911 vs 2002 Turbo

cegerer · cegerer's Garage

Anybody see the latest issue of Euro Car? It features the BMW 2002. A pretty cool car, IMO, but not in the same league as a 911. Nonetheless, they describe the 74 2002 Turbo as "a Porsche killer in its day". OK, this thing's got 170HP and I'm not sure what it weighs. But a Porsche-killer???? -- Curt

paulhagedorn · 07-23-2002, 08:30 PM

Keep in mind the regular 911 of the day had 150 hp in 1974. So, I would say that yes, the '02 turbo could beat a 911.

cegerer · cegerer's Garage

I guess that's true. 1974 was "the day the music died", wasn't it.

-- Curt

CamB · CamB's Garage

My 2002tii (non-turbo, MFI) would be equivalent in performance to my '69 T (with similar hp) - not quite as quick but better handling thanks to slightly better thought out weight distribution

.

With an extra 40hp, it would be very very quick... it only weighs about 2200lbs. This would put it on par on a power to weight basis with many 911s... except I have a nagging suspicion that 170 Porsche horsepower (eg approx 72/3 911E or a 74/75 911S) is more hp at the wheels due to the transaxle design.

In any event, every report I have ever read of an 02 Turbo is that it was incredibly laggy, so real world driving it would take a very good driver to best a contemporary 911.

Now an '02 with an e30 M3 engine swap (apparently not an enormous amoutn of effort) and 170-220hp (depending on engine and tune) - that is a Porsche beater...

BlueSkyJaunte · 07-23-2002, 10:23 PM

Not only that, but you can get 4 girlfriends to join you in the '02, and they won't hate you afterwards.

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

Feb 3, 1959...the day the music died

I think you're referring to Don McLean's ode to that fateful day..but that was recorded in 1971. I think that targa has been warping your sense of the space-time continuum

CamB · CamB's Garage

The music Curt refers to even made a brief resurgence in about '83, and was around until at least '76 in Europe.

Shame about the other music too.

thrown_hammer · 07-24-2002, 03:58 AM

Crap, I thought this was another 996 bashing party! I am outta here.

cegerer · cegerer's Garage

"Crap, I thought this was another 996 bashing party! I am outta here."

ROFL!

"I think you're referring to Don McLean's ode to that fateful day..but that was recorded in 1971. I think that targa has been warping your sense of the space-time continuum"

Who's Don McLean?

I'm referring to the beautiful music of an unsmogged pre-74 air-cooled flat-six! -- Curt

beepbeep · 05:31 AM

This is turbo-converted 2002 from a guy i know,
notice "tidy" venting holes for turbocharger and "optimal" placement of air-filter

Turbo is off some Saab and everything is done in the "shed":

It's a very entertaining little car that is devastatingly quick around short courses (as auto-X). He also "blessed" it with solid diff ("AGA-diff" as we call it .. AGA is manufacturer of welding equipment and his dif is welded solid

)

Here is another turbo 2002 drag-racing my friends 02' 996 C2 and eventually spanking him further down 1/4-mile course (and yes, he knows how to shift):

So much about 996-bashing

Saffs · 07-24-2002, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by paulhagedorn
Keep in mind the regular 911 of the day had 150 hp in 1974. So, I would say that yes, the '02 turbo could beat a 911.

Taking it from a German basis, the standard 911 had 150 bhp, it's predecessor, the 2.4 T, had 140 - with MFI and CIS - 130 in Europe w/carbs. The 2.7 was faster in all respects, I think - so it seems the music didn't quite die then...

A BMW 2002 Tii (with Kuglefisher MFI) does 0 to 60 in about 8.2 secs. This car really is the obvious "competitor" to the 911 in performance structures. The straight 911 did 0 to 60 in 7.9 sec.
The Turbo was an expensive car in it's day and I guess comparing it to the 2.7 911S would be fair (in proper Euro spec.) the Turbo did 0 to 60 in about 6.9 sec, I think, and a top speed of about 130 mph, maybe? The 911S did 0 to 60 in 6.1 sec and 140 mph. Obviously, the 911S and the 2002 Turbo are close, I think the 911S would have the edge though. But, if the 2.7 Carrera with MFI was brought out, which it could be given we're talking a top of the range model, it would all be over!
The 2002 Turbo has quite a shocking turbo lag, but it a great car....

CamB · CamB's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by cegerer
I'm referring to the beautiful music of an unsmogged pre-74 air-cooled flat-six! -- Curt

And this kept going for those lucky Europeans 'till '76 (ask Matt H).

Plus the SCRS in '83 - I have read a road test of one of the few of those they made and it must have been quite some car (3.0 MFI with 255hp)...

Titov61 · 03-14-2014, 11:36 PM

I had a 1973 911S until recently and now have a 1974 2002 turbo. The S is faster and more precise in corners and braking HOWEVER the 2002 in my opinion will beat any T, even a 72-73, and make utter mincemeat of a 914, 912 or other lesser engined Porsche. But the S and E (pre 74) are likely too much for the 2002. But they are a different class of car, not fair really. 1974-77 911s I am not sure. Having owned both no doubt the 2002 turbo is more pleasurable and strangely gets more attention and picture takers when parked than my S ever did. And cheaper to fill up as I can't use 91/92 octane with that turbo boost, plus better mpg too. 911s and 2002s are both great, why not praise them both?