ran 11.85 @ 120 mph in 1/4 mile, so yes, car is fast but not THAT fast.
10-14-2014, 09:44 AM
#16
Race Director
The Buick -love it- I remember that car all too well. My Buddy got one for his senior year in High school and totaled it in no time. Why any Father would buy some thing like this for a kid so young at the time I do not understand? Then I did not - today I do.
10-14-2014, 09:57 AM
#17
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Belmont Shore in Long Beach CA
Posts: 2,740
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
This coming Mecum Auction in Anaheim they are selling an GNX with 57 miles on it. Would love to have it but the value in those cars are the miles that have't been driven in then.
10-14-2014, 10:31 AM
#19
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somewhere in a galaxy far, far away....
Posts: 17,107
Likes: 0
Received 258 Likes
on
172 Posts
Actually 11.85 @ 120mph is fairly reasonable for a car stated to have potential of 11.2 @ 126mph.
Especially for a normally aspirated 6.
You were not far off the mark so no real need to be disappointed because lets face it, when has a magazine test ever live up to the published numbers?? Typically they beat on a loose mule to get a bench mark for publication.
Lot of variables. Tires pressures, weight of driver, track temp, how many miles on car?
11 second car out of the box is impressive. Especially given the suspension is based on a track car.
Again, how many miles are on the car?
Especially for a normally aspirated 6.
You were not far off the mark so no real need to be disappointed because lets face it, when has a magazine test ever live up to the published numbers?? Typically they beat on a loose mule to get a bench mark for publication.
Lot of variables. Tires pressures, weight of driver, track temp, how many miles on car?
11 second car out of the box is impressive. Especially given the suspension is based on a track car.
Again, how many miles are on the car?
10-14-2014, 02:26 PM
#20
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Belmont Shore in Long Beach CA
Posts: 2,740
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Actually 11.85 @ 120mph is fairly reasonable for a car stated to have potential of 11.2 @ 126mph.
Especially for a normally aspirated 6.
You were not far off the mark so no real need to be disappointed because lets face it, when has a magazine test ever live up to the published numbers?? Typically they beat on a loose mule to get a bench mark for publication.
Lot of variables. Tires pressures, weight of driver, track temp, how many miles on car?
11 second car out of the box is impressive. Especially given the suspension is based on a track car.
Again, how many miles are on the car?
Especially for a normally aspirated 6.
You were not far off the mark so no real need to be disappointed because lets face it, when has a magazine test ever live up to the published numbers?? Typically they beat on a loose mule to get a bench mark for publication.
Lot of variables. Tires pressures, weight of driver, track temp, how many miles on car?
11 second car out of the box is impressive. Especially given the suspension is based on a track car.
Again, how many miles are on the car?
10-14-2014, 04:15 PM
#21
Race Car
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: With A Manual Transmission
Posts: 4,728
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Altitude bro. 2000 ft altitude your car will not trap it's best, neither will the others, hence the slow trap speeds. That 5-6 mph will probably get you your .6 too. Doubt it will "feel" a lot different, but the GT3 is not a torque monster, it just goes, and the acceleration doesn't fall off.
10-14-2014, 04:52 PM
#22
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just wanted to report a quick trip to the drag strip today, last track event of the year here in Northern Alberta.
temp was about 17.5 deg c, altitude is i believe around 2200. humidity 30%. and i was running with stock air pressures ~ 33 psi rear with ESC and TC left ON. may try turning those off next time.
overall not that impressed with the cars straight line performance. at least at the drag strip, on the street the car is down right savage. and of course its not a drag car, but then again, what stock car is?
it seemed like several people were getting less than optimal times; a Lamborghini aventador also ran only an 11.8!! and they should be in the low/mid 10's. lightly modded cadillac cts-v's running mid 12's @115-116 mph... again, all unusually slow trap speeds. i wouldnt have minded the higher ET as much as my low trap speed of 120 mph. especially since it was tested at 11.2 @ 126 mph by one of the mags so thats movin'.
what was sweet is the launch control. works flawlessly every time and hooks up and launches very hard, with seemingly little to no wheelspin. effortless to engage too; floor brake, floor gas, release brake, done. no stupid sequence of ***** to turn/buttons to press like in the ///M cars and ///AMG's
temp was about 17.5 deg c, altitude is i believe around 2200. humidity 30%. and i was running with stock air pressures ~ 33 psi rear with ESC and TC left ON. may try turning those off next time.
overall not that impressed with the cars straight line performance. at least at the drag strip, on the street the car is down right savage. and of course its not a drag car, but then again, what stock car is?
it seemed like several people were getting less than optimal times; a Lamborghini aventador also ran only an 11.8!! and they should be in the low/mid 10's. lightly modded cadillac cts-v's running mid 12's @115-116 mph... again, all unusually slow trap speeds. i wouldnt have minded the higher ET as much as my low trap speed of 120 mph. especially since it was tested at 11.2 @ 126 mph by one of the mags so thats movin'.
what was sweet is the launch control. works flawlessly every time and hooks up and launches very hard, with seemingly little to no wheelspin. effortless to engage too; floor brake, floor gas, release brake, done. no stupid sequence of ***** to turn/buttons to press like in the ///M cars and ///AMG's
10-14-2014, 07:22 PM
#23
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada
Posts: 462
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually 11.85 @ 120mph is fairly reasonable for a car stated to have potential of 11.2 @ 126mph.
