The Bad News piles up about the new Turbo
12-16-2009, 08:51 PM
#181
Rennlist Member
I would be more than happy to take you out onto the track in my lowly 996 Turbo or Cup Car.
Furthermore I promise to NOT go past 4th year...we can chat on the front stretch, stretch arms and legs, perhaps even have a cup of coffee. Feel free to wave to your friends in the paddock as we saunter by (I'll be too busy with one arm out the window pointing everyone by)
However, I reserve the right to drive the turns (those are the parts of the track that aren't straight) in a proper fashion.
And, as a token of goodwill, I will promise to pay the bill to have the Code Brown removed from your undergarments.
In exchange, you can offer me a ride in your car and demonstrate 0-60 and 0-100...I will even bring an airsick bag so you can demonstrate 0-100-0 for me.
Furthermore, I promise I will NOT produce a Code Brown moment and ruin your passenger seat.
Happy Holidays,
Furthermore I promise to NOT go past 4th year...we can chat on the front stretch, stretch arms and legs, perhaps even have a cup of coffee. Feel free to wave to your friends in the paddock as we saunter by (I'll be too busy with one arm out the window pointing everyone by)
However, I reserve the right to drive the turns (those are the parts of the track that aren't straight) in a proper fashion.
And, as a token of goodwill, I will promise to pay the bill to have the Code Brown removed from your undergarments.
In exchange, you can offer me a ride in your car and demonstrate 0-60 and 0-100...I will even bring an airsick bag so you can demonstrate 0-100-0 for me.
Furthermore, I promise I will NOT produce a Code Brown moment and ruin your passenger seat.
Happy Holidays,
12-16-2009, 08:55 PM
#182
Rennlist Member
Saying the GT3 with shorter gearing and more horsepower is like saying put more gearing and more boost into the new turbo car.
Talking stock to stock here.
The new turbo is more of a street car and the GT3 is more of a track car.They may be close 100-200kph,the new turbo has less boost than the old turbo more for drivability gas milage etc but with better all around performance and still lays down some really good numbers.Comparing the 100 to 200kph of the GT3 to the new 997TT of only .3 faster is like saying the GT2 is only .4 faster than the new turbo.At those speeds 3 or 4 tenths is alot to make up.As for the 1/4mile or aprox. 0-200 11.3 compared to a (12.3 on the gt3) or (12.1 on the old turbo) the new turbo 0-200 would suck the headlights out of both in 1/4mile comparing all cars being stock out of the showroom floor.
11.3 to a 12.3 is a good 10car lengths give a take alittle.Go to the drags and watch or run a car running low 11's to low 12's in a heads up race then you will know how much distance it is.
Talking stock to stock here.
The new turbo is more of a street car and the GT3 is more of a track car.They may be close 100-200kph,the new turbo has less boost than the old turbo more for drivability gas milage etc but with better all around performance and still lays down some really good numbers.Comparing the 100 to 200kph of the GT3 to the new 997TT of only .3 faster is like saying the GT2 is only .4 faster than the new turbo.At those speeds 3 or 4 tenths is alot to make up.As for the 1/4mile or aprox. 0-200 11.3 compared to a (12.3 on the gt3) or (12.1 on the old turbo) the new turbo 0-200 would suck the headlights out of both in 1/4mile comparing all cars being stock out of the showroom floor.
11.3 to a 12.3 is a good 10car lengths give a take alittle.Go to the drags and watch or run a car running low 11's to low 12's in a heads up race then you will know how much distance it is.
I am talking stock for stock... The new RS has 15hp more than the GT3 and a shorter diff ratio... AS STANDARD! Not talking modified. How do you think it lapped the NBR 7+ sec faster????
12-16-2009, 09:00 PM
#183
Indeed we can quantify this: The new turbo has completed the quarter mile in 11.3 sec at about 120 mph. One second at this pace is 88 ft/sec X 2 = 176 ft. With a 14.5 foot car this is approximately 12 car lengths.
12-16-2009, 09:02 PM
#185
Rennlist Member
And you've just demonstrated that you still don't get it.
Let's go over this again: top speed and NBR times are unquestionably performance indicators.
They're just not of pracitcal value given the way most TT owners use their cars.
My point is that straight line performance (no matter how you choose to measure it whether it be 0 - 60, 0 - 120, 60 - 120 etc) is far more important in the context in which most TT owners use their cars than NBR times, top speed (or if you like g forces and slalom times).
Let's go over this again: top speed and NBR times are unquestionably performance indicators.
They're just not of pracitcal value given the way most TT owners use their cars.
My point is that straight line performance (no matter how you choose to measure it whether it be 0 - 60, 0 - 120, 60 - 120 etc) is far more important in the context in which most TT owners use their cars than NBR times, top speed (or if you like g forces and slalom times).
12-16-2009, 09:04 PM
#186
Yes you are missing something.
