eclou

Wanna,

you are alot less confrontational on 6speed, and we tend to agree with each others posts there. I am guessing that the hostile reception to your track event idea led you to treat this community/thread with less tact than you usually display. You do realize that it is much the same crowd here? Hell even most of the usernames are the same

wanna911

You must not have seen the RWD vs AWD thread with myself and Divexxtreme. I'm not a bigtime confrontational guy but when I have an opinion I dont waiver unless there is solid proof to the contrary. I could care less about the track day not being embraced here, I didnt think I'd find most of the old racers in the other sub forums anyways so that has no affect on my opinions here.

I've also spent hours arguing with GT500 owners, people on the upcoming GT-R website, and some on corvette forum about this debacle from C&D with the GT500 and Turbo being same on track and the Z51 being faster. Utter nonsense, but that doesnt change the fact that the Z06 is faster in a straight line, which it should be. Unfortunately as with all forms of racing no one does a comprehensive enough test to really prove anything, so it still ends up being all conjecture.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point as I have arguements that are valid and so do you, but there are always gaps that are left unexplained. I dont make biased opinions on anything but I do stick to my guns. A full comprehensive time for these cars would include.

1) Surface conditions
2) Air conditions (some affect FI vs NA)
3) 0-60
4) 60' time
4) 1/4 (lets us know if the car is running properly and driven properly to this point)
5) 0-100
6) 0-150
7) 0-186


I have yet to see this test and frankly if #1 and #3 arent done in detail it's useless, because if you have ever drag raced you would know that .1 improvement in 60' time can mean .2 to .3 seconds off your 1/4 mile time and that would also decrease your 0-186 mph time by AT LEAST the same amount. So when we are dealing with cars this close in performance every detail is needed, and I ahvent seen that yet.

eclou

You might find this interesting - the match between the RT12 and CGT. IIRC it was a flying start from 80 kph and went well over 300. The CGT had a bit of an early launch and its HP advantage leads the RT12 until the drag factors let the RT12 start to pull away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae2PAOMBSZ8

It is quite interesting b/c I always thought gearing was why all the hopped-up Vipers still hit the wall at 170-180mph. FWIW I will be doing the Texas Mile this year in Oct, and my friend has a 130mph trapping C6Z06 (cammed, exhaust) which was written up in GM High Performance Mag. We'll see the HP vs Drag effects in person.

Whoopsy

Dude, do I really need to remind you AGAIN?!?!?!? You wrote that damn message, not me, I didn't put words in your mouth.

If throwing out standing start and do rolling start to negate the AWD advantage is NOT handpicking, I don't know what is.

Maybe you need to get a life, you spent far too much time arguing on at least FOUR online forums.

wanna911

Your comments make little to no sense, hence the difficulty in responding. I have stated my reasons for the tests being done for multiple reasons. You have done nothing but make childish statements in the form of mockery I am guessing.

I can argue all I want, when you become a moderator on these forums, you can ban me, but last I heard there was no penalty for being an avid car enthusiast. So until you find one, or become that moderator, shutup.

You like to make assumptions about people based on who knows what but in reality you dont know anything and you make it more and more obvious everytime you hit "submit reply". Please stop making a fool of yourself.

wanna911

I understand completely how aero makes a HUGE difference at top end speeds. I have also seen vids of stock Z's going to 190 mph and hitting 180 mph faster than the magazine tests, so I'm not so inclined to beleive them. Of course it's also possible that the TT could be faster than the magazine as well, but how do we know? We dont, and the Z gets to 175+ before it starts to crawl which isnt too bad if you have watched top speed runs of highly modded cars.


I guess my point is more so, if the TT catches the Z and passes at 180, what is there to be proud of, the Z would pass back at 193 which is the top speed of the TT anyways, I cant prove it either way, but I dont believe mag tests are accurate enough. And hardly anyone races to 180 in stock cars, at least not in the states, so saying the TT is faster to 186 mph is an anomoly to me because the Z is faster from 0-170 and wins anything other than this uncommon test, if in fact that was the case.

AAHTT

since you like real life clips, how do you explain this real life encounter? no overboost either.

http://www.rennteam.com/showflat.php...&page=0#365674

wanna911

LOL. anything can happen on the street, these cars are not exactly worlds apart you know? with novice drivers, especially from a dig, it's a drivers race.

