Are 1990s "performance" cars still quick?

Are 1990s "performance" cars still quick?

Author
Discussion

AntiLagGC8

1,724 posts

111 months

Sunday 13th September 2015
quotequote all
swerni said:
AntiLagGC8 said:
Welshbeef said:
AntiLagGC8 said:
Welshbeef said:
They will probably feel faster due to more noise - but sadly all of those are beaten and well beaten by diesels these days. Heck not even the fastest diesel is needed to do it.


11 seconds (Lotus Carlton) is E46 M3 fast and Jag XJR
But the new M3 is what 8 seconds ?/not that much slower than an F40 to 100mph!
How many 4 second diesel cars are there? How many could cross country like an EVO or one of the high spec Impreza's?

But most importantly how many are fun and engaging to drive?
Of that original list none are sub 5 second cars to 62mph


But these are
Alpina D3
Alpina D5
BMW 335d
BMW 535d
BMW M550d
Audi SQ5
masserari Ghibli diesel
Audi Q7 V12
Audi A8 v8 TDI
VW Phantom 5.0ltr V8 TDI
Jag XF bi turbo TDI is close but not there

Many others are close too - however they sound crap and id say when I wrung the neck on a Clio Sport 172 that was raw fun but slower than the above still highly enjoyable.
Did you mean sub 6 seconds? The 535D isn't a sub 5 second car as far as I can see, although happy to be corrected!

It interesting you've found a few of the extreme cars to compare to the performance cars from the 1990's.

So I think we can conclude some of the 1990's performance cars are really very fast even by modern standards.

smile
I had a 1.9 GTI in the early 90's, it felt very fast, looking at the stats the 0-60 was 7.8.

fast for then, not for now
I wasn't talking about the 1.9 GTI bud, it was pretty pedestrian back in the 1990's compared to the EVO's, Impreza's and other Japanese turbo cars.

It's a great drivers car though! smile

LotusOmega375D

7,580 posts

152 months

Sunday 13th September 2015
quotequote all
Also remember that the Lotus Carlton was launched at the very start of that decade, so 25 years on, that 11 seconds to 100mph for a four door saloon still impresses. I believe it was really only comparable with the Lamborghini Diablo back then and I would expect most people to still consider that a quick car. It remained the fastest production 4 door saloon for about 10 years. Also the LC did it all without much noise or drama.

aka_kerrly

12,416 posts

209 months

Sunday 13th September 2015
quotequote all
delta0 said:
The GTI clearly not even a hot hatch by today's standard. It would be just into the warm territory.
Yes, which must mean that modern warm hatches are quick then;)

e21Mark

16,205 posts

172 months

Sunday 13th September 2015
quotequote all
LotusOmega375D said:
Also remember that the Lotus Carlton was launched at the very start of that decade, so 25 years on, that 11 seconds to 100mph for a four door saloon still impresses. I believe it was really only comparable with the Lamborghini Diablo back then and I would expect most people to still consider that a quick car. It remained the fastest production 4 door saloon for about 10 years. Also the LC did it all without much noise or drama.
I remember the calls in the press, to ban them for being too quick. I've only ever seen one in the metal but they were lovely looking things.

delta0

2,334 posts

105 months

Sunday 13th September 2015
quotequote all
aka_kerrly said:
Yes, which must mean that modern warm hatches are quick then;)
Yes and they are 10 a penny which many of these cars weren't back then.

white_goodman

Original Poster:

4,042 posts

190 months

Sunday 13th September 2015
quotequote all
aka_kerrly said:
If you consider that for example a 2007 Civic 1.8 with 143 hp weights nearly 350Kg MORE than the likes of the mk2 GTI, 205gt, even the E30 an 306s are barely over 1000kgs then you can appreciate why the civic is approximately 3 seconds slower to 60mph than 80s hot hatches!

However that only tells part of the story. Take a 205 GTI 1.9, 150hp per tonne, the same as a Civic Type R (fn2) and same as a Jaguar XF 3.0D

What's interesting though is how the 0-100mph times vary, 22.6sec for the GTI, 16.8 CTR, 19.8sec for the Jaguar.

