Hey - did you know if you click on the title of a thread it will take you to the first unread post since you last visited that thread?
but were afraid to ask: 
STOP!! Never post your email address in open forums. Bots can "harvest" your email! If you must share your email use a Private Message or use the 
smilie in place of the real @
Pretty Please - add it to our Events forum(s) and add to the calendar! >> 
Bret
Yoda
Offline
-
Hi Guest!
You can help ensure that British Car Forum (BCF) continues to provide a great place to engage in the British car hobby! If you find BCF a beneficial community, please consider supporting our efforts with a subscription.
There are some perks with a member upgrade!**Upgrade Now**
(PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra video
- Thread starter Bret
- Start date
Share this page
kennypinkerton
Yoda
Offline
Pretty good... I've seen the more modern recreation of that on Top Gear. I like the 928 cornering attitude a lot better than the Merkur.
OP
Bret
Yoda
Offline
Sorry you must be thinking of a stock 911. The Porsche pictured in this video is a 928 and as they said one of the fastest āroad carsā you could buy back in the day.
As for the Sierra RS500? Sorry again but you just canāt compare a āspecialā one off vehicle. As they said these are āRoad Carsā. The RS500 was a special homologation of ~500 units for the 1987 Touring Car Championship. Of witch only about ~10% where offered to the public. In other words the RS500 was a race build car. BTW I think the video was made back in the early 80ās so the RS500 wouldnāt even of existed yet.
But if you want to play that game and afford me the same opportunity to put in a ringer ā remember that the Porsche used appears to be stock 928 or 928S. Hardy the best 928 offered by Porsche during the whole 1977-1995 production run. Believe it or not there are quite a few freighting factory 928ās out there that could go toe to toe with āanyā super car of the same model year. Iād put a factory prepared 928 S4, a GT or a GTS up against anything out there.
Additionally most folks donāt know it ā but there are a few (albeit āveryā few) 928ās out there that are still regularly campaigned in competition. Likewise for a mere $4 to $5 grand one could stuff in a supercharger that would dang near take a factory stock 928 GTS in to astronomical numbers. Add some track tires & big brake kit and youād be hard pressed to find a road car in the world that would beat it.
As for the Sierra RS500? Sorry again but you just canāt compare a āspecialā one off vehicle. As they said these are āRoad Carsā. The RS500 was a special homologation of ~500 units for the 1987 Touring Car Championship. Of witch only about ~10% where offered to the public. In other words the RS500 was a race build car. BTW I think the video was made back in the early 80ās so the RS500 wouldnāt even of existed yet.
But if you want to play that game and afford me the same opportunity to put in a ringer ā remember that the Porsche used appears to be stock 928 or 928S. Hardy the best 928 offered by Porsche during the whole 1977-1995 production run. Believe it or not there are quite a few freighting factory 928ās out there that could go toe to toe with āanyā super car of the same model year. Iād put a factory prepared 928 S4, a GT or a GTS up against anything out there.
Additionally most folks donāt know it ā but there are a few (albeit āveryā few) 928ās out there that are still regularly campaigned in competition. Likewise for a mere $4 to $5 grand one could stuff in a supercharger that would dang near take a factory stock 928 GTS in to astronomical numbers. Add some track tires & big brake kit and youād be hard pressed to find a road car in the world that would beat it.
OP
Bret
Yoda
Offline
Re: McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra vi
[ QUOTE ]
I don't remember the 928 as being particularly quick. It had a pretty decent top speed, but all the 928 owners I've spoken with noted that it wasn't that fast at lower speeds.
[/ QUOTE ]Well, quicker than most Steve, quicker than most. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
I don't have the numbers or specifics in front of me at the moment but if you do a little checking youāll discover that the 928 was touted once or twice (maybe more?) during itās production 18 year run as being the āfastestā production car. I have to assume that they were referring to top speed rather than 0-60 runs but still the numbers for the 928ās late in their life where staggering.
