944 vs 968 - lower boot floor??

[PSH]

ORIGINAL: Jonny944CS

ORIGINAL: PSH

One more small piece of info for anyone considering buying a 944 turbo and intending major power increase, look for an early 220 version. These have far stronger blocks designed to handle 500BHP without fuss, these cars had the same blocks as the race cars before costs got to high and cutting corners began.

Interesting Pete, I recall reading that the first turbo blocks had castings with an extra 1mm wall thickness. I dismissed it as rumour at the time.

It is a shame Herr Mezger and his team couldn't get the head gasket to seal reliably when running 500bhp with the GTP back in 1981 - I wonder what effect a Le Mans win would have had on the history of the frontrunners...

Perhaps Herr Mezer would have had no problems sealing 500bhp and above if he had the use of Raceware Engineering head studs which have a minimum rating of 190,000 psi,, yes you are reading it correctly but don't get to carried away guys this is the alloy steel strength not what boost you can force through the engine.. however it does mean using these you'll never have lift from the head. Now amagine using Raceware head/main and con rod studs with race pistons in a newly rebored block...???? I'll be able to report back on this once I've rebuilt my engine having all of the above ready for action..

Back to the early 220's having stronger blocks their biggest advantage is forged internals whereas later engines were all cast and why you need to be very careful going much above 350bhp on the later cars unless you upgrade to forged con rods.

Pete

Edit: sorry forgot to add the front runners were never going to succeed against the bias of the then Porsche customer base, I mean just how much better could the GTP be, first in class and seventh overall against a very competitive field, you can't get much better than that..

 

[TTM]

ORIGINAL: Jonny944CS
The 968 gearbox is near identical in height to its 5-speed father (as it too originated as an Audi front axle install), just a bit longer to accomodate the extra gear set. The fuel tank is also nearly the same, just modified to clear the longer gearbox - so no scope for lowering the floor.

I once tried to install the gearbox-holding cross brace of a 968, which is made of aluminium, on a 944T and it would not fit because of hitting the fuel tank. This suggests to me the fuel tanks are not quite the same, but I can only find one part number...?

 

[Jonny944CS]

Yes, they are different:

944 = 951 201 021 02
968 = 944 201 021 04

 

[PSH]

ORIGINAL: Jonny944CS

Yes, they are different:

944 = 951 201 021 02
968 = 944 201 021 04

Now that's interesting... Without double checking, those numbers suggest to me that the 968 used the earlier steel fuel tank. Perhaps this was the cheapest way of obtaining a tank that would fit without the tooling costs of producing a new one. Does anyone know if this is the case?

Pete

 

[os951]

so was the floor ever lowered or did it stay in the same place?

Floor itself was not lowered, but the carpet was.... If you look closely the sparetire section in 968's carpet, it is quite a lot lower than 944 version, so Jeremy is right in some part []

Now that's interesting... Without double checking, those numbers suggest to me that the 968 used the earlier steel fuel tank. Perhaps this was the cheapest way of obtaining a tank that would fit without the tooling costs of producing a new one. Does anyone know if this is the case?

No, 968 uses a plastic tank. Transmisson cross brace is more or less the same shape as 944 have, 968 version is just made of aluminium when 944 uses a one made of sheetmetal.

 

[Jonny944CS]

No, definitely plastic and similar to the later 944. Just a modified moulding shape to clear the larger gearbox and it seems different x-member.

The 968 does not have its own part number system. A combination of "˜944' and "˜951' suffixes is used.

The steel tank originates from a VW design and therefore has a 477 suffix.

 

[PSH]

ORIGINAL: Jonny944CS

No, definitely plastic and similar to the later 944. Just a modified moulding shape to clear the larger gearbox and it seems different x-member.

The 968 does not have its own part number system. A combination of "˜944' and "˜951' suffixes is used.

The steel tank originates from a VW design and therefore has a 477 suffix.

Ahhh..... You learn something everyday, I never knew that 968's had their own 951/944 part numbers.

