Vmax day -excuses excuses
10-10-2006, 08:36 AM
#33
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by leonsamonas
just teasing..
Actually, I'd love to see your dyno sheets if you have them
Re The Yellow GT2. That sounds right,there was definately something wrong, he should have smoked me on that 0-130 run even with 590hp - although it must have cleared up somewhat for him to hit the 198
js-911
Yeah....that's the one, new cores which are 12% more efficient than the circa '95 EVO Secan core (per unit of surface area) - this thing will not let inlet temp get more than 25DegC above ambient.
10-10-2006, 10:41 AM
#34
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I like the way you guys keep a civilized spirit here despite the competitive minds that you have.
Leon was the absolute winner of this event and the only thing I regret is that he was not able to beat the 996 GT2 by a miserable 1mph which would have given 993TTs absolute supremacy..However being another RUF, I can only think that there was foul playing between the cousins!
I am amazed (but not surprised) at how good RUF are in providing a complete package of a killer car. The work done on Leon's car is just fantastic like a purpose made car for high speeds. The tire combo used is just proof of how good RUF think of every component carefully.
TB's car on the other hand is certainly not a high speed challenger, with his fat *** (no pun) and flares and amateurish 285/30s in the rear, he did not stand a chance. I have been thinking all along that this was the cause of his "only" max. 193mph, but then a few things started getting clear in my mind.. Here they are...
MOD 500 car... 3500lbs 4WD car with single plug tuned by RS Tuning with turbos quite smaller than TB's etc.. a 533HP package.. and having reached the exact same top speed as TB's state of the art 2WD 3100lbs, RS Tuning top MAF twin plug, tractor-like turbos, Secan animal back there etc.... What gives???
Second question.. I have in my database a couple of runs from TB going beyond 150mph on the autobhan recently, and I remember comparing them to some other runs, notably a 996 GT2 Nardo, and seeing how much faster he was... Yet that Nardo reached 201mph and he only did 193mph...Not during the same day, which might not be a 100% good comparison of course, but good enough though directionally.
And then when he mentioned above that he was neck and neck with the yellow GT2 up to 140mph, it really triggered my curiosity.
So...here I go, off to my AX22 data(mine)field
Data:
I used 4 runs:
1- Blue run: MOD 500 car during a 60-130mph run in 10.6 seconds. His car weighs 3520lbs here.
2- Green run. TB993TT during his VMAX 193mph run
3-Black run: Guy R. with the RUF Nardo 996GT2 that dyno'ed 630HP and did a 201mph during this run here (another VMAX)
4-Red TB993TT's run on the autobahn last week
Findings:
80-134mph (To be able to include MOD500's run)
Red: 6.5 seconds covered in 1045ft.
Black:7.2 seconds covered in 1150Ft
Green: 7.7 seconds covered in 1241feet
Blue: 9.7 seconds covered in 1567 Ft.
The difference between TBs red run and MOD's run is about 400feet and 3.2 seconds from 80-135mph, yet the top speed for both was 193mph?
TB's fast run is 105 feet ahead of the RUF GT2 yet the GT2 manages a 201mph top speed
The difference between TB's VMAX day and his run one week earlier was 1.2 seconds and 200feet almost!
80-155mph
Red: 10.62 seconds covered in 589meters (1935 feet)
Black:11.97 seconds covered in 661 meters (2172 feet)
Green: 12.55 seconds covered in 694meters (2281 feet)
- The distance between the Red and the Black run was 237 feet.
- The distance between the Black and the Green was about 110 feet
- The distance between the red and green was 346 feet, and that is quite some distance after an 11 second run!
Obviously the exact same car having a 346feet difference between two similar runs means it has a serious problem.
Still , one cannot guarantee that data recorded during different days will be 100% comparable, but I think the data speaks for itself, TB's car has an issue.
While the 993TT RUF was clearly the winner and I admire how well it has been setup, if we want to talk strictly from an HP POV, we need to look beyond the trap speed of this run and have a peak at aerodynamics (disregarding HP/Weight and rolling resistence etc..)
Aerodynamics...
A Stock 993TT has a CDa of 0.34 x 1.93 = 0.656
Assuming the 993TT RUF has a CDa of 0.33 x 1.93 = 0.637 (shaved gutters/mirrors, wing..)
