Road test 993 Turbo S 450PS
02-14-2007, 01:05 PM
#16
Thanks, now I see it. That makes sense.
Where did you find that the 9M 993RSR racer claimed 0-150 at 21secs? I can only find the following: "9m/4T equipped cars ran 0-150 in 32secs".
Where did you find that the 9M 993RSR racer claimed 0-150 at 21secs? I can only find the following: "9m/4T equipped cars ran 0-150 in 32secs".
02-14-2007, 01:48 PM
#17
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
TB, thanks for the article, fantastic test. I would love to see the GTPP, 911&Porsche, Total 911 Magazines do similar tests nowwadays, so much information!
Avoyvoda
I believe that time was posted in the magazine, I have a copy at home but I am on the move. Here is a quote from a rennlister that seems to confirm it:
I have been preaching the 350-360Hp for that RSR all along as you know, seems like there is more proof now. As TB said, these are already outstanding numbers for a N/A so it does not take any merit from 9M at all, only dyno numbers seem to be once more challenged with tangible data.
Let us not forget that the TT is 4WD too.
Avoyvoda
I believe that time was posted in the magazine, I have a copy at home but I am on the move. Here is a quote from a rennlister that seems to confirm it:
Originally Posted by maurice97C2S
..........One aspect of the performance figures quoted that intrigued me rather, was that while Colin's RS racecar was lightest by a substantial margin, & quickest of all 0-30, 60, 100, and 150 (20.74 secs !), it was an also ran in the 3rd gear runs in 10 mph increments 40-80 mph ..
As it does hillclimbs / sprints it is unlikely to have a tall 3rd gear .. as it has billet heads (I assume) in conjunction with increased capacity it ought to have substantial torque throughout the mid range. Is the Motec not optimised ?
Enough rambling .. Jean is right to question, and has every right to do so without being insulted. Please keep the discussion rational !
cheers, Maurice
As it does hillclimbs / sprints it is unlikely to have a tall 3rd gear .. as it has billet heads (I assume) in conjunction with increased capacity it ought to have substantial torque throughout the mid range. Is the Motec not optimised ?
Enough rambling .. Jean is right to question, and has every right to do so without being insulted. Please keep the discussion rational !
cheers, Maurice
Let us not forget that the TT is 4WD too.
02-14-2007, 03:31 PM
#18
Team Owner
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: As you can see, I'm right here.
Posts: 85,814
Received 1,657 Likes
on
1,063 Posts
I just looked up the Turbo S that Sloan has. I love the exterior color, but I think that carbon package looks kinda lame. And, of course, I think that price is loco.
Buy a 97 993TT, a bodykit, and a few performance mods and bingo! you're there - and you probably haven't even spent $95K yet. You don't have to be an *** or anything and put an S badge on it, but your car would look and run awesome and you sure as hell didn't spend $158,000. (I would also have to pay another $14600 in sales tax when I went in to get my tags
)
Buy a 97 993TT, a bodykit, and a few performance mods and bingo! you're there - and you probably haven't even spent $95K yet. You don't have to be an *** or anything and put an S badge on it, but your car would look and run awesome and you sure as hell didn't spend $158,000. (I would also have to pay another $14600 in sales tax when I went in to get my tags
)
02-14-2007, 03:57 PM
#19
Interesting... So, Jean, you are saying:
If a 1,650 kgs car with a verified 450hp does 0-150 mph in 22 secs then a 1,260 kgs car (1,180 kgs plus 80 kgs passenger) that does the same distance in 20.74 secs will have about 350-360 hp.
Not trying to start an argument here (I have no 0-150 data to support either position) just summarising the facts. This substantially correct?
Then, how do you explain the brace of normal 3.6 na 993s (with Colin's heads etc) who in the same test covered the same distance in 32secs (11 seconds more)? They weigh perhaps 200 kgs more than the racer in standard trim. By the same logic, either they are producing well under 200 hp, or ... something here doesn't make a huge amount of sense.
If a 1,650 kgs car with a verified 450hp does 0-150 mph in 22 secs then a 1,260 kgs car (1,180 kgs plus 80 kgs passenger) that does the same distance in 20.74 secs will have about 350-360 hp.
Not trying to start an argument here (I have no 0-150 data to support either position) just summarising the facts. This substantially correct?
Then, how do you explain the brace of normal 3.6 na 993s (with Colin's heads etc) who in the same test covered the same distance in 32secs (11 seconds more)? They weigh perhaps 200 kgs more than the racer in standard trim. By the same logic, either they are producing well under 200 hp, or ... something here doesn't make a huge amount of sense.
