who would win? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners

blinkwatt · 12-12-2005, 12:08 AM

Those stats are based on runs in different temp./weather/track/drivers. Car & Driver stats and all those are all gonna be different and just give you a general idea. I have seen manufactures claims be beaten time and time again by independent testing. According to Car & Driver stats the 2.5L 5 speed can beat a CLK 430,its not about HP and Torque but about how efficient it is. IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THE DRIVER. I myself have beaten those "5.0" mustangs with a 5 speed,300Hp and i'm guessing plenty more torque then my Boxster(Untampered 2.5L). A friend of mine says my Boxster fells faster then his '95 M3. I guess its all up to the driver.

TriGem2k · 12-12-2005, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blinkwatt

Those stats are based on runs in different temp./weather/track/drivers. Car & Driver stats and all those are all gonna be different and just give you a general idea. I have seen manufactures claims be beaten time and time again by independent testing. According to Car & Driver stats the 2.5L 5 speed can beat a CLK 430,its not about HP and Torque but about how efficient it is. IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THE DRIVER. I myself have beaten those "5.0" mustangs with a 5 speed,300Hp and i'm guessing plenty more torque then my Boxster(Untampered 2.5L). A friend of mine says my Boxster fells faster then his '95 M3. I guess its all up to the driver.

HAHAH your right Robert. But i gotta tell you man you can't really know til you drive both cars. Ive driven MBZ ranging from C230 to SL65 AMG. Honestly i would NEVER want any of them, cant stand Benz, But they have power. I honestly don't think that the 2.5L can do it, and maybe not even the 2.7L. Id put my money on the Mereceds to take the box every time.

And as far as the mustang is concered, lol they blow until you get up to the Mach 1 and Cobra range. Oh and i hope there arent guys here that really think they can take a Mach 1 or Cobra Mustang straight drag....

Brucelee · 12-12-2005, 06:40 AM

In a drag race, I do think the Merc will hammer an older Box. However, I had one in inventory once and did not like it at all, but it had decent acceleration.

Seems you have to make turns ever once in a while ............

Adam · 12-12-2005, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TriGem2k

. Oh and i hope there arent guys here that really think they can take a Mach 1 or Cobra Mustang straight drag....

I raced a stock 305hp 98 Slobra from a roll and a dig and he got walked by a few car lengths both times. Late 90's Cobras suspossedly didn't deliver the kind of power ford was advertising. The newer S/C'ed Corbra is a seriously quick machine especially with a few relatively inexpensive mods.

Blinkwatt is right about the car results comparisons. They can only give you general idea of the cars speed because they were all done with different drivers on different days and venues.

TriGem2k · 12-13-2005, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

I raced a stock 305hp 98 Slobra from a roll and a dig and he got walked by a few car lengths both times. Late 90's Cobras suspossedly didn't deliver the kind of power ford was advertising. The newer S/C'ed Corbra is a seriously quick machine especially with a few relatively inexpensive mods.

Blinkwatt is right about the car results comparisons. They can only give you general idea of the cars speed because they were all done with different drivers on different days and venues.

Adamn you try running either a 2000+ Cobra or Mach 1?

Adam · 12-13-2005, 10:35 PM

I have not had the chance to race either of those yet but I will if I ever get a chance. Judging from the performance numbers a Mach 1 would be a very close race for a Box S. They seem to run high 13's like the boxster. The 320hp cobra's would be more of a challenge but certainly not impossible to beat if the boxster was driving well and the other guy doesn't really know what he is doing. If I ever get a chance at either I will post up what happens.

TriGem2k · 12-14-2005, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

I have not had the chance to race either of those yet but I will if I ever get a chance. Judging from the performance numbers a Mach 1 would be a very close race for a Box S. They seem to run high 13's like the boxster. The 320hp cobra's would be more of a challenge but certainly not impossible to beat if the boxster was driving well and the other guy doesn't really know what he is doing. If I ever get a chance at either I will post up what happens.

Adam the Cobra pushed 400Hp with 400lbs of torque....Have fun smelling his exhaust fumes

Oh and the Mach 1 pushes 310hp with 335lbs of torque....Have fun with that one as well.

Adam · 12-14-2005, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TriGem2k

Adam the Cobra pushed 400Hp with 400lbs of torque....Have fun smelling his exhaust fumes

Oh and the Mach 1 pushes 310hp with 335lbs of torque....Have fun with that one as well.

Umm...ok. Who was talking about beating the 390hp/390ft/lb 03+ Supercharged cobra? Not me. How about you reread the above posts. I said that car was fast paticularly with mods and I know a boxster has no chance.

The Mach 1 is not that fast, I don't no why you think it is....here are it's stats.
http://www.car-videos.net/performance/view.asp?id1=226&id2=0

As I said before the Boxster S and a Mach 1 are nearly dead even.

Here are the stats for the SVT 2000-2002 cobra.. while it is faster than a box s, I wouldn't say blows it away especially if the Boxster driver is better as I mentioned above.
http://www.car-videos.net/performance/view.asp?id1=238&id2=0

Here are some 2003 Boxster S stats...
http://motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0305_boxz4/index4.html

I think you fail to realize(as most newbs do) that it's not all about total hp, but HP TO WEIGHT. Maybe you should do some research before you open your mouth newbie.

