Quickest point to point car
Discussion
TBH I think the guy suggesting the 911 Turbo S is onto a winner.
Lap times are very close, if not often faster than GT3 or even GT3RS.
Straight line performance not far off a Veyron up to 100mph.
Ceramics, RWS, PDK, lots of tyre, PASM and Sport+ and it would be very difficult to keep up.
IIRC Top Gear did a point to point test with the M6, V8V and 911 2S a few years ago and I think the 911 (even in base form) was several seconds faster than the others.
Lap times are very close, if not often faster than GT3 or even GT3RS.
Straight line performance not far off a Veyron up to 100mph.
Ceramics, RWS, PDK, lots of tyre, PASM and Sport+ and it would be very difficult to keep up.
IIRC Top Gear did a point to point test with the M6, V8V and 911 2S a few years ago and I think the 911 (even in base form) was several seconds faster than the others.
As has already been pointed out in the real world the car makes little difference, it comes down to the driver's disregard for life and their driving licence.
In a hypothetical situation where the road is closed and essentially a tarmac rally stage then I agree with the Evo/Impreza/911 Turbo suggestions, the ability to haul out of tight corners on bad surfaces will put them ahead of even fast 2wd cars like Caterhams and Ferraris. For a pro driver I'd pick one of the rally reps, us mere mortals would probably be much quicker in the 911 with its PDK gearbox and idiot-friendly setup.
In a hypothetical situation where the road is closed and essentially a tarmac rally stage then I agree with the Evo/Impreza/911 Turbo suggestions, the ability to haul out of tight corners on bad surfaces will put them ahead of even fast 2wd cars like Caterhams and Ferraris. For a pro driver I'd pick one of the rally reps, us mere mortals would probably be much quicker in the 911 with its PDK gearbox and idiot-friendly setup.
RogueTrooper said:
DonkeyApple said:
Over a section of typical UK B roads the big ugly van will be swifter for less risk than the faster and better handling lower cars.
Typically diesel too, so you'll be making hay while the hot hatches and kit cars have to refuel (twice.) Win.
Best assume that point A is less than 200 miles from point B. No room for diesels in a conversation about fun driving, unless someone does actually get a boner from pretending to be late for a sales convention
My mate's old FQ360 was very quick on a B road, in a very noisy (nasty HKS exhaust), bouncy and harsh way. And it had to be kept on the boil at all times because the lag was horrendous.
I reckon there are faster things these days, but for me that was the quickest B road experience to date.
I reckon there are faster things these days, but for me that was the quickest B road experience to date.
many years ago a guy we knew in a cavalier SRI was the fastest thing we knew on the country lanes heading to york dragway, no one would keep up with him, as he basically had a total disregard for his and others safety. this also included jumping the car off a slightly humped level crossing, resulting in broken rear shockers, which to be fair hardly hindered him.
no one would have passed him in any sort of car as he basically used the centre of the road and the offisde on bends, cut corners, and generally didnt want to be passed, the car was worth about a grand at best and was disposable :-)
no one would have passed him in any sort of car as he basically used the centre of the road and the offisde on bends, cut corners, and generally didnt want to be passed, the car was worth about a grand at best and was disposable :-)
Evo for me, even as a 911 turbo owner.
The Evo is just stupidly easy to drive, to chuck around, and correct your mistakes, and you can enjoy all this from day 1 of your ownership.
Go into a corner at 90%, do something stupid like drop a gear or two and boot it half way through, and it will just use up the remaining 10% to shoot off into the straight.
No idea whether the Scooby is similar no experience but in the real world as opposed to a track I would not dream of driving my 911 Turbo in the same manner it would end up very badly indeed.
The Evo is just stupidly easy to drive, to chuck around, and correct your mistakes, and you can enjoy all this from day 1 of your ownership.
Go into a corner at 90%, do something stupid like drop a gear or two and boot it half way through, and it will just use up the remaining 10% to shoot off into the straight.
No idea whether the Scooby is similar no experience but in the real world as opposed to a track I would not dream of driving my 911 Turbo in the same manner it would end up very badly indeed.
the 911 turbo S on the track vid is fine but its a track not a B road.
not showing off but to add to the conversation. Having owned 2x 911 turbos 1x Scooby 1x RS6 2x Caterham 7s' 1x M5 1x E63 AMG and various Hot hatches
As others have said it comes down to personal safety and other road users and speed limits.
Understand the argument about a high driving position but with good road craft in the Caterham 7 this is not an issue. It can be such a weapon because of its light weight and small size. BHP/ton was over 400 which is violent. So easy to overtake - more bike like then car. If it were dry and normal B roads then I would wager none of the other cars I have driven would keep up even if you were going upto 100mph in places where safe. The corner speeds are faster then the 911 I believe certainly later braking and through the corner. Traction out in the dry not an issue when on AO32R tyres - standard road yokos of the time for a 7.
If it were wet then all bets are off with the 7 and yes the 911tt would be up there but then depends if you are keeping to speed limits and how much risk you want to take.
