Actual hp and torque figures for 991.2 base & S?
02-05-2018 | 09:50 AM
#46
Banned
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 375
Likes: 1
Since this is the same discussion we just had on another thread, I’ll paste my same general response to your take on the matter as well:
That hypothetical figure at the hands of Gebhardt in a 991.1 S is way too slow a prediction, though. Gebhardt may not be a pro driver, but he seems to have more runs on the Ring than any other driver. And all his times are fast. He also did a 7.42 in a GT4, which always seems to get slower lap times than a 991.1 S (and way slower against a PDK .1 S on a high speed track) when MT and others did track tests (Porsche as we all know are very careful in maintaining hierarchy, to an almost ridiculous precision). No way he’d be 12 seconds slower in a 991.1S, considering all this.
Which would put Gebhardts hypothetical time in a 991.1 S probably not that far off of Kluk’s. Especially since he already got a GT4 “only” 4 seconds slower than Kluk’s 991.1 S time (and “only” 8 seconds off of his own 991.2 S time).
What I think it really comes to is that aside from pure acceleration via low range torque, the .2’s aren’t *significantly* faster than .1’s, but a lot of this is determined by what you deem “significant,” i.e if you run on the track competitively where every tenth counts, your driving style (do you prefer revving out the powerband, do you do WOT runs from a standstill? Etc.), etc. The main difference is the low end torque. Trap speed which is a truer barometer of true power is less significant than the acceleration times of the two cars. .1 base and .1 S trap about 3-4 MPH less than .2 base and S. Not a massive difference. BUT, it is worth mentioning that .1’s are over 100 lbs lighter. Which means of course there are more factors than purely power at play.
Again you compare apples and oranges - the facts are as I stated. The .2s are significantly faster as they produce significantly more power under the curve. There will be an eight second difference between Kluck (Porsche works driver) and Gebhardt - how do I know, look at the the difference in times between the works driven 991.2 GT3 and the Gebhardt driven 991.2 GT3 ~ 8s.
These are not 10ths, the differences are significant in the seconds per lap level. So about 12s between the 991.1S and 991.2S. Not a lot of hypothetical in this debate.
"Without turob lag as fast as the GT3" Sport Auto Christian Gebhardt
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...-11404996.html
Read it.
Last edited by RRDnA; 02-05-2018 at 10:06 AM.
02-05-2018 | 10:18 AM
#47
Drifting
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,452
Likes: 139
I gave you the facts as I know them, I read your response in the other thread. So see below..
Again you compare apples and oranges - the facts are as I stated. The .2s are significantly faster as they produce significantly more power under the curve. There will be an eight second difference between Kluck (Porsche works driver) and Gebhardt - how do I know, look at the the difference in times between the works driven 991.2 GT3 and the Gebhardt driven 991.2 GT3 ~ 8s.
These are not 10ths, the differences are significant in the seconds per lap level. So about 12s between the 991.1S and 991.2S. Not a lot of hypothetical in this debate.
"Without turob lag as fast as the GT3" Sport Auto Christian Gebhardt
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...-11404996.html
Read it.
Again you compare apples and oranges - the facts are as I stated. The .2s are significantly faster as they produce significantly more power under the curve. There will be an eight second difference between Kluck (Porsche works driver) and Gebhardt - how do I know, look at the the difference in times between the works driven 991.2 GT3 and the Gebhardt driven 991.2 GT3 ~ 8s.
These are not 10ths, the differences are significant in the seconds per lap level. So about 12s between the 991.1S and 991.2S. Not a lot of hypothetical in this debate.
"Without turob lag as fast as the GT3" Sport Auto Christian Gebhardt
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...-11404996.html
Read it.
The manual GT4 did the Ring WITH Gebhardt driving at 7.42. Gebhardt did a Ring time of 7.34 with the 991.2 S. The 991.1 S PDK WILL BE faster at the hands of Gebhardt than his 981 GT4 time. Your “12 second” number is pulled out of thin air. And is impossible, as again, he’s faster than that with a manual GT4. With a 991.1 S PDK in Sport+, looking at his GT4 time, he’ll probably be in the high 7.30’s as well. Again, not a big difference if you ask me. Don’t take that as me calling the 991.2 “slow.” Stating factual data isn’t a dig at the newer car.
