Supra Twin Turbo or R32 Skyline GT-R

But the Supra bits last for a LONG time, parts aren't /that/ silly and with the twin turbo set up, don't they start boosting from 1200rpm or something silly?

Well, quite :)

In news:43c2b3e6$0$82630$ snipped-for-privacy@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net, Jack wrote something quite bizarre, possibly in an effort to confuddle the world. It went like so;

I'd buy my 911 for £9k instead.

The insewerance difference alone will make the extra couple of grand worthwhile..

£375 fc on a classic policy :-D

That and the lack of depreciation that comes with an older 911.

More scary than a Skyline or Supra as well... 911s *always* want to throw you through the nearest hedge...

This isn't the 80's anymore.

Correct. They've gotten a whole lot better, but if it's a manual one can tell if it's turbocharged or not.

No I won't, because when one extends the throttle, there's l-a-g. There might not be much, but it's there. It gets annoying.

Big capacity V8s don't do lag with the possible exception of moving this little island when you nail it.

OK, what's the odds of needing all that all at once?

For a start, I was looking at Slushomatic cars, which are more common and less likely to be thrashed and abused. Tyres, I'll give you, brakes

- pattern parts are available that don't cost the earth. Belts - £200 for belt / tensioner and waterpump, plus fitting. Annual, 12k mile service is around £395 from a decent Porsche specialist.

OK, you *could* spend another £7k on it..... however, the Toyota will also need maintenance and tyres, but it's all offset against depreciation anyway. Although the Supra is holding up quite well - it's not as well as a decent 928S4 would.

As with any car offering that kind of performance - putting away £500 - £1k per year on top of standard servicing costs should see you right.

You just have to be *very* careful when buying.

Maxim of Triumph Trident and Yamaha XS750 owners: "God loves a Triple".

They don't behave like a jack hammer. They don't have 2 x engine speed vibration like an inline 4 to give you white finger. They have just a little bit of rock 'n roll from a rocking couple.

When asked most girls express a preference for the back seat of a BMW Boxer flat twin but won't say why. They have a sort of rotating shake that's amplified by distance away from engine (hold your hand still, point fore finger and make your finger tip go round 'n round you'll get the picture) and each bang gives a little thrust (now make it go back and forth in the direction you are pointing while still wiggling

- are you up to speed yet?).

Inline 6's are like putting two triples end to end but it kills the rocking couple of the triple. Dead smooth or just plain dead?

V8's are like going around with a spare engine. One that's smashed 4 big holes down the side of your slant 4 crankcase to make it piss weak. Thanks to those big holes in the side of the crankcase all the factory V8 blocks give up at about 600-650bhp (even with 4 bolt mains) and then you have to pay big bucks for "race" blocks. GM has half sussed this and they have taken to switching the spare engine off to save fuel but can't quite bring themselves to leave it off all together. Dodge have so they made the 2.5L SRT-4, some tuners think they can get 1000bhp from it with original block and head. Removing the holes in the side of the block and putting cylinder upright makes it that much stronger. V8's you have to chose between high frequency vibration worse than an inline 4 but with even power or smooth running thanks to heavy counter weights on crank and offbeat power. You may like the burble but the drive train don't like it up it, so big heavy torsional dampers have to be fitted.

Big is not always good. In an effort to reduce the fuel consumption caused by lugging a spare engine around most 4L+ V8's and 3L inline

6's have very high gearing. This reduces the rpm so they don't sound totally frantic but are going bang at almost the same number of times per min as an inline 4. It's those power stokes and frequency of exhaust the user experiences rather than the actual rpm. As they all have about the same number of power strokes per min, each cylinder is doing the same amount of work as cruise needs about same amount of power. This gearing makes the "roll on" top gear performance poor at normal M-way and Autobahn cruise speeds as they are running well way from peak torque.

Corvette C5, 6 speed manual (M/T), peak torque 4500rpm.

46.4mph/1000rpm. 70mph = 1508rpm = 6032bangs/min. Top gear 70mph, WOT power at wheels is 80bhp, on road mass 1575Kg (I've allowed about 140Kg for driver etc on all kerb weights)l, CdA 0.58 resulting acceleration is 0.69m/s^2.

