kevin Dubois

and you think this del sol was not purpose built? you think he spent 30k just to say he had the fastest honda in the neighborhood? he most likely races it, legally or not, but there had to have been a purpose to him building it. also, that del sol has next to nothing in common with a factory del sol, just as a WRC focus has nearly nothing in common with a factory focus. The del sol has a roll cage, turbo, NOS, ext.. it's not like he bolted on a cold air intake and a fatty exhaust, and some big stickers calling it good.

Bob S. 1984 Silver

Just an additional point (or two)

Most car buyers are not afficianodos. They want a grocery getter, period. Something relaible, comfortable that takes little or no skill to drive. I don't live in the snow belt any longer, but when I did, my winter car was ALWAYS a fwd. They inherently handle much better in icy conditions and helped me avoid some of the hazards on the winter roads, mostly other cars.... Also, it is not fair to think of the 911 and its variants as simply "rwd" They are far more than that. They have the engine hanging way out there, aggrivating any steering and traction problem imaginable. That is why Porsche over the years has tweaked the livig hell out of the design to try to compensate. The 914, on the other hand, with its mid engine design is a very forgiving vehicle and fun to drive at high speeds, as is the 924/944/951.

Whether or not the 951 is the "best bang for the buck", I don't know. I do know that the N/A gets short shrift by some folks in this BB, as if it were a poor stepchild. It may be, but "can't we all get along"? After all, your dick size is not related to your car's horsepower. Having been a PCA member for many years, I have had an opportunity to hear nightmare stories about repairs done an all iterations of Porsche and the little "10-12k" 951 is right up there with the big boys. At least in the category of maintenance/repairs the 944/951 meets the Porsche standard for keeping owner's wallets slim.

My regular "grocery getter" is a VR6 Passat, FWD. If you haven't driven one, you should try before you damn evenything without a front to rear driveshaft. You might just be pleasantly surprised.

I simply do not understand why the major manufacturers can build a car that can be repaired with a good set of basic tools while folks like Porsche build cars that require a boatload of special purpose tools just to change a water pump. Any of you folks have an answer for that? I'm beginning to wonder how much thought and quality actually go into some of these more exotic marques.

Don't forget how many parts on a Porsche are farmed out and how many of them say "Made in Japan" on them...(radio, a/c compressor to mention two, and God knows how many sub assemblies.....)

"Ach, Heinrich...Ve vill put Porsche emblems on Yugos....." "Ja, Fritz, und ve vill charge 70 k Euros for dem..." "Think ve can make them fast enough?" "Nein, Fritz...they vill nefer be fast, but they vill cost an arm und a leg to keep running.." "Ja...ve vill sell them special tools und make sure critical parts must be replaced und nefer rebuilt...." "I vill call der cardboard factory und order der dashboards und der door panels.." "Ja, und I vill call VW und see if they sthill have any of those courtesy light assemblies left over from der original bug.."(Sound of laughter and beer steins clinking while the Brinks truck trudges off to the bank) fade to black.....

my 2 pfennigs worth

Bob S.

Dave

[quote] I what the hell your logic is above but it's f***ed.<hr></blockquote>
Well said.
[quote] Any car can be made to go fast, handle well, etc. if you dump enough money into <hr></blockquote>
In this case, about $500 in the engine and $800 chassis between '83 and '86 so adjust for inflation.
[quote]and 80s vettes were pathetic garbage.<hr></blockquote>
IIRC the '85-'86 vette, speced out very similar to YOUR car, of course they were brand new then so I guess that's BETTER than your car. Then again, "F-bodies" ?!? Bargains?!? They're still crap.
[quote] I can give you a link to a 9 sec hyundai - not that it proves anything.<hr></blockquote>
You are correct here, unless it can also handle and stop well, and can be built for just a few grand.
[quote] RWD is vastly superior for any sort of performance car period.<hr></blockquote>
I still think you don't know how to drive FWD, and it's easier to bash than it is to own up. I do not disagree that RWD has advantages, but your blanket statement shows your ignorance.

Mongo

My cousin and I paid a visit to a local illegal street race one night last year in his red 86 951 that can turn a mid 12 on the track. This guy braggin he ran low 11s on his TT black Civic EX with a B18C (Type R integra motor i believe) engine wanted to race my cousin. So he said yes. So they got flagged off and my cousin ended up spinning his tires off the line too much and lost his ground for the first 3 seconds of the race. The civic was gone, then about 5 seconds after that we all (the crowd and me ) heard a loud pop and flames from a distance. It was the black civic. It had caught fire and its engine completely blown. I took my car and drove to the burning rice patty and i saw the guy crying on the road after putting the fire out with the extinguisher he had hooked up to his roll bar inside. Most likely homeboy thought he can run about 15 psis on a motor with 9:1 compression and still drive home. Anyways the cops showed up and they impounded his car and took him to jail and my cousin and I just continued along our merry way...

Moral of the story, you can turn an 11, you can turn an 10....when that motor blows in a few miles....whatcho' gonna do then????

Mongo

another thing...there are Porsches out there that run 11s and 10s. Autothority's upgrades for the 993 Turbo made a black one I saw in a magazine one time turn a 10.7 somwhere around 150 mph bracket at a track in Sonoma, California. Eddie Bello's white 911 Turbo (964 body styling) ran a 9.0 flat on street tires!

