Well, as an example of what I'm trying to point out, according to a chart on 911 performance figures:

1967 911S 0-60 = 8.0 sec
1973 911T 0-60 = 8.1 sec
1973 911S 0-60 = 6.6 sec
1974 911S 0-60 = 6.1 sec

If the 1973 MFI T 0-60 is 8.1 sec
and the 73 CSI T 0-60 is 8.1 sec

either
(1) the MFI has a faster initial throttle response, but in order for them both to get to 60 in the same 8.1 sec, the CIS car has to catch up in those 8.1 sec, which means its rate of acceleration must exceed that of the MFI T - and arguably its intial performance is worse, but its ongoing performance is better; or

(2) they have the same throttle response, and when people say the MFI has better throttle response, they are mistaken or attributing "better throttle response" to louder engine noise.

And, given the numbers above, I would say also that the '74 CIS S has better throttle response than a '73 MFI S - even if attributable to the 2.7L.

As an aside, I do see now that we were using "performance" for two different things: performance of the car and performance of the engine.

A bit off topic, but how do you guys get your cars to smog?

I was over the "smog" testing age in Denver, however I was tagged by a "smog van" and had to go back to my stock equipment.

To Jay.
Its the position of the throttle butterfly not the injectors that gives throttle response.
If its closer to the head its faster.
Like low profile tyres are more responsive than high profile tyres.
Throttle response is the time it takes for the engine to start accelerating from the moment you depress the throttle pedal.
In CIS its noticeably slower.

As for your MFI to CIS comparo, the acceleration figures dont tell much about response.
Here you are talking about full throttle acceleration put the pedal to the metal type..., not engine response to small or differing changes in pedal pressure.

But you certainly have a point there.

Difficult to use timed runs for comparisons; different tires, drivers, wind conditions, drive ratios, test weights plus some engines of the same parts and build specifications produce more power than others, even from the factory.

Car and Driver, Sports Car Graphic and Road and Track tested the 67 S with 0-60 times of 7.0 for C&D, 8.9 for SCG and 9.0 for R&T. Porsche factory published a 0-60 time for the S of 7.4 seconds and when R&T tested Alan Johnson's 1967 911S after winning the GT class at Sebring they reported a standard 911S 0-60 time of 8.1 seconds.

was I dreaming or are there EFI setups that almost look like the PMO's or MFI's out there? and better, yet who's using them :)

The PMO throttle bodies look exactly like carbs with deleted fuel compartments and other metering pieces like jets etc.

The Porsche MFI intake manifolds are longer and converge at the top while they bolt to the short and parallel throttle bodies which in turn bolt to the heads, the injectors are bolted directly to the head intakes.

The PMO use converging intake manifolds just like the carbs and the throttle bodies are parallel. They have injector holes at the bottom of the throttle bodies.

The Porsche MFI has a shorter run from throttle body to valve, about 3-4 inches, therefore, theoretically, has better throttle response. But in practice the difference is minute.

The question: electronic vs mechanical fuel management, is easy to answer, with the former being easier to setup and better performing.
It is 2011 things have progressed since the 70ies

Having said the above there is a certain allure in the intricate mechanical detail and linkages involved in MFI but it is very close to fetish...
Like watches, you just know that no matter how good an old Rolex is, a Casio Gshock is a far superior timepiece but still people pay $$$$ to buy em!