Bitter SC: Which Version Should You Buy?
The Bitter SC range consists of four Cabrio versions from its single generation, produced from 1979 to 1986. The main choice is between the 3.0 models with 178 hp and the 3.9 models with 207 hp, followed by a choice of 5-speed Manual or 3-speed Automatic transmission.
The Bitter SC range consists of four Cabrio versions from its single generation, produced from 1979 to 1986. The main choice is between the 3.0 models with 178 hp and the 3.9 models with 207 hp, followed by a choice of 5-speed Manual or 3-speed Automatic transmission. Based strictly on the available specifications, the 3.0 MT is the quickest 3.0 and reaches the joint-highest top speed, while the 3.9 MT combines the strongest engine with the lowest kerb weight among the 3.9 versions. The 3.9 AT offers the same stated acceleration as the 3.9 MT, but it is heavier and has a lower top speed.
Bitter SC generations and version choices
The Bitter SC has one generation in the supplied data. The 1 generation ran from 1979 to 1986, used the Cabrio body style and included four versions: 3.0 MT, 3.0 AT, 3.9 MT and 3.9 AT. There is therefore no numerical basis for comparing changes between multiple generations or identifying a restyling. The meaningful buying comparison is between engine sizes and gearboxes within this generation.
Bitter SC specs and engine comparison
All four versions use a front, longitudinal Gasoline engine with 6 Inline cylinders, 2 valves per cylinder, central injection and no boost. Every version is RWD. The 3.0 engine displaces 2,969 cc, produces 178 hp at 5,800 rpm and develops 243 Nm at 4,800 rpm. The 3.9 engine displaces 3,849 cc, produces 207 hp at 5,100 rpm and develops 320 Nm at 3,400 rpm.
| Version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders | Layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.0 MT | 178 hp | 243 Nm | 2,969 cc | Gasoline | 6 | Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
| 3.0 AT | 178 hp | 243 Nm | 2,969 cc | Gasoline | 6 | Inline | No | 3-speed Automatic | RWD |
| 3.9 MT | 207 hp | 320 Nm | 3,849 cc | Gasoline | 6 | Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
| 3.9 AT | 207 hp | 320 Nm | 3,849 cc | Gasoline | 6 | Inline | No | 3-speed Automatic | RWD |
Moving from either 3.0 version to either 3.9 version adds 880 cc, 29 hp and 77 Nm. That is a 16.3% power increase and a 31.7% torque increase over the 3.0 engine. The 3.0 produces about 60.0 hp per litre, while the 3.9 produces about 53.8 hp per litre. The smaller engine therefore has the higher specific output, but the 3.9 supplies substantially more total power and torque.
The 3.0 engine has a compression ratio of 9.4 and a bore and stroke of 95 × 69.8 mm. The 3.9 engine has a compression ratio of 9.5 and a bore and stroke of 95 × 90.5 mm. These figures make the engine distinction clear, although the data provides no reliability, maintenance-cost or problem records from which to judge ownership risk.
Bitter SC performance and mpg
| Version | 0–100 km/h | Top speed | City consumption | Highway consumption | Combined consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.0 MT | 8.8 seconds | 220 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 3.0 AT | 10.1 seconds | 220 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 3.9 MT | 8.6 seconds | 216 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 3.9 AT | 8.6 seconds | 207 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
The gearbox makes the clearest performance difference in the 3.0 pair. The 3.0 MT reaches 100 km/h 1.3 seconds sooner than the 3.0 AT, although both have a stated top speed of 220 km/h. A buyer prioritizing acceleration should therefore choose the Manual within the 3.0 range; the Automatic does not provide a top-speed advantage.
Both 3.9 versions reach 100 km/h in 8.6 seconds. However, the 3.9 MT reaches 216 km/h, which is 9 km/h faster than the 207 km/h 3.9 AT. Curiously, the 3.0 MT and 3.0 AT each have a 4 km/h higher stated top speed than the more powerful 3.9 MT. The data records these results but does not provide additional measurements to explain them.
