Jean

Guys can we hug instead of kissing?
Allan, are you asking because you really want to know or is a machiavelic trick that will prove to us all here how technically challenged we are?

If you want to know seriously I can answer you quickly, and maybe help out, since this is what we pride ourselves for doing here..other than bragging of course ...

Just before that, can you please confirm what you said on the other forum?

You did the run at 1.2 Bar all the way?
The only mods done where the ones you posted, None else?
What octane where you running?

Thank you.

Jean

BTW I am matching TB993TTs 500 Pound offer to a charity if he looses. What if he wins?

MOD500

Have been pondering this potential test session today.

Is it worth introducing some charitable element to the proceedings? It would realise some £££ for good causes whilst we enjoy ourselves. I don't want to detract from the wagers going on of course; though I testify I am not into male lovin' given the bottom puckering comments.

What are people's thoughts?

Your bum chum



Sir. Elton John

Full Boost

Interesting post... in many ways...

I dont know Allan or TB and have no affiliation either way....

But I do object to some of the posts here by UK trucks/Allan - (I am so far removed from either the US tuners or your company - (unless you are associated with the AU Company using the same name as yours????) so I wont shop with you or the US guys either!!) nor do I care which forum is best or who said what....but the real issue here is just BS.

Allan is clearly pushing his own barrow (as a tuner) and as far as his product is better (using his OWN dyno) and quotes all sorts of figures and even uses the tagline "pure PS no BS"..... Well Allan - you have been called on it.

Dyno tweaking, boost levels/TQ levels all = BS.
Real world driving = the REAL winner here.

TB has been an advocate (from a customers perspective) for RS tuning here and conducts real world tests openly and posts data (not heresay)for all to see (including his failures..) and has early on in the post offered the fact that the different dynos on the same car produced different results.

As far as I can see both TB and Allan have made offers however due to all sorts of discrepancies between dyno tweaking and boost/torqe tweaking/intake temps etc. the only real way to see this is to line up the two cars on the same day at the same time.

Allan - where are you?? - TB has kindly offered $$ to charity....putting his money where his data is - Are you going to do the same???

I watch this post with interest...

Simon

Full Boost

red993tt

I am smelling AX22 shootout happening real soon. Our group buy AX22s will be delivered May 11th. This will be a race without a race.Gentlemen game on....

Jean

MOD, that was needed in the forum Thank you..

I just wanted to reply to an earlier post as well concerning the accuracy of readings with an AX22 or similar...I certainly agree that it is not perfect, however the margin of variance is so much lesser than any chassis dyno because of the limited parameters one can change. True, a slope will help, but I don't see a customer going to all this length and find a strong enough slope, and then run a crazy 60-130mph on that slope, to prove a point.. Even if he does, it can be found out with some calculations, and over and above that, simply asked to do another run..You can tell whether it is the same slope or not by the data provided... One last thing, in this international forum, it is the best way possible to compare notes between users..I for one would not lie about my data, but rather the opposite, I would like to know that I paid my tuner to build me what I paid for...Phewww...

Red 993TT, so May 11th? Great news, we will have some data coming our way in the next 2-3 weeks from a few Rennlisters, there are 5 interested parties so far in the AX22 that I will circulate

Now back to our technical discussion, let us see how those 996GT2s can have 100 ft/lb better torque than 997s with more efficient VTG turbos and 1.5 bar overboost

AVoyvoda

Jean, to make the test even fairer (i.e. take out the slope element) wouldn't it be better if the runs were made twice, one each way on the same patch, then simply take the average? No need for complicated calculations then. What the slope giveth one way, it taketh away etc ... (Time to insert some poetry into this exchange).
Gentlemen, start your engines...

Jean

Avoyvoda,
So far the AX 22 has been used by a few of us, starting by a couple of UK listers, for our own personal enjoyment and information, I did not think about that, it sounds like a good idea however and can make it a standard for the upcoming runs.
Darn this is getting serious, we have no place to hide behind our keyboards anymore now

uk trucks

Simon
My post on the 996GT2 was on a small UK forum to people we regard as friends. It was lifted and posted here not by us I might add. As you can see my post rate on rennlist prior to this bun fight was very low. So in essence I refute that I was "pushing my own barrow"

As for Dynos being BS sadly I disagree but such is my entitlement. A dyno of whatever type is a good safe tuning tool, prior to final on road set up. I agree wholeheartedly that a cars behaviour on road is everything. We take great care in mapping for driveability not absolute numbers.

The financial incentives on offer do not faze me and I will gladly agree to a "pot" situation whereby I will match the £500 and if a WM 993 runs faster than TB's RS Tuning 993 then it goes to a charity of choice.

As a matter of interest please enlighten me on what basis you formed your opinion ? Are you a Porsche Tuner/ Have you invested in a dyno / Have any of your cars run over 190 MPH ?

Regards

Allan

FM9

Ok this is getting very interesting although it doesn't really answer the question whether the WM GT2 really does have 870NM torque.

