944 vs C4 as a DD track rat

OK, I know, chalk and cheese. I'm basically looking for a less projecty car than the Celica as we're short one "back-up" car if one of our vehicles takes up residence with the local mechanics or I'm working on it for a few days.

I'm looking for the usual suspects (E30, Miata, MR2) but I've also looked at a couple of 944s and am most likely going to look at an S2 on the weekend. However a quick look on the CLs around here suggests I can get a manual C4 for similar money or less, which threw up a couple of interesting thoughts - why not get an L89 C4 as something I take on the track (or even a later one, I've seen a couple that are around the $5k mark).

I'd expect consumables (tires, fuel) for a C4 to be more expensive than a 944, but OTOH for the stuff I can't do on a C4 I can throw it at the local mechanic rather than have to schlep 1 1/2h up to Reno for the closest people who can do the work. That would be a huge bonus for me simply because it makes the logistics a lot simpler. Also, I'm getting more comfortable working on our C4 Convertible and I think having two of the same might just make the whole wrenching thing simpler. Plus of course the speed parts for C4s are, shall we say, slightly cheaper than for a 944.

I remember that one of the comments re the GRM C4 was that it would be much nicer on the track if it was smaller, but what other holes can the community poke into these plans?

In reply to BoxheadTim:

I suspect they both make far better track cars than daily drivers. I'd take the C4 for lower priced parts and more power.

The 944 will be a far better DD. Both make good track cars, but a stock C4 (especially one priced the same as a 944) will make low power and have issues. I just compared these two myself about a month ago and ended up buying the 944 over the C4.

The C4 has the following Pros: Good power, great power for cheap mods, big tires, easy bolt-pattern/wheels, easyish to work on. Cons: Early transmissions problem areas, later cars are expensive to buy, impossible to get good seats for, heavy, expensive tires, early electronics are garbage.

The 944 has the following Pros: Good power, 951 can make great power for cheap mods, more comfortable, easier ingress/egress, has good track classes for DTD racing, cheap to buy, cheap tires. Cons: Expensive parts and maintenance (unless DIY), not-common/expensive bolt-pattern/wheels, timing belt has to be watched like a hawk, later models (S, S2, 2.7, 951) are expensive.

In conclusion, the 944 makes a better DD, has better classes available to it both for racing and DE (through the PCA), and is cheaper overall (cheaper buy in and cheaper consumables). Wrench on it yourself and keep up on the maintnenance and it should be a winner.

Final thought: Gas is $4+ a gallon again, I am averaging 24MPG in the N/A 944, with a best tank of 28. TPI C4, even with a working 4+3, will struggle mightilly to match that. How many V8's do you really want to feed?

In reply to Javelin:

I never tracked my 944, but I understand that it is common for track 944s to spin a bearing after suffering oil starvation from going around hard corners. The engines aren't cheap.

But yeah, the 944 should be a far better DD. I couldn't agree more. I could haul a family of four or my mountain bike in mine. I averaged around 22 mpg.

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to Javelin: I never tracked my 944, but I understand that it is common for track 944s to spin a bearing after suffering oil starvation from going around hard corners. The engines aren't cheap. But yeah, the 944 should be a far better DD. I couldn't agree more.

I have been researching this and I'm seeing it as being a few isolated cases turning into internet hard truths. Basically, the rod bearings are the first to wear out in the motor, and if you track it heavily with low oil and a stock pan and do a lot of steady-state sweepers eventually the oil pump will grab air and wipe the rod bearings.

The preventative maintenance is to drop the pan and swap bearings before tracking the car heavily if it has high miles, always run good/fresh oil topped off (and check it religiously), and you should be OK. Dedicated track cars run baffled pans and Accusumps as well.

I should note that the LS1 is an extremely easy and well-documented swap into the 944 should the bent-4 ever break.

Javelin wrote: Final thought: Gas is $4+ a gallon again, I am averaging 24MPG in the N/A 944, with a best tank of 28. TPI C4, even with a working 4+3, will struggle mightilly to match that. How many V8's do you really want to feed?