BMW 330Ci, M/T 6, peak torque 3500 rpm. 29.3mph/1000rpm. 70mph =

2389rpm = 7167bangs/min (buzzy bugger). WOT power at wheels = 88bhp, mass 1643Kg, CdA 0.63, accel = 0.75m/s^2. (It's got oddles of grunt, please just stick it in top at 40mph and keep it there)

(wait for it, can you guess .. it's my favourite .. you can skip it if you want)

200SX 1.8 turbo, 5M/T, peak torque 4000rpm. 22.4mph/1000rpm. 70mph = 3127rpm = 6254bangs/min (nice and steady). Power at wheels = 76bhp, mass 1326Kg, CdA 0.57, accel = 0.82m/s^2. 200SX has higher top gear acceleration than the V8 or I6 all the way up to 120mph. Above 105mph the BMW and C5 are neck and neck until 130mph where the BMW runs out of go as 6th limits speed to about 135mph. Below 55mph the BMW is better and holds about same 0.75-0.78m/s^2 accel down to 30mph in top. I haven't found a dyno graph for a C5 that goes low enough. The 200SX drops off to 0.55m^2 at 40mph, not very happy at all, far better in 4th. Everyone learn what a gear box is for, change down and it's all over for the 200SX.

OK at this point petrol heads will want to change down a few gears or this will yomp past you like its got a rocket up it. Dervy will love it! Ford Mondeo 2.2TDCi 155bhp, 6M/T, peak torque 1800rpm. 35mph/1000rpm.

70mph = 2000rpm = 4000bangs/min (thump thump throb). WOT smoking power = 96bhp, mass 1630Kg, CdA 0.656, acceleration = 1.18m/s^2 storming! It drops dead below 40mph (less go than a 200SX), at 90mph 200SX can best it, it's not until the TDCi is about done for at 105mph that the V8 and I6 can match it's top gear performance.

Petrol heads this is a good bit. Even if the TDCi jockey knows what a gearbox is for it won''t do any good. Between 65 and 100mph the gain in acceleration from changing down in the TDCi will be lost by the time taken to change down. TDCi in 4th at 70mph (3rd redlines at about

62-65mph) can only rustle up 1.36m/s^2, at 70mph in 3rd 200SX and 330Ci have 1.8m/s^2 but 330Ci can do 70mph in 2nd and then has 2.3m/s^2 acceleration.

C5 owners you should have asked for the optional drag race axle ratio. Both 5th and 6th on the BMW are overdrives, top speed is attained in

4th. 5th on the 200SX and 6th on TDCi are a true top gear with max speed in these gears.

Cool, I've got a flying machine!

I took a few shortcuts. Took trans efficiency as 80% off the top of my head, getting this about right and the 1050bhp being a rear wheel figure from a dyno run on a 2JZ INSTALLED in a 240SX means flywheel power is purely an estimate has no effect on calculated speed. Ignored rolling resistance altogether. Just scaled on CdA for car to car and V^3 for speed changes. Thought this was rec and not sci.grad thesis .physics.

Power at wheels = 0.5pCdAV^3 + MgCrV

assume Cr is 0.015 p is density of air 1.2929Kg/m^3 g is 9.81m/s V is 253mph = 113m/s

Veyron Cd = 0.36 A = 1.95m^2 lowered Mass = 1950Kg +150Kg driver etc. Gives 830bhp at wheels and as the factory say all the engines tested have made between 1020 and 1040bhp, at best 81.5% trans efficiency. If they selected an engine with max power then it's down to 79%.

200SX Cd=0.31 A = 1.85 Mass = 1170Kg + 80Kg estimated add'n engine/gearbox + 150Kg driver etc Power SX wheels for 253mph = 747bhp assume trans is 83% efficient as 2wd will be better than 4wd. Estimated bhp at fly required = 900bhp.

I did say AROUND 1200bhp and ABOUT 290mph. with 1050 rear wheel hp it runs out at 284mph which is only 2% off. estimated power at fly 1265bhp is a bit more than my estimate.

Now the Veyron plays a few tricks.

1: It lowers and flattens it's spoiler 2: whole car drops over 2" 3: has a smooth underside Before playing tricks 1 & 2 it's Cd is 0.41, 2.07m^2 area - mainly due to "handling" spoiler deployment.

