928 comparisons
12-23-2006, 06:00 PM
#31
Nordschleife Master
Stock the edge goes to Porsche, but if I could go to my Porsche dealer, hand him a check for $5,000 and walk out with a 450 hp smog legal motor with a 3 yr/36,000 mile warranty, we wouldn't be having this conversation. As it sits I need to take a check for $15,000 to one shop 500 miles away, and my warranty is that they hope it works out ok.
12-23-2006, 09:00 PM
#32
I think what silver bullet was saying is that the 928 "feels'' slow. 951s have a power curve that comes on strong at over 4K with a snap at full throttle. As has been mentioned already, an S4 has a sub six second 0-60. There are a few simple mods and routine services that can enhance that, esp. the seat of the pants feel. S4s just don't feel fast, even when they are cranking you up to double digits. They are too smooth and quiet.
100 + MPH feels so slow. Um, have you ever rolled down the driver's window at 120 ? I really think the best mod you can make to a ''slow'' 928 is to add a RMB, or a REAL performance exhaust. With the X etc. you will pick up free ponies, but more signifigantly, your ears will hear a snarling BEAST with MUSCLE projecting your car toward the horison with AUTHORITY. I routinely blew the doors off some reasonably fast cars with my S4, and it always surprised me how fast it felt passing on two lane roads. It was just so quiet and refined while kicking ***.
If you want to feel fast, change your muffler. I have driven 924 turbos, and they are seven second cars to 60. but they have sound and a kick that makes them feel much faster. They are not. BTW, that 60 to 80 in 2.8 is real. MY 80 5 SPD is much slower than my S4 was. But it has a Nascar sound track, and peppy gearing. My mind tells me it is faster.
I once chased a sport bike with my S4. Was I surprised when I looked at the speedo.
BTW, the next time I see Andrew Olsen, I WANT A RIDE !!!!!!!!!! I KNOW that car is faster than my 951 [which ain't slow].
100 + MPH feels so slow. Um, have you ever rolled down the driver's window at 120 ? I really think the best mod you can make to a ''slow'' 928 is to add a RMB, or a REAL performance exhaust. With the X etc. you will pick up free ponies, but more signifigantly, your ears will hear a snarling BEAST with MUSCLE projecting your car toward the horison with AUTHORITY. I routinely blew the doors off some reasonably fast cars with my S4, and it always surprised me how fast it felt passing on two lane roads. It was just so quiet and refined while kicking ***.
If you want to feel fast, change your muffler. I have driven 924 turbos, and they are seven second cars to 60. but they have sound and a kick that makes them feel much faster. They are not. BTW, that 60 to 80 in 2.8 is real. MY 80 5 SPD is much slower than my S4 was. But it has a Nascar sound track, and peppy gearing. My mind tells me it is faster.
I once chased a sport bike with my S4. Was I surprised when I looked at the speedo.
BTW, the next time I see Andrew Olsen, I WANT A RIDE !!!!!!!!!! I KNOW that car is faster than my 951 [which ain't slow].
12-23-2006, 10:34 PM
#36
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by Kevin Michael
The auto s4 I had was a jack rabbit. Start it in first, brake stand to about 2800 then let go. It has to collect itself for a moment , then it flew. I G-teched my auto s4 with no mods at 5.7 doing this.
If I go out and buy an S4 automatic, put it in proper but stock running condition which should I expect when hold down the brake and tear off a 0-60 run, 5.7 seconds or 6.3 seconds?
12-23-2006, 11:25 PM
#39
Rocket Pilot
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: gettysburg pa.
Posts: 3,298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by danglerb
Its really confusing to a new guy like me when performance figures vary more than tenths. Its so bad in many car forums that nobody pays much attention to anything but timeslips. Why would anybody testing a cars performance do anything other than exactly what you did holding the brake on to build rpm on an automatic?
If I go out and buy an S4 automatic, put it in proper but stock running condition which should I expect when hold down the brake and tear off a 0-60 run, 5.7 seconds or 6.3 seconds?
If I go out and buy an S4 automatic, put it in proper but stock running condition which should I expect when hold down the brake and tear off a 0-60 run, 5.7 seconds or 6.3 seconds?
12-24-2006, 04:00 AM
#40
Rennlist Member
I think the key thing for most of these discussions is "driveablilty" . with a 928, if you are not shifting at 6500rpm, you are not getting the most out of the car. and if you are, the shift brings you back to 4500rpm+. so, if we are talking about other cars and how they feel when you stand on it at 3000rpms, then yes, there can be differences. however, when racing after 1st gear, the shape of the hp curve is all that determines acceleraton. However, how the car feels is something different. mustangs and the older vets seem to feel much faster due to the things mentioned already. I remember driving a 350hp 78 vet, and it felt like i was going 500mph and on the edge of disaster. felt like the front wheels were tied together with steering rack made of kite string
anyway, the key thing here is that we all agree that the 928 is an amazing car. my racer is living proof. 20 years, not a bolt turned on the engine since it was made in 1985. 5 race seasons to boot! (not counting that fluke cam gear teeth thing
). is there any car in the world as old that can run as fast as the holbert car with their original engine ??? even 10 years newer? .....not a chance!
mk
anyway, the key thing here is that we all agree that the 928 is an amazing car. my racer is living proof. 20 years, not a bolt turned on the engine since it was made in 1985. 5 race seasons to boot! (not counting that fluke cam gear teeth thing
). is there any car in the world as old that can run as fast as the holbert car with their original engine ??? even 10 years newer? .....not a chance!mk
Originally Posted by danglerb
Sure HP and torque are tied together via the gear ratio. An S4 and a Cobra Mustang are closer together than my two cars. A lot of feel difference could be the gears too.
