Car magazine test of 930 in 1974/5?

[1975turbo]

Hi, I'm trying to trace a copy of the Car magazine test of the 3 litre Turbo carried out by Mel Nichols in late 1974 or 1975. Does anyone know which issue it was published in? Thanks for any assistance! Regards to all, Chris Sherwood.

 

[Kevin Cooke]

Was that the stand alone test article or the one of the road trip with the lambo and the fezza?

That's the arcticle, I think in the same issue as a write up on Von Karrahans 3.0 RS.

It was these two articles that got me into Porkers.

Regards

Kevin

 

[1975turbo]

Hi Kevin, I believe it was a stand-alone test written byf Mel Nichols. Nick Faure was also involved in the test, doing some very high speed driving. Am keen to know which issue of Car it was in, either Late '74 or early 1975, so I can get a copy. Regards, Chris.

 

[John_Ward]

I've got a copy at home - has a red 930 on the cover. Will check to see which month. Turns up reasonably often on eBay.

 

[1975turbo]

Thanks John. Have found out from Mel Nichols, who wrote it, that it is the Dec 1975 edition and he is sending me a copy. My car (1975) is being borrowed for a test by one of the car magazines. I originally floated the idea of a comparison between 2.7RST and 3.0 litre Turbo (but they are not going for this). Not so strange a comparison as might first be thought. The 3 litre is lighter than the later cars and has handling akin to the 2.7 Carrera but lots more power. Nick Faure also thinks would make an interesting comparison and offered to do the test if someone wanted to set it up. You had a 3 litre and have much experience of the later cars, what do you think? Kind regards, Chris Sherwood. (btw I am a Club member, but the forum shows me as not for some reason - I have registered my number).

 

[John_Ward]

Basics first - sort out Non Member here
http://www.porscheclubgbforum.com/tm.asp?m=70284
Your idea about comparing the 2.7RS and the 3.0 930 is a good one, as they were both built in order to homologate race versions, and the 3.0 turbo is the next iconic production model following the 2.7RS.
As for the driving experience, weight is the key. The 2.7 RS is more nimble than the 930 3.0 litre, which is hardly surprising. However, in comparison with the 3.3 turbo, the lighter 3.0 version comes out well in comparison, as although the 3.3s had more power, their greater weight and altered balance made them feel that bit less chuckable in normal driving.
Floor it when they are pointing in a straight line though, and boy, do they go..... and if you have the 330bhp SE / LE output - well, an extra 10% is always handy!
And as for your 3.0 litre 911 turbo's two cited weak points - inadequate brakes and turbo lag - all I can say is that once you get used to driving one, you learn to work with what you've got and neither "fault" is particularly apparent.
John

 

[1975turbo]

Thanks John, I did register by sending the email to forum, but have done so again now. Tks also for your experienced comments. I have not driven a later Turbo so cannot compare. A servo for the brakes would be welcome though as they do need a good push to work! Regards, Chris.

 

[John_Ward]

If it's any consolation, the brakes need a good shove on a 2.7 RS as well!
Slightly bizarrely, the nearest I ever came to an accident due to brakes on the 3 litre was when I had to stop from about 20mph and the brakes were completely cold. Definitely one of those sphincter tightening moments when you just pray that the car is going to stop before you gently roll into the back of the car in front of you!