Vintage AMS Review: How the 1964 German Cars Accelerate – Including the New Porsche 911

Different parts of the world often have very different expectations of power and performance. If you grew up reading American car magazines of the 1960s, you probably had a strong sense of how the different models stacked up when it came to acceleration: which were quickest and which were “stones.” This 1964 article from the West German magazine auto motor und sport (AMS) — presented here in English translation — offers a glimpse of how the other half lived, presenting acceleration figures for 1964 German-market models in different classes, from the basic Volkswagen Beetle to a brand-new Porsche model still known as the Porsche 901.

How They Accelerate

This three-page article originally ran in AMS 10/1964, cover-dated 16 May. It was written by senior editor Gert Hack, who, like Reinhard Seiffert, remained a fixture of the magazine’s editorial staff well into the 1980s.

The car doing a tire-smoking burnout on the first page appears to be the W112 Mercedes-Benz 300SEL. (Note the pronounced negative camber of the rear wheels under power!)

The main text reads:

There used to be a lot of talk about top speed. Today, acceleration has become the most important measure of a car’s performance. It depends on,

HOW they accelerate

The ever-increasing density of traffic on Europe’s roads requires ever more spirited cars. This is because as the number of vehicles increases, the gaps in the traffic flow narrow and close. In order to be able to use smaller gaps as overtaking opportunities without risk, you need sufficient power reserves, especially in the medium speed range between 80 and 100 km/h. Many drivers do not realize how big the differences are in the overtaking opportunities between spirited and “tired” cars. For example, if you are the fifth vehicle in a queue led by a truck going 80 km/h, even a one-kilometer gap is not enough for a Volkswagen to overtake if oncoming traffic is approaching at 100 km/h. An Opel Kadett S, on the other hand, can overtake the four vehicles in front of it about 100 meters before the next oncoming vehicle. This is no problem at all for a Porsche Carrera, in which the overtaking maneuver can be completed about 300 meters before the oncoming traffic.

Good acceleration is therefore a criterion for the maneuverability and driving safety of a car in traffic, and the automotive industry is beginning to draw conclusions from this: The days when good acceleration figures were the privilege of large, expensive saloons and equally expensive sports cars are finally over.

If you are not up on the metric system, it may help to keep in mind a couple of benchmarks: 80 km/h is about 50 mph, while 100 km/h is 62 mph. Therefore, 0–100 km/h is roughly comparable to U.S. or British 0–60 mph benchmarks. A speed of 120 km/h is about 75 mph, while 160 km/h is about 100 mph.

In later years, European testers began citing 0–400 meter standing-start acceleration times — 400 meters is about one quarter mile — but while that metric became common in Japan by the late ’60s, I’ve rarely seen it in European publications of this era. They instead give standing kilometer acceleration times; one kilometer is about five-eighths of a mile.

Page 2:

The punchline of the cartoon on the left, which is by is by Lothar Ursinus (signed “URS”), reads “Got old while overtaking.” (“Beim Überholen alt geworden.”)

The main text continues:

Today, even small cars in the one-liter class offer acceleration values that were only found in the upper displacement classes just five years ago. The main pacesetters in this development were the new models in the 1000 to 1500 cc classes. A few years ago, the VW 1200 was one of the liveliest cars in this class, but now it is at the lower limit of what is reasonable.

In our five tables, the most important passenger cars and sports cars are listed according to engine capacity and performance. It can be seen that normal production cars achieve acceleration values that come close to the Porsche C. The general tendency towards lightweight construction, which is particularly evident in cheap mass-produced cars, supports this development, while the more elaborately built products carry a weight handicap that has to be compensated for by increased engine power. Thus the Opel Kadett S, “best in class” in Table 1, in the class up to 2 liters would still take an honorable fifth place ahead of the Mercedes 190, both in terms of performance and power-to-weight ratio. It disrespectfully showed the exhaust pipe to its larger and more expensive brother, the Rekord 1700, which had an antiquated engine. This is because the lower acceleration regime is almost exclusively due to power-to-weight ratio. Only in the upper speed range does a favorable or unfavorable drag coefficient become more noticeable, since in this area the drag already takes up the lion’s share of the available power. The poorer acceleration values of the Opel Diplomat with an unfavorable Cd value “simulated” on the test bench show this quite clearly.