Lets press on for a 290mph 200SX!

No reason I can't lower 50mm/60mm on height adjustable coilovers. I can take spoiler off and fit a smaller lip. I can take wipers off (at least rear), maybe make a flap to smooth front ones. I can fit full smooth undertray with diffuser, should stop the lift and improve the drag. I can fit a decent front splitter and use manometers to check it and the under tray are working. I think I should be able to shave 0.02 off my Cd so it's down to 0.29.

I can fit links and variable resistors to anti roll bars to drive display of down force or lift to check I'm not about to need a pilots licence. Or even cruder, Bowden cables into cabin to show movement up or down from normal ride height, up = lift.

Now with low drag for 253mph Power SX wheels = 703bhp Estimated Power SX fly = 845bhp.

Power for 290 mph at wheels = 1045bhp. So now I have 5 REAR wheel bhp to spare for downforce mods. Estimated Power SX fly = 1259bhp

I'll put my hands up to this. Supra and Skyline 1500bhp was a total top of the head guess. To match the top speed of 284mph that 1050 rwhp would give the 200SX, the Skyline needs 1520rwhp and (about) 1900bhp at the flywheel while the Supra needs 1341rwhp and (about) 1680bhp fly. With 1050rwhp the Skyline will top out at 232mph and the Supra at

259mph (it's a bit BETTER than a Veyron). Didn't suss the R32 was that power hungry at speed, even though I called it a barn door. It's the 0.4Cd that cripples it for top speed runs, R33 and R34 have much better 0.35 and 0.34 Cd. I've been doing calcs for a properly designed sleek low drag car too long. I've forgotten why I stopped looking at all those "supercars". Made in too low volume so they can't afford wind tunnel time, or just have to have "in your face" styling to sell to rich schoolboys, or have to be 2m wide to stop you using them anywhere other than race tracks, or have a 2nd front halfway down the body where the engine is, or just simply don't have a lid on them.

How many Supras have you driven?

Fraser

One. More than one medium capacity turbocharged machine though. And more bigger capacity V8s or above than I know what to do with.

I know the bed I'd lie in...

On a 1990 S4 with 150.000 miles (that's what you get for 7k) on the clock there are no odds: then it is dead certain and the reason why the price tag is 7k.

And 7k for needed maintenance on a 7k 928 is a very, very optimistic figure.

There's the difference between you and me : you get quoted, I get invoiced.

Just checked (my GTS has 110.000 km and at 98.000 it had the major maintenance): the OEM Porsche kit ( belt, waterpump, tensioner) costs 620 Eur + VAT (21%). To me that's about 410 UKP + VAT. Fitting is 16 Hr but then I hadn't "a decent Porsche specialist" but a Porsche mechanic at an official dealer...

We live in different worlds: you in a dream world, I in the real world. Each one of us has his 928 in his world.

You just don't get it, do you?

You think of putting "1 k per year away on top of standard servicing"... Why is then that as good as no one drives a 300 HP supercar from the nineties which can be bought for the price of a specced up Ford Fiesta?

I'll tell you why: when I fill the car up 80 liters of Super goes in the tank, the car gets 400-450 km further with it. 1k is about the price for a new set of cats never mind the rest of the exhaust.

Don't say it: firstly your "decent Porsche specialist" knows how to weld an exhaust and secondly your 7k S4 with 150.000 miles won't need a new exhaust because you checked "very carefully"...

I saw your sig and the cars you've had: where did you get the knowledge to advise on cars with 5l V8 and 300 HP when the most powerfull car you've had is about half those figures?

Let's guess: Top Gear?

Tom De Moor

Skyline, Supras are for fuckwits.

No, I'm offering an opinion.

There's a difference.

My opinion, based on UK-specific research, is that the running costs aren't as high as they appear to be on the continent.

One of the nice things about the UK is that we're relatively free of anal regulations regarding non-OEM parts etc., which means running older cars can be significantly cheaper than our Euro counterparts would expect.

Well, it's better than taking a sample of one as being totally representative of the ownership experience. That's what's nice about the 'net - instead of having no choice but to believe the first opinion offered, you can look around and gain a balanced view.

You should try it sometime.

Yes, and look how effective Euroland is......

