Tuning Mods, Mods, Mods...How reliable
11-15-2020, 12:03 AM
#76
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Metro Atlanta, GA area
Posts: 7,295
Received 2,125 Likes
on
1,341 Posts
coming in late...
Sub'd.
My old 997.2 TTS with Europipe and Sams 2.5 tune did a best 60-130 in 6.83 sec.
I hope my 991.2 TTS with a Catless Tubi (for now - switching to EP2 soon) and a GIAC tune (for now) will do a bit better.
Sub'd.
My old 997.2 TTS with Europipe and Sams 2.5 tune did a best 60-130 in 6.83 sec.
I hope my 991.2 TTS with a Catless Tubi (for now - switching to EP2 soon) and a GIAC tune (for now) will do a bit better.
11-15-2020, 01:46 AM
#77
There are a few extra steps to do the PDK relearn but it’s easy and worth it...that combination of Sam’s tune on theCobb and the high torque PDK setting was so good that I would have been fine never making another mod except maybe exhaust.
the only reason I went bonkers with my car after that was that I think this will be my last great petrol only car....hereafter electric motors and new technology will be so far along that petrol cars will hardly be competitive.
so I wanted one last great epic Petrol build.
and glad I did
The following users liked this post:
Big Swole (11-15-2020)
11-15-2020, 03:01 AM
#78
Rennlist Member
I think one could consider a stock car that traps 125 and a modified car that traps 145 and look at the deltas in total distance required for each to complete a 60-130 run.
My previous C5 Z06 ran 6.89 seconds and covered about 1000 feet during a 60-130 run.
For example, on Dragtimes, one particular Turbo S runs a 5.17 60-130 with a 9.7/143 1/4 mile and covers 755 feet during a 60-130 run, putting the delta between the two cars near 245 feet.
I never did get a good 1/4 mile run in my vette (trapped 126 on the only decent run I had) but this leads me to the above conclusion.
Just a thought.
I don't know what a stock Turbo S runs for a 60-130 but if we knew that, we could extrapolate because cars running similar 60-130 times cover basically the same distances, the primary variable being slope over the run.
My previous C5 Z06 ran 6.89 seconds and covered about 1000 feet during a 60-130 run.
For example, on Dragtimes, one particular Turbo S runs a 5.17 60-130 with a 9.7/143 1/4 mile and covers 755 feet during a 60-130 run, putting the delta between the two cars near 245 feet.
I never did get a good 1/4 mile run in my vette (trapped 126 on the only decent run I had) but this leads me to the above conclusion.
Just a thought.
I don't know what a stock Turbo S runs for a 60-130 but if we knew that, we could extrapolate because cars running similar 60-130 times cover basically the same distances, the primary variable being slope over the run.
It doesn't work out that way though. You can't look at the deltas in distance covered to run 60-130 to look at how far ahead the faster car would be. It seems like you could, but you can't. Here's some info I just brought up from my 6 speed manual 997.1TT racelogic graphs before I went big and built the motor (forged rods, 3.8L, head studs, Xonas, etc). This is all from Racelogic curves I had saved from before I built my car up when I was still messing around with lesser mods.
Run1 60-130 in 7.25 seconds, 1048 feet distance covered.
Run 2 60-130 in 8.70 seconds, 1245 feet distance covered.
You'd think that the car in run 1 should be 197 feet in front of car 2 at the end of the run, right? But it's not. When you graph it out on Racelogic software, you can easily see how much distance car 2 (the slower car) has covered when car 1 hits 130 mph in 7.25 seconds. At 7.25 seconds (when car 1 has hit 130 mph and has travelled 1048 feet) car 2 has travelled 975 feet. Thus when car 1 has hit 130, he sees himself as being 73 feet in front of the slower car. In the run up to 130, the slower car indeed needs an extra 197 feet to do it in, but the difference in feet between the cars is not 197 feet.
This stuff is pretty confusing and is not very intuitive!! And that's a darned fast c5Z you had...especially considering you were rowing gears to get that 6.89 sec 60-130.......Awesome.
Last edited by wcarson; 11-15-2020 at 03:12 AM.
11-15-2020, 08:50 AM
#79
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Think BEFORE hitting "Submit Reply"
Posts: 1,263
Received 447 Likes
on
338 Posts
It doesn't work out that way though. You can't look at the deltas in distance covered to run 60-130 to look at how far ahead the faster car would be. It seems like you could, but you can't. Here's some info I just brought up from my 6 speed manual 997.1TT racelogic graphs before I went big and built the motor (forged rods, 3.8L, head studs, Xonas, etc). This is all from Racelogic curves I had saved from before I built my car up when I was still messing around with lesser mods.
Run1 60-130 in 7.25 seconds, 1048 feet distance covered.