Especially for a normally aspirated 6.
You were not far off the mark so no real need to be disappointed because lets face it, when has a magazine test ever live up to the published numbers?? Typically they beat on a loose mule to get a bench mark for publication.
Lot of variables. Tires pressures, weight of driver, track temp, how many miles on car?
11 second car out of the box is impressive. Especially given the suspension is based on a track car.
Again, how many miles are on the car?
Especially for a normally aspirated 6.
You were not far off the mark so no real need to be disappointed because lets face it, when has a magazine test ever live up to the published numbers?? Typically they beat on a loose mule to get a bench mark for publication.
Lot of variables. Tires pressures, weight of driver, track temp, how many miles on car?
11 second car out of the box is impressive. Especially given the suspension is based on a track car.
Again, how many miles are on the car?
10-14-2014, 07:29 PM
#24
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada
Posts: 462
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as far as comparison to the gts, from what ive seen its just a carrera s with the power kit. and looks wise, dude, theres no comparison. the gt3 look so much better than a carrara s in person. on the road it basically has the same kind of presence as a ferrari or lamborghini. or very close. the gts looks pretty much the same as a carrera s with the sport design kit, doesnt it?
do you already have a deposit on a gt3? because i dont think theyre taking any more.
10-14-2014, 07:39 PM
#25
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes i do. i wouldn't worry about the clearance. if you are ll you need to do is get the lift. but i didnt order the lift and i get by just fine. or unless you dont care about save 4k then i guess just go ahead ad get the lift.
as far as comparison to the gts, from what ive seen its just a carrera s with the power kit. and looks wise, dude, theres no comparison. the gt3 look so much better than a carrara s in person. on the road it basically has the same kind of presence as a ferrari or lamborghini. or very close. the gts looks pretty much the same as a carrera s with the sport design kit, doesnt it?
do you already have a deposit on a gt3? because i dont think theyre taking any more.
as far as comparison to the gts, from what ive seen its just a carrera s with the power kit. and looks wise, dude, theres no comparison. the gt3 look so much better than a carrara s in person. on the road it basically has the same kind of presence as a ferrari or lamborghini. or very close. the gts looks pretty much the same as a carrera s with the sport design kit, doesnt it?
do you already have a deposit on a gt3? because i dont think theyre taking any more.
10-14-2014, 07:41 PM
#26
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada
Posts: 462
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For this one one I will just point the finger at environmental conditions. As we all know so many data points we can measure that can effect the overall Quarter times and speeds. Heck, even the Lambo didn't do too great in comparison to what these cars can really do on a good day.
But I just love the Title of this post. Just go back 20 - 30 years and see what any car could do! Personally then I would still take a Buick GN or GNX!
But I just love the Title of this post. Just go back 20 - 30 years and see what any car could do! Personally then I would still take a Buick GN or GNX!
another factor i wonder about is with my other cars i beat the times achieved by the magazines. ie, in my m5 i could run 11.9-12.1s all day at 121-122 mph. this is better than the figures gotten by the mags. same with my cls63. always at 120-121 mph. when they were quoted at under 120.
with the gt3 tested to be over 126 mph, i expected to match that.
although i had a friend who was there the same day with his weistec supercharged C63, and he had similar issues as me. he ran 10.88's when he could usually run 10.5's.
i willl have to go back in the spring and try with tc and esc off. and maybe let some air from my back tires.
10-14-2014, 07:45 PM
#27
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: edmonton, alberta, canada
Posts: 462
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah i figured. but from the way my sales guy was talking it sounded like this is it for the gt3. as in , no 991.2 or anything. as for gt3rs i would think that should happen. i hope so, because i want to see it rape everything! lol.
10-14-2014, 07:48 PM
#28
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually I am kinda depressed now that I won't get one. The sales guy told me that this is it for the GT3 as well but I took it as "it" for the 991.1. Hopefully not the end of the GT3. Its too bad they can't get one of the allocations from the dealers in the US.
10-14-2014, 09:37 PM
#30
Rennlist Member
I think you should leave ESC & TC off when doing a drag run. I cant tell from the runs actually posted as video (Sabine Schmidt in the RSR Nurburgring car, 11.2 & the Ausralian member in the aforeposted clip) had those off but it would be possible to ask them to find out. Altitude and tyre temp would definately have some baring too on traction off the line. 17.5C ambient with cold tyres wouldnt make for brilliant grip. Once warm would need 3-4psi dropped out of them to be optimal is my guess....