The 996GT2 has a CDa of 0.34 x 1.96= 0.666
TB993TT has a CDa of 0.34 x 2.04= 0.694
Then TB's car would have increased drag equivalent to 30HP vs. the 993RUF and 13HP vs. the 996GT2 at 190mph based on the drag formula.
Sorry for the long post but I think things are quite straightforward based on the above.. I would expect that TB's car would reach 205+ mph if it was running well and had the gearing/tires for it.
Leon was the absolute winner of this event and the only thing I regret is that he was not able to beat the 996 GT2 by a miserable 1mph which would have given 993TTs absolute supremacy..However being another RUF, I can only think that there was foul playing between the cousins!
I am amazed (but not surprised) at how good RUF are in providing a complete package of a killer car. The work done on Leon's car is just fantastic like a purpose made car for high speeds. The tire combo used is just proof of how good RUF think of every component carefully.
TB's car on the other hand is certainly not a high speed challenger, with his fat *** (no pun) and flares and amateurish 285/30s in the rear, he did not stand a chance. I have been thinking all along that this was the cause of his "only" max. 193mph, but then a few things started getting clear in my mind.. Here they are...
MOD 500 car... 3500lbs 4WD car with single plug tuned by RS Tuning with turbos quite smaller than TB's etc.. a 533HP package.. and having reached the exact same top speed as TB's state of the art 2WD 3100lbs, RS Tuning top MAF twin plug, tractor-like turbos, Secan animal back there etc.... What gives???
Second question.. I have in my database a couple of runs from TB going beyond 150mph on the autobhan recently, and I remember comparing them to some other runs, notably a 996 GT2 Nardo, and seeing how much faster he was... Yet that Nardo reached 201mph and he only did 193mph...Not during the same day, which might not be a 100% good comparison of course, but good enough though directionally.
And then when he mentioned above that he was neck and neck with the yellow GT2 up to 140mph, it really triggered my curiosity.
So...here I go, off to my AX22 data(mine)field
Data:
I used 4 runs:
1- Blue run: MOD 500 car during a 60-130mph run in 10.6 seconds. His car weighs 3520lbs here.
2- Green run. TB993TT during his VMAX 193mph run
3-Black run: Guy R. with the RUF Nardo 996GT2 that dyno'ed 630HP and did a 201mph during this run here (another VMAX)
4-Red TB993TT's run on the autobahn last week
Findings:
80-134mph (To be able to include MOD500's run)
Red: 6.5 seconds covered in 1045ft.
Black:7.2 seconds covered in 1150Ft
Green: 7.7 seconds covered in 1241feet
Blue: 9.7 seconds covered in 1567 Ft.
The difference between TBs red run and MOD's run is about 400feet and 3.2 seconds from 80-135mph, yet the top speed for both was 193mph?
TB's fast run is 105 feet ahead of the RUF GT2 yet the GT2 manages a 201mph top speed
The difference between TB's VMAX day and his run one week earlier was 1.2 seconds and 200feet almost!
80-155mph
Red: 10.62 seconds covered in 589meters (1935 feet)
Black:11.97 seconds covered in 661 meters (2172 feet)
Green: 12.55 seconds covered in 694meters (2281 feet)
- The distance between the Red and the Black run was 237 feet.
- The distance between the Black and the Green was about 110 feet
- The distance between the red and green was 346 feet, and that is quite some distance after an 11 second run!
Obviously the exact same car having a 346feet difference between two similar runs means it has a serious problem.
Still , one cannot guarantee that data recorded during different days will be 100% comparable, but I think the data speaks for itself, TB's car has an issue.
While the 993TT RUF was clearly the winner and I admire how well it has been setup, if we want to talk strictly from an HP POV, we need to look beyond the trap speed of this run and have a peak at aerodynamics (disregarding HP/Weight and rolling resistence etc..)
Aerodynamics...
A Stock 993TT has a CDa of 0.34 x 1.93 = 0.656
Assuming the 993TT RUF has a CDa of 0.33 x 1.93 = 0.637 (shaved gutters/mirrors, wing..)