Run 2 60-130 in 8.70 seconds, 1245 feet distance covered.
You'd think that the car in run 1 should be 197 feet in front of car 2 at the end of the run, right? But it's not. When you graph it out on Racelogic software, you can easily see how much distance car 2 (the slower car) has covered when car 1 hits 130 mph in 7.25 seconds. At 7.25 seconds (when car 1 has hit 130 mph and has travelled 1048 feet) car 2 has travelled 975 feet. Thus when car 1 has hit 130, he sees himself as being 73 feet in front of the slower car. In the run up to 130, the slower car indeed needs an extra 197 feet to do it in, but the difference in feet between the cars is not 197 feet.
This stuff is pretty confusing and is not very intuitive!! And that's a darned fast c5Z you had...especially considering you were rowing gears to get that 6.89 sec 60-130.......Awesome.
Run1 60-130 in 7.25 seconds, 1048 feet distance covered.
Run 2 60-130 in 8.70 seconds, 1245 feet distance covered.
You'd think that the car in run 1 should be 197 feet in front of car 2 at the end of the run, right? But it's not. When you graph it out on Racelogic software, you can easily see how much distance car 2 (the slower car) has covered when car 1 hits 130 mph in 7.25 seconds. At 7.25 seconds (when car 1 has hit 130 mph and has travelled 1048 feet) car 2 has travelled 975 feet. Thus when car 1 has hit 130, he sees himself as being 73 feet in front of the slower car. In the run up to 130, the slower car indeed needs an extra 197 feet to do it in, but the difference in feet between the cars is not 197 feet.
This stuff is pretty confusing and is not very intuitive!! And that's a darned fast c5Z you had...especially considering you were rowing gears to get that 6.89 sec 60-130.......Awesome.
Graphing it all out does make sense.
The vette was a 1-shift 60-130 run, 3rd to 4th.
It had an APS twin turbo system and made a TON of low and mid range torque which helped a bit starting from a 3rd gear roll.
That's what I'm hoping for this 2015 TTS, something in the upper 6's would be very nice.
11-15-2020, 12:40 PM
#80
Rennlist Member
Yea, I understand what you're saying.
Graphing it all out does make sense.
The vette was a 1-shift 60-130 run, 3rd to 4th.
It had an APS twin turbo system and made a TON of low and mid range torque which helped a bit starting from a 3rd gear roll.
That's what I'm hoping for this 2015 TTS, something in the upper 6's would be very nice.
Graphing it all out does make sense.
The vette was a 1-shift 60-130 run, 3rd to 4th.
It had an APS twin turbo system and made a TON of low and mid range torque which helped a bit starting from a 3rd gear roll.
That's what I'm hoping for this 2015 TTS, something in the upper 6's would be very nice.
With a few basic mods, your 991TTS shouldn't have any problem meeting your goals. Especially with the PDK. With these manual 997TT's, it's much harder to get great 60-130 times due to shifting time and boost fall off during shifts. BTW- I had a c6Z with exhaust, heads, cam, intake and tune. I loved that car.
Last edited by wcarson; 11-15-2020 at 12:43 PM.
11-15-2020, 01:05 PM
#81
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Think BEFORE hitting "Submit Reply"
Posts: 1,263
Received 447 Likes
on
338 Posts
With a few basic mods, your 991TTS shouldn't have any problem meeting your goals. Especially with the PDK. With these manual 997TT's, it's much harder to get great 60-130 times due to shifting time and boost fall off during shifts. BTW- I had a c6Z with exhaust, heads, cam, intake and tune. I loved that car.
I'm sure yours with that setup moved along quite nicely.
The following users liked this post:
wcarson (11-16-2020)
11-16-2020, 11:30 AM
#82
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I think I got my math wrong! What I assumed was all pretty much correct WRT average speeds and the differences in speeds (delta) being around 14-15 feet per second difference in the 2 cars in the above scenario. What I got wrong was that the faster car is pulling 14-15 feet per second on the slower car not just for the 1 second difference in their times, but for ALL 9 or 10 seconds during the 1/4 mile run. So indeed the fast car wouldn't be just 1 car ahead, but would be more like 10 cars ahead, and actually even more than that accounting for non linear acceleration. Apparently I need to stick with my day job (and that doesn't involve math).........
I have indeed seen folks use the rule of thumb of .1 sec equals 1 car length in the 1/4 mile. Seems like this is probably pretty accurate.
Either way Steven31371, your car will kill just about anything!
I have indeed seen folks use the rule of thumb of .1 sec equals 1 car length in the 1/4 mile. Seems like this is probably pretty accurate.
Either way Steven31371, your car will kill just about anything!
The following users liked this post:
wcarson (11-16-2020)