16v vs. 32v Driving Impressions.
03-15-2006, 12:01 AM
#91
Rennlist Member
PLEASE, its not all about gearing or when the torque peaks! Its about the HP over the speed range you can put down!! if you are serious about what car beats another, its about max hp and average hp to the wheels over the speed range. OK, we all know this, right? agreed?
next, a '93 quatro kicked the *** of the S4????? who was driving?? thats just plain silly!! 1700lbs more weight!!!!! I think you had it backward. at best, the Audi would beat an S4 off the line. you mentioned its specs of 290ish hp and 270ish torque. clearly, it is more like the 1985 928US. an S4 has 30 more hp and 50more ftlbs of torque, making more hp, for more of the time over any speed range! Just look at the specs, 0-60 is not going to count, though i imagine that 1700lbs heavier Audi will find a way to make up some ground, but 60-100, willl be in the hands of the S4, even if you could imagine shorter gears for the Audi , which it doesnt have.
Now, what does walk all over the S4 is the RS6, at 450hp and 4000lbs, or even the slightly old M5 at 400hp and 4000+llbs.
Mk
also, there are no US vin 928s with euro parts on them. Im sure 928 intl can back me up on that point.
The facts are this: the S4 and euro 84-85 are close to the same car with different looks. 310hp vs 316hp. same brakes, slight difference in trannies.
US 86s get the 5 liter, have a bunch of potential for more power vs the euro
US 84s and earlier are dogs, but can be upgraded to euro.
79 range has the lower gearing, and the 4.5 liter and has the CIS, which breathes better.
bottom line, they are all in the same weight class. somewhere between 3350lbs and 3500lbs. 150lbs is not enough weight to really debate about, its like comparing 15hp. sure its better, but its not a huge factor. Plus, the weight can be dropped on the S4 pretty easily.
next, a '93 quatro kicked the *** of the S4????? who was driving?? thats just plain silly!! 1700lbs more weight!!!!! I think you had it backward. at best, the Audi would beat an S4 off the line. you mentioned its specs of 290ish hp and 270ish torque. clearly, it is more like the 1985 928US. an S4 has 30 more hp and 50more ftlbs of torque, making more hp, for more of the time over any speed range! Just look at the specs, 0-60 is not going to count, though i imagine that 1700lbs heavier Audi will find a way to make up some ground, but 60-100, willl be in the hands of the S4, even if you could imagine shorter gears for the Audi , which it doesnt have.
Now, what does walk all over the S4 is the RS6, at 450hp and 4000lbs, or even the slightly old M5 at 400hp and 4000+llbs.
Mk
also, there are no US vin 928s with euro parts on them. Im sure 928 intl can back me up on that point.
The facts are this: the S4 and euro 84-85 are close to the same car with different looks. 310hp vs 316hp. same brakes, slight difference in trannies.
US 86s get the 5 liter, have a bunch of potential for more power vs the euro
US 84s and earlier are dogs, but can be upgraded to euro.
79 range has the lower gearing, and the 4.5 liter and has the CIS, which breathes better.
bottom line, they are all in the same weight class. somewhere between 3350lbs and 3500lbs. 150lbs is not enough weight to really debate about, its like comparing 15hp. sure its better, but its not a huge factor. Plus, the weight can be dropped on the S4 pretty easily.
Originally Posted by animal8526
havin driven all but the gt and the gts and euros, knowing alot about HP@ what rpm and TRQ@ what rpm and gearing and weight.. you guys can chest pound allday long bottom anscer is on paper the last 16v euros are the best out of the box...ON PAPER!! besides that APPLES TO APPLES test drive one 928 to another(TOP SPEED NOT COUNTING) !!!..knowing that some ATs start in first gear..unless you pound on the gas!! Iv test drove an 87 s4 hard then test drove a 93 audi v8 quattro(4.2 v8 276hp 296TQ 4800lbs) kicked the *** off the s4 everywere but right off the line...but dosnt give the driver control feel the S4 dos. but look how much more it weighs!!!..its all about gearing/when the TQ peaks and and how flat the HP curve is....not to mention HOW WELL TUNED IT IS!!!! NOWING ALOT ABOUT MOPARS AND HOW DIFFERANT THEY CAN BE IN THE SAME YEAR..id have to say thier are a few special order US 928s that probly have euro stuff in them from the factory!!!ie; cams heads and posibly the whole shabang but still have US vin#s on the casting..its all about who the original owners knew and how much they wanted to pay!..so if i was the original poster of this thread i would of liked just the facts not all this "" I got this"" "" Mine can do this"" most all 928 are stock mostly and probly not well tuned. So lets just help with the mostlikly what he will find out thier senerio and give the guy a fighting chance to get the right car for his money..( i wish i had known all you guys befor purchasing the 81 my nephue has now.) THANKS FOR READING MY RANNTLIST!! = ) 
LIST OF APPLES iv driven.....ok...and some ORANGES!!!!