02-14-2007, 05:03 PM
#20
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
Interesting... So, Jean, you are saying:
If a 1,650 kgs car with a verified 450hp does 0-150 mph in 22 secs then a 1,260 kgs car (1,180 kgs plus 80 kgs passenger) that does the same distance in 20.74 secs will have about 350-360 hp.
Not trying to start an argument here (I have no 0-150 data to support either position) just summarising the facts. This substantially correct?
If a 1,650 kgs car with a verified 450hp does 0-150 mph in 22 secs then a 1,260 kgs car (1,180 kgs plus 80 kgs passenger) that does the same distance in 20.74 secs will have about 350-360 hp.
Not trying to start an argument here (I have no 0-150 data to support either position) just summarising the facts. This substantially correct?
993ttS power to weight ratio: 450/3637X2240=277bhp/tonne
For the 993RSR to have a power to weight ratio of 277bhp/tonne weighing 1260kg(2778lbs) ; "x" /2778X2240=277
"x" = 342hp
The flaws in the argument I guess are that the shape of the ttS's power curve may give it a greater area under the curve during the run up through the revs (although the curves I posted above do not really show this) compared to a naturally aspirated power curve.
The RSR was infact 1.3 seconds faster which is why I guesstimated the hp to be 360 rather than the 342 above.
The ttS being 4WD versus the 993RSR's 2WD probably cost the ttS 30+hp
The CdA for the ttS is 0.656 and the RSR with 0deg angle on the wing is 0.632, with 9deg angle is 0.669
Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
Then, how do you explain the brace of normal 3.6 na 993s (with Colin's heads etc) who in the same test covered the same distance in 32secs (11 seconds more)? They weigh perhaps 200 kgs more than the racer in standard trim. By the same logic, either they are producing well under 200 hp, or ... something here doesn't make a huge amount of sense.
02-14-2007, 05:05 PM
#21
Pro
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: London, UK : Tel-Aviv, IL
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
A very interesting read. Apart from the truly amazing figures, it does explain the baffled look I get from regular TT owners when I tell them how terrifying the car is at high speeds... thought there was something wrong with me till I read that...
...the S suspension should come with an extra set of underwear... bring on the PSS9s...
And for anyone in the UK interested, here's one available. Seems strangely good value... wandering what the catch is. Thought about taking the plunge, but I guess I'm just too happy with mine... that CanCan really gets under your skin... as you yanks would say, "We bonded"...
http://pistonheads.com/sales/131240.htm
...the S suspension should come with an extra set of underwear... bring on the PSS9s...
And for anyone in the UK interested, here's one available. Seems strangely good value... wandering what the catch is. Thought about taking the plunge, but I guess I'm just too happy with mine... that CanCan really gets under your skin... as you yanks would say, "We bonded"...
http://pistonheads.com/sales/131240.htm
02-14-2007, 05:23 PM
#22
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by urban_alchemist
A very interesting read. Apart from the truly amazing figures, it does explain the baffled look I get from regular TT owners when I tell them how terrifying the car is at high speeds... thought there was something wrong with me till I read that...
...the S suspension should come with an extra set of underwear... bring on the PSS9s...
And for anyone in the UK interested, here's one available. Seems strangely good value... wandering what the catch is. Thought about taking the plunge, but I guess I'm just too happy with mine... that CanCan really gets under your skin... as you yanks would say, "We bonded"...
http://pistonheads.com/sales/131240.htm
...the S suspension should come with an extra set of underwear... bring on the PSS9s...
And for anyone in the UK interested, here's one available. Seems strangely good value... wandering what the catch is. Thought about taking the plunge, but I guess I'm just too happy with mine... that CanCan really gets under your skin... as you yanks would say, "We bonded"...
http://pistonheads.com/sales/131240.htm
If you are fitting the PSS9 you will have a choice since I am pretty certain your "S" camber plates/monoball set up is not a fit with the PSS9 so you can either go with stock rubber or FVD do a camber plate set up specifically for the PSS9. If you wait a few weeks I will be able to give you some feedback on how the two set ups compare
BTW I think £75 K is not cheap, even though the Euro versions have a lot more done to them than the US version !
02-14-2007, 07:05 PM
#24
Still don't get it. Sorry.
Lets start from known facts:
Standard 993tt 0-200 kph (124 mph) 15.1 secs, 1,585 kgs, 408 hp (add driver of 80 kgs).
The TTS, with more power but also greater weight should be quicker. At 0-150 mph (0-241 kph) the TTS requires 22.1 secs. We can, therefore, deduce that the last 41 kms need at least 8 seconds, say 60% more time.
