Iloveheat

Does anybody know anything about the next 996TT? Will there be a 997TT, how much power and how much torque? And then? Where are we going to go? If the next Porsche 997T will have say 500HP, in 10 years with all the X versions in between, the 998TT will come with 600HP, ot will not? Are we heading to performance that will really require the driver to be in a perfect health condition? Really: where are we going to end up in 30 or 40 years? 1000hp?!! 0-60 in 2.5 seconds? Or have we already got to the endge? When will cars start flying (joking)?

adsc4s

HP and torque have continued to increase through the years but performance has not. Going from a 0-60 in 8 seconds down to 4 seconds is not that difficult. However, going from 4 seconds to 3.5 seconds to 3 to 2, etc is very difficult. It comes down to alot of factors including gearing, aerodynamics, tires, etc. Can it be done? Probably. Will it be driveable for the general population? Probably not.

With that said, if the 997TT doesn't have 500hp, it won't even have bragging rights over the M5.

Iloveheat

Probably not, but at the same Hp I still think the possible 997TT will be still faster than an havier BMW M5. What I also think is that a 60 year old guy that has seen the evolution from the 8 sec and skinny tires to the 4 seconds and stiff chassy and wide tires can really enjoy it; I can too but I don't think I will ever see it get to the 3 seconds. Like you said the smaller the number the more difficult it becomes to improve the porformance. So, is the game going to be over?

CP

Addison hits the nail on the head as usual. For a multitude of engineering problems, it is very difficult/costly to get a car to go from 0-60 MPH in under 4 seconds. It is exponentialy costly/difficult to make it go under 3 seconds, and certainly prohibitive for the general public to entertain buying such cars. I think that's why the high-end manufacturers are introducing more techno-gizzmos in their cars. Since they can't easily distinguish themselves with quantitative performance numbers, they'll try to win the big-spenders over with techno bragging rights.

Unfortunately, these new acronym-features turn me off big time. I don't feel I need them, certainly do not want them in my cars. I guess I 'm not their 'modern' target buyer after-all.

CP

OldGuy

Pong what you and Addison forget is soon we will be in restrictor plate production cars!

PorscheDavid

I think (hope) the coming techno wars will involve weight reduction and composites. This will increase handling, braking performance, acceleration etc. The feel and agility of a lighter car is a phenomenal experience, and one that we have gotten further and further away from. Test drive a Lotus Elise if you get the chance...I hope this car starts a weight reduction war.

FixedWing

I don't see it. Why is it so difficult to get 0-60 mph (0-100 km/h) times down from 4 seconds to 3 seconds? Add power as required and beef up the suspension & drive train as necessary. That's all. Nothing magical about that.

The real problem isn't 0-60 but making the car handle. The only way to do that is to reduce weight. And that is expensive.

Bumping the power to decrease the 0-60 time is a great way of distracting attention from just what a pig these "sports" cars are becoming. Chopping 500 kg from a 996 would transform it.



Stephen

1AS

3 seconds is a tough number. The twin to my old Lola T165 CanAm was tested by R/T. It did 60 in about 3 seconds. That was with 17inch rear slicks, a dry weight of about 1700, and gearing that got to 60 without shifting. Mine was street licensed. There were a lot of compromises to get that type of performance. Compromises like no windows, doors, upholstery, room, emissions control and a willingness to accept 4 mpg.
My Lotus Elise 190R is also no compromises. About 1600 pounds wet. It gets to 60 just fine (and not much slower than a 355 Ferrari) but falls off rapidly after that point. It also feels incredibly tiny next to a semi (don't ask how I have a street plate for that) you wouldn't regularly want to drive it 200 miles on an interstate. After 25 or so, you want a radio, silence, A/C etc. So, it's unrealistic to think we're going to have all the safety stuff, the necessary accessories, and performance at less than 3000 pounds.
At the last Chicago auto show, there was a C6 Corvette chassis. It looked very solid, but there weren't a lot of places you could see to chop off weight. With the block aluminum, I'd like to see where there is 300 pounds to eliminate. You'd need shell seats, tiny battery, plexi instead of glass, and no insulation and I'm not sure you'd shave 200.
Lastly, I may not be the best driver out there, but the only performance enhancement I'd like on my X50 is a longer first gear. I can't find a place to use any more power on the street. A 1000 hp Veyron is about the last thing I'd want. I also don't like all the electro-gimicks. A 7 speed trans, CVD transmission, or economy/reliability improvements are all I'd look for. We're kind of at the point that the supersonic transport was- it was faster but everything else was fast enough. AS

DonneyJ

One day Porsche might wake up and provide a next generation Turbo made with lightweight parts..What a great job for a designer and engineer...and I don't mean stripped out, I need toys....I mean aluminium/carbon body parts Some alloy engine parts and Everything from the interior panels to the sunvisors made with lighter material, then we would have a real car which handled well. Surely it's easier to increase bhp per ton by changing material usage rather than making the engine more powerful.