Again, faster, but no where near another realm of performance. Until mods start, at least.
02-05-2018 | 10:26 AM
#48
Banned
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 42
From: Where aspirations are natural
I gave you the facts as I know them, I read your response in the other thread. So see below..
Again you compare apples and oranges - the facts are as I stated. The .2s are significantly faster as they produce significantly more power under the curve. There will be an eight second difference between Kluck (Porsche works driver) and Gebhardt - how do I know, look at the the difference in times between the works driven 991.2 GT3 and the Gebhardt driven 991.2 GT3 ~ 8s.
These are not 10ths, the differences are significant in the seconds per lap level. So about 12s between the 991.1S and 991.2S. Not a lot of hypothetical in this debate.
"Without turob lag as fast as the GT3" Sport Auto Christian Gebhardt
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...-11404996.html
Read it.
Again you compare apples and oranges - the facts are as I stated. The .2s are significantly faster as they produce significantly more power under the curve. There will be an eight second difference between Kluck (Porsche works driver) and Gebhardt - how do I know, look at the the difference in times between the works driven 991.2 GT3 and the Gebhardt driven 991.2 GT3 ~ 8s.
These are not 10ths, the differences are significant in the seconds per lap level. So about 12s between the 991.1S and 991.2S. Not a lot of hypothetical in this debate.
"Without turob lag as fast as the GT3" Sport Auto Christian Gebhardt
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/...-11404996.html
Read it.
The #2 cars are faster - but they are no more or less under rated from the factory than any other generation. The RWD platform is very efficient. The #1 car is not now or was it ever, slow. Even the #1 base was lighter and made more and better power than previous S's. The 992 will be incrementally faster than the 991, #2 cars. Also - we'd have our torches and pitchforks out if Porsche did not continue to become faster and more efficient.
02-05-2018 | 02:30 PM
#50
Rennlist Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,619
Likes: 332
From: At the outer marker...
Proper experiment design is the key to answering the OP's question. I see very little of it in these discussions.
What's the metadata on the 'ring times? Time-of-day, temp, track temp, tires, how much fuel in each car, did the driver have a cold...etc. Too many variables to assess what one driver "would" do vs. what another driver did. If you want that test, have them run back-to-back in the same car on the same day...no traffic. Average of 3-5 laps. We don't have that test, so everything stated regarding this comparison is just gossip.
Gossip is entertaining. Don't get me wrong. That's why we have Rennlist :-)
Just don't mistake it for DATA.
cheers!
What's the metadata on the 'ring times? Time-of-day, temp, track temp, tires, how much fuel in each car, did the driver have a cold...etc. Too many variables to assess what one driver "would" do vs. what another driver did. If you want that test, have them run back-to-back in the same car on the same day...no traffic. Average of 3-5 laps. We don't have that test, so everything stated regarding this comparison is just gossip.
Gossip is entertaining. Don't get me wrong. That's why we have Rennlist :-)
Just don't mistake it for DATA.
cheers!
02-05-2018 | 03:08 PM
#51
Banned
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 42
From: Where aspirations are natural
Proper experiment design is the key to answering the OP's question. I see very little of it in these discussions.
What's the metadata on the 'ring times? Time-of-day, temp, track temp, tires, how much fuel in each car, did the driver have a cold...etc. Too many variables to assess what one driver "would" do vs. what another driver did. If you want that test, have them run back-to-back in the same car on the same day...no traffic. Average of 3-5 laps. We don't have that test, so everything stated regarding this comparison is just gossip.
Gossip is entertaining. Don't get me wrong. That's why we have Rennlist :-)
Just don't mistake it for DATA.
cheers!
What's the metadata on the 'ring times? Time-of-day, temp, track temp, tires, how much fuel in each car, did the driver have a cold...etc. Too many variables to assess what one driver "would" do vs. what another driver did. If you want that test, have them run back-to-back in the same car on the same day...no traffic. Average of 3-5 laps. We don't have that test, so everything stated regarding this comparison is just gossip.
Gossip is entertaining. Don't get me wrong. That's why we have Rennlist :-)
Just don't mistake it for DATA.
cheers!
