730hp 993TT VS CGT 0-160mph
01-19-2006, 11:56 AM
#47
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: london, uk
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jean, i have one, still to use it though, have been travelling alot.
toby, have dyno sheets and weight chart at home. btw curious what air temperature did rs tuning use when they din your car?
toby, have dyno sheets and weight chart at home. btw curious what air temperature did rs tuning use when they din your car?
01-19-2006, 12:02 PM
#50
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.. Just one minor related question.... obviously weight is massive(pardon pun) in power/weight acceleration times... I used to have a formula.. but isn't it virtually meaningless in top speed? (taking distance out)... something to the effect that 500 or even 1000 pounds is virtually irrelevent assuming you have enough road??
Ed
Ed
01-19-2006, 12:06 PM
#52
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: london, uk
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ed, that's true with unlimited distance. weight kills the driving/handling characteristics of any car though in my opinion. i have a conti gt which i love but handles like a boat...2.3 tonne boat
01-19-2006, 12:19 PM
#53
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks.. just wanted to confirm.. though I readily see why it's insanely important with limited 'launch' distance....
... I had talked 'way back' with (a name from past) Ron McClure (sp?) from BAE turbo systems .. old timers may remember....
when there was no one else to my knowledge building turbos for me to talk with in '80 and later..(unitl Todd K in later 80's) . Ron built a fair number of 308's and TR's with turbos... and they had pretty ugly frontal/cd... he was espousing something to the effect that to add 25 mph above 200 you almost needed to double the hp and an additional double per additional 25 mph... just reminiscing. :-)...
e
... I had talked 'way back' with (a name from past) Ron McClure (sp?) from BAE turbo systems .. old timers may remember....
when there was no one else to my knowledge building turbos for me to talk with in '80 and later..(unitl Todd K in later 80's) . Ron built a fair number of 308's and TR's with turbos... and they had pretty ugly frontal/cd... he was espousing something to the effect that to add 25 mph above 200 you almost needed to double the hp and an additional double per additional 25 mph... just reminiscing. :-)...
e
01-19-2006, 02:22 PM
#54
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by leonsamonas
Jean, i have one, still to use it though, have been travelling alot.
toby, have dyno sheets and weight chart at home. btw curious what air temperature did rs tuning use when they din your car?
toby, have dyno sheets and weight chart at home. btw curious what air temperature did rs tuning use when they din your car?
Would love to see the dyno sheets as well as the weight details if poss - I will email my fax # if you will share ?
Re DIN all power/torque measurements are corrected to 20DegC.
To give an example my first engine was on the engine dyno with 30DegC ambient (It was a flaming June in Bavaria) and 959 (units ?) pressure. At 5800rpm it gave 486PS on the engine dyno which when adjusted to DIN (CF of 1.074) became 521PS.
I always find this fascinating as I'm sure few people realise how much their output reduces when the temperature outside goes up.
01-19-2006, 02:49 PM
#55
Nordschleife Master
Leon,
Thanks for posting the pictures. Gadzooks that car is SOOOOOOOO clean with no rain gutters... its been a very long time since I've seen a proper (aircooled) 911 with those removed. It's very easy on the eyes. The car looks great. Thanks again.
Thanks for posting the pictures. Gadzooks that car is SOOOOOOOO clean with no rain gutters... its been a very long time since I've seen a proper (aircooled) 911 with those removed. It's very easy on the eyes. The car looks great. Thanks again.
01-19-2006, 03:15 PM
#56
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by leonsamonas
p.s thanks for your comments guys, still puts a smile on my face
Last edited by red993tt; 01-19-2006 at 03:37 PM.
01-19-2006, 03:40 PM
#58
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leon,
If you want a picture hosted on here email it to me and I'll host it.
TB,
You need to be careful about temperature corrections on Turbo cars. I'm never quite convinced it has the same validity as for non-turbo cars where intake temp=ambient. On Turbo cars it is the effective intake temperature post intercooler that matters.
Guy
If you want a picture hosted on here email it to me and I'll host it.
TB,
You need to be careful about temperature corrections on Turbo cars. I'm never quite convinced it has the same validity as for non-turbo cars where intake temp=ambient. On Turbo cars it is the effective intake temperature post intercooler that matters.
Guy
01-19-2006, 04:59 PM
#59
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by GuyR
TB,
You need to be careful about temperature corrections on Turbo cars. I'm never quite convinced it has the same validity as for non-turbo cars where intake temp=ambient. On Turbo cars it is the effective intake temperature post intercooler that matters.
Guy
I understand and agree with your point for 99.5% of tuners, however
all the numbers I used above were straight from an RS Tuning engine dyno data sheet - so the validity is not in question. They have the facilities to produce an environment where the CFs work with the fluctuating ambient, it has been carefully calibrated using lots of experience and includes the 300kph I/C cooling hood which (AFAIK) shoots ambient air through the I/C.
As you say, possibly another reason why other tuners numbers do not seem quite as good on the road. I'm pretty sure Ruf do it the same way, they did when Rheinhold was running the engine shop anyway
Leon
I recognise that intercooler
- Is this the one you kept on with the Ruf conversion ? Whose decision was it to keep it on. Did Ruf test it against stock ?Please share
01-19-2006, 06:08 PM
#60
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: london, uk
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
toby,
yes, its the same one, ruf claimed the sportec intercooler was very good (apparantly sportec put alot of funding into their research and development of cooling systems) they say the cores are strong and its also about 40pct deeper than stock. Ruf engine dyno was done at 27degrees C will send you details when i return
regards
yes, its the same one, ruf claimed the sportec intercooler was very good (apparantly sportec put alot of funding into their research and development of cooling systems) they say the cores are strong and its also about 40pct deeper than stock. Ruf engine dyno was done at 27degrees C will send you details when i return
regards