911E's owners keep saying that an E is faster than an S up to 100mph???

[gruen911]

Guys,
I have seen more 911E owners post this statement recently about the E being faster than the S to 100mph, yet in every book I have ever read about early 911's and perfomance numbers, I have NEVER seen this supported. In fact, I have read the opposite. In fact, it doesn't make any sense. Based upon this logic, a 911T would be faster than a T from 0-100!.
Bottom line is this: The 911S had more HP and more torque than the E. Okay, so the E comes on cam at lower RPM's than the S, but it also gives up earlier wheras the S keeps pushing harder at the upper rev range.
Anything the S gives up in the lower rpm range, it takes back plus some up top. Every factory article and brochure I have ever read shows that the S is faster than the E from 0-60mph, and from 0-100. So why does the myth continue to propogate that the E is faster to 100?
Soemone provide hard numbers, or let's put this propoganda to rest once and for all.

[robmog]

sir , i do believe you have insulted my honor.
there is only one way to settle this, foil or sabre your choice!.
just kidding.
but i did dig up two old articles.
"autocar" 11/25/71 states for a 72 e: 0-60 in 6.4 sec; 1/4 mi 14.4 sec
"motor "1/29/72 states for a 72 s: 0-60 in 6.2 sec; 1/4 mi 14.7 sec
so it depends, no surprise that the s accelerates faster but in a drag race the torque curve favors the e. i guess with quick shifting it's harder to stay in the "zone"
no surprize the s stat were all superior,except the 1/4 mi and 1 km straightaway.
they're both nice cars.
bob

[hgo]

I read some old artikels (from when the cars where new)
they state this but are refering to the S from the previous model.

the 2.4E is (depending on the amagzine they put here the word "almost")as fast or faster then the 2.2S

but I have an old R&T test for an 2.4E 0-60 in 6.6 and for a 2.4S 7.8
and 0-100 E 18.9 and S 19.1

But in a later test they wrote that something was wrong with the S

In Porsche documents the S is always the faster one

[gruen911]

This brochure only shows a comparison from 0-60mph. However, the S beats the E by almost a whole second (0.9) 911E 7.9, 911S 7.0.
I find it very hard to believe that the E would be able to make up the difference by almost a second as both cars start to really unwind above 60mph. In fact, I would think that the E's best chance would be at the beginning of a dead start, rather than when both cars get up and running.

[dvkk]

"autocar" 11/25/71 states for a 72 e: 0-60 in 6.4 sec; 1/4 mi 14.4 sec
"motor "1/29/72 states for a 72 s: 0-60 in 6.2 sec; 1/4 mi 14.7 sec
so it depends, no surprise that the s accelerates faster but in a drag race the torque curve favors the e. i guess with quick shifting it's harder to stay in the "zone"

Those ¼ mile times are worthless for comparison purposes. The #1 biggest variable in ¼ times is the driver. #2 is the weather. The two tests you quoted were obviously driven by different drivers on different days. Switch the drivers, the other car wins.

Here's a real world example. A friend of mine used to drag race a 68 Camaro for many years. When family came along, he sold everything. Years later he wanted to get involved, but couldn't afford a car, so instead he "crew chiefed" a friend with a 5.0 Mustang. Through tweaking and tuning the car got to 12.20s, but they couldn't go faster. After a while, my buddy says to the owner, "let me take it for a run." Up to now he had never driven the car, and it had been over a decade since being on the track. My buddy's first pass was 11.90, and he weighs more than the car's owner! Yes the owner was pissed, and no, he still couldn't match my buddy's time.

[W Scott Shores]

From 'Excellence Was Expected':

"Except for it quarter-mile time and top speed, this 911E seemed to outperform the 911S. The 'E' returned figures that were better than those quoted by Porsche, while the 'S' was slower than the factory's figures."

Tests of 1970-71 Porsche coupes

7.0 sec 0-60 911E
7.3 sec 0-60 911S

15.4 sec 1/4-mile 911E
14.9 sec 1/4-mile 911S

137 mph top speed 911E
144 mph top speed 911S

(note that these tests were performed by two different magazines, Motor (England) for the 911E and R&T for the 911S)

[robmog]

another old article;
road and track 2/72
E 0-60 5.8 sec; 0-100 15.2 sec; 1/4 mi 14.3 sec.
S 0-60 6.0 sec; 0-100 15.7 sec; 1/4 mi 14.4 sec.
one article: i assume same driver and best times.
res ipsa loquteur (or smething like that).
bob

[Cornpanzer]

There is no way that this can be true, it is completely illogical. To achieve 100 mph you must run both cars to redline though several gears negating the lower torque range benifit of the "E".

Now, if we made the statement that an E is quicker than an "S" to 100 mph if you keep both cars below 5500 RPM, then maybe this would be true.

[911quest]

One other thing I doubt the sales brochure is very accurate it would be hard to sell an S for a higher price if the E was faster.

[robmog]

i don't know if it's true, but it's in print.
but my mistake; it was car and driver mag not road and track.
a quote from the article says it all:
"The S clearly makes more power than the E but acceleration is marginally poorer because it takes so long to get on top of the power peak. You only get your money's worth when you can stuff your foot into it and leave it there... flat out down the Autobahn ... or flat out toward jail in this country."
they're still both great cars, much better than a T.
just kidding they're all great.
bob