68 CHARGER R/T 440 AT.....OOooo WHAT A CAR..NEVER SHOULD OF SOLD IT!
68 ROADRUNNER 440 6PACK...WAHOOO...AND SCARY!!!
72 CUDA 340 AT....MY FIRST REAL CAR......DRAG MOTOR IN A STOCK CAR...OVERKILL, BUT SUCH FUN
80-81-86-87-88-89 928 ALL AT
86 944
2002 BMW z3
2004 MB AMG 360HP
2004 CAYENNE TURBO <------I WANT I WANT I WANT!!!
93 audi v8 quattro (my everyday allwheel drive family replacement porsche!!)
LIST OF APPLES iv driven.....ok...and some ORANGES!!!!
68 CHARGER R/T 440 AT.....OOooo WHAT A CAR..NEVER SHOULD OF SOLD IT!
68 ROADRUNNER 440 6PACK...WAHOOO...AND SCARY!!!
72 CUDA 340 AT....MY FIRST REAL CAR......DRAG MOTOR IN A STOCK CAR...OVERKILL, BUT SUCH FUN
80-81-86-87-88-89 928 ALL AT
86 944
2002 BMW z3
2004 MB AMG 360HP
2004 CAYENNE TURBO <------I WANT I WANT I WANT!!!
93 audi v8 quattro (my everyday allwheel drive family replacement porsche!!)
03-15-2006, 12:36 AM
#92
Burning Brakes
mark...sorry for the confusion thiought i should get my own account!!!(animal8526)as for the audi...276hp and 296TQ....and HP is nothing with out TQ..mabee i need a new class on physics but lets see...TQ is what moves said object and HP is what keeps it moving..right?
so you can have 500HP motorcycle motor...but the TQ is 300 and way too high up the rpm. ei: would suck in a 928.. and my audi is by no means a speed king...specialy off the line but its TQ and HP are right in the sweet spot (and gearing) not going to spank any S4....but it will not get spanked...and concidering its 1/4 miles stock are mid 14s ...it is slow off the line high 7s to 60 its still no slouch...so the point i was trying to make is concidering its weight its a good example of how thier are many factors to figure into performance......as for porsche sliding in some super stuff into the US market...i mabe wrong but it by no means is it unheard of. But do we not all degress....lets all have a brew and raise one to our cars
03-15-2006, 12:56 AM
#93
Burning Brakes
16v vs. 32v Driving Impressions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Guys-looking to add a 928 and looking at the 1983-1986 cars realistically, what is the real world difference in driving the 234hp 16v cars vs the 288hp 32v cars. This will not be a track car (have the 911 for that), and please dont say 54hp that much I figured out. Also is the much diff in maintenance, I am mostly a diy type. Thanks Jim.
Gee...how far we have all come in this thread...im wondering if JIM figured out what car is best..
we all can agree that above all CONDITION CONDITION CONDITION.. is the one factor that rules them all....right????
if i was spending 10-18k and wasnt looking to sup it up id opt for 86 Euro S
but if i was looking around the 20 to 35k id get a 89 to 90 S4 or the MIGHTY GTS!!!!
(cant drive 5spd...missing one leg so GT's are out)
03-15-2006, 02:07 AM
#94
Rennlist Member
Actually, you got it a little backward. engine torque means nothing without speed! Its really the rear wheel torque through the gears that you need to know and thats complex to figure out. Remember, HP is comparitively equal to torque, through the gear box, at the wheels at any vehicle speed!
Its that torque, through the gears that gets you going, accelerates you and gets you to top speed. If you know the Hp you can compare two cars (the range of HP used over) If you only know engine torque, you have to go through a multiplication excersise to figure out the actual torque to the ground through the gear box at any speed. Looking at HP is just much easier, and it basically means "torque through the gears at any speed".