Actually our slushbox C4 Convertible does appear to come in around 24-25mpg on average driving around here in the mountains, more on long trips.

Obviously I'm trying not to drive in a way that spells "arrest me".

That's over twice the mileage I'm seeing from a certain AMC V8 .

You got double-digit MPG's out of an AMC V8!!!

Yes, 10.85mpg on the last fill up . Probably would've made it to 10.87 if I hadn't had to drive around in a snow storm for two hours with chains on all wheels.

Fuel consumption isn't being helped by the CJ being of the Quadratrac variety, either.

Javelin wrote: The 944 will be a *far* better DD. Both make good track cars, but a stock C4 (especially one priced the same as a 944) will make low power and have issues. I just compared these two myself about a month ago and ended up buying the 944 over the C4.

Low power wouldn't be that big an issue - I'm not that far from the "need GPS to find my way around the track" stage yet anyway so I'd prefer something slower so I don't plow quite as deep into the kitty litter.

I heartily vote for the C4. Vette has WAY more potential than the German.

Javelin wrote: I should note that the LS1 is an extremely easy and well-documented swap into the 944 should the bent-4 ever break.

Personally I think that would be sacrilege in an S2, but a baffeld pan might still be a good idea. That one has about 150k on it from what the seller told me, but I'd rather not tear into the engine for the sake of a few track days.

Supposedly the pan is stupid-easy to drop. Like changing the rod bearings is easier than doing the timing belt easy.

Javelin wrote: I have been researching this and I'm seeing it as being a few isolated cases turning into internet hard truths. Basically, the rod bearings are the first to wear out in the motor, and if you track it heavily with low oil and a stock pan and do a lot of steady-state sweepers eventually the oil pump will grab air and wipe the rod bearings. The preventative maintenance is to drop the pan and swap bearings before tracking the car heavily if it has high miles, always run good/fresh oil topped off (and check it religiously), and you should be OK. Dedicated track cars run baffled pans and Accusumps as well.

I kind of agree with you. Since I went through 3 motors before getting the accusump it is not myth and legend. It is fact! As a street car this is not an issue it is a track issue only. Long left handed sweepers especially flat corners (like turns 1&2 on the oval and NHIS) will kill a 944 motor in short order when driven "at speed"

An accusump solves the problem. From experience topping off the oil only prolongs the inevitable. Regular bearing changes and keeping an eye on the oil pressure (especially hot idle oil pressure) is key. The good thing is that changing the bearings is not a big deal. Set a 4x4 across the strut towers and strap the motor to it. Drop the cross member, I don't completely remove it as the rack and the A-arms are attached to it. Drop the pan and swap bearings and then bolt it back together. I have done it in an hour with a helper. Realistically it is a 3-4 hour job the first time you do it after that it is 1-2 hour job.

Javelin wrote: The 944 will be a *far* better DD. Both make good track cars, but a stock C4 (especially one priced the same as a 944) will make low power and have issues. I just compared these two myself about a month ago and ended up buying the 944 over the C4. The 944 has the following Pros: Good power

Huh? 150 hp in a 2850lb car is good, 245hp in a 3200lb car is low power? Not to mention you only have to look at the L98 funny to make more power.... I loved my (LT1) C4 in autox and it was a joy on smooth roads. I'd imagine it would be a fantastic, very well balanced track car. 26-27mpg was easy. If I was to do it again, I'd get the L98 version for parts availability and cost.

The Porsche would be a nicer DD, no question in my mind. The corvette interior was pretty...sad. Unfortunately.

Crossfire 84 C4: 205HP, 3,200Lbs TPI 85 C4: 230HP, 3,230Lbs

Neither is light nor powerful, really. Yes the power/weight for paper specs is better for the C4, but in the real world stock TPI (and especially Crossfire) engines are struggling to make that number. Also, can you find any Corvette with no options (and therefor stock weight)? Most C4's pork out around 3,800 with the leather, power everything, and stereos...