Dr. Kill · 12-30-2005, 11:29 AM

It is funny to hear Boxster owners talk about beating stock Mustang GTs. As a former owner of several Mustangs, I remember the guys on Mustangworld.com and Stangnet talking about beating Boxsters with ease. It is nice to see that we all love the cars we own.

I think that what several people mentioned above is critical – the driver - especially with the MT cars. I don’t know whether my last GT was faster than my 987 or not, but I can tell you that the 987 is MUCH easier to drive fast. The back end of the Stang is so light and the suspension so poor that a good launch is incredibly difficult. I imagine with me driving, I would get better ¼ mile times in the 987, but maybe somebody with serious talent might pull a better time in the ‘Stang, I don’t know. The other factor here is mods. Yes this is an academic question, but in reality, it is quite common for a street GT to be modded with inexpensive parts that will provide some very serious performance increases. In fact, I didn’t know any enthusiast drivers who did not have at least a couple of things done. I personally went nuts modding my GT until it was complete monster (much faster than my 987 and still only around $25k new including all of the parts).

Adam · 12-30-2005, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Kill

It is funny to hear Boxster owners talk about beating stock Mustang GTs. As a former owner of several Mustangs, I remember the guys on Mustangworld.com and Stangnet talking about beating Boxsters with ease. It is nice to see that we all love the cars we own.

I totally agree, the driver is a central variable. The guys on the stang board talking about beating boxsters with ease were probably racing 2.5L's and maybe some 2.7's.. I'm sure most of those guys don't know the difference between a base and an S. The stock and bolt-on Gt's should be able to see the dual outlet muffler as the boxster S is passing them. That's the dead give-away.

TriGem2k · 12-31-2005, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

I totally agree, the driver is a central variable. The guys on the stang board talking about beating boxsters with ease were probably racing 2.5L's and maybe some 2.7's.. I'm sure most of those guys don't know the difference between a base and an S. The stock and bolt-on Gt's should be able to see the dual outlet muffler as the boxster S is passing them. That's the dead give-away.

Heres one for you guys.....I was beaten by a Mustang Mach 1 today twice, once from a dead stop and the other on the freeway...It was a buddy of mine and i just wanted to see how it goes....Yep I had no chance....The Boxster just doesnt have the go in a straight line.

Oh ya then on the way home I was SMOKED by a RX-7 like theres no tomorrow. Took me and the Mach 1

Its all good though, i still take pride in being able to drive left and right.....

threpwood · 12-31-2005, 04:05 AM

Boxsters excell in handling and that what makes it a fun car. Of course racing in streets or highway isn't recommended because the consequences are too high, but if you bring it to track where curvy roads are a factor, then Boxsters have a higher ground than 300-350 hp cars.

It's just about bringing the right equipment for the job. If we want to go fast straight lines than we all should get 400hp+ Corvette or supercharged Viper etc etc for the same amount of $ or maybe a lot less.

Being a "Porsche" also gives the car an exotic value... I mean would you rather drive an RX-7 or Mustang to a date than drive a Porsche?

Adam · 12-31-2005, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TriGem2k

Heres one for you guys.....I was beaten by a Mustang Mach 1 today twice, once from a dead stop and the other on the freeway...It was a buddy of mine and i just wanted to see how it goes....Yep I had no chance....The Boxster just doesnt have the go in a straight line.

Oh ya then on the way home I was SMOKED by a RX-7 like theres no tomorrow. Took me and the Mach 1

Its all good though, i still take pride in being able to drive left and right.....

Well, what do you expect Trigem? You have a 2.5L right? It's amazing what injecting an extra 50-80hp can do for a relatively small/light car such as the boxster. I appreciate the fact that you drive a boxster too but you can't trasfer your driving experiences to all boxsters in general. That's like me driving a V6 mustang and then saying "yup them mustangs are pretty slow." Or driving that standard C5 and saying" yup, those Z06's don't handle all that well." I don't know how a Z06 handles because I've never driven one. I doubt you have driven a boxster S or you would've said so by now. Maybe you should try it out first before making blanket statements. I think the S can hold it's own against some pretty formidable cars. For instance, I have a friend who has a stock twin turbo Rx7 and him and I are dead even in a drag race. Actually I happen to have a pic of it on file. This is him and I at an auto-x.
http://media.racingflix.com/awais/pd/2.jpg

Richard, I agree with you, the vette does have a high degree of lateral grip but through my driving experiences with C5's they tend to feel a bit big and clumsy compared to the boxster. It isolates the driver more and the feeback left alot to be desired imo. The driving position didn't give my any confidence either, I didn't like sitting so far back in the car looking past that looong hood. I think it is a good handling car but the boxster is just on a completely different level in my opinion.

Ghostrider 310 · 12-31-2005, 02:56 PM

And as far as the mustang is concered, lol they blow until you get up to the Mach 1 and Cobra range. Oh and i hope there arent guys here that really think they can take a Mach 1 or Cobra Mustang straight drag....[/QUOTE]

A straight drag isn't much of a measuring stick in overall performance. Passed by a stang on the highway I shadowed for a while, as soon as it got twisty on came his brakelights, I was on throttle. Blew by him at a good clip, he tried to catch me for a few miles but my car's ass was his only view. His car didn't have stability in the top end, handling or brakes. He was soundly spanked, that was with a 20+ year old 944....Alfa Romeo had a good line about it:

It's not how fast you go, it's how you go fast.

Brucelee · 12-31-2005, 03:36 PM

Those 944s handle very nicely indeed.