Yea to be fair, 8 have ended in the last 2 weeks on Ebay, a few of them looking nice and tastey, only one was over £5k.

My last reply in this thread because the "researched" advise of Mr Steve is hoovering on the limits of acceptable, in my eyes on the limits of desinformation.

The "hardly sophicated" ECU of the 928 S4 -GTS is a major cause of problems as are the numerous "masse"-points on the car. Furthermore the tweaking is impossible by Bosch-specialists because the orginal tuning device, referred to as the "Hammer" is not available anymore.

The pressure of US-owners resulted in that an Englishman, see below, actually re-engineered the Hammer. The "loads of Bosch specialists" is in the same way reduced to 1 company: JDS Porsche in Cambridge, UK. They can also recalibrate the MAF-device to 928-spec and sell the Kempf-tensioning tool for the cambelt.

Just in order to show how "cheap" these ECU's, MAF-airflowmeter etc are: my S4 trackcar has an Halltech-ECU. Among other things (well reprogrammability actually) it saved about 20 kg of wiring, computers and Maf-sensor.

The ECU and MAF-sensor were put on Ebay at 1 Euro: it was not my intention to make money from them, just a way to get rid of them and to provide a few cheap parts to other 928-owners.

Well the plan failed: the ECU sold for 820 Eur and the MAF-sensor for 500 Eur. The official Porsche-price on these units is about 3 times higher.

To all interested parties in buying a "cheap" 928 with the exclusion of researchers as Mr Steve -which must have French origins- I highly recommend the website of JDS, Rennlist, 928 International, DEVEK. They contain actual data and some close-up pictures of the "hardly sophisticated" items.

Plase visit also

The 928 is one of the best cars available for its money but by no means it will be a cheap car to run or to maintain. In 1990 the electronics were not as tested as now, vacuumlines and pneumatics contacts deteriorate and can cause intermittent faults, which can be very hard to locate.

If you can't do the maintenance yourself, a person *with genuine 928- experience* is an obligation. There are some, they ain't cheap. Otherwise: buy the most expensif 928 you can afford or don't buy it at all.

Run as hell if that decent Porsche independant doesn't know what the "Hammer" is or if he states that he can tension the cambelt by hand. I would also run if he charges but 25UKP/Hr.

Don't run and accept that he is fiddling with an engine that will set you back

15 kUKP (on that 7k-car) if he gets it wrong. Rest assured : you won't be the first.

Follow the "expert"-advise of Mr Researcher Steven, who won't go into detail but drives the Ferrari model Marea: let some back street mechanic without the proper and specific tools work on your nice looking S4, bougt for 7kUKP, which suddenly but sadly refuses to start.

At best you will first empty your bancaccount and then you will put the S4 as a "project needing some TLC" on Ebay or look-a-like for 1 UKP. At worst that car with the "hardly sophisticated ECU" (but containing 20 kg of wires for it) will kill you.

In the above cases: I will feel sorry for the car, not for you.

Tom De Moor

Well done for being taken in by all 'black magic'.

If I listened to all that kind of stuff, I'd never have found anyone to change the belts on a quad-cam Alfa, I'd be looking for a specialist to replace cambelts on a TSpark and having my engine removed to replace the cambelt on my Fiat.

There is, as we say in England (FYI, I'm not French, it's just that Belgium is a sort of poor quality photocopy of France), more than one way to skin a cat.

You have gone down the road of paying 'specialists' top money to do everything - I tend to be a bit more careful with my money - changing a cambelt isn't rocket science, so long as you follow the diagrams and tension everything up properly, for example. IME 'specialist' is a designation used to denote either a back-street mechanic wanting to charge a premium, or someone who has been booted out of the franchise network.

YMMV. But I suggest that, before commenting on pricing, you gain a little more insight into the UK car market.

Now I understand why Porsche are the worlds most profitable car maker.

1: Sell expensive cars. 2: Persuade your buyers that they should use them every day and not hide them in sheds. 3: Make them pay lots for spares and service. 4: Delevop a culture that a car fitted with non OEM parts or incomplete franchised dealer service history is worth nothing.

But if they are so good how can RUF claim to make them better? And as RUF fit non Porsche bits they must be worth nothing.