[Cloud9...68]

[size="2"]I managed to steer a discussion in another thread about relative acceleration capability of the 968 compared to the BMW E46 330Ci to a discussion about the 968's prowess on the track, so I decided to start a new thread about it. [/size]



[size="2"]I know it's been talked about before in other threads, but I'd like to hear those who campaign these cars explain how is it that a car whose basic suspension design was conceived in the mid 70s is so competitive on the track against much newer cars.[/size][size="2"]We all know the 968 is pretty challenged from a weight-to-power perspective (although class rules often equalize that out), so its edge must be in the handling/cornering department. But given that the competition from the likes of BMW and Nissan have the benefit of decades-newer suspension design and technology, how is it that the 968 can handle (and from Flash's definition, also corner) so much better than its much newer competition? And this isn't just folklore - in order to win races as frequently as it does, often against cars with a significantly better weight-to-power ratio, it must generate exit speeds that dramatically outclass the competition. I've even had a taste of this myself at DEs. My question is - how? Surely the BMW/Nissan, etc. world has its own versions of Pete, Karl, Jason, and Chuck to set these newer cars up very well. Are our drivers just superior? Yeah, that's it .[/size]



[size="2"]Anyway, looking forward to your theories.[/size]

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

i've been setting up cars for about 30 years now, and there is one common factor that continually determines how a car handles - i'll get to that in a minute



how fast a car goes around the track is due to 4 things - they are, in no particular order, power, weight, cornering capability, and handling



power is expressed in two forms, torque and horsepower - broad torque bands across the middle lead to a flexible and fast car able to power out of corners much more easily than one with a narrow high rev torque band - the 968 excels here over other cars with more power, but way up in the revs and over a narrower range



weight is an enemy of anybody trying to go fast around a track - every pound you carry requires more power and grip to maintain speed - the 968 is considerably lighter than many newer cars, and consequently needs less power to push it around - further, it's balance lends itself well to transitions



cornering capability is the ability of a car to maintain or achieve a particular speed in one corner - the 968, with its balance and wide tires for its weight, has the ability to hold corner speed fairly well - its rear suspension design, with the compound angels, while difficult to adjust, also adds a lot of negative camber when leaned on, so it gains ability there over other cars which would tend to swing out much earlier



handling is key on a road corse, and the 968 has the ability to maintain composure better than many cars, due to the design of the suspension - while primitive, the placement of the components allow for angular stability that is as predictable as it is controllable - this is also why heavy springs and stiff shocks on this car do not make the car faster, and while adding cornering capability, actually frequently slow it down, due to the onset of instability in transition



the key though, to this car's ability, and the item i said i would get into, and why it regularly outruns other cars which by all rights should beat it, is not in any of that - it is in the chassis design itself - the unibody chassis allows stresses to be transferred across the car - further, the chassis is fairly soft in some areas, which allows for a more gradual twisting, which results in a more controllable loading of the corners of the car as the weight transfers - the absence of abrupt shifts, as would be the case in a stiff chassis or one with a frame structure, allows for the car to be much more stable and controllable - this lends itself to the sensation that you are oozing through a corner, rather than fighting to hold it there - while there are some areas that can stand some reinforcement at the suspension mounting points for heavy track use, a certain amount of chassis flex is a very good thing on this car, and exactly what makes it work so well



so, while no single aspect is responsible for what the car does, the 968 benefits from an almost accidental combination of factors that have led to its unique ability to be driven fast with relatively little effort

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

I ain't no racing guy, but Flash's description of "oozing through a corner" certainly describes how it felt to drive the Sunday Paso Robles fun run on Santa Rosa Creek Road to Cambria.



Bill

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

So it's a wide array of seemingly accidental factors all working in beautiful harmony that allow this car to achieve beyond what it appears to be capable of on paper. I would have to add that it must need a very extensive set of expertly-applied modifications to really bring its potential to the fore, because my mildly-modified 968 is utterly mediocre compared to other cars of comparable power and weight, and that's with either me at the helm, or with an expert, again from personal experience.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Monstrous4Banger]

Yeah those BMW 3.0 I6 motors are quite responsive. The balancing in a 968 is a big factor too. Newer cars are easier to drive fast. All the new fandangled bells, and whistles(ABS, traction control, etc) make up for inexperienced/unskilled drivers(I know 968 has ABS). All that extra crap also adds weight. It really all comes down to the driver. If you cant drive, it dont matter how fast your cars is on paper. Newer cars boast all kinds of new techno gadgets, and flywheel power numbers. But they usually hesitate telling you the curb weight, and have horrible weight distribution. I wouldnt call a 968 light necessarily, but compared to contemporary offereings, it is. This is how the 968 keeps up with the new stuff. Its lighter, and well balanced(damn near perfectly). Combine that with a driver who knows how to utilize it, and all that weight adding driver assisting crap means nothing. Like flash said, the tub is unique too, in the way it flexes. When properly modded, our cars are tough to beat. Its been the same basic tub design since the 924. Every one knows the 924 wasnt well received by enthusiasts. They tried to make up for this, by developing it, and improving it in Le mans racing. What it evolved into was a 944. My point is, Stuttgart meant for our cars to be track cars. It was part of the "breeds" purpose. Our 944s3's....err I mean 968's, are very much purebred race cars. Albeit in production, street trim usually. Most of the other modern cars dont share this type of pedigree. Most of em are more like sedan/sports car hybrids. The 968 is a pure sports car, based on a foundation of relatively well proven race cars. A cars specific design purpose, and budget has almost everything to do with how the end product turns out. Simply put, it was designed, developed, and intended to be what it is. I dont think it was by accident.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[danderson]

