Notices
928 Forum 1978-1995
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 928 Specialists

Thoughts on the "928GT"

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-19-2017, 09:44 PM
  #16  
JWise
Rennlist Member
 
JWise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,704
Received 207 Likes on 70 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Chris Lockhart
And for some reason the '89 GT's seem to put down more RWHP (in basic factory form) than any other year/model of 928, GTS's included. Porsche was very conservative when they rated them at 326 CHP. :-)
Originally Posted by Chris Lockhart
Ahh ok. Yeah the GT's were all very strong, but I remember years ago someone had put together a spreadsheet with all various member's published chassis dyno results and what if any mods had been performed prior to said run, and the '89 GT seemed to reign in the stock RWHP war even over the '90 and '91 models. Not sure if that still bares true but back around 2005 it was . :-)
I'll just leave this 90GT here...





Originally Posted by Imo000
My 100% stock (even had the spare tire in the car) '85 5-speed ran a 13.7 sec. in the 1.4 mile. That's faster than any stock 928 I've herd of by a lot. Logically that would make it stronger then others too.
Car and Driver July 1990 issue, 90GT, 13.7 quarter, and that's carrying an extra 150+ lbs vs. the 85S manual.


Old 04-19-2017, 10:45 PM
  #17  
worf928
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
worf928's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,329
Received 1,543 Likes on 1,007 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by docmirror
The GT ... Cooling is the same as S4 with 5sp where there is no auto trans cooler, but the GT has a low mounted engine oil cooler. 90 and later have the air flaps to block off rad cooling air. From 90-91 got the digi-dash, airbags, and a few other gewgaws over the 89GT.
Some minor corrections:
'89GT does not have the low-mounted oil cooler. 90+ all models do.
all '87-90 928s had the cooling flaps; factory delete starting '91
'91 gets more noise deadening (along with self-destructing rear liners)

Other diffs:
'91+ gets 'fat and short' shift boot
'89GT had standard forged wheels. only 928 to ship with 8" front and 9" rear.

Fun fact: this coming winter I will have 1.09% of the OC-listed GTs in my garage
Old 04-20-2017, 12:08 AM
  #18  
Weissach
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
 
Weissach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,152
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by JWise
I'll just leave this 90GT here...







Car and Driver July 1990 issue, 90GT, 13.7 quarter, and that's carrying an extra 150+ lbs vs. the 85S manual.


From the road test-- looks like the top speed is gear limited, not horsepower limited.
Old 04-20-2017, 11:30 AM
  #19  
kmascotto
Rennlist Member
 
kmascotto's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,111
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JWise
I'll just leave this 90GT here...







Car and Driver July 1990 issue, 90GT, 13.7 quarter, and that's carrying an extra 150+ lbs vs. the 85S manual.


Are these numbers based at the rear wheels...?
Old 04-20-2017, 12:10 PM
  #20  
worf928
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
worf928's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,329
Received 1,543 Likes on 1,007 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by kmascotto
Are these numbers based at the rear wheels...?
Based upon the dyno charts I have, I will hazard an educated guess that those are rwhp numbers. 300 rwhp is about 'average' for a healthy GT. I suspect Jarrod's made his GT a bit 'healthier' than average. It's not too hard to do so, especially with a SharkTuner.

Last edited by worf928; 04-20-2017 at 12:14 PM. Reason: spelin bAd
Old 04-20-2017, 12:13 PM
  #21  
worf928
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
worf928's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,329
Received 1,543 Likes on 1,007 Posts
Default

Although, looking at the A/F ratio chart... it's inverted. An A/F of 20 doesn't combust. GT's - without some help - will typically be in the mid-11s or high 10s after 4k rpm and that's actually too rich and robs power.
Old 04-20-2017, 12:13 PM
  #22  
kmascotto
Rennlist Member
 
kmascotto's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,111
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by worf928
Based upon the dyno charts I have, I will hazard an educated guess that those are rwhp numbers. 300 rwhp is about 'average' for a healthy GT. I suspect Jared's made his GT a bit 'healthier' than average. It's not too hard to do so, especially with a SharkTuner.
Thanks Dave
Old 04-20-2017, 01:02 PM
  #23  
kmascotto
Rennlist Member
 
kmascotto's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,111
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