No city, highway or combined fuel-consumption figure was measured for any version. MPG therefore cannot be calculated, and the available data does not support calling one engine or gearbox more economical. CO₂ output and environmental class are also not measured for all four versions.
Bitter SC dimensions, weight and capacity
The supplied specifications do not provide exterior length, width or height for any version. Wheel sizes are also not measured. Ground clearance is 140 mm and fuel-tank capacity is 75 litres throughout the range.
| Version | Kerb weight | Gross weight | Ground clearance | Fuel tank | Wheel sizes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.0 MT | 1,590 kg | not measured | 140 mm | 75 litres | not measured |
| 3.0 AT | 1,590 kg | 1,900 kg | 140 mm | 75 litres | not measured |
| 3.9 MT | 1,650 kg | 1,975 kg | 140 mm | 75 litres | not measured |
| 3.9 AT | 1,670 kg | 1,975 kg | 140 mm | 75 litres | not measured |
The 3.0 MT and 3.0 AT share the lowest stated kerb weight at 1,590 kg. The 3.9 MT adds 60 kg over either 3.0, while the 3.9 AT adds 80 kg. Within the 3.9 pair, choosing the Automatic adds 20 kg. Gross weight is not measured for the 3.0 MT; the 3.0 AT is listed at 1,900 kg, and both 3.9 versions are listed at 1,975 kg.
Weight per horsepower further separates the choices. The 3.0 MT and 3.0 AT each carry about 8.93 kg per hp. The 3.9 MT improves that figure to about 7.97 kg per hp, while the 3.9 AT records about 8.07 kg per hp. On this measure, the 3.9 MT has the strongest power-to-weight relationship in the range.
All versions have Independent, spring suspension at both ends and disc brakes at both ends. Because these chassis specifications, ground clearance and tank capacity are common across the range, they do not favor one version over another.
Which Bitter SC version should you buy?
The 3.0 MT is the strongest choice for buyers who want the lowest stated kerb weight and the highest stated top speed without selecting the larger engine. At 1,590 kg, it is 60 kg lighter than the 3.9 MT and 80 kg lighter than the 3.9 AT. Its 8.8-second acceleration time is only 0.2 seconds behind either 3.9, and its 220 km/h top speed is the highest figure in the range, shared with the 3.0 AT.
The 3.0 AT is primarily the Automatic alternative to the 3.0 MT. It retains the same 178 hp, 243 Nm, 1,590 kg kerb weight and 220 km/h top speed, but its 10.1-second acceleration time is 1.3 seconds slower. Since no fuel-consumption or reliability measurements are available, the specifications establish no other quantified advantage over the 3.0 MT.
The 3.9 MT is the best specification-led choice for maximum engine output and power-to-weight performance. It offers 207 hp and 320 Nm, weighs 1,650 kg and reaches 100 km/h in 8.6 seconds. Compared with the 3.0 MT, it gains 29 hp and 77 Nm while adding 60 kg; acceleration improves by 0.2 seconds, although top speed falls by 4 km/h. Its 5-speed Manual also avoids the 20 kg weight increase and 9 km/h top-speed reduction recorded by the 3.9 AT.
The 3.9 AT suits a buyer who wants the larger 3,849 cc engine with the 3-speed Automatic. It matches the 3.9 MT’s 8.6-second acceleration time and retains its 207 hp and 320 Nm, but its 1,670 kg kerb weight is the highest of the four versions and its 207 km/h top speed is the lowest.
On the available numbers, the 3.9 MT is the most compelling all-round performance choice, while the 3.0 MT offers the best combination of low weight and top speed. The 3.0 AT and 3.9 AT are the gearbox-led choices, not clear numerical winners. No price, for-sale listing, fuel economy, reliability or maintenance data was supplied, so none of those factors can be used to recommend one version over another.