gcb951

951 every time.

brrgrr

Bone Stock Vs. Bone Stock, I think the 968 wins. Any mods, the 951 hands down.

I had a S2 and a lightly modified 951 at the same time and every time I got into the S2 I felt like the parking brake was stuck on.... the torque difference above 3000 rpm is huge.

hot-J

bone stock the 951 wins. Years ago I had tried to keep up with a 87 951 stock with a stock 968. He walked away every time. Especially if we were going uphill.

333pg333

Well I think the OP's question was probably just a bet with his buddy otherwise what's the reason for the question?

Doing a little bit of reading I have found that the later model 944 turbo did a faster 1/4 mile time than the 968 and that will pretty much cover off the 0-100mph bet. For the 1986 951 it looks like they were very close depending on who you believe. Mid 14's for both so the 0-100mph would be very even.

Interestingly I found that the factory engine designation for the 1986 was M44/51 and the later S model was the M44/52. So perhaps this is where the 951 / 952 debate originated from. For the US guys this is less significant but many R.O.W. owners thought that there car model was a 952 due to it being rhd...so....not sure now?

95ONE

The old torque vs hp. argument. There's some disgusting thread in the racing section that goes on and on and on. horrible..
I say it's all about torque/hp vs time. but.. moving on.. my 191ft lbs torque NSX BLEW away any 242ft lbs 5.0 mustang... why? torque vs rpm over time.. which is what?...... HORSEPOWER BABY.

And the example of tool losing the race is bad.. his mph was there.. his traction was not. A variable that inconveniently does not remain constant. And of course, driver ability.

Chris White

Its just a saying – don’t take it literally – or you will get your panties in a bunch…and that is just a saying too, I am not literally going to come over to your house and bunch up your panties!

gt37vgt

i think althogh a bit of a genralisation its true .. if you have reasonable torque (70% 0f max) over a 4000 rpm spread the car will be faster on the circuit then a one with similar torque figures in a narrower rev band even if the later has more power ..Tony G is a good example his car has heaps of predictable not and modest hp but is a force on the track ...

wjk_glynn

Independant test data: http://www.weissach.net/924-944-968_...stSummary.html

Karl.

rgs944

That is a great link Karl, thank you for providing it and thanks to everyone who posted here. I learned quite a bit. No it was not a bet with my buddy just my curiosity. It looks like the road test are very similiar with the 968 testing just slightly faster to 100. To put a little excitement into my Sat. night I might try to time a run from 20 to 80. I never like starting from scratch because it is too hard on the clutch and I do not want to go much past 80 because of all the deer on the roads around here. Does anyone with an early 951 want to try to do the same and see what the times are?

333pg333

Take those performance figures for what they are. There is so much variation that it shows how different cars, drivers, conditions etc create such differing figures. I'd say that brand new out of the box they would have been very close in a straight line.

rgs944

Those #'s are fun to look at but yes you are right, there are a lot of variations to consider and then throw in age. Did anyone notice the 968Turbo S 60-100. (5.7 seconds) Wow, but Porsche could not have a mass produced, water cooled car as the top performing car for that year. Also the 924 carrera GT puts up a fast 0-60. I did not realize any of the 924's were that fast.