That said, recently I plotted a viper 440hp vs a GT3porsche 438hp curve. the curves were so close in proportion, even though their respective torques were totally different. (ie 260ftlbs vs 475ftlbs) bottom line, in every gear (assuming proportional gear boxes) they both put down the same torque at the wheels at any speed! the only sweet spot you need to look at is max hp. the closer you operate at max hp, regardless of torque (see our cars!) the faster, quicker you will be. max torque on our S4s are anywhere between 3000rpm and 4300rpm. but, when racing, aside from the launch, you will never see an rpm below 4500rpm (to be fastest) Make the gears closer, and that lower rpm goes up, further away from max torque rpms.
Yes, our cars certainly deserve a glass to be raised to! every weekend i race mine, im totally amazed.
MK
I got to imagine that a audi 4x4 will just launch off the line! im sure its a fast car, even spite its porky weight.
mark...sorry for the confusion thiought i should get my own account!!!(animal8526)
as for the audi...276hp and 296TQ....and HP is nothing with out TQ..mabee i need a new class on physics but lets see...TQ is what moves said object and HP is what keeps it moving..right?
so you can have 500HP motorcycle motor...but the TQ is 300 and way too high up the rpm. ei: would suck in a 928.. and my audi is by no means a speed king...specialy off the line but its TQ and HP are right in the sweet spot (and gearing) not going to spank any S4....but it will not get spanked...and concidering its 1/4 miles stock are mid 14s ...it is slow off the line high 7s to 60 its still no slouch...so the point i was trying to make is concidering its weight its a good example of how thier are many factors to figure into performance......as for porsche sliding in some super stuff into the US market...i mabe wrong but it by no means is it unheard of. But do we not all degress....lets all have a brew and raise one to our cars
Its that torque, through the gears that gets you going, accelerates you and gets you to top speed. If you know the Hp you can compare two cars (the range of HP used over) If you only know engine torque, you have to go through a multiplication excersise to figure out the actual torque to the ground through the gear box at any speed. Looking at HP is just much easier, and it basically means "torque through the gears at any speed".
That said, recently I plotted a viper 440hp vs a GT3porsche 438hp curve. the curves were so close in proportion, even though their respective torques were totally different. (ie 260ftlbs vs 475ftlbs) bottom line, in every gear (assuming proportional gear boxes) they both put down the same torque at the wheels at any speed! the only sweet spot you need to look at is max hp. the closer you operate at max hp, regardless of torque (see our cars!) the faster, quicker you will be. max torque on our S4s are anywhere between 3000rpm and 4300rpm. but, when racing, aside from the launch, you will never see an rpm below 4500rpm (to be fastest) Make the gears closer, and that lower rpm goes up, further away from max torque rpms.
Yes, our cars certainly deserve a glass to be raised to! every weekend i race mine, im totally amazed.
MK
I got to imagine that a audi 4x4 will just launch off the line! im sure its a fast car, even spite its porky weight.
Originally Posted by tommytomaso
mark...sorry for the confusion thiought i should get my own account!!!(animal8526)as for the audi...276hp and 296TQ....and HP is nothing with out TQ..mabee i need a new class on physics but lets see...TQ is what moves said object and HP is what keeps it moving..right?
so you can have 500HP motorcycle motor...but the TQ is 300 and way too high up the rpm. ei: would suck in a 928.. and my audi is by no means a speed king...specialy off the line but its TQ and HP are right in the sweet spot (and gearing) not going to spank any S4....but it will not get spanked...and concidering its 1/4 miles stock are mid 14s ...it is slow off the line high 7s to 60 its still no slouch...so the point i was trying to make is concidering its weight its a good example of how thier are many factors to figure into performance......as for porsche sliding in some super stuff into the US market...i mabe wrong but it by no means is it unheard of. But do we not all degress....lets all have a brew and raise one to our cars
Last edited by mark kibort; 03-15-2006 at 03:24 PM.
03-15-2006, 02:21 AM
#95
Originally Posted by mark kibort
US 84s and earlier are dogs.
Even barring unnamed freakish 16Vs, if you take any US 4.7 16v and cut the weight down to about 2900lbs(doable while still maintinaing a very streetable car) while adding a no-cat MSDS X-over exhaust/FPR you will have a respectable mid 14 second car on your hands. It should be an easy match for the 5.0 S cars(288hp @ 3350lbs).
03-15-2006, 02:24 AM
#96
Originally Posted by tommytomaso
...and HP is nothing with out TQ..mabee i need a new class on physics but lets see...TQ is what moves said object and HP is what keeps it moving..right?
03-15-2006, 02:47 AM
#97
Rennlist Member
yes, "most" or "some" are. (sorry!!)