The 993 vario, 0-200 kph, 21.6 secs, 1,478 weight, 285 hp. Add 60% and the standard 993 vario should - in theory - need 35 seconds to do the 0-150 mph distance. But it doesn't. Instead, the standard 993 vario needs 42-44 secs, more than double the time…
Colin's RSR at 1,260 kgs does 0-150 mph in 20.74 secs, half the time of the standard 993 vario, and faster than the TT and the TTS.
Deducing that the RSR racer needs about 13 seconds to do 0-200 kph (i.e. faster than the TT and the TTS) and taking account of its lighter weight and 2wd, then the RSR has to generate at least 380-400 hp. A weight to power ratio of approx 3.3 - 3.6 in line with the Ferrari F430 (w/p 3.21), where 0-200 kph needs 12.6 secs or the 997 TT (w/p 3.5) at 12.5 secs.
Lets start from known facts:
Standard 993tt 0-200 kph (124 mph) 15.1 secs, 1,585 kgs, 408 hp (add driver of 80 kgs).
The TTS, with more power but also greater weight should be quicker. At 0-150 mph (0-241 kph) the TTS requires 22.1 secs. We can, therefore, deduce that the last 41 kms need at least 8 seconds, say 60% more time.
The 993 vario, 0-200 kph, 21.6 secs, 1,478 weight, 285 hp. Add 60% and the standard 993 vario should - in theory - need 35 seconds to do the 0-150 mph distance. But it doesn't. Instead, the standard 993 vario needs 42-44 secs, more than double the time…
Colin's RSR at 1,260 kgs does 0-150 mph in 20.74 secs, half the time of the standard 993 vario, and faster than the TT and the TTS.
Deducing that the RSR racer needs about 13 seconds to do 0-200 kph (i.e. faster than the TT and the TTS) and taking account of its lighter weight and 2wd, then the RSR has to generate at least 380-400 hp. A weight to power ratio of approx 3.3 - 3.6 in line with the Ferrari F430 (w/p 3.21), where 0-200 kph needs 12.6 secs or the 997 TT (w/p 3.5) at 12.5 secs.
Last edited by AVoyvoda; 02-16-2007 at 07:41 AM.
02-14-2007, 07:51 PM
#25
Rennlist Member
urban_alchemist: that does look like a deal. Go for it. I always though one silver and one black would be the ideal pairing.
That is the first one I've ever seen in my color combo, so I obviously think it looks amazing. Black Metallic was a somewhat popular on the S, but I've typically seen it with red, which does not work as a combo for me. One silver/black and one black/black side by side would make for a nice looking garage. Also, I must say that the metallic black makes the abunance of carbon on the inside look less silly.
That is the first one I've ever seen in my color combo, so I obviously think it looks amazing.
Black Metallic was a somewhat popular on the S, but I've typically seen it with red, which does not work as a combo for me. One silver/black and one black/black side by side would make for a nice looking garage. Also, I must say that the metallic black makes the abunance of carbon on the inside look less silly.
02-15-2007, 06:52 AM
#26
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
bb993tt
I was thinking mainly of the $16K suspension package which the Euro model got, and also the 450PS engine I don't know if you can see it on the scan above but these cars in the UK in '98 cost around $260K US - I remember when they came out musing at just how much profit Porsche could squeeze out of their punters....... They overdid it a bit on the ttS $$ wise IMO, I remember at least two friends who usually religiously bought the latest and greatest Porsche offerings, even they decided it was dubious value for money.
Incidentally those two mates currently drive Ferrari and Bently
The 408PS tt timed 0-150mph in 24.2 secs weighing ~1650kg
This is irrelavent, when you start switching to different models, as you can see from the extract below the 300PS 996 at ~1470kg takes 25.2s 0-150mph
Problem is we need some data from other 320-350hp 993C2s to really be able to know what is happening.....Check out the 993C2 non vario 272hp/1520kg road test, it takes 10.8s to go the 10mph from 140-150mph ! and 41.5s 0-150mph
9Ms non varioram 993C2 takes 32.6s 0-150mph but weighs 150kg less than the test data below (assuming 1 occupant in the 9M car -the test has 2 occupants)
There is one thing that is conclusive, forgetting the numbers - the 9M 993s are rapid and Colin's RSR is f^*+kin rapid
I was thinking mainly of the $16K suspension package which the Euro model got, and also the 450PS engine
I don't know if you can see it on the scan above but these cars in the UK in '98 cost around $260K US - I remember when they came out musing at just how much profit Porsche could squeeze out of their punters....... They overdid it a bit on the ttS $$ wise IMO, I remember at least two friends who usually religiously bought the latest and greatest Porsche offerings, even they decided it was dubious value for money.Incidentally those two mates currently drive Ferrari and Bently
Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
Still don't get it. Sorry.
Lets start from known facts:
Standard 993tt 0-200 kph (124 mph) 15.1 secs, 1,585 kgs, 408 hp (add driver of 80 kgs).