02-06-2018 | 12:03 PM
#52
Burning Brakes
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 121
From: Golden, CO
To get back to the OP's original question, If you compare the quickest 991.1 and 991.2 that Car and Driver has tested--both with PDK--you have the following:
991.1 C2S weighed 3265 pounds and went 0-60 in 3.6 seconds and through the quarter in 12.0 at 118 mph.
The 991.2 C2S weighed 3363 pounds and went 0-60 in 3.1 seconds and through the quarter at 11.4 at 123 mph.
The weight difference is about right between the two cars and the much quicker acceleration times reflect the 991.2's greater low-end torque, which helps during the launch and through first gear.
Most of the 5 mph difference in trap speed, however, comes from increased horsepower and if you assume that trap speed is proportional to the cube root of weight/power, that suggests about a 60-hp increase from 991.1 to 991.2, rather than the stated 20-hp difference.
In other words, if the 991.1 C2S has 400 hp, than the 991.2 C2S has around 460. Or going the other way, if the 991.2's 420 hp is correct, then the 991.1 only as around 360 hp.
Car and Driver never tested a base 991.1 with the PDK, but comparing manual transmissions, the Base 991.2 is again far quicker:
The quickest 991.1 manual tested weighed 3164 pounds and went to 60 in 4.2 seconds and through the quarter in 12.7 at 113 mph.
The 991.2 weighed 3229 pounds and to 60 in 4.0 and through the quarter in 12.4 at 117 mph.
Here, the 991.2 again benefits from greater low-end torque, but is also hampered by the engine management system's refusal to allow clutch drops above 4000 rpm (unlike the 991.1), so the difference in accel times is not as great as with the C2S comparison.
However, The 4 mph trap speed difference suggests a power difference on the order of 55 hp, not the nominal 20 hp.
Whether you want to call the 991.1 over-rated or the 991.2 under-rated is up to you, but it's clear that the power difference between the models is far greater than the stated 20 hp.
991.1 C2S weighed 3265 pounds and went 0-60 in 3.6 seconds and through the quarter in 12.0 at 118 mph.
The 991.2 C2S weighed 3363 pounds and went 0-60 in 3.1 seconds and through the quarter at 11.4 at 123 mph.
The weight difference is about right between the two cars and the much quicker acceleration times reflect the 991.2's greater low-end torque, which helps during the launch and through first gear.
Most of the 5 mph difference in trap speed, however, comes from increased horsepower and if you assume that trap speed is proportional to the cube root of weight/power, that suggests about a 60-hp increase from 991.1 to 991.2, rather than the stated 20-hp difference.
In other words, if the 991.1 C2S has 400 hp, than the 991.2 C2S has around 460. Or going the other way, if the 991.2's 420 hp is correct, then the 991.1 only as around 360 hp.
Car and Driver never tested a base 991.1 with the PDK, but comparing manual transmissions, the Base 991.2 is again far quicker:
The quickest 991.1 manual tested weighed 3164 pounds and went to 60 in 4.2 seconds and through the quarter in 12.7 at 113 mph.
The 991.2 weighed 3229 pounds and to 60 in 4.0 and through the quarter in 12.4 at 117 mph.
Here, the 991.2 again benefits from greater low-end torque, but is also hampered by the engine management system's refusal to allow clutch drops above 4000 rpm (unlike the 991.1), so the difference in accel times is not as great as with the C2S comparison.
However, The 4 mph trap speed difference suggests a power difference on the order of 55 hp, not the nominal 20 hp.
Whether you want to call the 991.1 over-rated or the 991.2 under-rated is up to you, but it's clear that the power difference between the models is far greater than the stated 20 hp.
02-06-2018 | 12:19 PM
#53
Burning Brakes
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 55
To get back to the OP's original question, If you compare the quickest 991.1 and 991.2 that Car and Driver has tested--both with PDK--you have the following:
991.1 C2S weighed 3265 pounds and went 0-60 in 3.6 seconds and through the quarter in 12.0 at 118 mph.
The 991.2 C2S weighed 3363 pounds and went 0-60 in 3.1 seconds and through the quarter at 11.4 at 123 mph.
The weight difference is about right between the two cars and the much quicker acceleration times reflect the 991.2's greater low-end torque, which helps during the launch and through first gear.
Most of the 5 mph difference in trap speed, however, comes from increased horsepower and if you assume that trap speed is proportional to the cube root of weight/power, that suggests about a 60-hp increase from 991.1 to 991.2, rather than the stated 20-hp difference.