Something can be a performance indicator and yet given the way it used not be of any practical value. Top speed is precisely in that category. The cars top speed is an indicator of its performance but of no relevance if you never approach it as most here do not. So not being of any practical value it's value is for bragging rights only.
Something can be a performance indicator and yet given the way it used not be of any practical value. Top speed is precisely in that category. The cars top speed is an indicator of its performance but of no relevance if you never approach it as most here do not. So not being of any practical value it's value is for bragging rights only.
12-16-2009, 09:10 PM
#187
Rennlist Member
Yes you are missing something.
Something can be a performance indicator and yet given the way it used not be of any practical value. Top speed is precisely in that category. The cars top speed is an indicator of its performance but of no relevance if you never approach it as most here do not. So not being of any practical value it's value is for bragging rights only.
Something can be a performance indicator and yet given the way it used not be of any practical value. Top speed is precisely in that category. The cars top speed is an indicator of its performance but of no relevance if you never approach it as most here do not. So not being of any practical value it's value is for bragging rights only.
Where I come from, the type of launch that will yield a 3.2s 0-60 gets your car impounded for a few days and gets yourself a date with the local judge. I doubt that it is much different where you come from....
Last edited by 911rox; 12-16-2009 at 09:36 PM.
12-16-2009, 09:17 PM
#188
Rennlist Member
What is my point? All these performance advantages aren't due to the new lightweight engine but rather due to to other technical improvements (pdk, dynamic mounts etc) and the results would have been no different if these were coupled to an M64 rather than 9A1... IMO
Thus,
performance advantages of new motor: NIL
reliability advantages:??? but questionable at best
Profit for Porsche: Increased
Savings passed on to consumer: Yeh right!
Last edited by 911rox; 12-16-2009 at 09:43 PM.
12-16-2009, 09:39 PM
#189
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As we can't compare new vs old motor in repective TTs, I was comparing 435hp GT3 to new 500hp TT. In manual format, dispite not even being close in torque range which is vital for launch, there is only 0.4s too 100kph and nothing in it to 200kph... Fact is that the comparison we would like to make (ie TT.1 vs TT.2 new engine vs old) can never happen.
What is my point? All these performance advantages aren't due to the new lightweight engine but rather due to to other technical improvements (pdk, dynamic mounts etc) and the results would have been no different coupled to an M64 rather than 9A1... IMO
What is my point? All these performance advantages aren't due to the new lightweight engine but rather due to to other technical improvements (pdk, dynamic mounts etc) and the results would have been no different coupled to an M64 rather than 9A1... IMO
12-16-2009, 09:40 PM
#190
Super Moderator
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Just trying to offer you an opportunity to experience some of the things being discussed....like what it's like to drive a Turbo, what its like to experience 1G in a turn...rather than flooriing it from stoplight to stoplight.
BTW, are you sure you're not GhettoRacer re-incarnated?
Not a bad thing, he actually got his own forum.
12-16-2009, 09:49 PM
#191
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doing it in reality is when someone really feels the difference and at that distance when drag racing it's really getting smoked!
12-17-2009, 12:32 AM
#192
The implication here is that a less costly engine is less sophisticated or "desirable." The other point that has been made is that why is the price of the new turbo marginally higher when the engine costs have decreased?
With respect to cost don't forget that Porsche has produced an entirely new engine with 40% fewer moving parts. Of course that should translate into higher manufacturing efficiency and thus lower costs. This has no bearing, whatsoever, on the robustness of the design. It may still be a better engine produced at lower cost.
Now why is the new car no cheaper than the outgoing model? I'm not in a position to justify Porsche's pricing structure (which in many cases is ridiculous) but consider that they may want to recoup their research and development costs that were incurred to produce an engine that is lighter, higher revving, more fuel efficient, has lower emissions and produces more horsepower and torque than the outgoing model.
And this ignores the real improvements made in the cars suspension and transmission.
Finally, Porsche may very well not have adaquately hedged their bets against a dollar that has been in free fall against the Euro for the past several years.
Capiche?
12-17-2009, 12:37 AM
#193
OK, I'll put you down for "no thank you".
Just trying to offer you an opportunity to experience some of the things being discussed....like what it's like to drive a Turbo, what its like to experience 1G in a turn...rather than flooriing it from stoplight to stoplight.
BTW, are you sure you're not GhettoRacer re-incarnated?
Not a bad thing, he actually got his own forum.
Just trying to offer you an opportunity to experience some of the things being discussed....like what it's like to drive a Turbo, what its like to experience 1G in a turn...rather than flooriing it from stoplight to stoplight.
BTW, are you sure you're not GhettoRacer re-incarnated?
Not a bad thing, he actually got his own forum.
Just a few days ago you were imploring others to avoid responding to me and, yet, you seem to have a great deal of difficulty following your own advice.
Instead of bravado and ad hominem attacks don't you think you would be better served just sticking to the facts of this comparison?
...........
OTOH, pondering that, I can see what your dilemma is.