As a result for the average traffic light grand prix, motorway slip road/dual carriage way blast at somewhat short of 100mph an old school hot hatch will not be embarrassed by modern run of the mill cars.
You make a good point. Look at the mk2 Golf 16v vs. a new GTI (without the Performance Pack). Both around 145bhp/tonne due to the new one weighing nearly 400kg more but I appreciate that the turbo gives the new GTI a lot more top end performance.

white_goodman

Original Poster:

4,042 posts

190 months

Sunday 13th September 2015
quotequote all
AntiLagGC8 said:
I wasn't talking about the 1.9 GTI bud, it was pretty pedestrian back in the 1990's compared to the EVO's, Impreza's and other Japanese turbo cars.

It's a great drivers car though! smile
Let's be fair though and compare like for like. It was a quick HOT HATCH in the 90s. How much quicker in the real world is the modern equivalent (208 GTI). I haven't driven a 205 GTi for over 10 years. If I were to today, would it really feel that slow? I agree that Jap turbo cars were fast back then and still fast now though. A bit ahead of their time in terms of performance perhaps but I guess other cars have caught up now.



Barronmr

17 posts

154 months

Sunday 13th September 2015
quotequote all
swerni said:
i know and you said
"Seriously, off a roundabout and full on foot to the floor acceleration very little will outrun it in the legal zones"

I was pointing out that this was wrong, lots will
I disagree. A manual boost controller bypasses the stock mr2's ECU's boost limits, (peak limit and 1st/2nd gear limits). So 0-60 is now 4.5s and 1/4mile is 12.8 smile.

I don't know how you define lots, sure odd GTR etc... but I wouldn't say lots that can go from 20-70 much quicker unless your counting bikes.

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
I reckon the old cars would get from A-B in much the same time as the new cars. smile

Baryonyx

17,990 posts

158 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
heebeegeetee said:
I reckon the old cars would get from A-B in much the same time as the new cars. smile
More than likely. They always felt faster though, the old cars. I think the lack of sound deadening and weight did that to them. I could drive along a B road in my 106 Rallye pressing on quite quickly and it really felt quick. The wind rushing by, the way the car settled into the face pace, the fact that you had to drive it along. I could do the same in the Astra 1.7CDTi I have at work now and it wouldn't be much slower, if at all. It doesn't feel as fast though, and nowhere near as fun.

Mind you, I rode my 1997 Triumph Daytona home from work tonight along empty roads, now that felt fast!

Supra and RX7 Twin Turbos, Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo, B5 S4, Escort Cosworth - yep, still fast!

Pebbles167

3,417 posts

151 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
Yes, but only in regards to their current counterparts.

The 306 gti6 for instance, is more or less in league with the smaller hatches such as a 208 gti or Fiesta ST. I don't think the current crop of large power hatches really counts as they are no longer in marketed at the same buyer really, and technology has progressed to a level where it's financially viable to put such high performance in a road going hatch.

My old EVO was just as quick as several 80's/90's exotics, but you'd never say that a Testarossa, a 348 or a 911 was slow. The markets are different and different tech available so it's largely irrelevant.

bigkeeko

1,370 posts

142 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
I know two guys with cars nearly 15 years apart that they both see as `performance` cars.

One has a 2008 BMW 535d . So thats a 3.0 diesel with two turbos.

One has a 1994 Supra TT. So that`s a 3.0 petrol with two turbos.

All I can say is the Supra would absolutely murder the BMW and that`s before throwing parts at it.

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
If you can drive them yes their quick and fun, I have a 1985 944 8 valve, doesn't get overtaken much, my Lotus elan will run with anything on A or B road, I also have a Lotus Carlton it is still very fast, fast enough to scare people brought up on Civic type R, and Clio type things.

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

197 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
bigkeeko said:
I know two guys with cars nearly 15 years apart that they both see as `performance` cars.

One has a 2008 BMW 535d . So thats a 3.0 diesel with two turbos.

One has a 1994 Supra TT. So that`s a 3.0 petrol with two turbos.

All I can say is the Supra would absolutely murder the BMW and that`s before throwing parts at it.
The 300bhp 535d the latest one is 313bhp so is faster than this.
http://fastestlaps.com/cars/bmw_535d.html

http://fastestlaps.com/cars/toyota_supra_twin_turb...

