Car and Driver test of 78SC 0-60 in 5.8 secs?

One resource not mentioned yet, is Paul Frere's Porsche 911 Story, in all six editions! He has tested every 911 variant since 1965, and collected 0-60, 1/4 mile, 0-100, and top speeds in tabular form, so there is no changing magazine staf variable at play ... he tested them all, himself!!!
------------------
Warren Hall
1973 911S Targa

[This message has been edited by Early_S_Man (edited 12-23-2000).]

Inconsistent, sure, but most of the times are better than the limited number of articles I've seen (which were show a 0-60 of 7.0-7.5 sec for 0-60). To me, this is a GOOD thing ...I think I'll start taking better looks at the SCs as candidate cars.

I look at the inconsistent data as illustrating what the car can be capable of, which is apparently quite a bit!

Well, of course I'm going to agree with that. My SC is no slouch. I am quite confident I can beat 7 seconds, and SSIs are somewhere in my future. I would think a matchup with those Mustangs and Camaros would be a fair fight. I like my chances there.

Really, the SC is a pretty strong car and also has beautiful driveability characteristics. The power band is exciting and fairly wide. The engine is set up to be pretty torquy for its size, so it's pretty easy to drive and have fun. Totally excellent as a daily driver!

------------------
'83 SC

[JR_NYC]

Sub 6 secs for an SC must've been when brand new, no options, and with a 5'0" Peruvian jockey for a driver. 7.0 should be no problem though, but then we're talking late 80s Maxima territory.

The stats that I find have more real world relevance are the mid-gear acceleration figures like 50 - 80 mph or 70 - 100 mph. When I'm in 4th gear on the freeway and the traffic opens up and I lay into the gas pedal the SC takes off like a rocket leaving the other cars behind.

I did a lot of damage to the various cars I owned from ages 16 to about 20 and learned what drag racing can do to your drivetrain. An RX-7, a Scirocco. I remember doing neutral drops in my friend's sister's 1986 Dodge Omni. It was tan. Rev it up to about 4 or 5k while in neutral and then drop it into drive! When we brought it home and turned off the ignition it started dieseling. As it dieseled, it started to get louder and louder like it was reving up even though there was no key in the ignition. We all thought it was going to blow up so we ran for cover. Finally it made a really loud bang and blew smoke all over the neighborhood. A week later she had a new car.

Don't punish your car with 0-60 trials. Especially not your '86 Omni.

[aigel]

I got 6.8 with the G-tech accelerometer after fiddling with the CIS. I have since put some SSI and am confident that I may get to the low 6s. There is NO WAY you can get in the 5 s range with a bone stock US SC unless you do 5000 rpm clutch drops and 915 ruining fast shifts. Of course, that's what the magazines probably did. I still think low 6 is the best.

I agree with what others have said. The 0-60 times are not very important. Any 25 year old 911 will look bad compared to a newer sports car. What matters to me is the track time on a nice road course. There you can still impress the newer cars, with a well set up SC. For a fraction of the $ spent, you can have a lot of fun. And when you are done, the SC will still be worth what you paid for it!

George

[bigchillcar]

wow...old thread from 12/2000. look at the post count for warren..n/a..lol.

my '74 car & driver magazine shows a 6.1 time for 0-60...in a base 911 like mine! 2nd gear in my box goes to 57...if i let it go just past redline to hit 60, i can get under 7 seconds, but that's with me driving and working a stopwatch. still, my little '74 with 7:31 tranny is plenty quick..
ryan

[morrisjm1]

PO gave my a copy of a Road and Track article. They got 6.3 sec, 0-60. Owner's manual says 7.0 (CA

[SC-targa]

The road test techniques varied considerably. C&D beats the living heck out of their cars. R&T used to use two testers in the car, though new test equipment in the late 70's eliminated the second person to operate the stop watches. R&T tried to shift quickly, but the drove the car like the were paying for it and planned to keep the car for a while.

You will note that in every case, the 80-83 US versions of the SC are slightly less quick than the 78-79 versions, even though Porsche claimed the same power ratings.



Regards,

Jerry Kroeger

[Huh]

From the info I have gathered in from various websites, the 0-60 times for the SC is the Euro models. They were considered lighter and more hp.

[Jay H]

I've got a 1980 test report from Car and Driver and they got 6.0 seconds from 0-60. It's in .pdf format otherwise I'd post it here. Good read!

Jay
90 964

[Huh]

http://www.adelgigs.com/911sc.shtml

[Jay H]

From that same 1980 test report, there is a "Counterpoint" section where three writers give their opposing view. Check out this one counter point:

The writing, it would seem is on the wall. And what is written is that the venerable and venerated 911 is in the twilight of its years. I can remember when there were so many 911 variations I couldn’t keep them all straight. Now there’s just this one. Porsche says there will be a 911 as long as there is a demand for one, but it’s difficult to see the car or the demand lasting more than another couple of years. At the most. The 911SC is as good as it can be made. Porsche has massaged, refined, reworked and improved on it until the car is as near perfection as it can be. And that’s why it will go away. Innovation and challenge are very important to Porsche. The 911 no longer provides either. It has outlived it’s usefulness, and as attrition takes the die hard traditionalist, the 911 will finally outlive its demand. I loved driving the SC, and I could live a long and happy life with it. It’s still that good, that satisfying. But, we’re getting a 928 in a few weeks, and I know it will turn my head, and it’ll make my knees feel funny, and the hair stand up on the back of my neck. The 911 just doesn’t do that to me anymore. The 928 is the now Porsche, and that’s fine by me. Mike Knepper.