I should have premised the statements as "for the weight" though.

3800 pounds? Where did you get that? The convertible is under 3400 from what I'm seeing.

njansenv wrote:

Javelin wrote: The 944 will be a *far* better DD. Both make good track cars, but a stock C4 (especially one priced the same as a 944) will make low power and have issues. I just compared these two myself about a month ago and ended up buying the 944 over the C4. The 944 has the following Pros: Good power

Huh? 150 hp in a 2850lb car is good, 245hp in a 3200lb car is low power? Not to mention you only have to look at the L98 funny to make more power.... I loved my (LT1) C4 in autox and it was a joy on smooth roads. I'd imagine it would be a fantastic, very well balanced track car. 26-27mpg was easy. If I was to do it again, I'd get the L98 version for parts availability and cost. The Porsche would be a nicer DD, no question in my mind. The corvette interior was pretty...sad. Unfortunately.

double huh? A 96 C4 with 330 hp compared to whatever the 944 put out? I'd take the C4.

'96 C4s aren't exactly coming it at 944 budgets, though.

Does anybody know how they compare insurance-wise? Is a 944 much more expensive to insure than a C4?

I see it as....

Do you want to be seen as Joe Frazer(C4), or Sugar Ray Leonard(944)

pres589 wrote: 3800 pounds? Where did you get that? The convertible is under 3400 from what I'm seeing.

Track scales

plance1 wrote: double huh? A 96 C4 with 330 hp compared to whatever the 944 put out? I'd take the C4.

Say what? A 96 LT4 C4 goes for $10,000+ dude. We are talking $3000-$5000 cars here, which is solidly in the TPI era, maybe a thrashed LT1, neither of which made 300HP. The 944 had 150, then 170, then 210 and the 951 was even more, all with ~500Lbs less weight and 50/50 weight distribution.

BoxheadTim wrote: '96 C4s aren't exactly coming it at 944 budgets, though. Does anybody know how they compare insurance-wise? Is a 944 much more expensive to insure than a C4?

For me (27, married, no kids yet, house, clean driving record for 5+ years) it was a wash. They were within pennies of each other for the same coverage (State Farm, Comp & Collision included).

I have a vague idea how much State Farm wants for a C4 because that's who ours is insured with so it's good to know that a 944 is unlikely to be that much worse.

Mind you, there's NotACheapClaim on my record now and a slightly soiled drivers license on top of that (I'll know how soiled after the court date) since my attempt at using the CJ7 as an involuntary road block.

Actually, the DD-ability is a nice to have more than an absolute requirement as the summer DD has two wheels rather than four and driving a sports car around here in Winter generally has Bad Idea written all over it.

Javelin wrote:

plance1 wrote: double huh? A 96 C4 with 330 hp compared to whatever the 944 put out? I'd take the C4.

Say what? A 96 LT4 C4 goes for $10,000+ dude. We are talking $3000-$5000 cars here, which is solidly in the TPI era, *maybe* a thrashed LT1, neither of which made 300HP. The 944 had 150, then 170, then 210 and the 951 was even more, all with ~500Lbs less weight and 50/50 weight distribution.

A 951 isn't a 944, and a good one isn't $5000. TPI Corvettes are quicker and lighter than your giving them credit for. Magazines tested them at 13.9's to 14.6's (Heavy verts), stock. The same magazines tested the non S2 944's in the MID 16 SECOND range, and the S2's in the mid 15's. Thats a BIG difference. Don't get me wrong, I like 944's, and I'm glad you like yours. But lets not call the Corvette slow and then say the 944 has good power. The 944 accelerates more slowly than a maintained DOHC Neon.

Around here, a reasonably clean (not mint) 951 is at least 8k.... Of course, you're going to tell me about all the ones in your neighborhood that are $2500.

Well, I have found a 951 on the way to the S2 for $5k. Not sure it's worth the detour, though.

I've also found a '95 6sp C4 for the same money as the S2 more or less on the way back from the S2...