What is the real difference in 996tt X50 vs 996tt s
12-14-2016, 05:07 PM
#61
^yep. I'll add that I asked a number of the "tuners" the Todds and of course Kevin. Kevin, provided such in depth information about why you do what. He provided a tune (91) to match the other components (which I mostly bought from him) and then fine tuned it sending data logs back to him. Completely satisfied and no issues for over 10 years (actually tried a high octane tune once, but quickly found the weak spot in my setup...fuel).
12-14-2016, 05:15 PM
#62
Originally Posted by SimonK
Actually, I did have a point which was brought on by your statement "I'd like to see k16 vs the same Audi". The reason I brought flash into it is that x50/S car in addition to bigger turbos also runs a higher boost. So, in fact x50/S car is actually flashed by the factory. Remember they do run the same engines. It therefore follows that if you flash k16 car by 30 bhp, the x50/S acceleration advantage reduces dramatically to hardly any. So yes a 450 bhp k16 car would **** over the Audi just the same ;-).
Ps. Also, a stock 420k16 turbo would **** all over the Audi due to a near 400kgs weight advantage. I will let you work out bhp per tonne difference ratio on your own. ;-).
Ps. Also, a stock 420k16 turbo would **** all over the Audi due to a near 400kgs weight advantage. I will let you work out bhp per tonne difference ratio on your own. ;-).
What are you on? No it wouldn't, it's not like my car beat that RS7 easy, barely beat it but still was a win. A stock K16 Turbo won't be near the RS7. You clearly haven't seen RS7s perform or been in one. BHP per ton is just a small part of how a car performs.
Originally Posted by Dock
It's a matter of when he/she went WOT and if they kept their foot in it the entire time. Did they lose traction anywhere along the run? I wasn't in the car with him/her, so I have no idea whether or not they max perfoprmed the car.
I also don't have any idea how the Audi was running. Was it up to full power, or did it need a tune up?Can you tell a performance advantage between the k16's and the k24's via SOTP, or does it require racing another car?
Do you think the result of your race with the Audi establishes that the k24 turbos don't lag more than the k16's?
I personally went with k16's because I placed "less turbo lag" over "an additional 30 hp" (k24's). For the vast majority of my driving, I enjoy less turbo lag more than I would have enjoyed what little SOTP difference 30 hp makes. I elected instead to go with some stage II tuning to get another 80-100 hp, while keeping the less laggy k16's.
I also don't have any idea how the Audi was running. Was it up to full power, or did it need a tune up?Can you tell a performance advantage between the k16's and the k24's via SOTP, or does it require racing another car?
Do you think the result of your race with the Audi establishes that the k24 turbos don't lag more than the k16's?
I personally went with k16's because I placed "less turbo lag" over "an additional 30 hp" (k24's). For the vast majority of my driving, I enjoy less turbo lag more than I would have enjoyed what little SOTP difference 30 hp makes. I elected instead to go with some stage II tuning to get another 80-100 hp, while keeping the less laggy k16's.
No he can't lose traction as it's a Quattro Audi and we started from 30 mph. The car is a 2015 Audi RS7, why on earth would it need a tune up?
I never said that the K24 lag LESS or EQUAL to K16, not sure what you're on about there. I've been in plenty of K16 Turbos, stock and flashed...they lag less but the difference isn't that much bigger and I honestly don't know how some drive to complain about lag. If you're the type of driver that don't wanna shift much, pick the K16.
The race with the Audi established a nice thing, the old tech "laggy" 996 Turbo X50 managed to beat Audis finest, despite RS7 having a 4.0 l turbo V8 with 560 hp connected to a dual clutch gearbox which not only shifts fast as lightning, it won't ever let that Audi drop boost.