If you guys wanna see a Porsche that can run 10s again look at Kelly Moss' 944 with a 928 motor. Go to Devek where they are currently working on Twin Turbos and Superchargers for 928s up to 600 HP and put that in a 2500 lb car. That'll turn an 11 easy. but you get the 10,000 mile thing again i bet... <img src="graemlins/cussing.gif" border="0" alt="[grrrrrrr]" />

Luke

[quote]Originally posted by brh986:
<strong>

I have no idea what that is but basically left foot braking applies to any car in the right situation (but it's rarely used) so I have no idea why you brought that up.</strong><hr></blockquote>

HAHAHAHAHAHA, FWD and AWD are better suited as rally cars (rwd ISN'T the best senario there). Go ask a WRC driver how "RARELY" he left foot brakes <img src="graemlins/roflmao.gif" border="0" alt="[hiha]" /> . Scandinavian flick, is jerking the wheel into the apex on a RWD car and then following through.

nib5

1/4 mile - 3.58 seconds at 386mph - "Vanishing Point" Santa Pod raceway, Bedfordshire, England.

0.16 sec 0-60, 0.36 sec 0-100. Okay, I know the pedantic will uncover the fact that it is a hydrogen peroxide rocket car, but I imagine ANYTHING else would feel like a motorised wheelchair in comparison.

Just think of the laundry bills <img src="graemlins/oops.gif" border="0" alt="[oops]" />

Lemon Yellow 87 n/a

Was too lazy to read the whole thread. All I have to say is this car is a HONDA DEL SLOW

Thaddeus

Somebody in the thread above criticized my method for evaluating the 951 in determining whether it's good value for money. They said that comparing the cost of a 951 to a new car with comparable performance wasn't valid. No rationale, just a flat assertion.

OK, so compare an 87 951 to other cars of that age with comparable performance. Oh, can't find any? 87 951 performs better and cheaper than an 87 Vette? Perform better than an 87 Ferrari and cost less? Go figure.

Compare insurance costs too while you're at it. I can't even insure a Vette. The 951 costs 300 bucks every 6 months.

So, Still think it's not good value for money? Please... on an objective basis, the 951 is excellent value. Repair costs are manageable if you try a little bit.

On a subjective basis, it's even better. I love driving that car. Nothing like it.

'Nuff said.

Thaddeus

tylerdurden

Do I want a RWD car (proud CRX owner)? Yes. Does FWD "suck", as you so intellegently put it? Um, no. Witness Roger Foo's crappy little Civic hatch with a whopping 1.6 liter NA engine soundly beating numerous RWD bavarian cars with nearly twice the engine and a proper drivetrain layout(not to mention the Type R's which have until recently dominated the series) in the Speedvision World Cup series. Pull your head out your ****.

brh986

[quote]Originally posted by Luke:
<strong>

HAHAHAHAHAHA, FWD and AWD are better suited as rally cars (rwd ISN'T the best senario there). Go ask a WRC driver how "RARELY" he left foot brakes <img src="graemlins/roflmao.gif" border="0" alt="[hiha]" /> . Scandinavian flick, is jerking the wheel into the apex on a RWD car and then following through. </strong><hr></blockquote>


Obviously but neither are rice boy cars, 911s have been known to be used for rally purposes despite the rwd. And awd is still better. FWD blows, period. Even in a rally application the only reason you would use it is if you couldn't get AWD for some reason. It sucks, there's no excuse or defense for it.

brh986

[quote]Originally posted by tylerdurden:
<strong>Do I want a RWD car (proud CRX owner)? Yes. Does FWD "suck", as you so intellegently put it? Um, no. Witness Roger Foo's crappy little Civic hatch with a whopping 1.6 liter NA engine soundly beating numerous RWD bavarian cars with nearly twice the engine and a proper drivetrain layout</strong><hr></blockquote>


And if they had RWD they'd be even faster, dumbass!

brh986

[quote]Originally posted by Dave:
<strong>
I still think you don't know how to drive FWD, and it's easier to bash than it is to own up. I do not disagree that RWD has advantages, but your blanket statement shows your ignorance.</strong><hr></blockquote>

ANYONE that can drive RWD can drive FWD. With a neutrally handling RWD car you have to learn to controll both understeer (easy) and oversteer (more difficult). FWD only has understeer to deal with which any idiot can handle (that's the idea behind this moronic setup, every day drivers are too incompetent to handle RWD). Why you would go out of your way to perfect your FWD technique is beyond me unless you simply cannot afford RWD (or awd for rally).

bs

[quote]Originally posted by brh986:
<strong>
FWD only has understeer to deal with which any idiot can handle.
Why you would go out of your way to perfect your FWD technique is beyond me unless you simply cannot afford RWD</strong><hr></blockquote>

my contour (fwd) oversteers all the time. of course that is only when i'm using the front wheel drive-specific technique of "right hand braking".

and yep, that's exactly why i spent all those years at college perfecting my fwd technique... i was paying for school.

tylerdurden

FWD cars understeer because YOU CAN'T DRIVE. RWD cars oversteer becuase YOU CAN'T DRIVE. If you want to go as fast as possible, you need to drift, which you can do with a properly set up RWD OR FWD car. Learn how to drive.