Whoopsy

Once again you failed to grasp WHAT you said yourself, you are ONLY comparing situations where the Z06 is faster, and throw away situations where the TT is faster. Your so call reasons are just constrains that you set so the Z06 will have the maximum advantage. Go back and read your own posts again, but this time take off your homer glasses and see if your criterias are really objectives or not. TT launch better, so you discounted the lauch, TT has less drag, so you discounted the top end. Who is the one making a fool of themselves? You or me? Remember you are the one bringing the Z06 to a TT forum, not me.

I don't know, you sounded more like a biased, not avid car enthusiasts.

If you do not have anything else constructive to say, I suggest you should be the one to shutup, your posts here are just wasting bandwidth, just go back to 6speed where they are more receptive of you.

AAHTT

exactly my point. you see, not everyone on the street is a skilled drag racer who is able to get low 11s in a car like a z06 for example.
also, the clip you alluded to in the beginning, (and there is only one where a z06 walked away from a tt), also could have the same problem: driver skill.
not to mention that the car in that particular old clip posted by the white trash redneck idiot (I can tell just by the way he talks), was not stock as he claimed.
so, since you just said: "the cars are not worlds apart", and I agree with you but then you can't say: "the z06 is faster period".
btw: the clip above was not from a dig.

wanna911

I agree, I am a large part of that guy getting banned from 6speed. He's a jerk. I dont beleive what I see on the net neccesarily but you cant argue with the large number of people that have trapped 125-127 in the Stock Z, that is pulling hard on a Turbo that will trap 118-121. That is what I eluded to before talking about any videos and I only used that one because it is an accurate representation of what would occur at those speeds with a 127 trapping car vs a 121 trapping car.

AAHTT

all the trap speed indicates is that the z06 is traveling faster at the quarter. the TT has a better 0-60 but similar quarter time in the hands of most people and mags, so yes the z06 starts to walk away at that point (125 mph or so), but not for long. The TT has a better acceleration once the z06 goes into 5th at 155mph.
so in summary and at least theoretically, the TT is ahead from launch and until the quarter mile, then the z06 starts to walk away until 155 mph, the TT will then catch up before both cars hit 185 mph. None of them is faster than the other overall, they just trade first place several times before top speed.

wanna911

Where have you seen 11.3 - 11.5 in stock turbos? The fastest I have seen from an owner is 11.8. There are dozens of low 11's in stock Z's. Nothing near that in the turbo. As far as launch consitency, I'll give you that, but a good launch on a Z can equal that of a turbo and if that happens (which is the case in my assertions) the TT would not catchup from that far behind. The Z is just starting to pull at 130 and pulls hard to 165 when aero starts to kick it's butt, but AWD kicks the turbos butt at those speeds too, so both cars are losing accleration coefficient rapidly. AWD sucks for high speeds, lets not forget that, there is a huge amount of drag at this point from the front drivetrain that is not present in the Z. Many more factors than just front drag.

1AS

Nope, the trap speed is the better indicator of power (as compared to ET which places a premium on traction at launch). But, who really cares about that?

Personally, I don't, as all 911-based cars are abysmal from a standing start, despite the great numbers. If I wereinterested in top 0-60 times or quarter mile, I would take any V8 rear-drive car over a 996 0r 997tt.

Who wants to traumatize their own drive train, experience the axle hop, or destroy their clutch, all for the purpose of saving .5 seconds? Not me.
For drag racing, put slicks on whatever car you choose, and shut up.

The ZO6 happens to also be a superior track car (and I own a 996ttX50 plus four dedicated track cars), as it not only has more power, it weighs less, and isn't hampered by awd understeer.

Porsches excel in other areas. Basing your opinion on some numeric performance parameter is a recipe for fruitless arguement. If you want a fast lap on a road course, take a ZO6. If you want a great 50 laps in an enduro, take a ttTip (especially if it rains). If you want drag strip numbers, put slicks on a ZO6. If you just want to drive to work, take whatever you perfer, since if you can afford the tt, you can afford either. AS

eclou

Driveline losses are figured at a fixed percentage, whereas aero/drag losses increase by a cube. A Rennteam member just posted a GPS logged 0-300kph time of 33.6 seconds, which is equivalent to a Carrera GT. His TT has only an ECU program from Digitec rated at 550hp, and the temp was 40C (Kuwait). The CGT has a 500lb weight advantage, 2wd, 600 hp, but a horrific Cd of 0.39.