Thanks for the info

Pete

 

[Frenchy]

Pete,
where is the Titanic webbie now ?
Also heard that the Turbo was restricted so as not to steal the show my Turbo S was 44k 24 years ago....Mad
MY 220 is an early car and should have the forged internals, i timed a 951 racecar with an S2 motor at Oulton and it was quicker than a bona fide 964 cup car by 2 secs, though the 911 sounded wonderful.

 

[PSH]

ORIGINAL: Frenchy

Pete,
where is the Titanic webbie now ?
Also heard that the Turbo was restricted so as not to steal the show my Turbo S was 44k 24 years ago....Mad
MY 220 is an early car and should have the forged internals, i timed a 951 racecar with an S2 motor at Oulton and it was quicker than a bona fide 964 cup car by 2 secs, though the 911 sounded wonderful.

Titanic can be found at porsche944@titanic.co.uk, it's a lot quiter these days but now and then has a burst of energy.

My car celebrated it's 25th birthday last week and certainly has forged internals as its currently in pieces so I can see for myself, I'm fairly confident that yours should be the same, I guess you may be able to check with Porsche using your engine number.
I've witnessed at race meets the 951 best 964RS 's etc with little effort, it's a real shame that the Porsche cup became just like the Super cup with only GT3's allowed. It was fun however for the couple of years that the older cars were still not only competing with the GT3's but beating them. The thing is it wasn't just in the bends, I remember laughing out loud at silverstone when a 944T was chasing down a GT3 through luffields, coming onto the straight with the 944T shooting past the poor thing, that was some neat driving and great exit speed.
But I guess Porsche had had enough in the last season before the championship became GT3's only when the championship was won by a 964RS, there were at least 13 GT3's that season but the really telling story was Chris Healey's 944T ( my fav driver) that IIRC finished 3rd overall. He actually had the most wins but alas a lot of DNF's too (reliability issues) that kept his score lower. I miss those days, miss the close battles between the likes of Chambers (996, later GT3) Rice (944T,later GT3) Heeley (944T) Littlejohn (944T) and Titanics very own,Sweetenham (944T) fond memories indeed...

Pete

 

[944 man]

ORIGINAL: PSH

ORIGINAL: Jonny944CS

No, definitely plastic and similar to the later 944. Just a modified moulding shape to clear the larger gearbox and it seems different x-member.

The 968 does not have its own part number system. A combination of "˜944' and "˜951' suffixes is used.

The steel tank originates from a VW design and therefore has a 477 suffix.

Ahhh..... You learn something everyday, I never knew that 968's had their own 951/944 part numbers.

Thanks for the info

Pete

From memory, any 951 part which was used retained its part number and any new 968 parts have a 944 part number prefix, as the car was originally going to be marketed as a 944.

An example would be the alloy suspensions used on series two 944s, which had a 951 part number. When re-designed for the 968 they have a 944#.

 

[TTM]

The cross brace for the 968 gearbox is significantly different to the 944's, it's made of aluminium while the 944's is made of steel and the shape where the gearbox mount attaches is much recessed upwards, hence why I didn't get to install it on a 944.

The only numbers prefixed with 968 are for the 968 turbo S/RS specific parts.

 

[graham.webb]

Hi Jonny
Good point, wondering what might have been. Even so, at le Mans they managed 6th in 1980 (a wet race), 7th in 1981 then 16th in 1982. Not bad for a production car especially when you see what else was on the grid at the time.

I think in 1980 they ran the 2.0 litre 924 turbo, but was 1982 a 944 Turbo? That year the car was sponsored by BF Goodrich and ran the entire race on just 5 road tyres!! There's a good video of this on You Tube somewhere...

 

[Jonny944CS]

ORIGINAL: graham.webb

Good point, wondering what might have been. Even so, at le Mans they managed 6th in 1980 (a wet race), 7th in 1981 then 16th in 1982. Not bad for a production car especially when you see what else was on the grid at the time.

I think in 1980 they ran the 2.0 litre 924 turbo, but was 1982 a 944 Turbo? That year the car was sponsored by BF Goodrich and ran the entire race on just 5 road tyres!! There's a good video of this on You Tube somewhere...

Hi graham, hope you are well.

