Eggplant Cab

Actually M division did make E34 M5 wagons. I actually wanted one but decided to be practical and got the 530 instead.
Another reason why he had you was transmission. Autos have kickdown, so he jumped down 1-2 gears to get going. If you didn't downshift but used the torque to go, no way in hell you are going to catch that car.

McJohn

YUP ... and at the end of that straight is where they park the camera van.

McJohn



PS Glad you all liked my article, thanks

911addict

Surprised so many of you saying the 964 isn't very fast by modern standards!

Comparing it no faster than a Celica and Fiat Turbo Coupe (the Fiat is much faster than the Toyota anyway, I had one) is plain wrong. These cars are still very fast, at least my 1988 3.2 Carrera was, and I imagine a 964 is similar, even by today's standards.

My suggestion is either:
- your car is out of tune;
- you had a big weight in the car (don't forget we are more weight sensitive than heavier cars)
- your clutch is slipping
- you didn't have it in the right gear
- you need to be quicker on the gear change;
- you didn't boot it: I mean 'floor' it, don't feather the throttle.

If you drive at 7 tenths you will be as fast as the modern cars but at 9 or 10 tenths and you'll blow almost anything away! (A few weeks ago an Audi A6 4.2, light and fast, tried to show me up with his acceleration on an A road, and succeeded up to about 4000 revs but then the 911 showed its mettle, and in my case the turbo!)

I honestly believed my 1988 was one of THE fastest cars on the road up to around 80, and pretty well nothing could out accelerate me when I put my foot down. Yes, now I have a turbo, but by the comments on this thread, as its 13 years old I wouldn't be able to hold my own against more modern machinery. Don't you believe it!!!

DaveK

There was no weight in the car other than me, and a full tank of petrol.
The clutch is brand new, so not slipping.
It's hard to believe it wasn't in the right gear if I was red-lining it in each gear.
I'm sure I could be quicker on the gear change with practice - but I wasn't hanging about.
I definitely booted it - foot was on the floor.

I really don't believe a 964 will blow most things away these days. It is quicker than most other cars (e.g. the Civic Type R) but I certainly wouldn't say I can blow them away. Maybe mine is a little down on power.

One thing I have meant to check for ages, is that my WOT switch / resonance valve work. Maybe they don't and I'm missing out. Still not sure it will make so much difference though - 250 (flywheel) horsepower isn't so much compared to modern cars.

TR6

With modern sports cars, sub 5 second zero to sixty seems to be the new standard. Most serious sports cars are now in the 4.8 range. A 911 turbo can probably match or beat that, but not the garden variety NA 964. I had fallen in alongside a Cayman S a couple of days ago on the highway and I was very impressed at the rate he pulled away from me when he put the hammer down. Granted, I wasn't trying to race him, but I doubt I could have kept up with him.

Wikkid911

No matter how fast they get i'm gonna resist any rediculous urges to get a diesel. Its just plain nasty stuff. It stinks. If you drive round her at about 2am you get people whistling you and getting in your car at the lights telling you to take them home thinking you are a taxi. Its bloody noisey. Did i mention it stinks?
Petrol is a far far nicer. The fuel for the discerning gentleman.

DaveK

I confess - if I was looking for a new car (and I'm not) - I would almost certainly get a diesel. I think modern diesels are very good cars (and that view isn't affected by the BMW estate - which I'm sure must have been tuned by 9M or someone......). A guy at work has just bought a diesel BMW and raves about it.

Hmm - come to think of it - his is an estate I think. If his is silver, he and I are going to have words on Monday......

Sten

I feel as if I can shed some light on this - my everyday car is a 2003 BMW 330D Touring Auto (aka the Dog Transporter). As standard it's something like 204BHP and 370 lb ft of torque. A quick mod and you have 240BHP and 450 lb ft of torque - delivered at about 2000rpm! Put it in sport mode and plant your foot and it goes like the proverbial **** off a shovel. And around 36mpg...

GeorgeK

M5 touring (it's for sale, btw):

dougn

here in the peoples republik of kalifornia and the whole US for that matter, we don't have access to these wonderful euro diesels. i would love to have one

jjbunn

I bet that's a fun car on the twisty mountain roads of the Valais!

GeorgeK

It is huge fun. A bit heavy at close to 2000Kgs, but 350hp, 6 throttle bodies and a 6 speed gearbox make it a real pleasure to work with. Just don't look at the consumption while in the mountains...
Many an Impreza owner is still wondering why the "525 estate with large wheels" left him in the dust.

jeff522

I have a good friend with a 2004 M3. ON long straits There is no way I can run with him. Put in a lot of curves, and its just the reverse. Its sad that the mark of a car today are 0-60 times, and not what it can do on the road, or track.

N51

I never give challenge to anyone. Especially chipped diesel pickup trucks. No need for humiliation - that can be provided through internet forums.

n

pcar964

I just read your thoughts - No offense McJohn, but when it comes to 911s, you just "don't get it." You belong in a boxster or 996, not a 964.