DonnyJ

Bill S.

No reason why a 4WD Porsche Turbo can't break 3 seconds. R&T magazine measured the 993 Ruf Turbo R 0-60 in 3.3 seconds. And that's with only 490 HP and 3300 lbs.

CP

Bill,

Always enjoy your posts and your vast knowledge in all things RUF. I agree with your point above, but the RUF tested probably costed $250k+. To add enough HP and shed enough weight to bring the time down to 2.999 secs will probably cost another $250k. But if anyone can do it, RUF can.

How tough is it to break 3 seconds in a production car? The Enzo takes 3.3 seconds to hit 60, and the CGT takes 3.5 seconds. The only sub 3 second cars I read about are highly modified Lingenfelter Vettes.

CP

1AS

And didn't CJV spend about a half million and not even come close? I think that journey even included nitrous oxide, which I thought was kind of a bizzare way to go for a sports car ( I kind of get it for drag racing where everything gets changed every 1350 feet). If you had the power and grip to do 3 seconds on a tt-like platform, the drive line would probably fail before the second person could confirm your feat. I found that the ultra super-performance race-car-on-the street vehicle could almost never be unleashed, and 99.999% of the time I was trundling along at something like 1/10 vehicle capacity, and changing plugs every 100 miles. The Lola I referenced earlier had street plates and would do 70 mph in first gear. Outside of a track, I can't recall ever having the opportunity to nail it and take it to the redline in even one gear on the street. On the single time I ran it thru most of second gear, police heard the car, assumed I must have broken every traffic law known to man, surrounded me when I drove discreetly into sight, and gave me a police escort out of town with the Lola on a trailer (thank you Portage, Indiana). AS

Bill S.

Actually, anyone with about $20K can convert their 993TT into a 3.3-second Ruf Turbo R, if you don't mind beating-up your clutch and transmission trying to do it.

Motor Trend tested the less-sophisticated 993TT AutoThority car at 3.4 seconds.

Vipers can do under 3 seconds on slicks with less than $30K in mods.

So, I don't think it's a problem at all for a 4WD Porsche to break 3 seconds.

Here's the cheapest recipe I can think of for a Porsche:

1. Buy a 993TT beater for $60K and remove everything the car doesn't need to be driven.
2. Pop-in a supercharged V8 (people do this all the time).
3. Put slicks on all 4 wheels.
4. Drop the clutch at 3K and hang on.

Some people may say that this is not a Porsche. But, when Porsche puts their V8 in the 911, is it still a Porsche?

My point is Porsche can do it now for an affordable price. But, if they do, they would lose their comfort of being able to keep selling "faster" cars every year for an additional 10 HP per year.

CP

Bill,

The Carrera GT has a 350 cu. in V-10 as is, and does 3.5 sec. The Enzo has a 6 litre V-12 and does 3.3 seconds. Of course what they both miss in your formula is a blower (supercharger or turbo). I'd be interested to know if the blower can shave the .3 to .5 seconds off their times.

Another question, the 911 engine bay is soooo tight, what is the displacement of the V8 that'll fit in there. Also, the SC is quite bulky as well. You said people had already done this? Pardon my ignornance but the v-8 Porsche I'm aware of is the 928 which is front-engined, with a scooth more room up-front. Have people successfully installed blowers in their 928s?

Thanks.

CP

CP

Bill S.

Remember that the Enzo and CGT we're not specifically designed for low 0-60s (i.e., most people care about 0-100 or 0-150). However, with updated engine torque curves and gearing, they would be in the low 3s, especially if you don't have to shift before 60.

BTW, I've always seen the modded 993TT 0-60 less than the 996TT. Probably mostly due to a lower first gear ratio (?) and lower weight. I'm not sure is the 993TT engine may also have something else for 0-60 because it's 2 valves instead of 4. Remember, Mercedes went to 3 valves, SOHC and twin plugs to get their power with 91 octane. I suspect Porsche will also do this some day when they have more money and more people complain about their cars losing power with 91 octane.

I've been away from the "V8 in the 911" crowd for a while, but I've seen supercharged V8s in 911s at shows. Probably a quick search on Google will bring something up.

BTW, the 4501-lb Mercedes SL600 did 0-60 in 3.6 seconds with A/T (Car & Driver, 3/04). These cars ARE designed for fast 0-60s. I'll be curious to see what the Mercedes SL 65 does. A 4WD SL65 at 3300 lbs should certainly break 3 seconds. Mercedes (AMG) could do it. They don't because the people that buy their cars would expect more quality, luxury and safety than what you can currently provide in a 3300 lb car.