Heck, i had a 175rwhp 84 US to start, and i just loved it. some work to get it to 243rwhp, but that was just with bolt on euro intake, RRFR, headers and a euro cam. I was speaking comparitively to the stock 300+ hp 928s!
mk
Heck, i had a 175rwhp 84 US to start, and i just loved it. some work to get it to 243rwhp, but that was just with bolt on euro intake, RRFR, headers and a euro cam. I was speaking comparitively to the stock 300+ hp 928s!
mk
Originally Posted by m21sniper
Ya think you could toss a 'most' in there?
Even barring unnamed freakish 16Vs, if you take any US 4.7 16v and cut the weight down to about 2900lbs(doable while still maintinaing a very streetable car) while adding a no-cat MSDS X-over exhaust/FPR you will have a respectable mid 14 second car on your hands. It should be an easy match for the 5.0 S cars(288hp @ 3350lbs).
Even barring unnamed freakish 16Vs, if you take any US 4.7 16v and cut the weight down to about 2900lbs(doable while still maintinaing a very streetable car) while adding a no-cat MSDS X-over exhaust/FPR you will have a respectable mid 14 second car on your hands. It should be an easy match for the 5.0 S cars(288hp @ 3350lbs).
03-15-2006, 12:12 PM
#98
Tommy-Jim figured out that an '85 US car will probably be what I buy (I posted another thread with photos and info), I will see the car today and probably be a shark owner tonite. As far as all the performace discussion, if I really wanted performance I would buy a 993TT which is my favorite Pcar but the old wallet doesn't support that choice at this time. I do love the balance of the 928s and 944s I had a 944 that was a blast on the track. Looking forward to shark ownership, the more valves the better 
.
.
03-15-2006, 12:51 PM
#101
Nordschleife Master
Mine, too.
Having cats is a matter of the federalization process. Mine has an un-touched dual exhaust. Shoot, one of those mufflers should be a cat.
Having cats is a matter of the federalization process. Mine has an un-touched dual exhaust. Shoot, one of those mufflers should be a cat.
03-15-2006, 01:06 PM
#102
Glen, congrats and keep us posted.
It seems like for most folks (including me) here, the best Porsche is the one they own. I've been very happy with the '82 928 I bought my wife, and liked the balance that one seemed to have over the two S4's I drove in comparison. Thats not nearly enough of a sample size to draw any conclusions from, and the S4's varied widely in feel between the two (and also in condition, which I am sure explains the variance). I am a DIYer as well, and aside from the cost of the parts, haven't found anything that was terribly different from working on my 944's. I'm betting that you will enjoy the car a lot. Have fun!
Regards,
It seems like for most folks (including me) here, the best Porsche is the one they own.
I've been very happy with the '82 928 I bought my wife, and liked the balance that one seemed to have over the two S4's I drove in comparison. Thats not nearly enough of a sample size to draw any conclusions from, and the S4's varied widely in feel between the two (and also in condition, which I am sure explains the variance). I am a DIYer as well, and aside from the cost of the parts, haven't found anything that was terribly different from working on my 944's. I'm betting that you will enjoy the car a lot. Have fun!Regards,
03-15-2006, 01:33 PM
#103
Originally Posted by mark kibort
yes, "most" or "some" are. (sorry!!)
Heck, i had a 175rwhp 84 US to start, and i just loved it. some work to get it to 243rwhp, but that was just with bolt on euro intake, RRFR, headers and a euro cam. I was speaking comparitively to the stock 300+ hp 928s!
mk
Heck, i had a 175rwhp 84 US to start, and i just loved it. some work to get it to 243rwhp, but that was just with bolt on euro intake, RRFR, headers and a euro cam. I was speaking comparitively to the stock 300+ hp 928s!
mk
03-15-2006, 03:18 PM
#104
Rennlist Member
It was a stick, and i think it was near 15-20hp down vs others with headers. (ie 200rwhp with headers and 3.5" exhaust) I saw someone elses dyno sheet, and he had 220rwhp with the same set up. however, with the euro stuff, it still got to 243rwhp!! not bad for a tired 145,000mile engine, for which i then raced it to 175,000miles before i retired the bottome end to be replaced with the 5 liter '85 and euro heads.
Mk
Mk
Originally Posted by m21sniper
Is 175 the stock RWHP reading one normally gets with a US 4.7 S car Mark(was it a stick or an auto)?
03-15-2006, 03:58 PM
#105
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by mark kibort
if you are serious about what car beats another, its about max hp and average hp to the wheels over the speed range. OK, we all know this, right? agreed?
Integrating power is just one approach. Integrating acceleration is another.