2005 Ford GT40 vs. 1988 951S
#46
if owning a six figures super car would guarantee high IQ but that's something money can't buy
#47
https://rennlist.com/forums/9793065-post586.html
a punny 2.8L 11.7 @ 124mph btw we aren't taking about stock 951's, lol
a punny 2.8L 11.7 @ 124mph btw we aren't taking about stock 951's, lol
#48
Team Owner
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 28,705
Likes: 213
From: one thousand, five hundred miles north of Ft. Lauderdale for the summer.
#49
Unless you live at high altitude and have the benefit of a turbo against the N/A, even an ideal setup doesn't matter.
A stock busa (sea level) will run 145mph quarter miles.
Mine (at the same track sid runs at) an EASY pass (no hard launch, rolling on the throttle...basically a street start) was a very low 11 at 131mph.
I am doubting many a 951 are making power like Sid is and that is about as close to an "ideal" advantage as you can give to a 951. A drag-strip at 6000ft.
#50
Nice story
I happen to have a Gallardo and a 944S2
I get people checking out the Gallardo all the time. I often avoid looking back as I don't want to provoke a race. So, if you even get someone minding their own business, that would be the "look"
The 944 S2 is so slow compared to Gallardo it's like comparing a bicycle to a motorcycle. Even my FD was much faster. Your 951 may be faster than a NA 944 3L engine. I have only driven 944 2.7 turbos and I am not impressed.
In short, there is nothing the 944 has over a modern supercar, except the price and the ability to not have to worry about the car in shady areas. That's why I have the 944.
Naturally, the story is only theoretical, of course.
I happen to have a Gallardo and a 944S2
I get people checking out the Gallardo all the time. I often avoid looking back as I don't want to provoke a race. So, if you even get someone minding their own business, that would be the "look"
The 944 S2 is so slow compared to Gallardo it's like comparing a bicycle to a motorcycle. Even my FD was much faster. Your 951 may be faster than a NA 944 3L engine. I have only driven 944 2.7 turbos and I am not impressed.
In short, there is nothing the 944 has over a modern supercar, except the price and the ability to not have to worry about the car in shady areas. That's why I have the 944.
Naturally, the story is only theoretical, of course.
However, I feel the car is faster than it is safe. It lacks many of the modern cars improvements (ABS, traction control, stability control, crush zones, etc, etc). I would feel much safer driving my Cayenne fast on an Autobahn than the 951. Never mind the 951 always needs "tweeking".
#51
up here they run 14's at just over 100. I have a video of one at the track. I was not impressed to say the least. The ET I could see with a bad driver but the MPH should still have been higher. I'll post the video for everyone to see.
#52
Post that..then my car will be faster than a Gallardo.
#53
Post that..then my car will be faster than a Gallardo.
130+ trap speed is insanely fast. Ok, so maybe not those 900-1000cc bikes but perhaps more in the 6/700 cc categories. However, I prefer to go with 4 wheels vehicles as it's a fairer comparison.
#55
#57
#58
Allow me, ahem... BRAPBRAPBRAPBRAPBRAPBRAPBRAPBRAPBRAP
One of the best noises in the world
One of the best noises in the world
#59
#60
3rd best car of the '80s, easily imo.
What would you consider the first and second? I would say the F40 and the 959 would have to be the top two of the 80's
What would you consider the first and second? I would say the F40 and the 959 would have to be the top two of the 80's