While my 78ā isnāt the quickest of them all by any means. Perhaps the folks you talked to had an early version like mine. Iāll admit that in 928 circles the early 928s like mine are the lease desirable with their 4.5L single overhead cam engine they pumped out a mere 220 hp (emissions) here in the US and a whopping 240 hp everywhere else in the world. Not great for a car as heavy as it is but the 4.5L engine was a compromise between performance and the oil crises at the time of the carsā introduction. Still it managed to achieve the title of āCar of the Yearā in 78ā. Anyway another reason for some folks disappointment with the 928 usually comes from owners who opted for the Automatic transmission. The Autoās usually accounted for much lower ETs by as much as a full second or more. Another interesting fact about 928ās is that it could almost always outperform their stable sibiling the 911 (w/o a hair drier of course). Something that most 911 folks don't like to talk about and forget to mention when bad mouthing the Shark. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
That said the most violent factory creation for public consumption had to be the 928 GTS with itās monster 5.4L quad-overhead cam 32V engine. Now depending on the year the numbers vary slightly, but the badist beast of them all had to be the 1995 GTS that pumped out 350HP and 500 lbs of toque.
My goal is to own one of those beasts some day.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/devilgrin.gif
Update correction: I made a mistake as to the GTS's Toque rating. It is "not" 500 lbs/ft. It is actually 500 Nm's of Toque. Thats about ~370 lbs/ft of toque.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't remember the 928 as being particularly quick. It had a pretty decent top speed, but all the 928 owners I've spoken with noted that it wasn't that fast at lower speeds.
[/ QUOTE ]Well, quicker than most Steve, quicker than most. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
I don't have the numbers or specifics in front of me at the moment but if you do a little checking youāll discover that the 928 was touted once or twice (maybe more?) during itās production 18 year run as being the āfastestā production car. I have to assume that they were referring to top speed rather than 0-60 runs but still the numbers for the 928ās late in their life where staggering.
While my 78ā isnāt the quickest of them all by any means. Perhaps the folks you talked to had an early version like mine. Iāll admit that in 928 circles the early 928s like mine are the lease desirable with their 4.5L single overhead cam engine they pumped out a mere 220 hp (emissions) here in the US and a whopping 240 hp everywhere else in the world. Not great for a car as heavy as it is but the 4.5L engine was a compromise between performance and the oil crises at the time of the carsā introduction. Still it managed to achieve the title of āCar of the Yearā in 78ā. Anyway another reason for some folks disappointment with the 928 usually comes from owners who opted for the Automatic transmission. The Autoās usually accounted for much lower ETs by as much as a full second or more. Another interesting fact about 928ās is that it could almost always outperform their stable sibiling the 911 (w/o a hair drier of course). Something that most 911 folks don't like to talk about and forget to mention when bad mouthing the Shark. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
That said the most violent factory creation for public consumption had to be the 928 GTS with itās monster 5.4L quad-overhead cam 32V engine. Now depending on the year the numbers vary slightly, but the badist beast of them all had to be the 1995 GTS that pumped out 350HP and 500 lbs of toque.
My goal is to own one of those beasts some day.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/devilgrin.gif
Update correction: I made a mistake as to the GTS's Toque rating. It is "not" 500 lbs/ft. It is actually 500 Nm's of Toque. Thats about ~370 lbs/ft of toque.
swift6
Yoda
Offline
Re: McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra vi
Many assume that since the 928 is a GT car that it is less capable than 'Sports' cars. While they are not designed for all out acceleration or for top speed, they still do both quite well. They are designed for covering large distances at great speed with a combination of comfort and control. Many also forget that 928's were in production for nearly 20 years and have been the only 'clean sheet' Porsche. Meaning it's design was never an evolution of another design. Not even the mighty 911 can claim that. It truly showed what Porsche Engineers were capable of in the mid seventies when Porsche could send a GT car to nip at the heels of and run with 'supercars'.