Considering the 924 origins their Le Mans record is fantastic. I just wonder if the aim at the start of the GTP project, boyed by their 6th place in 1980, was to win Le Mans with a car powered by the new, soon to be released 944 2.5l engine.

The 924 GTR came first with the 2litre VW engine in 1980. For 1981 the factory were keen to enter a stronger challenge using a heavily modified version of the GTR chassis, fitted with many bespoke parts including a special cylinder head, 944 2.5l block and the first ever application of Motronic to a racing engine.

The project must have cost A LOT of money and judging by the decisions made, particularly with the engine, I personally believe they were aiming for more than they got. You don't design a bespoke 16v cylinder head lightly "" I think only 5 engines were ever built.

During the off season development was plagued by engine reliability issues when running at full boost (500+hp). The decision was made to protect for a solid finish and the #006 car, driven by Jurgen Barth and Walter Rohrl, finished in 7th place and 3rd in the GTP class. They did however win a prize for the least time spent in the pits - a virtue of the Motronic and conservative boost settings no doubt.

A GTP Rondeau finished 2nd behind Porsches back-up plan - a 936 driven by Jacky Ickx and Derek Bell.

Chassis #006 now resides in the Porsche museum and #005 (the development mule) has recently sold as part of the Drendel family collection for a frankly bargain $308,000.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOv56K6RIDA&feature=player_embedded

 

[graham.webb]

Thanks Jonny...nice pictures. Is that the engine bay of the recent Freisinger car?

I'm fascinated by all this, the story seems to have been overshadowed by Porsche's other successes at the time, and of course the fact that it wasn't followed through. Certainly c.500bhp would have changed some prejudices! I guess they would have encountered a domino effect of other issues as they went on... the 1982 cars had gearbox problems for a start. If they'd had to sort that out maybe it would have filtered through to production and we wouldn't now be forever listening for chatter and wine at the back!!

 

[os951]

Here you can see gearbox arrangements.

 

[Jonny944CS]

Firstly appologies to 5lab, I appear to have veered widely off topic [8|] - perhaps we can move the relevent posts to a new thread, Mr Moderator?

ORIGINAL: graham.webb
Is that the engine bay of the recent Freisinger car?

The engine bay is from the '944' engined 2.5L 924 GTP, one of only 2, and very much a Prototype vehicle. Porsche wanted to call it a 944 GTP but the ACO wouldn't let them as the 944 production car wasn't due to be launched for another few months.

The Freisinger car is one of 19(ish) factory 924 GTR Customer cars with the 2.0L VW-based engine.

It is confusing and the cars are often quoted wrongly, but it is important to make the distiction, they are radically different.

The history goes something like this:

1980 - GTP Class - 924 GTR placed 6th, 12th and 13th
3 cars entered in Pre-Homologation spec.
~340hp from the VW-based 2.0l 8v engine

1981 - GTP class - 924 GTP placed 7th
Full factory-backed prototype
~420hp from a de-tuned 2.5L 16v 944-based engine and full revised chassis and drivetrain - only the basic shell and the odd few ancillaries common with the 924 GTR.

1982 - IMSA GTO class - 924 GTR placed 16th (road tyred BF Goodrich car you mentioned)
3 homologated entries running a similar specification to the 1980 pre-homologation cars
2.0L 8v ~375hp

ORIGINAL: graham.webb
I guess they would have encountered a domino effect of other issues as they went on... the 1982 cars had gearbox problems for a start. If they'd had to sort that out maybe it would have filtered through to production and we wouldn't now be forever listening for chatter and wine at the back!!

I believe the entire GTP car was significantly beefed-up relative to the GTR to handle the planned power-hike.

The 924 GTR uses a gearbox derived from the 931 'snail shell' with mods such as an oil cooler and stronger internals.

The pics kindly provided by Oli show the #006 GTP sat in Porsche's museum. The gearbox is a unique item as regards the transaxle racecars and has its own type number '949'. Totally different in layout, I suspect it might be based on a reversed version of the straight-cut 934/935 unit - even noisier than an old Audi 016 unit! Do you know Oli?

Connected to it are titanium driveshafts with race-style giubos. Also visible are the height adjustable inner trailing arm mounts to tune the roll center height.