a little bit more work, but is definetly worth it. Basically, making the car you want is very possible, the 944 is a very competent car that can handle what you are planning on doing, it really depends on exactly what you want, if you post some stricter specs for your dream car, we could probably be more helpful. Give us a budget, how much horsepower you want to make, how much work you would do yourself, what size engine you want in the car (2.5, 2.7, 2.8, 3.0, 3.2) and what kind you will be using the car for, daily driving or track or both. Let us know what is realistic for you and we will be more specific in our advice. You can always talk to some of the people who will build you an engine (I would recommend Garrity, a first rate guy who is brilliant with these cars!) and they can probably be even more helpful than us.
Good luck with it and keep us posted!
Maciek

[Rob-O]

Hmmmm....besides the difference of the 924/944 bulging fenders. As far as I know, the 83 chassis is the same as the 87. I have seen nothing to deter me from believing that (yet).

But Money has the right idea. Our cars are sweet. We can b**ch all kinds of ways at each other. The point is, we (most of us anyhow) own one of these vehicles and each one is our own baby. There really is no way to explain the experience to somebody who hasn't been in one of the cars. Hey, my car is in really good shape, and it's 15 years old this year. It looks better than just about any other 15 year old car I've seen that was manufactured by another car company. But really, that isn't what attracts me to my Porsche. To me, the interior of my car is not outdated. It still looks better inside than the Camaro SS. The brakes are better than most on the road today. The feel of the steering is more crisp than the Ford Mustang I test drove awhile back. And at 15 years old it's more solid than the 2001 Corvette I test drove about a month ago. Doors still close with a click, there are no dash rattles. The only thing you hear with our cars is the sound of refinement.

Peace my brothers, peace.

Rob-O

[psears]

It's nice to know that the phrase, "Excellence Was Expected", doesn't just apply to the 911 series.

[kukunaokala]

Nice thread. My main Porshe parts man digs the 951, "most bank for the bucks", he said.

Aloha, Neal