In 1992 there was a British built GT, a brutish sledgehammer of a car, that out accelerated nearly every supercar then in production (The Diablo was quicker and faster but weighed nearly 1000lbs. less and actually posted slower 1/4 mile times). Hitting 60mph in 4.5 seconds, the 1/4 mile in 12.9 seconds and kept pulling to a top speed of 186 mph. All while weighing 4387 lbs. in order to maintain the luxury expected from the manufacturer. As much as I like 928's. The mighty GTS would only be able to watch this other bigger, heavier, more powerful and more luxurious beast of an automobile wave bye bye in all the categories except cost. By 1998 this same car had recieved a more powerful engine and could break 200mph.
Anybody care to guess what this car was? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/computer.gif
Many assume that since the 928 is a GT car that it is less capable than 'Sports' cars. While they are not designed for all out acceleration or for top speed, they still do both quite well. They are designed for covering large distances at great speed with a combination of comfort and control. Many also forget that 928's were in production for nearly 20 years and have been the only 'clean sheet' Porsche. Meaning it's design was never an evolution of another design. Not even the mighty 911 can claim that. It truly showed what Porsche Engineers were capable of in the mid seventies when Porsche could send a GT car to nip at the heels of and run with 'supercars'.
In 1992 there was a British built GT, a brutish sledgehammer of a car, that out accelerated nearly every supercar then in production (The Diablo was quicker and faster but weighed nearly 1000lbs. less and actually posted slower 1/4 mile times). Hitting 60mph in 4.5 seconds, the 1/4 mile in 12.9 seconds and kept pulling to a top speed of 186 mph. All while weighing 4387 lbs. in order to maintain the luxury expected from the manufacturer. As much as I like 928's. The mighty GTS would only be able to watch this other bigger, heavier, more powerful and more luxurious beast of an automobile wave bye bye in all the categories except cost. By 1998 this same car had recieved a more powerful engine and could break 200mph.
Anybody care to guess what this car was? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/computer.gif
Steve_S
Yoda
Offline
Re: McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra vi
Bret needs this:
https://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Porsche-9...emZ300012737232
Bret needs this:
https://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Porsche-9...emZ300012737232
OP
Bret
Yoda
Offline
Re: McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra vi
I like it Steve, /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif
So much so in fact that I purchased one similar (no Shark) with the Porsche shield about 3 months ago.
But back to Shawnās question:
I did a little searching on line and believe heās talking about the Bentley āContinentalā R. If Iām wrong Shawn ā please do tell us?
But if weāre talking about the Bentley Continental R with a price tag in excess of $270,000 (USD) in 1992 ā it better darn well be freaking fast! Cause at that price I couldāve purchase a new 1995 GTS (~$95K in 95ā) had the engine punched out & blue printed and thrown on a supercharger. All of that & Iād still have money left over to put a ~10-15% down payment on a house on Coronado.
So unless weāre talking about something else entirely - looking at the numbers Iād have to disagree about the Continental. A factory (no modifications) 928 GTS has a top speed in excess of 170mph and a 0-60 time of 5.1 seconds. The best data I can find on the Bentley Cont R, in that same time period belongs to the āSā (1994) that says itās top speed to be about the same as the Porschesā. But according to the data on the R (1992) itās top speed was 145mph and a 0-60 time of 6.6 seconds. Those numbers arenāt that much better than that of my tired old bone stock 78ā 928. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
I like it Steve, /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif
So much so in fact that I purchased one similar (no Shark) with the Porsche shield about 3 months ago.
But back to Shawnās question:
I did a little searching on line and believe heās talking about the Bentley āContinentalā R. If Iām wrong Shawn ā please do tell us?