Guess he was wrong...

[JR_NYC]

One true statement in all of that: "The 911SC is as good as it can be made."

Except for those chain tensioners, air box explosions, and trombone coolers, of course.

[Terrh]

Heel-toe shifting is done on downshift only, when slowing to enter a corner. It's only really done to select the proper gear under hard breaking.

Procedure is about like this:

As you are approaching the corner (hard on the brakes) you push the clutch in with your left foot and begin shifting.. but you have to match the revs! And your right foot is allready busy witht he brake pedal!

No matter - while keeping one part of your foot on the brake (which part will vary between vehicles, but we'll say the ball of your foot for this example) you move the heel of your foot over to the gas pedal and blip the revs, complete the shift, let off the clutch and don't upset the balance of the car while entering the corner.

I hope I explained this correctly - it's much easier to just demonstrate.

[rallyracer]

Originally posted by Terrh
Heel-toe shifting...don't upset the balance of the car while entering the corner.

I hope I explained this correctly - it's much easier to just demonstrate.

You hit it right there. H/t allows the driver to control weight transfer at the limit while shifting, but, when mastered, allows smooth downshifting under braking in all conditions, in all types of vehicles.

I couldn't get the pedals right in my S-10, and it bugged me to no end. My 911 felt the same and until I figured out how to adjust the brake pedal height I hated driving it.

David

[aigel]

Originally posted by JR_NYC
One true statement in all of that: "The 911SC is as good as it can be made."

Except for those chain tensioners, air box explosions, and trombone coolers, of course.

Both the chain tensioners and the air box problem were basically solved in 81.

George

[AntiCHP]

Actually, I've had a facsimile copy from when fax paper came on rolls! And it's faded pretty bad, and for some reason I can't find the rest of the article (this was stashed in a 1989 copy of Excellence).

Anyway, it is certainly C&D, I believe it is late 1977 reviewing the up-coming 911SC. Cookie-cutter (ATS?) wheels, chrome targa bar.

On the spec page it shows

0 - 60 in 5.5 sec
-70 in 8.1
-80 in 10.3
-90 in 13.0
-100 in 17.0
1/4 mi in 14.8 sec at 94.0; top speed [factory rated] 136mph

Remember, though, that the early 3.0 litres ran with pretty advanced cam timing -and the 15" wheels offer shorter gearing than the 16"s more commonly seen on the 78-and later cars.
That might explain why the car peters out to an anemic 14.8 quarter mile after charging out of the gate so hard.

Also, here's a little something for you drag queens (
): even though first gear has rocket-like take-off, consider shifting out of first by 5,500 to 5,600 rpm. You won't beat up the synchros, and it is an incredible quick shift that puts you right on the bottom of the torque curve

[AntiCHP]

Actually, I've had a facsimile copy from when fax paper came on rolls! And it's faded pretty bad, and for some reason I can't find the rest of the article (this was stashed in a 1989 copy of Excellence).

Anyway, it is certainly C&D, I believe it is late 1977 reviewing the up-coming 911SC. Cookie-cutter (ATS?) wheels, chrome targa bar.

On the spec page it shows

172bhp @ 5,500
189lbs-ft @ 4,200

0 - 60 in 5.5 sec
-70 in 8.1
-80 in 10.3
-90 in 13.0
-100 in 17.0
1/4 mi in 14.8 sec at 94.0; top speed [factory rated] 136mph

Remember, though, that the early 3.0 litres ran with pretty advanced cam timing -and the 15" wheels offer shorter gearing than the 16"s more commonly seen on the 78-and later cars.
That might explain why the car peters out to an anemic 14.8 quarter mile after charging out of the gate so hard.

Also, here's a little something for you drag queens ( ): even though first gear has rocket-like take-off, consider shifting out of first by 5,00 to 5,600 rpm. You won't beat up the synchros, and it is an incredible quick shift that puts you out of first just out of peak power and into second right on the bottom of the torque curve. Plus, it is an incredbily quick but gentle shift to boot.

The bottom line is if you take the second gear ratio of 1.77 and divide it by the first gear ratio of 3.18 you will see the optimum shift point rpm expressed as a decimal: 5566, or 5600 rpm. (post 1978 and USA cars. (915/61))

The C&D example had the shorter 1.83 2nd gear, so the shift point moves up to 5,700 rpm. (78 and Euro SC: 915/63)

The test car had the shorter 2nd gear as well.

[AntiCHP]

Department of Redundancy Department:

Not only that, but the 1.83 2nd gear was in the test car.

[AntiCHP]

WTF? Sorry about the double post - a case of "key misapplication".