Thank you for that discussion. I really enjoyed reading it. The one statement with which I fully agree is that good drivers go fast almost no matter what they drive. And slow drivers are slow no matter what they drive. I have seen it time and again and I am amazed at how much money people will spend to make the car faster, when the issue is they need to be faster.

Dwight Anderson

94 coupe

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

I can't deny the success that 968 racers have had. And yet, anytime I read a track comparison test in Car & Driver between a diverse group of cars, the one with the fastest lap time is always, always, always, without exception, the car with the best weight/hp ratio. It's usually a Corvette. Blows the more "balanced" cars like the Cayman, Boxster S, and Mazda RX8 into the weeds. Not that this makes said car the best overall car in the group, but the one with the most power always wins. Period. This is what makes the 968's track success seem like alchemy. Sure is fun, though.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Monstrous4Banger]

Yeah, the new vettes are very well balanced too now. They have a rear mounted transaxle. Hmmmmmm, wonder where they got that idea.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

"They have a rear mounted transaxle. Hmmmmmm, wonder where they got that idea."





Good point! But still (prepare for some nerdy engineer-speak), if I ran a regression analysis to find the best correlation to track time, I'm sure weight:power ratio would far out-distance any other factor.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Monstrous4Banger]

You may be right. I would agree that power to weight is a huge factor. No one single factor is the end all be all(edit other than the driver of course). Its about being well rounded in IMO. Something the 968 is. Power can always be had. You can make a geo metro fast, but its still a metro. Still a horrible layout, and crap balancing, and suspension. over the last 16 years they keep bumping the power up for sales, but the weight has kept going up. The one thing you can always upgrade a car for is power, to stay competitive. The new vettes are actually very well rounded. It only took a couple decades to figure it out though. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/rolleyes.gif" class="smilie" alt="" /> Cant really say much bad things about them, performance wise. Id still never own one though. Without our front engine Porsche's, I doubt the vette wouldve ever become what it is now.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

having raced momentum cars for decades, i can tell you that the key to this car is how you drive it, and how you take advantage of its design - if you drive it like they teach you nowadays in race school, you will be slow - if you drive it like they used to teach you, you will be fast - take a british sports car out with an old race driver, and you will quickly understand how to get the most out of these cars - the bottom line is you have to stay off of the brakes, and drive with the throttle - the really fast 968 drivers have figured this out - the other guys still struggle - the entire idea of "go fast, brake hard, then go fast again" does not take advantage of the traits of the 968

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

Flash,



I couldn't agree more. This was the big aha! I had during my set of sessions I ran before taking my test to advance to the intermediate course (I passed) - stay off the brakes! Made a huge difference in my lap times. Now if I could just get the car more planted, and more stable through the transitions (and a little more power coming out of the slow corners wouldn't hurt - the light flywheel, headers, etc., will help here, along with the removal of about 150 lb), it would really be a blast to drive.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[968Syncro]

[quote name='Monstrous4Banger' timestamp='1302838347' post='108405']

They have a rear mounted transaxle. Hmmmmmm, wonder where they got that idea.

[/quote]

Not to nitpick on this point, since I always defend Porsches, but Pontiac put a rear transaxle in the 1961 Tempest, well before the 924. Not sure how long it stayed in this design, it probably changed with 1964 Tempest with the start of the GTO option, i.e. Pontiac's first mid-sized muscle car. There are also rear transaxle examples well before the 924 like the Porsche 904 in 1962 (?), and some Alfa, Lancia, Maserati and others (not sure of years and details).



   

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Handling vs Cornering:



Even with my relatively high-grade suspension, I still feel ( based on the nearly two decades I've driven 944s ) that a pure stock 944 will outdo the 968 in a any corner. I may be wrong, but I know I feel a lot more comfortable throwing the 944 into a turn at a much higher speed that I would the 968, and expect greater stability ; that sensation you're on rails and you can never lose control of the car.. after 7 years I still can't get that with the 968 in spite of all all the Konis and the springs, and the M030 set up.. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/dry.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />



Performance vs 330 i, M3( not the 8cyl one.. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/rolleyes.gif" class="smilie" alt="" /> ) , or a 335i twin turbo.