But if weāre talking about the Bentley Continental R with a price tag in excess of $270,000 (USD) in 1992 ā it better darn well be freaking fast! Cause at that price I couldāve purchase a new 1995 GTS (~$95K in 95ā) had the engine punched out & blue printed and thrown on a supercharger. All of that & Iād still have money left over to put a ~10-15% down payment on a house on Coronado.
So unless weāre talking about something else entirely - looking at the numbers Iād have to disagree about the Continental. A factory (no modifications) 928 GTS has a top speed in excess of 170mph and a 0-60 time of 5.1 seconds. The best data I can find on the Bentley Cont R, in that same time period belongs to the āSā (1994) that says itās top speed to be about the same as the Porschesā. But according to the data on the R (1992) itās top speed was 145mph and a 0-60 time of 6.6 seconds. Those numbers arenāt that much better than that of my tired old bone stock 78ā 928. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
swift6
Yoda
Offline
Re: McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra vi
The car I was referring to was not the Bentley but the 1992 Aston Martin Vantage. DOHC, 32V, twin supercharged V8, 549HP, 549lbft. and every bit as expensive and exclusive as the Bentley. It also began the last evolution of the Tadek Marek designed V8. This car eventually produced 600hp and 600lbft before being replaced by the rather more pedestrian DB7.
One of the 928's best selling points was its performance to cost ratio. However when your talking truly exotic cars, the cost isn't an issue to those buyers.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif
The car I was referring to was not the Bentley but the 1992 Aston Martin Vantage. DOHC, 32V, twin supercharged V8, 549HP, 549lbft. and every bit as expensive and exclusive as the Bentley. It also began the last evolution of the Tadek Marek designed V8. This car eventually produced 600hp and 600lbft before being replaced by the rather more pedestrian DB7.
One of the 928's best selling points was its performance to cost ratio. However when your talking truly exotic cars, the cost isn't an issue to those buyers.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif
OP
Bret
Yoda
Offline
Re: McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra vi
The Aston Martin Vantage is unquestionably one of the finest vehicles ever and as anyone who knows me can attest to, the marquee has always been one of my favorites. So it would run against all that I believe in to diminish or talk bad about these exquisite vehicles. Yes the numbers are impressive but as you pointed out the Vantage wasnāt cheap and still isnāt to this day.
It is for that reason I will simply quote an article that appeared in Autocar magazine in June 1988 comparing the Aston Martin Vantage to a 928S4 that I feel fits this discussion.
āIn the end, Aston versus Porsche comes down to craftsmanship versus design. The Porsche is slower outright, but quicker A-to-B than the Aston. With its V8-bellow and trad appearance, the Aston is much raunchier than the comparative austerity of the 928S4. The Vantage is Arnold Schwarzenegger flexing his muscles in a silk suit; a hand-stitched two-piece cut by tailors who ask witch way āsirā dresses. It is definitely not a ready-to-wear shoulder-padded number aimed at light beer drinkers. That is the difference.ā
The Aston Martin Vantage is unquestionably one of the finest vehicles ever and as anyone who knows me can attest to, the marquee has always been one of my favorites. So it would run against all that I believe in to diminish or talk bad about these exquisite vehicles. Yes the numbers are impressive but as you pointed out the Vantage wasnāt cheap and still isnāt to this day.
It is for that reason I will simply quote an article that appeared in Autocar magazine in June 1988 comparing the Aston Martin Vantage to a 928S4 that I feel fits this discussion.
āIn the end, Aston versus Porsche comes down to craftsmanship versus design. The Porsche is slower outright, but quicker A-to-B than the Aston. With its V8-bellow and trad appearance, the Aston is much raunchier than the comparative austerity of the 928S4. The Vantage is Arnold Schwarzenegger flexing his muscles in a silk suit; a hand-stitched two-piece cut by tailors who ask witch way āsirā dresses. It is definitely not a ready-to-wear shoulder-padded number aimed at light beer drinkers. That is the difference.ā
swift6
Yoda
Offline
Re: McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra vi
The 1988 AM Vantage was slower yet than the 1992 model which gained the twin superchargers. Absolutely no argument on the cost issue, the admiration of the marque or with the Arnold Schwarzenegger in a hand stitched silk suit comment. Hence my reference to a brutish sledgehammer of a car. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Whenever I pick up a new issue of 'Classic and Sports Car' I always thumb through the ads drooling on practically every Aston Martin. Someday... Anyway!
