SCCA rules, rule out big bore motors Options

[Randal]

At least in XP.

A fantasy of mine is to keep my car all Porsche and put in a 993 3.6. While the car would be +/-100 pounds heaver it would have over 300hp (with Varioram) and around 250lbs of torque. It would be a great hill climb car able to compete with the big bore modified cars.

OK, but then what do you do the rest of the year? XP rules would dictate ballasting up to 1997#. Are you kidding me?

So the only way to be competitive in XP is to convert to a Suby or shove in a twin turbo motor, just like everyone else.

Annoying.

[brant]

The 911 conversion adds a bit over 150lbs from a 4.

[Randal]

The 911 conversion adds a bit over 150lbs from a 4.

Ouch!

I could lose another 50lbs off my car pretty easily, so 1800# would be the target finished weight.

So 1800# (excluding driver) with over 300hp and 270+ foot pounds of torque. For a car that handles that would be a pretty good package. Personally I don't care about the HP, it's the torque that moves the car out of the corners.

[Woody]

I have begun to source some parts to build a short stroke 2.5 off of a 74 7R case. Displacement will be 2519 and I will be running in FP. I don't think I will have much problems keeping the car under 1900 lbs.

[Randal]

I have begun to source some parts to build a short stroke 2.5 off of a 74 7R case. Displacement will be 2519 and I will be running in FP. I don't think I will have much problems keeping the car under 1900 lbs.

Sounds interesting. How much HP and Torque?

[grantsfo]

Could always run EM. Even with turbo you'd have to ballast up. Then you have Driveability issues associated with low displacement turbo motor.

[Woody]

I'm hoping to see 220+ hp and 175 ftlbs but the torque may be a bit on the optimistic side. I intend to build it with a very light rotating mass and use a non counterweighted 2.0 crankshaft with E cams. I would like to have a 8,000 rpm redline and gear the car low. I think this could work if I keep the car light. Granted I am just now beginning to aquire the parts needed and have no idea how I am going to be able to afford everything. Buying a 3.2 or a 3.6 would be cheaper but I already have the 2.7.

[brant]

I have begun to source some parts to build a short stroke 2.5 off of a 74 7R case. Displacement will be 2519 and I will be running in FP. I don't think I will have much problems keeping the car under 1900 lbs.

Under 1900 with a 6 is doable but not easy. Review my thread about how we got to 1826. Don't expect to have any street legal gear (no headlights or windows for instance). An enclosed trailer becomes necessary for long tows through rain.

Most -6 cars are 2000lbs at road racing trim

[Woody]

I have begun to source some parts to build a short stroke 2.5 off of a 74 7R case. Displacement will be 2519 and I will be running in FP. I don't think I will have much problems keeping the car under 1900 lbs.

Under 1900 with a 6 is doable but not easy. Review my thread about how we got to 1826. Don't expect to have any street legal gear (no headlights or windows for instance). An enclosed trailer becomes necessary for long tows through rain.

Most -6 cars are 2000lbs at road racing trim

I read your thread. Great build. I intend to keep it street legal but am willing to go with glass lids and plexi windows. As for headlights I will probably fab up some sort of GT like kit.

[r_towle]

Twin turbo 3.6

Just saying

[brant]

Street legal is going to be closer to 1950 -2000lbs. Let us know when you weigh. I've been doing this for 25 years and 1900 will be tough if street legal.

Let us know.

[Britain Smith]

I was sub-1800 with a 2.7L 6-cylinder motor...and that was with a overly heavy cage.

-Britain

[brant]

Yes but not street legal. My car is a bit heavy because of the metal body panels/hoods and full trunk floor and roof when compared to yours. I have to keep metal fenders for my vintage class.

[J P Stein]

High HP works only when you're OTG, whereas light weight works all the time..... Just something to file in the back if your mind. At some HP/Torque point, a weight increase becomes inevitable.

Brit has doubled his HP with an expense that an AC Porsche motor cost that would more than double..... while maintaining the low CG that is something I would not give up. There are few even semi-affordable options that maintain that low CG and none of them say Porsche on em'.

[Randal]

High HP works only when you're OTG, whereas light weight works all the time..... Just something to file in the back if your mind. At some HP/Torque point, a weight increase becomes inevitable.

Brit has doubled his HP with an expense that an AC Porsche motor cost that would more than double..... while maintaining the low CG that is something I would not give up. There are few even semi-affordable options that maintain that low CG and none of them say Porsche on em'.

You are right, it's just hard to swallow.

[SirAndy]

I understand that people want to go faster, but what's the point of running a Porsche without a Porsche motor?

If you want to drive a subie so bad, use a damn subie for your racecar.

I never got that ...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

[ConeDodger]

I understand that people want to go faster, but what's the point of running a Porsche without a Porsche motor?

If you want to drive a subie so bad, use a damn subie for your racecar.

I never got that ...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

[r_towle]

I understand that people want to go faster, but what's the point of running a Porsche without a Porsche motor?

If you want to drive a subie so bad, use a damn subie for your racecar.

I never got that ...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

Twin turbo.....

[carr914]

I'm hoping to see 220+ hp and 175 ftlbs but the torque may be a bit on the optimistic side. I intend to build it with a very light rotating mass and use a non counterweighted 2.0 crankshaft with E cams. I would like to have a 8,000 rpm redline and gear the car low. I think this could work if I keep the car light. Granted I am just now beginning to aquire the parts needed and have no idea how I am going to be able to afford everything. Buying a 3.2 or a 3.6 would be cheaper but I already have the 2.7.

Numbers aren't far off.

I got 214hp, 185ftlbs out of this 2.5

[Randal]

I'm hoping to see 220+ hp and 175 ftlbs but the torque may be a bit on the optimistic side. I intend to build it with a very light rotating mass and use a non counterweighted 2.0 crankshaft with E cams. I would like to have a 8,000 rpm redline and gear the car low. I think this could work if I keep the car light. Granted I am just now beginning to aquire the parts needed and have no idea how I am going to be able to afford everything. Buying a 3.2 or a 3.6 would be cheaper but I already have the 2.7.

Numbers aren't far off.

I got 214hp, 185ftlbs out of this 2.5

On the dyno or to the wheels?

Beautiful motor!