For the runs to be fair, all the 993 turbos should be run in 4wd mode and should be topped up with the same fuel prior to the run. Only a 993 vs 993 contest is really relevant cause the weight and aero difference with a 996 bodyshape will confuse things too much.

Top speed is the only criteria as 60-130 runs can be affected too much by shift speed and gearing. This is a pure horsepower contest. I propose that since it is said that the WM dyno is overstating to the tune of 150NM plus and consequently 100hp plus, TB993tt would have to pull 7 to 9mph more top speed for this to be the case so anything below this speed difference would mean that is not the case.

What it will tell us is whether RUF or RS Tuning type performance can be had for a substantially cheaper price. The VMAX shootout seems to suggest so as the WM 993 turbo 4wd was just 1mph slower than a turbo R RUF 993. From the owner's profile, that was not an "ordinary" Turbo R:

1997 Ruf Turbo R 558 bhp/520 lbft - 1313 kgs
carbon doors/bonnet/mirrors/front and rear bumpers, ruf whale-tail derived rear spoiler, 18" ruf modulars, full H&R suspension, GT3 Recaros,no A/C, no soundproofing, ruf spec. titanium rods, intercooler, ruf exhaust with 100 cells.
424bhp/tonne and 396lbft/tonne

The WM 993 was also faster than a 996 turbo R on the same day.

I think that this contest will be a lot closer than some people may think!!!......

TB993tt

I'm not sure who you are, do you have a direct interest in this ?

This particular thread is about the torque figure being approx 120NM higher than is reasonable for the engine configuration on this particular 996GT2. Measuring whether this is true will entail giving the car full throttle in 3rd or 4th gear and running from 2000rpm to the red line. A car along side (993 or 996 doesn't matter too much) with 100NM less will be left for dead as the extra 100NM hits at 4100rpm - to confirm this two AX22 data plots of the event (for both cars) can be superimposed on one another. The AX22 will show the longitudinal G force of the 870NM and allowing for the weight of the car (996GT2) it will be easy to see whether this number is real or more like the 750NM it should be.

The other "issue" to be addressed is one which started a few months back when 993RSR and myself were discussing the power/torque figures which his car had obtained with K24 turbos and a fixed boost controller on the 9M dyno - this is what started the ball rolling on this meeting.

In the mean time I believe 993RSR has had his 993GT2 further enhanced by Weltmiester - I don't know the exact spec and whether it is still running boost control and K24s ?
What I do know is that his car and mine are 2WD and about the same weight and as long as his wing is set at 0deg should have similar areodynamics.
The acceleration runs using the AX22 for definative numbers will be solid evidence of which or these cars is delivering more hp/torque (shift speed, which I've no doubt will be my weak point can easily be factored out using the AX22 data)
The areo numbers CdXfrontal area for the 993tt and 996GT2 are so close that it won't make a significant difference.
The result will be close, as I'm sure most of the track guys know, to actually pull any distance on another car at these levels takes a lot more hp/torque. This is the beauty of the AX22, one can paw over the data afterwards in various forms which will reveal what is actually happening.

Red rooster

FM9,
Unfortunately top speed is goverened by maximum bhp / gearing / aerodynamic drag so is definately not a measure of the torque level.

The suggested acceleration run will show torque across the motor rev range.

Some accuracy will be needed as the dispute seems to be about an approximately 10% variation in maximum torque level acheived .

Who is going to monitor that the cars are run as specified ? Check there are no Nitrous bottles etc !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good luck with all of this.

Geoff

TB993tt

Here is an example of the "G" data available from the AX22 - this is in third gear with the throttle nailed at about 55mph, the Gs build to the peak at peak torque (in this run around 0.7g) then the Gs essentially follow the torque curve.

AFAIK the simple formula F=MA sorts out the total force the car is putting out for a known car's mass with the mass in this case being 1450kg and the acceleration being 6.87m/s-2. The force measurement has to be done in a similar gear at similar speeds to be fully meaningful.
Any physicists/mathematicians out there ?

uk trucks

TB is of course correct in that this thread was all about the accuracy or not of the torque reported on the 996GT2 and not anything to do with one 993TT vs another.

So to the matter at hand on torque on said 996 GT2. I am afraid that I do need to backpeddle ever so slightly [not a lot but none the less some] on the reported torque. It was never stated as 870Nm ever by us ! I said around 620lb-ft = approx 840Nm [The dyno plot indicated higher] However it transpires that because my business partner and Revo were live tuning this car Revo needed to use the OBD port to make live time changes. As the port was occupied we needed to use gearing to run the dyno [Porsche OBD cars usually plug in direct] As a result the torque MAY be overstated by c5%. When the car is next here I will retest it. It is our belief that it is still 600lb-ft/ 800Nm but I can confirm this just as soon as we get the car back for a test. Never too big to admit a mistake, please do not take this as anything other than a genuine error on my part. I will keep Rennlist updated on the retest.

Please avoid a "$h!tfest" of I told you so, until I can retest the car.

As to racing one against another, not like for like, that was never on the table. It was only ever going to be like for like i.e. 993 vs 993 etc

Cheers

Allan