Murder ??? At best it might be 0.5-1car length ahead by 100mph from a standing start which is not the 535d's party piece yet is the Supras.
Top speed Supra maxes out at what the 535d is limited to so again no murderinf in fact take the limiter off and it would go faster Supra cannot.


zygalski

7,759 posts

144 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
My Astra regularly surpises members of the Audi/BMW/VW 2.0l hire purchase repmobile club.
Up my backside in a light traffic, wait for it to clear, floor it & pull in to the left hand lane & watch the intense frustration in the rear view mirror as the tailgater makes no progress whatsoever laugh
135mph & 0-60 was had in 7.0 by some testers back in the day.


HonestIago

1,719 posts

185 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
GC8 said:
Even a UK Classic GC8 is still a quick point to point car, by any standards.
Indeed, I used to run a 300bhp classic (admittedly not a standard car) as a daily and recently had the chance to drive a DSG Golf R for comparison. I found the scoob more compliant and confidence inspiring even if maybe not necessarily any quicker in a straight line. A well set up classic Impreza will always be a very competitive B-road performer IMO.

ikarl

3,730 posts

198 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
Welshbeef said:
The 300bhp 535d the latest one is 313bhp so is faster than this.
http://fastestlaps.com/cars/bmw_535d.html

http://fastestlaps.com/cars/toyota_supra_twin_turb...

Murder ??? At best it might be 0.5-1car length ahead by 100mph from a standing start which is not the 535d's party piece yet is the Supras.
Top speed Supra maxes out at what the 535d is limited to so again no murderinf in fact take the limiter off and it would go faster Supra cannot.
Erm, think you're confusing the limiter on a Supra with the top speed, the Supra was limited to 155, but could see 170 on stock power.

The 535d, from my quick google, is seemingly limited to 130 - http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/video-chris-...


AntiLagGC8

1,724 posts

111 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
ikarl said:
Welshbeef said:
The 300bhp 535d the latest one is 313bhp so is faster than this.
http://fastestlaps.com/cars/bmw_535d.html

http://fastestlaps.com/cars/toyota_supra_twin_turb...

Murder ??? At best it might be 0.5-1car length ahead by 100mph from a standing start which is not the 535d's party piece yet is the Supras.
Top speed Supra maxes out at what the 535d is limited to so again no murderinf in fact take the limiter off and it would go faster Supra cannot.
Erm, think you're confusing the limiter on a Supra with the top speed, the Supra was limited to 155, but could see 170 on stock power.

The 535d, from my quick google, is seemingly limited to 130 - http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/video-chris-...
Lets face it the Supra is a far more capable performance car than the 535d. The 535d on the other hand is a very comfortable and fairly economical motorway cruncher.

It almost feels wrong comparing the two even if the 535d is decent in a straight line.

P.S. My next work car maybe a 535d so please don't think I've got anything against them! smile

Hol

8,359 posts

199 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
HonestIago said:
GC8 said:
Even a UK Classic GC8 is still a quick point to point car, by any standards.
Indeed, I used to run a 300bhp classic (admittedly not a standard car) as a daily and recently had the chance to drive a DSG Golf R for comparison. I found the scoob more compliant and confidence inspiring even if maybe not necessarily any quicker in a straight line. A well set up classic Impreza will always be a very competitive B-road performer IMO.
If I remember correctly, the detuned 1999 UK2000 version of the impreza still hit 0-60 in 5.3 or 5.4 seconds?

Where as the 1999 Sti Type R/RA hit 0-60 in 4.3 Seconds and the V5/6 EVO's was just a little slower.

Both of those numbers are for boggo standard cars and both stack up quite well to the modern 2.0turbo AWD alternatives 16 years on: (Golf R, AMG A45, RS3, etc..)

QuantumTokoloshi

4,161 posts

216 months

Monday 14th September 2015
quotequote all
e21Mark said:
Personally I'm not a fan of modern cars. Those that I've driven seemed devoid of character and driver involvement. Even the new fangled, 400bhp, all singing and dancing M3 I spent a few months in, was usually left at home in favour of my 1602 and it's heady 90 brake and 165 section tyres. Yes, modern stuff is invariably quicker, but I have more fun in cars from 25 years ago.

That said, you could always combine old with new and have the best of both worlds? A seventies car with modern fuel injection, brakes and suspension and 220+ bhp.

I like that, a lot. E30s with modern +250 Bhp I6 motors or supercharged I4 are also very much on my ownership list.

The Merc R129 SL 500 / 600 are still pretty quick, even by today's standards. The Integrale Evos will still keep up with modern metal, especially on B roads.

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Monday 14th September 08:44