S50 Road Test 98

[Broccers]

At the beginning ....

Click for the rest (http://s20.photobucket.com/albums/b213/Mikeshrops/Mcoupe/)

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b213/Mikeshrops/Mcoupe/mc1.jpg

[MGR]

Nice one - I've been looking for that for a while. I think thats a fair review which reflects my ownership experience.

[c_w]

Got that magazine out on the shelf at my mum and dad's since I got the car! (have also got it vs the 996). It's probably the least favourable review I've seen of the car, it criticises the handling, space, touring ability etc!

Got to agree with them on the handling though; it does ride well on standard suspension and offers more refinement but this is at the expense of body control. I find the boot space is fine and economy is pretty good if it's driven gentley.

[Broccers]

Got a scanner for the other reviews you have ?

Was looking at this the other day for their 1/4 mile which is within 0.1 secs of my time in a boggo/ish car the other week 9 years on :thumbsup:

[coupe fan]

Makes me wonder what they were on that day (lazy pills?). Can't disagree with most of it but saying it's short of space in the boot - you can actually get heaps in there due to the height - the reviewer didn't do that, he just opened the rear lid and looked at the size of the boot floor.

[Howiez]

Thanks for that. I'm a new member to the forum, having purchased the S54 that was advertised last month (by "quick chick")! It's without doubt the best car I've ever driven and I absolute adore it!

[MGR]

Makes me wonder what they were on that day (lazy pills?). Can't disagree with most of it but saying it's short of space in the boot - you can actually get heaps in there due to the height - the reviewer didn't do that, he just opened the rear lid and looked at the size of the boot floor.

I agree you can get a lot in but it has to be square-ish in shape but then again its pretty good really for a coupe.

[MGR]

I like the bit where they compare the 0-100 times with a lotus and porsche. They say it 'outpaces' the lotus and 'all but matches' the 911 even though the gap between the lotus, bmw, and porsche are very similar !

[c_w]

I like the bit where they compare the 0-100 times with a lotus and porsche. They say it 'outpaces' the lotus and 'all but matches' the 911 even though the gap between the lotus, bmw, and porsche are very similar !

What's even stranger is the 911 is marked down at 286bhp and is heavier but in every performance measuerment it outpaces the Z3M.

[Jonmurgie]

Thanks for scanning/posting that... was a good read even if it was a little bit of a luke-warm review.

Anyone else got some MC articles scanned in... I see there are several old mags for sale on eBay but guess someone's got these already and maybe access to a scanner?

[MGR]

What's even stranger is the 911 is marked down at 286bhp and is heavier but in every performance measuerment it outpaces the Z3M.


I wonder which one that is - I assume a 911 993 carrera 2 ?

This seems to be a common trait with 911s I remember an autocar comparison between a 911 gt3 and a ferrari 360 challenge Stradale and even though the ferrari had more hp and weighed less the GT3 was quicker or matched the ferrari depending on which speeds you looked between !

[c_w]

I wonder which one that is - I assume a 911 993 carrera 2 ?

This seems to be a common trait with 911s I remember an autocar comparison between a 911 gt3 and a ferrari 360 challenge Stradale and even though the ferrari had more hp and weighed less the GT3 was quicker or matched the ferrari depending on which speeds you looked between !

Its a 996, they came out on 97 R-plates I think. I'll try and scan in the article at some point. But yes Porsches always seemer quicker than other cars with similar power and weight, I wuld say that Porsche BHP is stronger than BMW bhp, the fabled 321bhp possibly being a little optimistic.

[MGR]

Its a 996, they came out on 97 R-plates I think. I'll try and scan in the article at some point. But yes Porsches always seemer quicker than other cars with similar power and weight, I wuld say that Porsche BHP is stronger than BMW bhp, the fabled 321bhp possibly being a little optimistic.

I always thought the 996 C2 had around 300 bhp which is why I thought it might have been the 993.

The peak power figure doesn't tell the whole story - could be that the 911 enigne puts out more total power if looked out over the whole rev range, seems that they always go a bit better than expected compared to other manufacturers power figures. I suppose they could just loose less through the drivetrain etc on the way to the wheels

I had mine dyno'd a few weeks ago and made 324.3 HP and theres no way that mine would match those figures for the 911.

[exdos]

This is hearsay only, but I understand that Porsche figures represent the very lowest output of any engine tested in its sampling batch, whereas other manufacturers use the average value of all their samples tested.
Anyone else heard the same?

[c_w]

I always thought the 996 C2 had around 300 bhp which is why I thought it might have been the 993.

The peak power figure doesn't tell the whole story - could be that the 911 enigne puts out more total power if looked out over the whole rev range, seems that they always go a bit better than expected compared to other manufacturers power figures. I suppose they could just loose less through the drivetrain etc on the way to the wheels

I had mine dyno'd a few weeks ago and made 324.3 HP and theres no way that mine would match those figures for the 911.

I think you might be right in that they have 300bhp, but tbh I think 10.5seconds for a regular 996 is a very optimistic going off the power and weight and must have been a very "good" one, otherwise I think yours would match one.

[MGR]

Yeah sounds a little quick I would normally associate that sort of pace with a car nearer 400 bhp or very light.

Might well have had a 'good' one its amazing the difference that can make. I remember driving several E46 M3s and they differed from slightly underwhelming to the one I eventually bought which was very quick.
The difference between mine and the slowest one I drove felt like there was at least another 40 HP in mine which there can't really have been but it felt like it.

The only thing I can think is that due to the engine in the back there is very little transmission loss so the wheel HP is higher than expected ?!?!

I'll have to look out for a 996 c2 to see. :lol:

[c_w]

I think I've heard they have lowish transmission losses too, but they also have very good traction so the 0-60 is always very good, but once on the move this shouldn't make much difference to intermediate times.