Who would have more fun or which would be more fun? Undoubtable the 7 but would also knacker you as well.....
not showing off but to add to the conversation. Having owned 2x 911 turbos 1x Scooby 1x RS6 2x Caterham 7s' 1x M5 1x E63 AMG and various Hot hatches
As others have said it comes down to personal safety and other road users and speed limits.
Understand the argument about a high driving position but with good road craft in the Caterham 7 this is not an issue. It can be such a weapon because of its light weight and small size. BHP/ton was over 400 which is violent. So easy to overtake - more bike like then car. If it were dry and normal B roads then I would wager none of the other cars I have driven would keep up even if you were going upto 100mph in places where safe. The corner speeds are faster then the 911 I believe certainly later braking and through the corner. Traction out in the dry not an issue when on AO32R tyres - standard road yokos of the time for a 7.
If it were wet then all bets are off with the 7 and yes the 911tt would be up there but then depends if you are keeping to speed limits and how much risk you want to take.
Who would have more fun or which would be more fun? Undoubtable the 7 but would also knacker you as well.....
Edited by superlightr on Wednesday 28th September 10:45
Edited by superlightr on Wednesday 28th September 10:46
Atmospheric said:
av185 said:
991 Turbo S unquestionably in the wet with 991 GT3 RS on a par in the dry.
Can't really argue with the Turbo S attributes. But how much of the 580 bhp can you safely use? Isn't the 991 quite big? (lovely though)Can a car have too much power for this task?
And it depends on what 'point to point' really means.
Whilst the 991 has grown slightly over the 997 it is still quite chuckable having not lost the ethos of the original 911s.
That video of JB chucking the Turbo S around Anglesey circuit is fine, but the TTS is also quite a heavy car, and driven at its limit like that on track will require tyres and brakes long before the lighter and much nimbler GT3 and RS.
The 991 GT3 and RS being essentially track focused will be far more nimble and chuckable than the TTs on the rapid B road blast but the TTs will make up for that deficiency slightly with its four wheel drive especially in the wet.
But in reality it is impossible for any driver no matter how good to come anywhere near the incredible levels of grip of the GT3 on public roads....moreso the RS which has around 60 per cent more aero still.
Edited by av185 on Wednesday 28th September 10:53
DonkeyApple said:
All these low cars would lose out to one of the fast SUVs like the RRS SVR on public roads. The ability to see that much further and over many obstacles reduces the risk significantly and allows for higher speeds to be retained for longer. Over a section of typical UK B roads the big ugly van will be swifter for less risk than the faster and better handling lower cars. Close the roads and the vans will be thrashed however.
I know we've just agreed to differ on this in the past, but I strongly believe this is a much more minor point than many make out. I do a lot of cycling on the B and C roads around where I live, which have a variety of hedges, banks and walls at their edges and a number of times I've ducked down and then stood up on the pedals to simulate the typical height difference, and the increase in visibility is absolutely miniscule. Unless you happen to luck on a hedge that's exactly the right height, or a hidden dip the right depth, the visibility difference most of the time is fairly minor. In terms of A to B pace it's certainly dominated by the huge decrease in handling and agility that a 'fast' SUV suffers with its tall ride height and greater weight over something more focused.In terms of road cars and bumpy British back roads, for me it's my old Lotus 2-Eleven, that I owned for three years, provided the road wasn't a very bumpy C road (e.g. grass in the middle, huge cracks etc) or had proper standing water. On the majority of B roads and certainly A roads it had utterly ridiculous performance and traction and was a league ahead of anything else I've driven in terms of performance. If there were significant puddles around though and nasty bumps, you'd have to back off quite a bit, so give me the latest 911 Turbo S, which I haven't driven, but I've not much doubt it would be extremely quick, and I believe the old 996 won an Autocar test years ago for point to point speed on a closed road.
If the roads are fairly smooth and we're not limited to road cars, then obviously one of the single seaters I've raced would decimate a road car with a cm or so increase in ride height (as per the Euro hill climbs on closed road), but I presume we're talking about pure road cars here on a typical bumpy British B road?
If the roads are fairly smooth and we're not limited to road cars, then obviously one of the single seaters I've raced would decimate a road car with a cm or so increase in ride height (as per the Euro hill climbs on closed road), but I presume we're talking about pure road cars here on a typical bumpy British B road?
deltashad said:
Bit of a teenager thread.
I used to think nothing would touch my lightly breathed on integrale but it all depends on the road and conditions. in the dry on a tight twisty mountain pass very little can get close to my Elise, only something stupid with no boot and limited body panels is going to get close.
There again other roads with a powerful EVO will kill the elise.
If you're an old bI used to think nothing would touch my lightly breathed on integrale but it all depends on the road and conditions. in the dry on a tight twisty mountain pass very little can get close to my Elise, only something stupid with no boot and limited body panels is going to get close.
There again other roads with a powerful EVO will kill the elise.
d like me, you may have read the magazine 'Fast Lane' - they actually had an issue with the headline 'Quickest car from a to b' and it was a Lancia Delta Integrale....I reckon you winGassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff