BHP Increases vs 0-60 Times

[EddySpaghetti]

Hi,

Gratuitous 'money no object' daydreaming here - does anyone know what effect upgrades such as the Lindsey Racing 'rear wheel horsepower' upgrades translate into in 0-60 times?

The stock 944 Turbo SE is supposed to go 0-60 in 5.7secs ISTR, and that's with 250HP (I'm guessing quoted at flywheel).

So what kind of 0-60 time could you expect with 270 / 300 / 340 at the wheels? Without any stripping out to reduce weight.

I find it easier to think in terms of 0-60 times to compare our cars with the the (cough - spit) moderns, since the higher performing uber saloons and supercars all have loads of BHP, but probably weigh a lot more than (even unlightened, tubby A.C equipped etc. etc.) 944's

Those that have read my other posts will realise that if I'm ever to get one of these upgrades my car needs to get welded first, hence the gratuitous daydreaming.

Those that are reading this having considered the 944 / 944 S2 / 944 T debate should bear in mind the mind boggling performance upgrades available specifically for the turbo cars. That potential influenced my buying decision a couple of years back - basically we all know you don't really need more power, but my car is a hobby and learning about turbo charging and the opportunity to improve the car over several years as cash allows (incl. getting older, thus cheaper insurance, and a house with a garage, ditto) keeps me interested in it long term...

Just a thought.

Cheers,

Eddy

 

[stevie d]

Found this generic calculator for estimating 0 - 60 times based on BHP at the fly wheel . http://www.letstorquebhp.com/calculator.asp . Seems to produce reasonably accurate results based on the figures quoted by Porsche for the various stock 944 models .

 

[zcacogp]

'Tis an interesting question, but I think you need to think beyond 0-60 times when discussing "fast". 0-60 is a very limited indicator of a car's performance and means little in the real world - and by "real world" i mean more than a traffic lights grand prix. LJK Setright (who is, in my opinion, the greatest automotive journalist who has ever lived) described 0-60 times as being "Suitable only for inadequates and delinquents"; the standing quarter is arguably a better measure, but even that takes no account of handling or braking. As I commented in my DIY caliper refurb thread, I was surprised how much difference rebuilt brakes made to my S2's effectiveness and speed down a twisty road.

The best measure of a car's real world performance can only come from a range of measures, including times 'round a known circuit - and even that is not as straightforward as it sounds, as different circuits will flatter different cars. Increasing the stated power figure will have a positive effect on some of these figures, but you need to take account of all the other factors which make up a car's "performance", and upgrade those accordingly if your is to be truly "faster".


Oli.

 

[TTM]

I find the 100kph-200kph (62mph-124mph) figure more suited to measure overall performance as it offers more timing precision and it avoids trashing the transmission with the brutal display of power involved when doing a standing start.

 

[deafasapost]

slightly off topic i know but, for me, the 0-60 times is not interesting, ie the traffic light grand prix. i'm more interested in the mid range acceleration to get me out of trouble if need be or for safe overtaking. more often than not, i've got the little fella in the front seat so i drive like miss daisy, but there has been occasions that i've needed the mid range power and imo, the s2 has more than enough for the real world roads.

anyway, back to you guys []

 

[Suffolk944]

Well you certainly wouldn't catch me wasting my money on ridiculous power upgrades !

oh wait a minute...

 

[Suffolk944]

I certainly agree that as our hobby cars it is fun and interesting to upgrade a 951.

Would concur with others that the 0-60 benchmark is pretty gratuitous, irrelevant and unattainable. Mods do help the off the line performance of course but being in first from a standing start is never a nice place to be in a Turbo. The cars are all about mid range punch and high end speed and are very impressive in that even by todays standards in unmodified form - mines now quite tweaked and she truly flies when asked through the mid range and beyond.

My only other caveat is that American claimed power outputs (especially at the wheels) seem to be somewhat inflated when compared with whats proved achievable over here. Must be the exchange rate or something []

Nonethless I would say that modding a 951 is very worthwhile (even if relatively modestly) if only to make it the car it should always have been without the handicaps Porsche built into it to prevent it blowing the 911's of the times into the weeds...

 

[Diver944]

We all know that our cars have never been especially good off the line (especially compared with 911's with all that weight over the rear for better traction). I have one of those G'tech accelerometer devices which I played around with when we were setting up my car after the engine conversion and it does a 0-60 measurement.

At the time the car was making 337bhp and with a soft launch to protect the clutch it measured a disappointing 5.8 seconds, slower than a standard 250 car. Though it did go on to measure a 1/4 mile speed of 110mph which is much better than standard (I had Ben in the car with me - he's a bad influence [] )

 

[zcacogp]

All this 911 comparison is probably not doing us any favours chaps. They are different cars, with different strengths and different weaknesses.

Some of the comments on here suggest people's shoulders bear large chips, and thus justify the "Poor Man's Porsche" tag - not something I subscribe to in any way, shape or form.


