165 Mph 73 2.4s ??? - Page 35

Zeke · 11-24-2006, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randywebb
So until the car is sold, or unless it is sold, I doubt we will ever know what that particular car can really do in top end speed, rpm limits on the motor or any other performance issue.

Or do we care?

lateapex911 · 11-24-2006, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by porsche930dude
hes got a nice alfa for sale now. Id drive it

One of the Spiders with the 2.0 litre 4?? I hear they have special "clover green tag" Spica injected motors...rare of course, but...even with the top down, they can go over 160 MPH.

the · 11-24-2006, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randywebb

Porsche claimed that a stock '73 S would go over 160 mph IIRC.

Really? Is that documented anywhere? That's a surprisingly high claim, it seems.

Wasn't there a famous R&T or C&D comparison test of the 72/73 T, E and S? What numbers did they get?

javadog · 11-24-2006, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randywebb
Porsche claimed that a stock '73 S would go over 160 mph IIRC. So a std. geared coupe could perhaps make 165. I don't see that happening in a short geared targa.

POrsche claimed to get 160+ mph out of a stock 2.4S? No way, Jose'.

Paul Frere timed a 2.4 S at 144 mph. He timed a 2.7 Carrera RS at 149 and a 260 DIN hp 3 litre turbo at 155. I don't have the factory numbers handy but they'll be pretty close to Frere's.

Porsche's claims were conservative.

JR

lateapex911 · 11-24-2006, 04:43 PM

My E topped out around 143 in stock trim, and had the S spoiler, and was a coupe. My speedo error at the time meant that number was close to 138 actual, into a very slight headwind.

If an S can go over 20 MPH faster, we are all jerks for buying anything but the stronger (by 20 HP) S....

(I have that darn C & D test somewhere, but can't find it now)

marc weintraub · marc weintraub's Garage

This conversation is totally rediculous. I have owned 8 early cars, included in that number was one 73RS (built out to a 2.8) and a 74 3.0rsr. The rest were "S" cars with one 72"E" in there. Two cars were targas. Each one of the cars was stock (with the exception of the RS) and with the exception of the 73 and 74 cars there was not one of them capable of going over 160 without modifications. Certainly, neither of the targas was capable of these speeds, especially with the top off. Totally rediculous!

Keep in mind that during one of the high speed shoot outs reviewed in Excellence magazine, one full convertible was able to hit 180 with the top down, but it was designed in a wind tunnel with a flat floor and over 540hp to boot. The coupe that was in this shoot off was rated at 20 less HP and hit 200. Given the fact that this was a full convertible, it is easier to control the actual airflow and wind buffeting than that of a targa... I could only venture to think of how much slower the targa would be in that scenario, with the air circulating around in that cockpit. The turbulance would be terrible and the car would not be that stable. I stated in an earlier response that I had my targa up to 130 (this car was stock, lowered, new tires and suspension and dynoed with 190hp listed as peak HP). The windows were up, top was off, front original spoiler in place and I had a ducktail painted to match the car (silver) when I wanted to take it out I would swap the stock hatch out. The car was fairly stable, but the wind in the drivers compartment was a bit much and it was a bit of a handful. This is not to say it wouldn't go faster, but had I not had the car lowered and the ducktail on it, it would have been a handful. I know this because I had the same car out before it was lowered, with the stock hatch and it was exactly that... a handful.

For those of you that think a stock early targa can go 165, get your heads out of the clouds. Do some math and try to include drag coeficients along with the fact that this was stated as being stock, which means no aero aids, huge wind buffeting issues with the targa on or off, greater frontal area... the list goes on and on.

A coupe has a much better chance of going that fast in any configuration because the drag coeficient is much lower. It takes less HP to get it to specific MPH markers than that of a convertible or targa. Keep reading the excellence 200mph plus shoot outs to understand what it takes to get cars to specific speed milestones. Also note that pro drivers do not go from zero to 200 in one acceleration... they do it in stages allowing the engines time to cool down, make sure the suspension settles in and ensure that the tires are up to the task. This guy was making claims that were so rediculous for a targa in stock form that he should write brilliant fictional stories.

Keep the BS coming....

randywebb · 11-24-2006, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by the
Really? Is that documented anywhere? That's a surprisingly high claim, it seems.

Wasn't there a famous R&T or C&D comparison test of the 72/73 T, E and S? What numbers did they get?

my error - I should have looked it up instead of relying on a recollection... p. 91 of the 1972 911S USA Owner's Manual (red cover) states 143 for a manual trans. car. & that would be a coupe as marc points out. Another 20+ mph on top of that would require a serious hp increase (the relation involves hp cubed), and adding the giganto targa air scoop would require even more.

dd74 · 11-24-2006, 09:50 PM

I bet this will get another 20 mph in that Targa...

kach22i · kach22i's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by marc weintraub
Also note that pro drivers do not go from zero to 200 in one acceleration... they do it in stages allowing the engines time to cool down, make sure the suspension settles in and ensure that the tires are up to the task.

Well, this thread did end up with some good informantion afterall.

I took my stock 2.7 (1977) to 140 mph once. Targa top was off, windows up, and front chin spoiler installed (no tail). I will never do that again, but I had to do it just once in the name of science.

pwd72s · 11-25-2006, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by kach22i
Well, this thread did end up with some good informantion afterall.

I took my stock 2.7 (1977) to 140 mph once. Targa top was off, windows up, and front chin spoiler installed (no tail). I will never do that again, but I had to do it just once in the name of science.

Well, as long as it was in the interest of science...

Randy, glad you corrected yourself. My published info here says 143 and also "approximately 145", depending on which factory piece you read. That is referencing coupes..

randywebb · 11-25-2006, 08:49 PM

Wonder what the top speed for an RS was?
They have a lot more hp than a specially selected 2.4L S motor would have and a bit lower drag besides...

dd74 · 11-25-2006, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randywebb
Wonder what the top speed for an RS was?
They have a lot more hp than a specially selected 2.4L S motor would have and a bit lower drag besides...

Only 20 more hp. IIRC, I think the RS top speed was 150 mph.

livi · 11-25-2006, 11:54 PM

According to Leffingwell:

1973 911

911 S : 142 mph (Road & Track)

911 RS: 149 mph (lightweight, factory)

Kemo · 11-27-2006, 08:58 AM

I love this thread

Regardless of the motor in EM's car, will it do 165? Will we ever find out?

And if it does, then what?

Is there any money still on the table?

Whats the end game here, and why am I still checking this thread?

pwd72s · 11-27-2006, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kemo
I love this thread

Regardless of the motor in EM's car, will it do 165? Will we ever find out?

And if it does, then what?

Is there any money still on the table?

Whats the end game here, and why am I still checking this thread?

No end game needed. Like the disclaimer on the lottery ticket: "For amusement purposes only". And you have to admit, our Mailbu friend is funnier than hell...

trader220 · 11-27-2006, 11:31 AM

I guess we messed up in that we let him understand how much we enjoy his rants and expect him to take the bait each time we plant it out here. Now he's not playing long.

pwd72s · 11-27-2006, 11:45 AM

Doesn't matter...still plenty of funny material here...I love rereading his "proof" offered...

trader220 · 11-27-2006, 11:57 AM

The picture of the tach is priceless,

pwd72s · 11-27-2006, 12:18 PM

I loved the bragging about all his toys...even a pic of the ocean view from his window...priceless! What a way to defend his performance claims of the car...

Kemo · 11-27-2006, 12:27 PM

Malibu has a much better sense of humor than Kramer...thats for sure. I wonder if every one of his posts was done in jest? now thats a setup even Andy Kaufman would be proud of.