In other words, if the 991.1 C2S has 400 hp, than the 991.2 C2S has around 460. Or going the other way, if the 991.2's 420 hp is correct, then the 991.1 only as around 360 hp.
Car and Driver never tested a base 991.1 with the PDK, but comparing manual transmissions, the Base 991.2 is again far quicker:
The quickest 991.1 manual tested weighed 3164 pounds and went to 60 in 4.2 seconds and through the quarter in 12.7 at 113 mph.
The 991.2 weighed 3229 pounds and to 60 in 4.0 and through the quarter in 12.4 at 117 mph.
Here, the 991.2 again benefits from greater low-end torque, but is also hampered by the engine management system's refusal to allow clutch drops above 4000 rpm (unlike the 991.1), so the difference in accel times is not as great as with the C2S comparison.
However, The 4 mph trap speed difference suggests a power difference on the order of 55 hp, not the nominal 20 hp.
Whether you want to call the 991.1 over-rated or the 991.2 under-rated is up to you, but it's clear that the power difference between the models is far greater than the stated 20 hp.
991.1 C2S weighed 3265 pounds and went 0-60 in 3.6 seconds and through the quarter in 12.0 at 118 mph.
The 991.2 C2S weighed 3363 pounds and went 0-60 in 3.1 seconds and through the quarter at 11.4 at 123 mph.
The weight difference is about right between the two cars and the much quicker acceleration times reflect the 991.2's greater low-end torque, which helps during the launch and through first gear.
Most of the 5 mph difference in trap speed, however, comes from increased horsepower and if you assume that trap speed is proportional to the cube root of weight/power, that suggests about a 60-hp increase from 991.1 to 991.2, rather than the stated 20-hp difference.
In other words, if the 991.1 C2S has 400 hp, than the 991.2 C2S has around 460. Or going the other way, if the 991.2's 420 hp is correct, then the 991.1 only as around 360 hp.
Car and Driver never tested a base 991.1 with the PDK, but comparing manual transmissions, the Base 991.2 is again far quicker:
The quickest 991.1 manual tested weighed 3164 pounds and went to 60 in 4.2 seconds and through the quarter in 12.7 at 113 mph.
The 991.2 weighed 3229 pounds and to 60 in 4.0 and through the quarter in 12.4 at 117 mph.
Here, the 991.2 again benefits from greater low-end torque, but is also hampered by the engine management system's refusal to allow clutch drops above 4000 rpm (unlike the 991.1), so the difference in accel times is not as great as with the C2S comparison.
However, The 4 mph trap speed difference suggests a power difference on the order of 55 hp, not the nominal 20 hp.
Whether you want to call the 991.1 over-rated or the 991.2 under-rated is up to you, but it's clear that the power difference between the models is far greater than the stated 20 hp.
02-06-2018 | 01:35 PM
#54
Burning Brakes
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 121
From: Golden, CO
I DEFINITELY could be missing something, but wouldn't transmission and gear ratios play in here? I don't know the ratios for the 991.2, are they the same? I would think if you were talking about the SAME car then the logic you apply makes sense (all else being equal), but with the substantial changes that came between models can one still apply an "apples to apples" logic as to their performance numbers? I'm genuinely asking this question, i don't know...
The 991.2 7-speed has essentially the same gearing in 1-3, and then progressively taller in 4-7.
Final drive ratio for the C2 models is 3.44 in both 1s and 2s, but the C2S has a slightly shorter final drive in the 991.2--3.59 vs 3.44. However, the 991.2 has one-size larger rear tires, going from 285/35-19 to 295/35-19in the base and 295/30-20 to 305/30s in the S.
To summarize, the base 991.2 has slightly to substantially taller gearing than the 991.1, depending on the gear, while the S has similar gearing in the lower gears, and substantially taller in the upper gears. In other words, these performance differences are not produced by more favorably gearing in the 991.2s.
10-26-2018 | 01:18 PM
#58
Burning Brakes
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 928
Likes: 679
From: Orlando
Dyno jet 424 LC2 - Titan motorsports / Orlando
It was just recalibrated.
I should have run the car stock but its all just fun you know. I got the pipe & cats for the sound & HP is just a bouns.
matty
It was just recalibrated.
I should have run the car stock but its all just fun you know. I got the pipe & cats for the sound & HP is just a bouns.
matty