The 996GT2 has a CDa of 0.34 x 1.96= 0.666
TB993TT has a CDa of 0.34 x 2.04= 0.694
Then TB's car would have increased drag equivalent to 30HP vs. the 993RUF and 13HP vs. the 996GT2 at 190mph based on the drag formula.
Sorry for the long post but I think things are quite straightforward based on the above.. I would expect that TB's car would reach 205+ mph if it was running well and had the gearing/tires for it.
10-10-2006, 11:34 AM
#35
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Jean
.. I would expect that TB's car would reach 205+ mph if it was running well and had the gearing/tires for it.
10-10-2006, 11:49 AM
#36
Please don't take this the wrong way, but having been to most of the Vmax events and having seen tuned 993TT, 996 TT/GT2 and now 997TT as interesting as such graphs are, real world times on the tarmac with one car against another often gives results you wouldn't totally expect.
There is relatively little skill required for Vmax (unless something were to go wrong), we have tried a tuned 993TT (DeR) vs a 993 TT'S going round the bottom corner and also starting in a straight line right at the start of the straight (50 metres back from the turn)...on these sperate runs there was no difference is terminal speed going through the timing beams.
Once you get over 150mph aerodynamics seem to play a major role, where the 996 has a clear advantage, this made it even more impressive to see the 993 speeds on the day.
There is relatively little skill required for Vmax (unless something were to go wrong), we have tried a tuned 993TT (DeR) vs a 993 TT'S going round the bottom corner and also starting in a straight line right at the start of the straight (50 metres back from the turn)...on these sperate runs there was no difference is terminal speed going through the timing beams.
Once you get over 150mph aerodynamics seem to play a major role, where the 996 has a clear advantage, this made it even more impressive to see the 993 speeds on the day.
10-10-2006, 12:10 PM
#37
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
TB, I was assuming Stummel was behind the wheel obviously
Clubsport1, the data posted here is real life data, the AX22 gave a reading of 193.3mph vs. the laser beam showing 193mph, pretty accurate. Aerodynamics certainly play a huge role as you mentioned, and as roughly calculated earlier in my post.
BTW, didn't DeR participate? Also no Weltmeister or 9M TTs were there? it is disappointing.
Clubsport1, the data posted here is real life data, the AX22 gave a reading of 193.3mph vs. the laser beam showing 193mph, pretty accurate. Aerodynamics certainly play a huge role as you mentioned, and as roughly calculated earlier in my post.
BTW, didn't DeR participate? Also no Weltmeister or 9M TTs were there? it is disappointing.
10-10-2006, 12:31 PM
#38
Jean, am no expert and certainly wasn't questioning your data, i hoped I tried to express that in my post........all I was trying to say is that from my experience up to now when you are comparing tuned cars there are so many factors that 2+2, doesn't always give you the answer you expect.
DeR, The Earl of Bolton, was there, but had occasional overboost problems,,,which is a real shame as I am sure Mod will tell you, his car is brutal
DeR, The Earl of Bolton, was there, but had occasional overboost problems,,,which is a real shame as I am sure Mod will tell you, his car is brutal
10-10-2006, 01:16 PM
#39
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
CS1
I agree 100%
Sorry to hear that, he also had overboost problems last time and IC pipe issues, must have been frustrating for him. Any car boosting 1.5 Bar will be brutal, but IC hoses will pop out
I agree 100%
Sorry to hear that, he also had overboost problems last time and IC pipe issues, must have been frustrating for him. Any car boosting 1.5 Bar will be brutal, but IC hoses will pop out
10-10-2006, 01:52 PM
#40
AutoX
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The North, Albion.
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi chaps - phew! What a day, eh?
Toby, great to finally meet you (a proper gent) and hats off to Mart (MOD) in the yellow streak - quite remarkable consistency.
As for Leon, well I'm just staggered. (By the way, matey, your upcoming RT12 is rumoured to be 2wd - is this the case? If so, why not just park it gently into a hedge and avoid all the damage actually driving will surely precipitate?)
Jean, the old beetle actually posted a 192 (2nd run) before the perennial overboost style gremlin came for his Vmax fix after which it was proving impossible to avoid a 6200rpm 'haitus,' as it were which lost loads of schnell and affixed me with a miserable run of 183s...
The GT2 style splitter with KW suspension appears to have resolved one major issue which other venerable geezers suffered from, namely, stability.