My stock 91 behaves a bit different than a typical heads, cam, and intake modified mustang, it has more low end torque, and while it spins to 6250, a reasonable shift point is 5600. Mine also is a 3.08 rear end ratio with a 5 spd, so that shift out of first is around 30 mph.
What the S4 has way over the 16v is more lower end torque, my 83 doesn't take off until 4000+, and doesn't feel at least like its dropping off much on the high end, but I have no idea how accurate the tach is and haven't bumped into a rev limiter yet.
After the holidays I hope to get some Gtech time on both of them, and maybe upload some graphs.
My stock 91 behaves a bit different than a typical heads, cam, and intake modified mustang, it has more low end torque, and while it spins to 6250, a reasonable shift point is 5600. Mine also is a 3.08 rear end ratio with a 5 spd, so that shift out of first is around 30 mph.
What the S4 has way over the 16v is more lower end torque, my 83 doesn't take off until 4000+, and doesn't feel at least like its dropping off much on the high end, but I have no idea how accurate the tach is and haven't bumped into a rev limiter yet.
After the holidays I hope to get some Gtech time on both of them, and maybe upload some graphs.
12-24-2006, 05:30 PM
#41
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by mark kibort
I think the key thing for most of these discussions is "driveablilty" . with a 928, if you are not shifting at 6500rpm, you are not getting the most out of the car. and if you are, the shift brings you back to 4500rpm+. so, if we are talking about other cars and how they feel when you stand on it at 3000rpms, then yes, there can be differences. however, when racing after 1st gear, the shape of the hp curve is all that determines acceleraton. However, how the car feels is something different. mustangs and the older vets seem to feel much faster due to the things mentioned already. I remember driving a 350hp 78 vet, and it felt like i was going 500mph and on the edge of disaster. felt like the front wheels were tied together with steering rack made of kite string
anyway, the key thing here is that we all agree that the 928 is an amazing car. my racer is living proof. 20 years, not a bolt turned on the engine since it was made in 1985. 5 race seasons to boot! (not counting that fluke cam gear teeth thing ). is there any car in the world as old that can run as fast as the holbert car with their original engine ??? even 10 years newer? .....not a chance!
mk
anyway, the key thing here is that we all agree that the 928 is an amazing car. my racer is living proof. 20 years, not a bolt turned on the engine since it was made in 1985. 5 race seasons to boot! (not counting that fluke cam gear teeth thing
). is there any car in the world as old that can run as fast as the holbert car with their original engine ??? even 10 years newer? .....not a chance!mk
Harvey
01-02-2007, 07:10 PM
#42
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Imo000
The LT1 and LS1 engines are verty clsoe in performace. The LS1 will only pull away starting in 3rd gear, but below that the two are the same. When my 928 was stock, in the 1/4 mile, it was as or even faster than my LT1 Trans Am. Thre is way too much credit given to the LT1 casue or perhaps not enough to the 928. The two cars are very similar in straight line performace.
They aren't that close. Basically, the LS1 is up on torque and HP everywhere over an LT1. The "LT1's have better Torque down low/LS1's make all the power up top" is a figment of some LT1 owners imaginations. LT1's are great motors, they are wheezy up top and make good power down low. LS1's just beat them everywhere.
Given the information I gather from my old '85 S and the '00 TA I have now. Also having driven a buddies S4 and both of his GTS'. My TA is a quicker (not sure about faster) car out of them all but maybe the GTS', and the only place one of the GTS' have a chance is from a roll. My car is a Manual though, but even if it wasn't, Auto LS1's typically run 13.5s at over 100mph. Manuals are usually a few tenths faster. I don't have my timeslip handy, but I can assure you that this is the norm, and not an exception to it. My car isn't even a freak.
My car is not a rattletrap. It's a stock TA that is babied like my 928 was. The build quality is not like the Porsche (It IS a Pontiac after all). I think that another issue that was left out of the equation in regards to the way the cars "feel" is weight. Early 5.0 Mustangs do not weigh much at all. I wouldn't be surprised if danglerb's '91 Mustang tips the scales much at more than 3100lbs wet with him in it.
Jon
*Flame suit off*
01-02-2007, 07:29 PM
#43
Rocket Pilot
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: gettysburg pa.
Posts: 3,298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jon, put it back on! My 5spd. s4(pre-SC) kicked the crap out of my brother-in-laws 98 TA. time and time again. Granted his was an auto and he shifted manually though. We have raced many times tuning our cars, roll-on ,flat out, on the line,every way. I imagine a manual T.A. would have been about even. We G-teched his T.A. 0-60 and it was a pretty consistent 5.5-5.7sec. Nothing to scoff at though for sure. The 5spd. s4 although factory times were 5.5 like all porsches driven right can achieve lower times!
01-02-2007, 07:48 PM
#44
Three Wheelin'
I suppose I should have mentioned that the S4 and GTS' that my friend owns are all automatics. My '85 was an auto as well. I'd imagine that yes, if his car was a manual it would have faired better. Or if he had an aftermarket torque converter. I think pretty much every car is gonna best the factory times. I don't know what it is car my car, but it was probably around what I ran. I can't see how some people got 12's out of their stock LS1's though. I am not that great of a driver. I guess I need to find a stock 5spd S4 to play with, my car is still painfully stock with only suspension tweaks. That'll all change after my deployment, can you say single turbo?
Jon
Jon