Bret, I absolutely understand your admiration for your shark. They are seriously underated cars by the majority of the public. Including the motoring public. Enjoy it! Just be careful of of some of those psychos on the Rennlist with the twin supercharged beasts. I don't think they are quite right in the head. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/jester.gif
The 1988 AM Vantage was slower yet than the 1992 model which gained the twin superchargers. Absolutely no argument on the cost issue, the admiration of the marque or with the Arnold Schwarzenegger in a hand stitched silk suit comment. Hence my reference to a brutish sledgehammer of a car. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Whenever I pick up a new issue of 'Classic and Sports Car' I always thumb through the ads drooling on practically every Aston Martin. Someday... Anyway!
Bret, I absolutely understand your admiration for your shark. They are seriously underated cars by the majority of the public. Including the motoring public. Enjoy it! Just be careful of of some of those psychos on the Rennlist with the twin supercharged beasts. I don't think they are quite right in the head. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/jester.gif
OP
Bret
Yoda
Offline
Re: McLaren TAG vs. Porsche 928 vs. Ford Sierra vi
[ QUOTE ]
The 1988 AM Vantage was slower yet than the 1992 model which gained the twin superchargers. Absolutely no argument on the cost issue, the admiration of the marque or with the Arnold Schwarzenegger in a hand stitched silk suit comment. Hence my reference to a brutish sledgehammer of a car. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Whenever I pick up a new issue of 'Classic and Sports Car' I always thumb through the ads drooling on practically every Aston Martin. Someday... Anyway!
[/ QUOTE ] You & me both my friend, you & me both. I too am hoping to own a piece of Aston history myself some day. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif
[ QUOTE ]
Bret, I absolutely understand your admiration for your shark. They are seriously underated cars by the majority of the public. Including the motoring public. Enjoy it! Just be careful of of some of those psychos on the Rennlist with the twin supercharged beasts. I don't think they are quite right in the head. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/jester.gif
[/ QUOTE ]Thanks for that. Yes itās true the Shark is often overlooked and even snubbed even in Porsche circles.
As for Rennlist.com ā yes, it can be pretty brutal over there sometimes (especially on OT /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif ) definitely not as cultured as the BCF. But Iād like to think I carry myself pretty good over there and have managed to make a few new friends.
[ QUOTE ]
The 1988 AM Vantage was slower yet than the 1992 model which gained the twin superchargers. Absolutely no argument on the cost issue, the admiration of the marque or with the Arnold Schwarzenegger in a hand stitched silk suit comment. Hence my reference to a brutish sledgehammer of a car. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Whenever I pick up a new issue of 'Classic and Sports Car' I always thumb through the ads drooling on practically every Aston Martin. Someday... Anyway!
[/ QUOTE ] You & me both my friend, you & me both. I too am hoping to own a piece of Aston history myself some day. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif
[ QUOTE ]
Bret, I absolutely understand your admiration for your shark. They are seriously underated cars by the majority of the public. Including the motoring public. Enjoy it! Just be careful of of some of those psychos on the Rennlist with the twin supercharged beasts. I don't think they are quite right in the head. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/jester.gif
[/ QUOTE ]Thanks for that. Yes itās true the Shark is often overlooked and even snubbed even in Porsche circles.
As for Rennlist.com ā yes, it can be pretty brutal over there sometimes (especially on OT /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif ) definitely not as cultured as the BCF. But Iād like to think I carry myself pretty good over there and have managed to make a few new friends.