wellcraft290

oracle not a wiz just facts here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snhMQvAFkyE
0-60 4.5seconds
1/4 mile 13.3 at 104
I could not find a normal c2 so went to a rs america version and lookie lookie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0jztFU_isM
0-60 5.4 seconds
1/4 mile 13.9 at 105

ok so 1 mph faster in the 1/4 but the normal c2 is heavier by 80 pounds so you will most likely be slower in every number here compared to the rs.

So now you still think weight is the only thing that matters? I don't try 6000 hp in a light car with thin tires and I would bet my jeep is faster because As you spin the tires I am moving.

I really hate this argument and honestly don't care what numbers companies push I believe tests when I see it with my own eyes and I think you will have to say the c4 is no slower then a c2.

so I provided facts and you provide me to be a whiz kid. Not arguing just hate when people don't know the truth

race911

The fact I still have it indicates my interest at that price level. But I would have let it go for $30K. Some deferred maintenance I was willing to let another owner deal with, but all in all a DIY guy would have had maybe $3K more into it. For a pretty decent 125K car that had the top end done and was a $90K+ fully optioned up car.

(My wife had a passing interest in us getting something more modern for a street cruiser, but all she did was sit in a 997 and basically said we'd be spending an extra $20-40K for exactly what?)

Nine11

I don't know nor care which is faster between a C2 or a C4. But with tests, it's important to note the test conditions for it to be a fair comparison. They can make a difference. In addition, 0-60 and 1/4 mile times are one part of a larger equation, what are 30-50 or 50-70 or a lap time around a circuit that requires a vehicle to use all aspects of the performance potential.

race911

Not exactly from winter time, but one time when the AWD saved the car. Literally. Dropping off the high side of T9 @ Willow Springs. The other blemished paint shot was when the hydraulic assist hiccuped on me going into T14 at Thunderhill. Had to slalom through tire barriers at about 70; kind of like a no-margin-for-error autocross maneuver.

race911

No kidding. I cannot believe anyone even considers it statistically significant. I'd run the C4 and RSA #1 same day and could I even tell a difference? About the only thing I remember off the top of my head is that I might want to shift into 5th at the end of the front straight at Willow, versus the RSA being fine in 4th.

Oracle

If your source of truth is that, I rest my case. Believe what you want to believe.

wellcraft290

My point is that they are both the same in speed or very very close. The C4 is not slower and i agree i don't think it is faste but the same at least.
I think you can agree on that. and if you can't not sure what to say except you would never believe the data.

Race I agree you would not or noone here would be able to tell the difference. I just don't like it when someone asks about a c2 or c4 and then someone states that the c2 is faster etc when it isn't

Oracle

Indeed, they're really-really close, but like anything else someone has to win.
http://www.pelicanparts.com/911/tech...rie_faq.htm#Q6

Besides, the C2 faster than the C4 is nowadays a cliché and nothing else.. don't get too railed, we're all friends here. Every time this same topic comes up the C4 owners rightfully defend they C4 and I'll be defending the C2

wellcraft290

oracle not sure what I should look at in the link and I agree someone must win and it was the C4 against the rs and you only have a C2 so the C4 will really beat your car up. I was trying to be nice and say they are equal even though the numbers were not that way.

Nine11

Oh brother....this is turning into a dick wagging contest. I'd like to see a stock 964 C4 today run 0-60 in 4.5 seconds.

Here's a list to show some comparable times.
http://www.exoticcarsite.com/0-60-qu...mile-times.htm

1989 Porsche Carrera 4 5.5 13.9
1994 Porsche 911 Carrera 5.2 13.8
1990 Porsche 911 Carrera 2 5.4 14.0
1991 Porsche 911 Turbo 4.9 13.4
1993 Porsche 911 RS America 5.3 13.8
1993 Porsche 911 Turbo 3.6 4.4 12.7


At the end of the day, nobody cares.

Bearclaw

I agree on both points. Too bad you (and I) weren't in the market just about a year ago, 993 owners in particular were dumping their cars like they were radioactive, freeing up cash. The entire pricing structure had settled down to rational ranges, even the rarer models. Things have rebounded somewhat since, and prices seem to be heading back to head-scratching levels. I think the 964 is still the best bang for the buck.

That craigslist car looks like a nice car at a real-world price. That black-and-tan combo is very classy, but a lot of folks have an aversion to light-colored interiors in P-cars. Good luck with your search, scour the countryside, you'll find the right one for you.

ChuckG

Lots more data here:

http://www.weissach.net/964-993_RoadTestSummary.html

Seems that when it comes to acceleration, the two are fairly evenly matched.

velocitylover

1989

RECOGNITION TIPS:

Aside from the "Carrera 4" script on the back of the engine lid (the
Carrera 2 came by in 1990), this is the first year of the new smooth,
body- colored bumpers. This is also the first year for standard
dual airbags and ABS.

This information is incorrect an 1989 C-4 was never ofered with dual air bags, but it did have an ABS. Oh and because of that and single mass fly wheel it is a bit lighter than a 1990 model. This source needs to study a little more...

wellcraft290

I agree Chuck seems like lot more of the c4 being tested and most quicker and a few slower So i agree they seem to be very evenly matched. So tell me now you still won't admit roughly the same speed oracle? I won't even ask you to really bow down and say the C4 is faster lol

Thank you all for once again proving my point that weight is not everything but grip as well.

Oracle

Don't worry, next time this comes up again I'll say the same. Until the next thread... See you in my rearview mirror!