STATMAN

Okay, I have seen countless different 0-60 times for the 997 S. Will the real time please stand up.

Porsche, always conservative, says 4.6
Automobile Magazine says 4.6
Road and Track says 3.9

and the list goes on....

Any insight into which number may be the "right" one? I've just recently broken mine in (I'm at around 3,000 miles) and not quite yet up to trying to do my own 0-60 test yet. Please weigh in on this....

Paul523

ibidem ad infinitum....just loop this thread.
If horse-whipped/clutch drop at 3500 RPM like the magazines I've no doubt 4.0 sec. is achievable.

Just for fun I did a hillbilly 0-60 using Sport Chrono and analog speedo (digital speedo takes a second to catch up) without abusing the car-- 1500 rpm clutch release-- got 4.55 seconds.

JFScheck

And 4.4 seconds with the X-51 option according to Porsche, gotta throw that one in there!

alex911s

I think the road and track one is way off, maybe the one with the powerkit

fast1

You are right on target. In order to get the best times, you have to abuse your clutch by dropping it at 3500+ RPM. I had a friend who use to run lots of 1/4s at the track with his S2000. He'd drop the clutch at 5K and got nice times, but his clutch lasted less than 15K miles. He tried to have the clutch replaced under warranty, but the Honda Dealer refused. They rightly diagnosed the failure as being caused by clutch abuse.

NITEALB

Dropping the clutch ain't neccesary, simply slipping the clutch smmothly gets u just as good times. takes practice to do it consistently bu the best i've had has been 3.97 secs (997s with sports mufflers/headers/giac reprogramming - 385hp).

texas911

If anything, its a low 4's car. I do believe R&T's time of 3.9.

PbPedis

What's there not to believe about R&T's number. That's what they got with that particular car on that particular day. Sure, it's faster than any other number out there, but that's what they got. There is no "right" answer. It's very dependent upon the driver and the weather conditions. Plus, no two cars will be exactly alike. BTW, even R&T were shocked by the number and ended up dynoing the car to make sure it wasn't a ringer. It wasn't.

1999Porsche911

Why is everyone so interested in what time someone elses car, can, has or could do 0 - 60? It has litlle to do with the capability of your car and you as a driver. Stop living off of someone elses experience and establish you own if you want to. A 0 -60 time, which is extremely abusive to any car, can vary by more than a full second depending on the driver. There is no way that the 997S will get even close to 4 seconds on a regular basis, so give it up. If you need to have it be faster, carry the R&T article in the glovebox so you can brag to your freinds.

I don't mean to sound like an *******, but so many people seem to want to establish that their car s something that it is not. If you have great performance in your car, that's great and I would like to hear about it. But don't tell me your car can perform a certain way simply because someone elses can. You want the best 0 -60 time your car can get, then give me the car for an hour, make an appoinment for a clutch replacement and I'll videotape the fastest your car will ever be capable of going with the current setup.

Coochas

I've noticed that R&T's 0-60 and 1/4 mile times are usually lower for most cars that they test versus other car mags and manufacturer times. I am not sure why this is.
Part of it could be their main testing facility - some tracks are 'quicker' than others owing to the way they are paved and typical ambient conditions (such as cool, low humidity) - I do not know if their facility falls in these categories.
Latest CaymanS Tests 0-60, 1/4 mile
R&T 4.8 13.3@106.2
C&D 5.1 13.4@105

texas911

1999Porscshe911, well for you don't read any of the magazines, for the rest of the world, we'll keep reading them. I love reading about Lambos, Bentleys, Ferraris, cars I don't own. How else can we compare cars performances if not for using some STANDARDIZED tests? If not, then it would all be opinion. And we see that you value yours above everyone elses.

STATMAN

Good points PbPedis: There will certainly be variability from car to car, from driver to driver, from track to track, from day to day, and the list goes on.

But, I also like the point that texas911 made: It is reasonable and desireable to have some sort of standardized measure of 0-60 capabilities (standardized in the sense that at least it is the same magazine conducting the 0-60 test under conditions that are reasoanbly consistent from car to car). This allows one to get at least a pretty good picture of the car's RELATIVE performance in comparison to other cars that the mag has tested.

I agree, that 0-60 time may not be what I get or you get in your 911 S, but it gives one a fair indicator of how the car stacks up in the performance kingdom out there, which is a nice (albeit imperfect) fact to know.

1999Porsche911

It's not that performance figures in magazines are not fun to look at and provide some sort of comparison to other vehicles, but these numbers do not translate into what a cars performance is to the average driver. Without knowing the testing details, including how much of a rollout they have before the clock starts, air temp, altitude, humidity, etc, what good are they, except for fun? Without details, we have no way of know that the ARE standardized tests.

What does YOUR car do 0-60? It doesn't matter what someone elses does. Why watch a porno flick when you can get the real thing? Some people like to live through others, while some of us like to stand on our own.


Like you said tho, it just another opinion.

texas911

Yes they do, since its a standardized test, its plain to see that a 997S will out accelerate, say a Civic. What's wrong with knowing that with empirical data? I think its just that you don't want to believe that the 997 is significantly faster than your 996. That's the true motive of your argument.

LVDell

FYI...these are NOT examples of standardized tests. These "tests" have extreme bias present in them. If you want to really know what standarization is then either pick up a stats book to refresh your memory or come sit in on one of my classes.

Have to agree with 1999 on this one.