Notices
928 Forum 1978-1995
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 928 Specialists

New Mercedes vs 928 S4 on Motor Trend

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-07-2016, 11:43 AM
  #16  
rnixon
Burning Brakes
 
rnixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Los Altos, CA
Posts: 757
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

The result wasn't really a surprise. It would have been somewhat different with longer straights though.

It is news that a 30 year old car is still competitive on the track, especially one made for Grand Touring, not racing. Personally, I bought mind for style and character - there are lots of modern cars that will out-perform it (at least when staying road-legal), and could cost a lot less to maintain. I have boring cars to drive in weather, and the 928 for smiles per hour.
Old 12-07-2016, 10:48 PM
  #17  
2002M3Drew
Burning Brakes
 
2002M3Drew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bernardsville, NJ
Posts: 1,212
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

If you happen t have old stacks of car magazines around, take a look at any early 1980's Road & Track Road Test Summary page...and then look at the same page from 2016. Quite an eye opener to see how fast the average car has become.

It was a fair point to illustrate how far these little sport utes have come, although as everyone has said, probably the slowest Porsche (other than the 944 or 968 automatic) to bring to the test. The MB automatic is not at all fast. My 2006 Cayenne S would spank my 1985 928S in a stop light race, mostly because you can preselect 1st gear and it will bang off the 1-2 shift at redline.

Would have been fun to see a 1987 3.2 Carrera take the same challenge...but then again, a 2800 lb sports car spanking a mini 'ute is not much of a challenge.
Old 12-08-2016, 04:14 AM
  #18  
Nicole
Cottage Industry Sponsor
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
Nicole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Silly Valley, CA
Posts: 25,780
Received 149 Likes on 80 Posts
Default

Bigger wheels could have made a significant difference. The Rogerbox didn't help, either.

But it really doesn't matter much. You either love the 928, or you don't. A second around a track is only relevant, if you actually drive on tracks.
Old 12-08-2016, 10:06 AM
  #19  
JPTL
Rennlist Member
 
JPTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Warrenton, VA
Posts: 2,654
Received 202 Likes on 89 Posts
Default

I think this guy's next video should be comparing the accuracy of a Timex Quartz to a Rolex Oyster Perpetual.
I'd be riveted.
Old 12-08-2016, 12:05 PM
  #20  
XS29L9B
Burning Brakes
 
XS29L9B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South of The Mason Dixon Line
Posts: 1,237
Received 131 Likes on 67 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 2002M3Drew
If you happen t have old stacks of car magazines around, take a look at any early 1980's Road & Track Road Test Summary page...and then look at the same page from 2016. Quite an eye opener to see how fast the average car has become.

It was a fair point to illustrate how far these little sport utes have come, although as everyone has said, probably the slowest Porsche (other than the 944 or 968 automatic) to bring to the test. The MB automatic is not at all fast. My 2006 Cayenne S would spank my 1985 928S in a stop light race, mostly because you can preselect 1st gear and it will bang off the 1-2 shift at redline.

Would have been fun to see a 1987 3.2 Carrera take the same challenge...but then again, a 2800 lb sports car spanking a mini 'ute is not much of a challenge.

In the 1990s, I had dinner with my Dad, taking my 1989 GTA I had, which at the time, could be a fair comparison to the 928 of the same. As we drove to dinner, I remember his comments about how the car was quite loud (compared to the 928) and not as smooth, but immediately recognized the car "felt" faster/quicker then its european counterpart.

Which car would have been fast around the track? Who knows. They were both fast, but in different ways. They were also both comfortable, in their own manners, as well. But fast forward to today, and they are both slow and antiquated by today's modern machines.
Old 12-08-2016, 12:07 PM
  #21  
XS29L9B
Burning Brakes
 
XS29L9B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South of The Mason Dixon Line
Posts: 1,237
Received 131 Likes on 67 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rnixon
...I have boring cars to drive in weather, and the 928 for smiles per hour.
Me too... My 928 is probably one of my slowest vehicles. I think my wife's SUV may be quicker, but it's a Porsche, too.
Old 12-08-2016, 01:32 PM
  #22  
JPTL
Rennlist Member
 
JPTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Warrenton, VA
Posts: 2,654
Received 202 Likes on 89 Posts
Default

I had my comeuppance last year at the track. This mostly stock looking econobox was on my butt through the turns, but that wasn't a huge surprise. With the right driver, the little cars do well in the twisties. It was when he was pushing me in the straights. WTF?
I was humbled and wanted to find out what this grocery-getter really was.
Turns out it was a mildly tweaked Mazda 3 MPS. Very unassuming, but the guy told me it dynoed at just under 300hp. In that little chassis..that explains a lot.
And it was his daily driver.
Looked kinda like this:



Who'dve thought?
Old 12-08-2016, 07:40 PM
  #23  
michaelathome
Race Car
 
michaelathome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chantilly VA
Posts: 4,458
Received 5 Likes on 1 Post
Default

It was a good watch, thanks for posting that.

That said, as he did say that's 30 years of advancements. My wife's VW 2012 CC 2.0 is just as quick as my '89. The DSG makes a difference as does the direct injection. Add stiffer springs and change the fuel mappings in the VW and it would beat my '89 by more than a few seconds. Top end I do not know as I haven't researched her gear ratio to hp/torque and what the limit might be.

The video shows what modern cars can do and not so much what an older car with modern technology "could be" capable of.

Michael
Old 12-08-2016, 08:23 PM
  #24  
James Bailey
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
James Bailey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 18,061
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Michael your S-4 should be slightly quicker than the CC and faster....you might want to dyno your car to see if it still is running as it should.
Old 12-08-2016, 09:07 PM
  #25  
michaelathome
Race Car
 
michaelathome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chantilly VA
Posts: 4,458
Received 5 Likes on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by James Bailey
Michael your S-4 should be slightly quicker than the CC and faster....you might want to dyno your car to see if it still is running as it should.
Jim,

I have no doubt that my '89 could stretch her legs and outrun the CC. 0 to speed limits I have the CC by a couple of cars but that is relative seconds.

Throw her car on a track with better springs/suspension than stock and mappings and the CC would catch me.

The video is about a track and 2 cars. Neither made it above 120-130mph. The 928 is a GT and not a Lotus.

The comparison was between a modern car (sports) and a 30 year old (sports) car.

Michael



Quick Reply: New Mercedes vs 928 S4 on Motor Trend



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 11:25 PM.