The TTS, with more power but also greater weight should be quicker. At 0-150 mph (0-241 kph) the TTS requires 22.1 secs. We can, therefore, deduce that the last 41 kms need at least 8 seconds, say 60% more time..
Lets start from known facts:
Standard 993tt 0-200 kph (124 mph) 15.1 secs, 1,585 kgs, 408 hp (add driver of 80 kgs).
The TTS, with more power but also greater weight should be quicker. At 0-150 mph (0-241 kph) the TTS requires 22.1 secs. We can, therefore, deduce that the last 41 kms need at least 8 seconds, say 60% more time..
Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
The 997 vario, 0-200 kph, 21.6 secs, 1,478 weight, 285 hp. Add 60% and the standard 997 vario should - in theory - need 35 seconds to do the 0-150 mph distance. But it doesn't. Instead, the standard 997 vario needs 42-44 secs, more than double the time….
Originally Posted by AVoyvoda
Colin's RSR at 1,260 kgs does 0-150 mph in 20.74 secs, half the time of the standard 993 vario, and faster than the TT and the TTS.
Deducing that the RSR racer needs about 13 seconds to do 0-200 kph (i.e. faster than the TT and the TTS) and taking account of its lighter weight and 2wd, then the RSR has to generate at least 380-400 hp. A weight to power ratio of approx 3.3 - 3.6 in line with the Ferrari F430 (w/p 3.21), where 0-200 kph needs 12.6 secs or the 997 TT (w/p 3.5) at 12.5 secs.
Deducing that the RSR racer needs about 13 seconds to do 0-200 kph (i.e. faster than the TT and the TTS) and taking account of its lighter weight and 2wd, then the RSR has to generate at least 380-400 hp. A weight to power ratio of approx 3.3 - 3.6 in line with the Ferrari F430 (w/p 3.21), where 0-200 kph needs 12.6 secs or the 997 TT (w/p 3.5) at 12.5 secs.
9Ms non varioram 993C2 takes 32.6s 0-150mph but weighs 150kg less than the test data below (assuming 1 occupant in the 9M car -the test has 2 occupants)
There is one thing that is conclusive, forgetting the numbers - the 9M 993s are rapid and Colin's RSR is f^*+kin rapid
02-15-2007, 08:22 AM
#27
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by TB993tt
bb993tt
I was thinking mainly of the $16K suspension package which the Euro model got, and also the 450PS engine
I was thinking mainly of the $16K suspension package which the Euro model got, and also the 450PS engine
02-15-2007, 08:33 AM
#28
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
The "S" suspension was developed by Porsche exclusive and put on the Euro S models (I believe it was not certified for US models they made do with stock tt suspension) it was available from '98 as a retro fit for £8K
The shocks and springs in conjunction with monoball top mounts make the car much too hard for UK roads - I run the kit with PSS9s and rubber tops and the ride is 100% fine - Next week I am having fitted a very pretty set of monoball camber plates from FVD in an attempt to sharpen it up a smidge more
As you can see below, the kit changed ALL suspension components:
The shocks and springs in conjunction with monoball top mounts make the car much too hard for UK roads - I run the kit with PSS9s and rubber tops and the ride is 100% fine - Next week I am having fitted a very pretty set of monoball camber plates from FVD in an attempt to sharpen it up a smidge more
As you can see below, the kit changed ALL suspension components:
02-15-2007, 08:52 AM
#29
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by TB993tt
The "S" suspension was developed by Porsche exclusive and put on the Euro S models (I believe it was not certified for US models they made do with stock tt suspension) it was available from '98 as a retro fit for £8K
The shocks and springs in conjunction with monoball top mounts make the car much too hard for UK roads - I run the kit with PSS9s and rubber tops and the ride is 100% fine - Next week I am having fitted a very pretty set of monoball camber plates from FVD in an attempt to sharpen it up a smidge more
The shocks and springs in conjunction with monoball top mounts make the car much too hard for UK roads - I run the kit with PSS9s and rubber tops and the ride is 100% fine - Next week I am having fitted a very pretty set of monoball camber plates from FVD in an attempt to sharpen it up a smidge more
02-16-2007, 04:50 AM
#30
"300PS 996 at ~1470kg takes 25.2s 0-150mph"
Are you absolutely sure about these numbers? I find it difficult to believe that the 996 with 300 hp will do 0-150 mph only one second slower than the 993TT with 408 hp (25.2 secs vis 24.2 secs)
Are you absolutely sure about these numbers? I find it difficult to believe that the 996 with 300 hp will do 0-150 mph only one second slower than the 993TT with 408 hp (25.2 secs vis 24.2 secs)