12-14-2016, 05:57 PM
#63
Nordschleife Master
The engine is an air pump. What no one seems to mention is that if you run a factory MAF your engine output at some point will be limited by the capacity of the MAF. As such, K24s might NOT offer any advantage on the top end over K16s. This was my case. I went from running RUF K24/26 hybrids to running Kevins K16/GT2RS ZC turbos. With Kevins K16s my output is capped at 600whp on the top end mainly due to the upper limit of the MAF which is maxed out and actually running slightly above it's capacity by scaling the tune. If I ran K24s my output on the top end would remain the same (it was actually less with the K24s) and I would simply be giving up power and torque down low along with increased lag. With the K16s my wheel torque is 670ft.lb at 4000rpm. Lag is virtually nil. This is on 91 octane at 1.25bar running exhaust w/ cats.... Engine basically feels like a big block V8 which pulls all the way to 7500+
[url=https://flic.kr/p/vqFY49]
[url=https://flic.kr/p/vqFY49]
12-14-2016, 06:29 PM
#64
Originally Posted by jumper5836
Well there you go, nice power with sufficient cooling to maintain it. K24's seem a little pointless if your losing down low and adding lag.
Here is something member TB993tt posted:
"With the 996tt forum begining to look like an offshoot of 6speed with lots of talk and little substance I thought I would treat 993tters with some data I found.
This data comes from Flat 6 magazine, the cars are 993tt stock 408PS and 993ttS Euro spec which means K24 and 450PS the gearing is the same for both cars, the temperatures were similar for all the tests
The time between when one hits the throttle pedal and when the turbos spool up and start boosting is one element of "lag" which is never tested for however the other element is using WOT from low revs and timing how long the car takes to accelerate between two times giving us a picture of the boost curve of the turbos.
I have extrapolated approximate rpm's from the before and after speeds to give the following
K16 K24
3rd gear 3650rpm - 5470rpm 2.8s 3.2s
4th gear 2820rpm-4235rpm 4.1s 4.3s
5th gear 2380rpm-3570rpm 6.2s 6.6s
6th gear 1760rpm-2640rpm 8.6s 10.4s
Just because I have the numbers here are the timings for the same speed increment for the K16 420hp 996tt versus the X50 K24 450hp 996tt
K16 K24
3rd gear 3.77s 3.80s
4th gear 4.4s 5.0s
5th gear 5.48s 6.4s
6th gear 7.2s 9.0s
As you can see, difference starts to show in highest gears, 5-6 and low rpm, so low that I'd say you're lugging the engine.
Another member added regarding the same test:
996TT vs. 996 TTS, very close in 3rd and 4th, from 3200RPMs or so upwards....Bigger difference in 5th and 6th, where they start at around 2K RPMs.
Is this how some of you drive and then talk about lag?
12-14-2016, 07:12 PM
#65
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Depending on how the owner has operated the car, and how he has taken care of it, of course it could be running underpowered. Then again, based on his weight and total power, he may simply be at a disadvantage against a 996 Turbo (k16 or k24). I have not researched what his test track measured acceleration times are compared to the 996 Turbo's.
I'm not talking about the lag when asking for boost in a higher gear at low RPM. The k24 has more turbo lag versus the k16 even when in a good start RPM for the selected gear.
The race with the Audi established a nice thing, the old tech "laggy" 996 Turbo X50 managed to beat Audis finest, despite RS7 having a 4.0 l turbo V8 with 560 hp connected to a dual clutch gearbox which not only shifts fast as lightning, it won't ever let that Audi drop boost.
The race results may indicate that the RS7 has turbos that are even more laggy than the k24's...
12-14-2016, 07:27 PM
#66
The numbers are there, and yes, K24 lag more compared to K16, haven't said the opposite.
As for the rest about the RS7 etc, you clearly have no clue whatsoever, just leave it at that.
Make your own conclusion as to where the K16 Turbo would be, because as I see it the M6 V10 beats the K16 Turbo but lost to the RS7.
As for the rest about the RS7 etc, you clearly have no clue whatsoever, just leave it at that.
Make your own conclusion as to where the K16 Turbo would be, because as I see it the M6 V10 beats the K16 Turbo but lost to the RS7.
12-15-2016, 01:53 AM
#69
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think With Berra it is time to flag up a troll alert. :-). His quote of the day must be that "we are clueless about RS7 and that the bhp per tonne isn't important". Clearly RS7 rules and k24's barely whip its ****. K16's however are old dogs and should just retire. Ha ha ha.
12-15-2016, 08:50 AM
#71
12-15-2016, 01:38 PM
#74
