2011 panamera turbo (stock) vs. 1983 911SC (stock)

[kramer747]

my brother in florida just bought a loaded Panamera. I think I will race him with my 911. Whadaya think?

[Flieger]

Don't bet him that you will win. Unless it is a V6 and you are doing a rolling start.

[Geronimo '74]

+1 not even in the twisties...

Unless you like to have your ass handed to you by a four door saloon, don't...

[wjfk32]

Put a k&n filter in and you'll show him..





Walt

[vwbobd]

You wont beat him......but you WILL kick his a$$ in style points

[Mitch Leland]

911 loyalty is one thing, but reality will win the day...

[safe]

Well, your car looks better, but most do... so a small victory

[JavaBrewer]

If it would be any consolation to you - I would rather have your 1983 SC

[kramer747]

I'd like to have both. And would like to have his money!

[EarlyPorsche]

There is nothing your 1983 SC can do that the 2011 Panamera Turbo cannot do. With that said, I wouldn't buy a Panamera whereas I would buy a Cayanne.

[RonDent]

I followed a Panamera a few weeks ago on some twisties.....I'll keep my Carrera

[Vincent Hill]

A friend of mine that works at a Porsche Dealer and has driven them all said that he preferred a Caymann. His thinking is that the Disconnected feeling he gets from the Big 4 door car is totally unexpected where as the Caymann suv it is expected!

[dw1]

30 years of automotive technology makes a difference. If driven with anything close to equal skill and aggressiveness, the new car will leave the SC wondering where it went.

The Panamera turbo (4.8 liter, twin-turbo) despite weighing well over 2 tons, has approximately double the power-to-weight ratio of the 911SC.

If he has the Panamera turbo, then he's got:
. SAE net hp: 500 hp @ 6000 rpm
. SAE net torque: 516 ft-lbs of torque @ 2250 rpm
. tires: 255/45ZR19 (front), 285/40ZR19 (rear)
. curb weight: 4343 lbs
. 0-60 mph: 3.7 sec
. 1/4 mile: 12.0 sec. @ 111.3 mph

A 911SC has (per Car & Driver magazine period reviews):
. SAE net hp: 172 hp @ 5500 rpm
. SAE net torque: 175 ft-lbs of torque @ 4200 rpm
. tires: 205/55VR16 (front), 225/50VR16 (rear)
. curb weight: 2700 lbs
. 0-60 time: 6.3 sec
. 0-100 time: 18.2 sec
. 1/4 mile: 14.7 sec @ 94 mph

That being said, I still prefer Porsches to be sports cars (911, Boxster, Cayman). I would take a E63 AMG over the Panamera turbo, but then my dd is a M-B and my weekend toy is my 911.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by dw1

30 years of automotive technology makes a difference. If driven with anything close to equal skill and aggressiveness, the new car will leave the SC wondering where it went.


A 911SC has (per Car & Driver magazine period reviews):
. SAE net hp: 172 hp @ 5500 rpm
. SAE net torque: 175 ft-lbs of torque @ 4200 rpm
. tires: 205/55VR16 (front), 225/50VR16 (rear)
. curb weight: 2700 lbs
. 0-60 time: 6.3 sec
. 0-100 time: 18.2 sec
. 1/4 mile: 14.7 sec @ 94 mph
.

yeah, 30 years does make a bit of a difference. The SC's 0-60 in 6.7 was pretty stunning in the US in the late 70s and early 80s (as I recall, it may have been the fastest acccelerating US legal production car).

These days, though, just about anything will smoke it.

Honda Accord Coupe
PRICE: $22,555 - $31,305
ENGINE: 2.4L I4 - 3.5L V6
HORSEPOWER: 190 - 271 hp
TORQUE: 162 - 254 lb-ft
SIZE (L x W x H): 190.9 x 72.8 x 56.4 in.
WEIGHT: 3221 - 3569 lbs
0-60 MPH: 5.3 sec (V6)
1/4 MILE: 14.2 sec @ 102 mph (V6)
TOP SPEED: 130 mph (V6)
FUEL (CITY/HWY): 17-22 / 25-31 mpg

[Flieger]

Originally Posted by Vincent Hill

A friend of mine that works at a Porsche Dealer and has driven them all said that he preferred a Caymann. His thinking is that the Disconnected feeling he gets from the Big 4 door car is totally unexpected where as the Caymann suv it is expected!

First, the SUV is the Cayenne.

Second, Cayman does not have two "n"s, even in Germany.

My favorite would be the Cayman, as well. It is the best handling car Porsche makes, other than the GT3RS and GT2RS possibly.

[dw1]

[QUOTE=McLovin;5836898]yeah, 30 years does make a bit of a difference. The SC's 0-60 in 6.7 was pretty stunning in the US in the late 70s and early 80s (as I recall, it may have been the fastest acccelerating US legal production car).

I believe the SC was never the fastest accelerating US legal production car.

You may recall that Porsche also made another 911 variant.....often referred to by its factory designation: 930.

Even now, an early 80's 930 would give that Panamera turbo a good run. 0-60 in the low-to-mid 5's, and a 1/4 mile in the low-to-mid 13's means it wouldn't be all that far behind (given roads where one could use the boost and someone skilled in driving it, of course), and it would be a LOT more fun.

[kiwiokie]

Originally Posted by kramer747

my brother in florida just bought a loaded Panamera. I think I will race him with my 911. Whadaya think?

Put a small block of wood under his gas pedal and you may have a hope.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by dw1

I believe the SC was never the fastest accelerating US legal production car.

You may recall that Porsche also made another 911 variant.....often referred to by its factory designation: 930.
.

True, except there was no US legal 911 Turbo/930 in 1980, 1981, 1982 or 1983 (or 84 or 85, but those weren't SC years).

What US legal production car did 0-60 faster than the SC in those years?

[dw1]

Originally Posted by McLovin

True, except there was no US legal 911 Turbo/930 in 1980, 1981, 1982 or 1983 (or 84 or 85, but those weren't SC years).

What US legal production car did 0-60 faster than the SC in those years?

Oh yeah...as I was in Canada for part of that time, I keep forgetting that the US (& Japan) were deprived of some fine auto.

During the SC years, one had to spend some serious coin to get a US-legal car that was faster, as most new US cars at the time had longer 0-60 times (think Corvette, Mustang, Camaro, Firebird).

But my records indicate that at least the Countach and BB512 were quicker and faster than an SC, but as of this writing I'm not sure for what years those cars were "officially" US-legal (gray-market legalization was big back then).

And, of course, there were still quite a few old muscle cars on the roads back then.