Oli.

 

[Suffolk944]

ORIGINAL: zcacogp


Some of the comments on here suggest people's shoulders bear large chips,

Oli.

Seriously ????????????????

I would love a 993 or 930 one day for instance amongst other 911 models I could reel off too. Porsches (and other manufacturers) practice of making sure different models don't outshine those they wish to be seen as higher in the hierarchy went on with the 944 as it goes on today its a simple fact. The 944 Turbo was almost the same price new as a 3.2 Carrera so was in no way a poor mans Porsche...

 

[Fat Albert]

ORIGINAL: Suffolk944
The 944 Turbo was almost the same price new as a 3.2 Carrera so was in no way a poor mans Porsche...

A grand more in 1987 the 911 was £32k and the 951 £33k!!
The Lux was £22k so the turbo was a 50% premium over the standard car!

 

[zcacogp]

ORIGINAL: Suffolk944
... was in no way a poor mans Porsche...

Wasn't. But is now. Compare the prices of a good 944 with those of a good 911 of the same era and tell me which one is more expensive.

The 911 had the history and the iconic status. Hence they have depreciated less. But it is a different sort of car - rear engined, air cooled flat 6 vs. front engined, water cooled inline 4. And very different to drive. The only similarity is the name badge and the price, and the fact that people who don't see beyond the badge don't see the differences.


Oli.

 

[Hilux]

especially compared with 911's with all that weight over the rear for better traction

Try launching a mildly tuned 993 TT 4wd [8D] from a standstill..................now that is awesome

According to that chart my Golf is supposed to be around 6 secs to 60 (at the moment) but I bet its nearer 7 as no-one treats their cars like the testers and journalists do to get the "quoted" figures.

I have always assumed add one second for not dumping the clutch at 5000k and banging home the gear lever with almost clutchless changes.

On the basis of my comments above I have always maintained that incremental times are what a car is really made of.

 

[Suffolk944]

ORIGINAL: zcacogp

ORIGINAL: Suffolk944
... was in no way a poor mans Porsche...

Wasn't. But is now. Compare the prices of a good 944 with those of a good 911 of the same era and tell me which one is more expensive.

The 911 had the history and the iconic status. Hence they have depreciated less. But it is a different sort of car - rear engined, air cooled flat 6 vs. front engined, water cooled inline 4. And very different to drive. The only similarity is the name badge and the price, and the fact that people who don't see beyond the badge don't see the differences.


Oli.

Erm yes wouldn't disagree with any of that, my first post simply said that modding even modestly could make the 951 the car it should always have been.

944's of whatever sort are great cars in their own right regardless of what badge is on the nose or what some folks perceptions/misconceptions of them are and I am for one and more than comfortable with that as are all on here I would think.

As for poor mans Porsches you can pick up a 996 for £10k so so much for iconic status...its all in peoples perceptions and prejudices *shrugs*

 

[Suffolk944]

ORIGINAL: Hilux

especially compared with 911's with all that weight over the rear for better traction

Try launching a mildly tuned 993 TT 4wd [8D] from a standstill..................now that is awesome

A car right at the top of my list for my dream garage !

 

[zcacogp]

Jon,

Maybe I read them wrongly, but the comparisons with 911s earlier on had the impression of oneupmanship. Hence my comments.

Yes, 944's are great cars in their own right, and I chose one for what it is, not for what it isn't (namely a 911.) The fact that they are so cheap is what makes them great cars, but is also (in a sense) their biggest weakness.

A £10k 996? I'm not sure which part of that statement would put me off more; the £10k bit or the 996 bit ... []


Oli.

 

[Hilux]

ORIGINAL: Suffolk944

ORIGINAL: Hilux

especially compared with 911's with all that weight over the rear for better traction

Try launching a mildly tuned 993 TT 4wd [8D] from a standstill..................now that is awesome

A car right at the top of my list for my dream garage !

Me too, the best 911 made in my book

A very generous neighbour/good friend lets me 'test' it now and again [8D]

Fetching miles over book at the moment for immaculate examples (which his is)

I can only describe them as a jet fighter on wheels - seamless torque and acceleration.

£245 fitted by OPC for an intercooler hose made his eyes water recently []

 

[Suffolk944]

No not one upmanship, just wanting to extol the virtues of the 944 is all (standard or modified !).

 

[TTM]

ORIGINAL: zcacogp
All this 911 comparison is probably not doing us any favours chaps. They are different cars, with different strengths and different weaknesses.

Some of the comments on here suggest people's shoulders bear large chips, and thus justify the "Poor Man's Porsche" tag - not something I subscribe to in any way, shape or form.


Oli.

... says the man with a 944 S2... Do you have something to tell us Oli? []

 

[zcacogp]

ORIGINAL: TTM
... says the man with a 944 S2... Do you have something to tell us Oli? []

Erm, that my car is better than yours?

No ... nothing apart from that ... []


Oli.