Banished, entirely, the old girl pushed on for the final chukka with astounding solidity which made the problem on the day all the more irritating.
I am now looking at another round of fiscally questionable expenditures designed to perpetuate the insanity, including the usual round of bigger blowers (i.e. hybrid 24/26s), more appropriately ridiculous intercooling and all sorts of bits and pieces which men with spanners and oil can bolt on
I don't really care for the detail so long as it is fit to mix drinks in the palaces of the mighty twin ton fraternity...
Cheers,
DeR.
Toby, great to finally meet you (a proper gent) and hats off to Mart (MOD) in the yellow streak - quite remarkable consistency.
As for Leon, well I'm just staggered. (By the way, matey, your upcoming RT12 is rumoured to be 2wd - is this the case? If so, why not just park it gently into a hedge and avoid all the damage actually driving will surely precipitate?)
Jean, the old beetle actually posted a 192 (2nd run) before the perennial overboost style gremlin came for his Vmax fix after which it was proving impossible to avoid a 6200rpm 'haitus,' as it were which lost loads of schnell and affixed me with a miserable run of 183s...
The GT2 style splitter with KW suspension appears to have resolved one major issue which other venerable geezers suffered from, namely, stability.
Banished, entirely, the old girl pushed on for the final chukka with astounding solidity which made the problem on the day all the more irritating.
I am now looking at another round of fiscally questionable expenditures designed to perpetuate the insanity, including the usual round of bigger blowers (i.e. hybrid 24/26s), more appropriately ridiculous intercooling and all sorts of bits and pieces which men with spanners and oil can bolt on
I don't really care for the detail so long as it is fit to mix drinks in the palaces of the mighty twin ton fraternity...
Cheers,
DeR.
10-10-2006, 06:26 PM
#42
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thank you all guys.
That is the most interesting thread since 60-130.
You do not find a similar "scientific" approach on any other (porsche) forum in the world.
And right here we are talking Porsche PS and nothing else.
A 993 is to be in the 200 mph club rather sooner than later I guess
That is the most interesting thread since 60-130.
You do not find a similar "scientific" approach on any other (porsche) forum in the world.
And right here we are talking Porsche PS and nothing else.
A 993 is to be in the 200 mph club rather sooner than later I guess
10-10-2006, 07:21 PM
#43
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oceania
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Way to much factual data in this thread. Can we have some more Dyno fiction where only opinions matter! Jean- where did the CD numbers come from? I was under the impression that the 996 was considerably sliperier(?) than 993.What is the number for GT3?
10-11-2006, 06:15 AM
#44
AutoX
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The North, Albion.
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/t...3&t=314605&h=0
The beetle is the first photo in the sequence.
Black and aesthetically standard.
The beetle is the first photo in the sequence.
Black and aesthetically standard.
10-11-2006, 06:40 AM
#45
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Red9
The aerodynamic data is factory published and taken from Paul Frere's book.
The 996 is indeed more aerodynamic than the 993, the numbers above are for the 996 GT2, in relation to the RUF Nardo.
The 996GT3 is substantially better as a result of its narrower (by 60mm) body, narrower wheels, improved rockers and some other aerodynamic aids. the CDxA = 0.30 x 1.95= 0.585 it is about a 14% advantage over the 996 GT2.
DeR, nice car. KW is a fantastic setup that I almost installed when my car was at Manthey Racing, interesting to know that the front lip helps so much with the balance.. My GT2 body, like TB's, suffers immensely from "windage" at high speeds.
Hope you get the car sorted out.
The aerodynamic data is factory published and taken from Paul Frere's book.
The 996 is indeed more aerodynamic than the 993, the numbers above are for the 996 GT2, in relation to the RUF Nardo.
The 996GT3 is substantially better as a result of its narrower (by 60mm) body, narrower wheels, improved rockers and some other aerodynamic aids. the CDxA = 0.30 x 1.95= 0.585 it is about a 14% advantage over the 996 GT2.
DeR, nice car. KW is a fantastic setup that I almost installed when my car was at Manthey Racing, interesting to know that the front lip helps so much with the balance.. My GT2 body, like TB's, suffers immensely from "windage" at high speeds.
Hope you get the car sorted out.