CodyBigdog

Saw it a week ago. Irrelevant to the discussion on 0-60. Oh, and already acknowledged that the TT-S will have a decided advantage at the higher speeds, 1/4 mile, etc….which this video showed, as it comes from behind after reaching > 100mph.. Nothing knew, and totally expected.

But do appreciate you posting. This was the ONLY post power bump flash I’ve seen on the 992….although not the flash I am interested in.

CodyBigdog

Yes, and he also has a 2.63 sec and a 2.61 sec run…so the average of 3 runs was, wait for it…LOL…2.596 sec…ummm, that’s pretty close to 2.6 sec, which I quoted. Oh, and where did he say without the 1 foot rollout. To the contrary, further into the video, he shows the face of the measurement box, and it CLEARLY shows “1 foot rollout: ON”. 😱

Sorry, not buying the 0.2 reduction by turning off the PSM. Oh, and let me save you a lot of time - you’ve been wrong in just about everything you’ve said…on this thread, and others. As such, I don’t believe anything you say. So, continue to knock yourself out.

What I will believe, however, are 0-60 times from people that have the M-engineering flash on their 992S with chrono+PDK.

Again, work on your reading comprehension. really.

..and yet, here you are, again, and again…..arguing about something, to quote you, “do not mater much to you”. LOL. Priceless. 😂

CanAutM3

I’ll just leave it at that:

confirmation bias, the tendency to process information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with one’s existing beliefs. This biased approach to decision making is largely unintentional and often results in ignoring inconsistent information. Existing beliefs can include one’s expectations in a given situation and predictions about a particular outcome. People are especially likely to process information to support their own beliefs when the issue is highly important or self-relevant.

RoughRider911

Well, the best I was able to do was a 3.09 - definitely a bit disappointed as that’s what I expected stock. I let off around 110 and hit a 11.2 1/4, so I think the main issue is traction. Might mess with the tire pressures and try again. This was on the 93-map.

ipse dixit

A tuned C2S will never be as fast as a stock TTS.

Can't fight hardware advantages of larger turbos with software.

And even if a tune could theoretically make the C2S faster than the TTS, how durable would it be? I wouldn't want to be the owner to find out.

RoughRider911

That was never what the discussion was about - the question was simply what figures are tuned Carreras putting down.

Having owned pro-tuned cars in the past, they’re as reliable as the tuner who tunes them. Stock maps are usually conservative and run unnecessarily rich to protect the car.

reddsektor

For some questioning the real power difference of the M-Eng tune.. 0-60 isn’t the best way (tho I get that’s this thread but not quite sure how it evolved from talking about the base and getting into the S models); 60-130 is a better indicator of power imo

on my C2S pdk, stock 60-130 dragy was 9.5 which is close to the average.

Tuned on stage 2 with catless dowpipes, the best time I’ve gotten was 7.1… I know it can be slightly better in colder temps. Still a huge jump.

7’s to low 8’s is supercar territory. A stock Audi R8 v10 perf, for reference, is around 7.3

A stock TTS is already in the 6’s however…

RoughRider911

I completely agree with you.

boutrosa

I don't understand why so much comparison to a turbo S. It's just whishfull thinking. You can expect a tuned 4s to be equal or faster than a 640hp turboS

I am happy with my tune. it adds exactly the power the car was missing where it was missing it. I think it falls slightly short of the turbo and I am fine with that.
I like the way it pulls from 30 to 80, or on the highway 80 to 120. keeps the c7 and c8 guys in check. I don't even think 0 to 60 makes any more sense. That's one of the reasons that so many people are moving back to manuals. the faster you get fast the less time you enjoy getting fast.

CodyBigdog

That is with a tune on 992S, with chrono+PDK? Really? With roll out deduction? The best I’ve pulled was 3.09, but consistently in 3.1x…with the rollout deduction - stock car. 11.2 for 1/4 mile is pretty much stock time. By the way, the draggy has an error of 0.03 sec, so times of 3.09 and 3.1 are essentially the same. Many car sources only list times to the tenth decimal, so either they truncate the number in the hundredth, of they round up/down…

I’d check with M-Engineering to see what their comments are?

CodyBigdog

The way I was looking at the M-engineering tune, was by looking at the stock GTS numbers (same engine and same turbo on both the S and GTS))…a 30HP increase with the GTS (compared to the S), translated to a drop of 0.1 sec 0-60mph (ie, 3.2 versus 3.3 - from Porsche web site). These numbers do not include the rollout deduction, which is nominally, -0.2 sec). So, I thought that with even more/additional power (assume minimal wheel slippage) would push the numbers into the high 2’s? If wheel spin with the higher HP is a problem on the 2CS, then maybe a lower HP tune would be better, for this metric…and a higher tune for the 4CS?

Yes, I agree that 30-70, 40-80, etc are far more relevant on the street…eg, entrance ramp acceleration, etc. With 60-130 maybe a relevant metric for the track.

The 0-60 is just a metric that every car manufacturer and car magazine have listed for decades Porsche, for example, only gives the 0-60 times. As cars have gotten more powerful and faster, maybe 0-60mph has become irrelevant?

Tupper

Exactly. Until the turbos fully kick in and you are well north of 4K RPM, the car with the M Engineering tune only feels slightly different than stock.

Once you start going through the gears you really feel it pull way harder. I would agree that I suspect a 60-130 time would be far more illustrative of the difference that the tune makes than the 0-60 time

CodyBigdog

Please, nobody (read ALL the thread, if you want to know what was said) said that with the tune, it would be “equal or faster” than the TT-S. That, would indeed, be “wishful thinking”.

Oh, and why the comparison to the TT-S?…well, in straight line acceleration, the TT-S is the gold standard in the Porsche lineup (for all practical purpose).

Have you measured any times, say, 30-70, 40-80 or 80-120? The sensation of more HP is one thing, quantifying, is quite another. I’d be interested to hear what those times are?

CodyBigdog

Then, per your comment, the 30 HP tune on the GTS has better performance/torque off the line, than does the M-Engineering tune? Interesting.

Unless I’m tracking, I doubt I will routinely ever be able to use/test 80-130mph. Roads are way too crowded where I live to go much above 20-30mph above the posted limit…lest I get charged with reckless driving. 40-80mph is a more realistic, highway on-ramp range…and 0-60 is something I can try every time I go out for a drive.

Fior me - this discussion has been very useful, and saved me $2,400. I’m not interested in the power bump, if the only improvements I see on the clock, are from 80-130mph. Appreciate the discussion folks. Out.

Tupper

^ No, I never said that. I have no idea how the GTS performs.

What I do know is that with 93 octane my boost hits 18 PSI below 4000 RPM (higher than Carrera S stock) and peaks at 25-28 psi after that based on datalogs I've looked at and based also on barometric pressures at my altitude