Megatron-UK

RSA quicker than 3.3 Turbo? I don't think that the RSA, which for what all intents and purposes is a C2 with cheap seats and interior, is anywhere near as quick as the 3.3 Turbo, let alone the 3.6.

springer3

Perhaps somebody used his car trying to get a 4.6 second 0-60 time.

TR6

Again, I got an actual reading of 0-60 in 4.75 seconds using a G-timer (best of three runs). And I'm an amateur. I'm guessing a 3.6 turbo would be a couple of tenths faster than that. Not sure about the 3.3 turbo.

ps. Cheap seats? Maybe in cost only. Recaro design, excellent bolster support, breathable cloth, wear like iron. I have a buddy of mine that purchased RSA seats to swap out the leather seats in his widebody 964. He loves them. You couldn't pay me to swap my RSA seats for the oem leather seats.

GG Allin

I took my RSA (when I had it) to the drag strip. I was only able to squeeze out a 14.1 at 101. I'm not sure what that translates to in 0-60 time. But I'm certain that there was only room for a couple tenths better time with more practice. These cars ain't launchers. I'm taking my M5 soon just to see what it can do. It feels faster than the RSA.

cobalt

From my experience my C2 is on par with most RSA's. I can tell you first hand that my C2 might best my turbo from 0-20mph but that is it by far.

Published numbers on the average have the C2/RSA 0-62.5mph at 5.5seconds and the RS at 5.3 seconds from experience and with a LWF I am seeing 5.0-5.1 sec 0-100 is rated at 12.9 for the C2/RSA, 11.1 seconds for the 3.3l Turbo and 9.5 seconds for the 3.6T. The real difference is to 124mph which the C2/RSA is rated at 21.3 sec and the 3.6 turbo is at 15.0 seconds. Unfortunately, I can't test the 2 side by side since my turbo has been slightly modified and now runs 430hp vs 360 stock and is much faster than stock but it will leave the C2 long in it's wake by numerous car lengths to 60 mph and would be a spec in the rear view mirror by 100mph.

That doesn't make the C2 or RSA any less of a great car. Still fantastic machinery for a reasonable price and more than fast enough for most drivers needs.

SimonExtreme

For once, we nearly agree! My euro RS, with about 300bhp (depending on which dyno you believe) would be lucky to get that. Best I have seen so far is a 4.7 sec (gps).

madmoog

FWIW (probably not much) I recently did it in 6 sec dead (C2 300bhp 3.8), with a leisurly take off, well shy of the red line and a first to second change of 0.7sec (all gps recorded). Hence dropping below 5 sec seems reasonable for the more dedicated or brutal!

N51

I'd hoped you might bring some sense to the discussion.

That's a ~2700# car with 300hp.

My best,
Noah

DHinkle

Has anyone thought that the turbo's 0-60 time is "conservative" by Porsche?

cobalt

No

From first hand experience the turbo is extremely hard to launch compared to the C2. The turbo has the lag issue. Even though they claim the newer turbos starting with the 3.6T had reduced lag they are still afflicted off the line. I had tested my car using a G-timer and found that no matter how hard I tried I was seeing 0-20mph times from 1.6 to 2.0 seconds and still achieving a 0-60 time of 4.8 seconds. So basically the car is a pig on standing starts most of the time being lost from 0-10mph. I am lost on standing starts unless I don't mind dumping the clutch which ain't happening, now rolling starts are a totally different story. Not much keeps up with me on rolling starts unless it is seriously modified. The newer 993TT's and 996TT's have the advantage of the dual turbos and the AWD so they launch better although ironically they run about the same 0-60 & 1/4 times as a stock 3.6T. So as you can guess the 3.6t is a beast from 20-60 and on up.

jeff91C2T

I did a couple of 4.2 second runs 0-60 (recorded w/ a G-tech) just playing around. The launch was tricky in getting just the right amount of boost off the line (ie...slipping the clutch). This was w/ passenger and 1/2 tank of gas. Car is not stock (313 rwhp).

cobalt

Wow,

That is quick, I can only assume you dropped your 0-20 times considerably to achieve this.

I am putting down 365hp and I could only imaging what you were putting your car through to achieve those numbers. I also found that if I push too hard even the 295 PS2's can't keep traction so maybe the extra weight helped. Am I correct by assuming you are running a cat bypass, this would help reduce the lag issues of the earlier cars.

TR6

Sounds like you just answered how in real world results, some normally aspirated C2's such as the RSA might be very close to the turbo in 0-60 times. Now, 20-100 mph, no doubt there would be a much larger gap between the turbo and an RSA since the turbo would be in its sweet spot in the revs and momentum.

Also, you accurately pointed out that you have to really abuse the clutch and drive train to get the fastest launch times. That's why I don't plan to ever test mine again in a standing start run. Someone that is more protective of their drivetrain isn't going to see the fastest possible results. I don't really doubt that the Car & Driver results are accurate. Why would they falsify them? The equipment they used was regularly calibrated (or so they always claimed). But, I also know that you can have three different magazines with three different drivers do 0-60 runs and come up with significantly different results. Case in point: if I remember correctly, the 1973 911s had 0-60 test results ranging from 6.1 to 8.2 depending on who tested it (official Porsche numbers were the slowest). No doubt, driver, weather conditions, weight of car with driver, fuel, etc, are all factors.

Whether my car is capable of doing 0-60 in 4.8 seconds (my best time out of three with the G-timer) or 5.0 or 5.2 (my slowest time) doesn't really matter to me in real world terms. It certainly doesn't make me a better driver. It just makes for interesting debate with friends over a couple of beers.

SimonExtreme

Word!

Our cars aren't about drag racing. Leave that to the "Fast and Furious" brigade and lets talk about real motoring!

jeff91C2T

Hi Anthony.....I'm running powerhouse headers with a Borla XR-1 muffler (no cat). And yes, the headers/muffler make for a great drop in lag. For the launch...it's actually not that bad on the car (in my opinion). I see the comments about "dumping" the clutch, but I'm not sure that applies well to the Turbo. The launch is all about rev's (3k), a bit of clutch slipping and then let it engage fully. Getting this combination right can make for a decent launch with just a little wheel spin all the way through 1st gear.

Re...drag racing or "fast and Furious", it's all motoring...and all fun!