So at 310hp at the rear wheels...what would it be at the crank?
Old 04-20-2017, 01:15 PM
  #24  
worf928
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
worf928's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,329
Received 1,543 Likes on 1,007 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by kmascotto
So at 310hp at the rear wheels...what would it be at the crank?
That depends upon the powertrain loss from the crank to the pavement. A rule of thumb is 15% for manual and 20% for automatics. My personal opinion is that a torque tube-based architecture has a lower loss (since that's the primary point of a TT architecture) and I used 12% and 17% respectively. I have no scientific basis for that. I've just looked at lots of dyno charts and operated under the assumption that Porsche's BHP figures are, on average correct and used that to back out those numbers.

Anyway: 352 - 364 bhp.
Old 04-20-2017, 01:58 PM
  #25  
Weissach
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
 
Weissach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,152
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by worf928
That depends upon the powertrain loss from the crank to the pavement. A rule of thumb is 15% for manual and 20% for automatics. My personal opinion is that a torque tube-based architecture has a lower loss (since that's the primary point of a TT architecture) and I used 12% and 17% respectively. I have no scientific basis for that. I've just looked at lots of dyno charts and operated under the assumption that Porsche's BHP figures are, on average correct and used that to back out those numbers.

Anyway: 352 - 364 bhp.
So you're saying that it's got more horsepower than a GTS with a smaller engine? Can't be right, those power figures have to be at the crank. In the quarter mile times, the trap speed would've been much higher with something like 360bhp
Old 04-20-2017, 02:21 PM
  #26  
Imo000
Captain Obvious
Super User
 
Imo000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cambridge, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,846
Received 337 Likes on 244 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JWise
....Car and Driver July 1990 issue, 90GT, 13.7 quarter, and that's carrying an extra 150+ lbs vs. the 85S manual.


Uhhh, that's interesting. I learn something new every day!
Old 04-20-2017, 02:45 PM
  #27  
worf928
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
worf928's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,329
Received 1,543 Likes on 1,007 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Weissach
So you're saying that it's got more horsepower than a GTS with a smaller engine? Can't be right, those power figures have to be at the crank.
rwhp is at the road. bhp is at the crank. And yes GT engines have demonstrated bhp that is similar to the advertised bhp of GTS engines.

This is one of the reasons why GTs are prized.

In the quarter mile times, the trap speed would've been much higher with something like 360bhp
Says who? Gearing, my man. Gearing!

928s - even with a 2.73 - are not 0-60 cars.

But, that's it: I'm done. If you want to debate this, call Kibort.
Old 04-20-2017, 02:46 PM
  #28  
terry gt
Burning Brakes
 
terry gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: West Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 908
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

with a few mods Colin figures my GT is doing less than 4.5 seconds to 60 mph
there is a video on utube showing in car 0-60
Old 04-20-2017, 03:30 PM
  #29  
AO
Supercharged
Rennlist Member
 
AO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Back in Michigan - Full time!
Posts: 18,925
Likes: 0
Received 59 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

0-60 is a POOR measure of stoutness. Manual shifting is S L O W. I've gone against 928s with an auto transmission with less power in a (virtual) drag race, and they won all because of the time it take to shift a manual. (look up the G-Tech threads).

Dyno is the way to go! The GT cars are a great car. The 91GT is basically a GTS with a 5.0 and no fender flares. Love it!
Old 04-20-2017, 03:57 PM
  #30  
Wisconsin Joe
Nordschleife Master
 
Wisconsin Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Kaukauna Wisconsin
Posts: 5,925
Received 302 Likes on 231 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AO
0-60 is a POOR measure of stoutness. Manual shifting is S L O W. I've gone against 928s with an auto transmission with less power in a (virtual) drag race, and they won all because of the time it take to shift a manual. (look up the G-Tech threads).

Dyno is the way to go! The GT cars are a great car. The 91GT is basically a GTS with a 5.0 that doesn't have the oiling problems of the 5.4 and no fender flares. Love it!
FIFY


Quick Reply: Thoughts on the "928GT"



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 03:34 PM.