The final sentence refers to the graph in the upper right. The Y axis reads “Top speed in km/h” and the X axis reads “Acceleration time in seconds.” There are three curves, each labeled with a different drag coefficient (abbreviated “Cw” in German): 0.32, 0.42, and 0.52. The text caption reads, “The acceleration diagram of the Opel Diplomat (with automatic transmission) measured on the driving resistance simulator with different drag coefficients (0.32, 0.42 and 0.52) shows that the acceleration times are only more strongly influenced by the different drag coefficients in the upper speed range.”

This is not easy to decipher, but the point they’re making is that acceleration is mostly about power-to-weight ratio. Slicker aerodynamics may help at very high speeds, but almost not at all on the street.

From an American perspective, the idea of the early Opel Kadett being considered fast may cause some serious cognitive dissonance, but in German terms, light weight (700 kg, about 1,540 lb) gave the Kadett a real advantage over leading competitors even with the base engine. The Kadett S had a bigger carburetor, higher compression, and 20 percent more power (48 PS total) from the same 993 cc (60.6 cu. in.). As the table shows, it would flat walk away from a 1.2-liter Volkswagen or the much heavier Ford Taunus 12M. On the other hand, it needed premium fuel and was in a pricier insurance class as well as being more expensive up front. Can’t win ’em all.

 

Here are the tables:

Type	Opel Kadett S	Glass 1204	DKW F12	Opel Kadett	Ford 12M	VW 1200
Power-to-weight ratio, full tank, kg/PS	14.4	14.7	18.9	17.4	21.8	22.2
With two people	17.5	17.5	22.7	21.1	25.5	26.6
0 to 60 km/h, sec.	5.9	6.8	6.3	7.7	10.0	9.5
0 to 80 km/h, sec.	10.0	11.3	11.7	13.5	16.1	16.2
0 to 100 km/h, sec.	16.2	18.0	20.9	22.0	30.0	36.0
0 to 120 km/h, sec.	27.5	31.4	—	—	—	—
Standing 1 km, sec.	37.6	37.9	40.3	40.6	43.6	44.4

Type	Fiat 1500	BMW 1500	Ford 12M-TS	Ford 12M 50 PS	VW 1500S	Opel 1500
Power-to-weight ratio, full tank, kg/PS	14.3	13.5	15.7	17.0	16.8	17.8
With two people	16.6	15.4	18.4	20.1	19.6	20.6
0 to 60 km/h, sec.	6.1	5.8	6.1	6.8	7.3	7.0
0 to 80 km/h, sec.	9.6	9.1	11.0	11.3	11.9	12.7
0 to 100 km/h, sec.	14.6	14.9	16.6	17.2	18.8	22.2
0 to 120 km/h, sec.	22.9	24.4	26.1	33.5	32.0	48.0
Standing 1 km, sec.	35.95	36.3	36.4	37.9	37.8	40.0

Note that while the Volkswagen Beetle eventually got the 1500 engine, the VW 1500S in the 1,500 cc table is the newer, pricier Type 3, which I think was not yet officially available in the U.S. in 1964, although it had been around for a while in Germany.

The main text continues on the right, discussing the increasingly power-hungry tastes of an increasingly affluent West German market:

Our tables allow a direct comparison of the power-to-weight ratio with the acceleration values achieved. In contrast to the normal data, the power-to-weight ratio was included here for the measurement (two people) with a full tank, as it is decisive for the acceleration times. As a rule, the driving performance decreases as the power-to-weight ratio increases. The fact that only the power available at the clutch is taken into account in the power-to-weight ratio and power losses in the transmission (gearbox, rear axle, etc.) are ignored may explain the few deviations from this rule. In addition, the values depend very much on the running condition of the engine in question and on the unavoidable power variations of series-produced engines.

The growing popularity of TS, TI and S versions proves that many car buyers want more power reserve and thus more driving safety, and are also prepared to pay a higher price for it. What Borgward once successfully started with the Isabella TS is now being pursued by many car manufacturers. Almost every German car is available in different performance levels; it is not unusual for the “sharper” version to achieve higher sales figures than the standard type. The 1.5 liter class is dominated by the Fiat 1500, which is now more than three years old and whose performance has been improved somewhat by a cooling fan that can be switched off, and the BMW 1500. Despite the increased performance of the VW 1500S, the Wolfsburg products are somewhat behind, and are in last and penultimate place in their classes. The venerable representatives of the class up to 2 liters were so outpaced by the two BMW 1800s that they will probably no longer be able to keep up on the former basis. Only Ford, with its TS versions, offers very powerful and inexpensive cars which, although they do not occupy a top position in their class, are very well positioned in the midfield.