With just a chip, airbox mod, BB catback and some 50-75 lbs lighter than stock, ( ok, and a fresh head rebuilt ),and shifting between 7000 and 7200 rpm, this car does quite well against a lot of the new(ER) and more powerful engines, so I have to believe 90% of that can be attributed to the weight/power ratio ..and driver skill <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/wink.gif" class="smilie" alt="" /> So I'm guessing if you have a supercharged coupe with a lightweight catback, and the spare tire removed, you should get close to, if not right at a 10:1 weight/power ratio and although the torque ratio may not be par with the new twin turbo 335i, I'm thinking from a rolling 20mph, it'll stay fairly even with it..but should easily smoke any stock 6cyl M3s out there.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Monstrous4Banger]

[quote name='968Syncro' timestamp='1302881441' post='108428']

Not to nitpick on this point, since I always defend Porsches, but Pontiac put a rear transaxle in the 1961 Tempest, well before the 924. Not sure how long it stayed in this design, it probably changed with 1964 Tempest with the start of the GTO option, i.e. Pontiac's first mid-sized muscle car. There are also rear transaxle examples well before the 924 like the Porsche 904 in 1962 (?), and some Alfa, Lancia, Maserati and others (not sure of years and details).





[/quote]



Yes, they also put a 3.0 4 banger in the tempest. The "trophy" engine. Some of Delorean's handy work IIRC. Porsche wasnt by any means the first. They proved it well beyond what Pontiac ever did though. If Porsche hadnt proven the design throughout the 70's, 80's, and 90's, I doubt GM wouldve re-incorprated it into the vette. By the 2000's, the japanese, and GM was still playing catch up to the leaps and bounds Porsche made with that layout.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

The thing that always bothers me about this whole argument is that if the front engine/rear transaxle layout is so great, why don't all the advanced racing classes (F1, Indycar, etc.) use it? For that matter, name the last supercar with this layout. Mid-engine, with its low polar moment of intertia, has been the near universally dominant layout in top-end street and racing cars for decades. And yet, the 968 continues to rock at the track. Again, pure alchemy...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[bombfactory]

My daily driver is an E36 M3 sedan, and while it and my 968 (both have engine and suspension mods) share similar power numbers, weight distribution and overall vehicle weight, it's interesting to experience how the two differ in the way they ride, handle and put power to the ground. The M3, as mentioned earlier, has terrific throttle response and low end torque, but I'm continually amazed by how long and hard the 968's 4-banger pulls in higher gears at freeway speeds. One of these days, when a suitably empty stretch of highway presents itself, I'm going to keep the go-pedal buried instead of lifting before 100.



I was fortunate enough to own an E30 M3 for a while and the 968 feels more like that car than the E36 in terms of power delivery (it's another 'momentum' car) and handling feedback. Once you drive cars like these, nothing less will do!



-Austin

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Ryan]

I think it (front engine/rear trans) is used on road cars over mid engine due to packaging. Sure there have been plenty of mid-engine road cars, but they don't have a lot of room and thus aren't as marketable as a 944 2+2 layout. Look at all the room we have compared to the Boxter.



Mid-engine may be the ultimate race layout but ours is the ultimate compromise.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Monstrous4Banger]

[quote name='Ryan' timestamp='1302891314' post='108445']

I think it (front engine/rear trans) is used on road cars over mid engine due to packaging. Sure there have been plenty of mid-engine road cars, but they don't have a lot of room and thus aren't as marketable as a 944 2+2 layout. Look at all the room we have compared to the Boxter.



Mid-engine may be the ultimate race layout but ours is the ultimate compromise.

[/quote]



Exactly, front engine/rear transaxle layout is more practical for a street car. Luggage room, and its much easier to service. Ever tried to wrench on a mid engine car? Not fun, just reaching over the engine bay trying to get to things is a pain. From a purely performance standpoint, mid engine all the way. Our layout achieves perfect balance, without sacrificing space.You can fit a lot of stuff in the back of a 968. Perfect for sports car. IMO a true sports car shouldnt only be performance oriented, but street oriented too. This is why the layout is so great for a sports car, its just the perfect compromise. Rigidity.....thats another story.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

But we're talking track performance, not track/street compromise issues. So let me raise a (probably meaningless) hypothetical, comparing two of my favorite cars. Given drivers of identical, fairly advanced skill and racing experience, which of these two cars is likely to be faster around a track?



Car #1: Porsche 968, with all the usual mods (monoballs everywhere, M030 sway bars, some type of LSD, say Moton Clubsports, 18" wheels, say 9.0 " up front, 10" in back, and say 260 hp at the rear wheels, 2500 lb empty weight)



Car #2: 2nd gen Toyota MR2 turbo, similarly set up in the suspension department, 350 hp at the wheels (easily and reliably attainable in these engines), 2200 lb empty weight



To me, the weight/power advantage of the MR2 should be overwhelming and devastating, but it would suffer from some degree of turbo lag, which when strapped to a mid-engined layout (and one known to suffer from snap oversteer at that), would make it trickier to drive smoothely. Would the 968 stand a chance against a weapon like the MR2? I'm curious as to peoples' opinions, because my original plan was to sell the 968, and use part of the proceeds to build an MR2 spec'd as described above.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.