Despite the recent increase in engine power, the Mercedes 300SE is outperformed by the Opel Diplomat. The Diplomat values are factory figures; due to the favorable power-to-weight ratio, it is quite possible that the actual measured values are even more favorable. The Opel Diplomat with 8.8 kg/PS (full tank plus two people) would even be able to compete with all sports cars. The BMW 1800 TI doesn’t cut a bad figure in comparison with sports cars either, and there is no doubt that other fast saloons will appear in the future that will take away the raison d’être of many a Gran Turismo, at least in terms of driving performance. Opel has such an iron in the fire: the Rekord will soon be available with the 2.6 liter six-cylinder engine from the Kapitän. With a power-to-weight ratio of between 10 and 11 kg/hp, this simple everyday car is in an area that was previously reserved for pure sports cars.

That the new Opel Diplomat would outgun the Mercedes is not surprising when you realize that the Diplomat was powered a Chevrolet 283 (which had a metric displacement of 4,638 cc to the Benz’s 2,996 cc), rated in Europe at 190 PS DIN with a four-barrel carburetor. Even with Powerglide, which I think was compulsory at this point, its power-to-weight ratio (and, perhaps more significantly, torque-to-weight ratio) was hard to beat in European terms.

 

The comment about the BMW 1800 dominating the up-to-2-liter class parallels what was also happening at this time in the UK, where modern 2-liter executive sedans — principally the Rover 2000 (P6) and Triumph 2000 — were rapidly decimating older, stodgier, more traditional upper-middle-class models. This general trend has continued in Europe and the UK, eventually destroying not only the trad E-segment models, but also D-segment sedans without premium badges, like the Honda Accord and Nissan Primera.

Here are the tables from the page above. Columns marked with an asterisk (*) are factory claims; all the other acceleration figures in this article are AMS road test results.

Type	BMW 1800Ti	BMW 1800	Ford 17M-TS	Ford 17M	MB 190	Opel Rekord 1700
Power-to-weight ratio, full tank, kg/PS	10.3	12.1	12.8	14.8	16.0	16.4
With two people	11.65	13.8	14.9	17.2	17.9	18.8
0 to 60 km/h, sec.	5.0	4.9	5.4	6.5	7.2	6.4
0 to 80 km/h, sec.	7.3	7.9	8.4	9.6	11.8	11.1
0 to 100 km/h, sec.	10.5	12.6	13.3	16.6	17.6	18.2
0 to 120 km/h, sec.	22.6	31.2	35.1	—	—	—
Standing 1 km, sec.	32.0	33.7	35.3	36.4	37.7	39.0

Type	MB 300SEL	Opel Diplomat*	MB 220SE	MB 220S	Fiat 2300	Opel Kapitän*
Power-to-weight ratio, full tank, kg/PS	9.5	8.0	12.0	12.7	12.2	13.7
With two people	10.4	8.8	13.25	14.1	13.6	15.2
0 to 60 km/h, sec.	4.6	4.6	5.2	5.6	5.7	6.5
0 to 80 km/h, sec.	6.6	7.0	8.0	8.9	8.7	10.5
0 to 100 km/h, sec.	9.8	10.0	12.1	13.5	13.2	16.0
0 to 120 km/h, sec.	13.2	13.5	17.0	19.1	19.7	23.5
0 to 140 km/h, sec.	18.75	17.5	25.8	29.3	30.9	—
0 to 160 km/h, sec.	26.0	23.5	—	—	—	—
Standing 1 km, sec.	30.45	—	33.45	34.55	34.9	—

Enter the Porsche 901 (aka Porsche 911)

All of the above cars are sedans, but Hack didn’t forget about:

Type	Porsche 901*	Porsche Carrera	MB 230SL	Porsche SC	Fiat 2300 Coupé	Porsche C
Power-to-weight ratio, full tank, kg/PS	7.7	8.1	9.3	10.1	9.75	12.6
With two people	8.85	9.2	10.3	11.7	10.85	14.7
0 to 60 km/h, sec.	—	4.7	4.4	4.8	4.7	5.2
0 to 80 km/h, sec.	5.9	6.9	6.6	7.2	7.5	8.0
0 to 100 km/h, sec.	8.7	9.4	9.7	10.7	10.8	12.3
0 to 120 km/h, sec.	12.5	13.6	13.6	15.2	15.1	19.0
0 to 140 km/h, sec.	19.8	18.8	19.2	20.9	21.1	28.7
0 to 160 km/h, sec.	25.9	25.2	26.8	28.8	30.9	—
Standing 1 km, sec.	29.5	29.1	29.7	30.6	32.0	32.8

When this article appeared in spring 1964, the all-new six-cylinder Porsche model, the Porsche 901, had recently made its public bow at the IAA show in Frankfurt in September 1963. It was still a few months away from series production, and Peugeot’s claim that model designations with a middle “0” violated their trademark had not yet led Porsche to hastily renamed the six cylinder car the Porsche 911.

Because the 911 was not yet in series production and AMS had not yet had the chance to do a full road test of it, the figures listed in the table above are factory claims. However, it was plain that the new Porsche was about to set the cat amongst the pigeons in the sports car class. The 901’s original 1,991 cc (121 cu. in.) six had 130 PS, modest by later 911 standards — today, I imagine you could probably order a Porsche-branded coffee maker more powerful than that — but it was enough to give the svelte 901 a league-leading power-to-weight ratio of just 7.7 kg per metric horsepower. Porsche claimed it would make the new car even quicker than the outgoing Carrera, which was much more high-strung, and 0–100 km/h in 8.7 seconds would make even American sports car buyers sit up and take notice, as would the claimed top speed of 210 km (130 mph).

 

As AMS determined months later, the new Porsche was even quicker in the real world than the factory claimed. Although the magazine’s first full road test didn’t appear until issue 2/1965, here’s what they recorded for the early 911:

1965 Porsche 911 (901)

Type	AMS Test Result
Power-to-weight ratio, full tank, kg/PS	8.4
With two people and equipment	9.7
0 to 60 km/h, sec.	3.4
0 to 80 km/h, sec.	5.7
0 to 100 km/h, sec.	8.0
0 to 120 km/h, sec.	11.3
0 to 140 km/h, sec.	15.3
0 to 160 km/h, sec.	20.6
1 km with standing start, sec.	28.0

 

The actual power-to-weight ratio wasn’t quite as good as claimed (the early 911 was a little heavier than the early prototype cars), but it didn’t matter. This was really scorching performance for a German car of this era, quick enough to blow the doors off any of the other cars mentioned here.

 

The 911 also promised to make life very difficult for traditional European GTs like the Fiat 2300S. On paper, these cars were competitors: The Fiat had a 2,279 cc (139 cu. in.) OHV six with two Weber 38 DCOE 16 carburetors, also good for 130 PS (CUNA rather than DIN, but still net — gross rating was 150 hp). However, calling the Ghia-bodied 2300S Coupé a sports car was arguable. Compared to the Porsche, it was high, heavy, and somewhat stodgy, a point made by William Boddy’s road test in the August 1965 issue of Motor Sport a year later, whereas the 911’s sporting credentials have never been in doubt.

 

And there you have it. The 30 cars listed in these tables obviously don’t include every model available in West Germany in the mid-1960s, but these numbers are enough to give a pretty good sense of what was hot, what was not, and what was about to be in the Federal Republic of Germany in 1964.

Of course, many of these cars were still on the slow side by American standards (though not as much as you might think if you’re focused on muscle cars — consider this 1966 Car Life comparison of the full-size, six-cylinder Chevrolet and Ford), but then, the largest engine available in any of these models was the Diplomat’s Chevrolet 283, which was considered a little engine as U.S. V-8s went. There may be no replacement for displacement, but there’s also no vexation like taxation, and motorists in West Germany and many other European markets were heavily taxed based on engine displacement, even discounting the higher price of fuel.

Besides, as evidenced by all the modern road tests complaining about 0–60 mph times of under 6 seconds being hopelessly slow, it’s not how quick you are on an absolute scale — it’s how quick you are compared to the person in the lane next to you.