1 2 3 4 [Last >>]
All Forums > European Cars > sport auto Supertest Porsche 997 Turbo > Post Reply
Post #1 Fri, Apr 20, 7:23 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542
Post #2 Fri, Apr 20, 7:56 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542

 some specs:

3.6-litres bi-turbo
bore x stroke: 100.0 x 76.4 mm
compression: 9.0:1
480 PS @ 6,000 rpm
133.33 PS/litre
680 Nm @ ~2,100 rpm
tires:
Michelin Pilot Sport Cup NO in the size of
235/35 ZR 19 and 305/30 ZR 19 in front/rear
brakes:
380 mm eventilated and drilled ceramic disk brakes in front/rear
kerb weight: 1581 kg
weight distribution: 39.0/61.0 per cent in front/rear
power-to-weight ratio: 303.6 bhp/ton
acceleration:
0-100 km/h 3.8 s
0-160 km/h 8.3 s
0-200 km/h 12.6 s
0-200-0 km/h: 17.7 s

80-180 km/h in 4th gear:
beats even the 806 bhp Koenigsegg CCR (8.6 s) to 7.7s !!!

handling:
max. lat. acceleration on track: 1.3 G
18m slalom 71.3 km/h
36m slalom 134 km/h
110m evasion test 153 km/h
wet handling track 1:13.6 mins.

aerodynmaic:
Cw 0.29
Cw x A 0.59
8kg uplift/12 kg downforce at 200 km/h

verdict:
score 72/80 pts.

7:54 mins at the Nurbrugring Nordschleife
as fast as the more powerful CLK DTM AMG, the F430 and even slightly faster than the 996 Turbo but not faster than the Gallardo SE. At D?ttinger H?he it achieves a top speed of 282 km/h, 996 Turbo only 272 km/h. It loses against the Gallardo SE due to less power but more weight, the 4WD of the Gallardo also makes a difference.

1:11.9 mins at the Hockenheim short track
only 0.2 secs and 0.1 secs. slower than the 996 Turbo or Gallardo SE but 0.6 and 0.7 secs. faster than the CLK DTM AMG and F430, nothing to worry about

The Porsche 997 Turbo is was the Porsche Turbo always was and is supposed to be, the ultimate driving machine offering a perfect handling even though the handling is a bit difficile and chnages from understeer to oversteer under load. Even though it is about 90 kgs more heavy than the 996 Turbo it beats it in all aspects, it more agaile than ever (even beats the CCR from 80-180 km/h in 4th gear. As standard it comes with 620 Nm of torques, in combination with the Sport Chrono package 680 Nm are available.

The new Michelin Sport Cup tyres limit the max. lat. acceleration a bit but also offer a much better wet handling. With 3.0 G in lines up with the CLK DTM AMG, the Gallardo E-gear and the old 996 Turbo. In wet handling it beats the Ford GT and Aston Martin V8 Vantage ut not the BMW M6, Corvette C6, Maserati Gransport or Porsche 997 GT3.

The 36m slalom it masters better than the Ford GT or F430 but not the RS4, Boxster S or 996 GT3. In the 110m evasion test it is as fast as the LP640 but not the 996 Turbo.

In general it beats the Ford GT, Gallrdo SE and F430 but not the LP640 or 996 Turbo.

Edited by ajzahn - Fri, Apr 20, 8:28 AM
Post #3 Fri, Apr 20, 8:01 AM
Justme
Supercar Guru - 529

 are these tries R-tires`?
Post #4 Fri, Apr 20, 8:13 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542

 semi-slicks
Post #5 Fri, Apr 20, 8:15 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542

 next is the Corvette Z06
may,18
Post #6 Fri, Apr 20, 8:16 AM
HeyHuub
Supercar Messi - 3504

 Dissapointing.

2 seconds faster then the much less powerfull 996.
The Hockenheim time is pretty impressive though.

"the 4WD of the Gallardo also makes a difference."
Isn't the 4wd of the Turbo supposed to be much more advanced?
You're hitting a hell at the edge of the stage and you are trying to kill me.


Edited by HeyHuub - Fri, Apr 20, 8:19 AM
Post #7 Fri, Apr 20, 8:17 AM
HeyHuub
Supercar Messi - 3504
Quote from ajzahn
next is the Corvette Z06
may,18
That would be verry interesting to see how it performes on the Ring, finnally something other then just claims.
You're hitting a hell at the edge of the stage and you are trying to kill me.
Post #8 Fri, Apr 20, 8:25 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542

 "80-180 km/H in 4th gear:
beats even the 806 bhp Koenigsegg CCR (8.6 s) to 7.7s !!!"

this is the best part of the whole article!!!

Edited by ajzahn - Fri, Apr 20, 8:28 AM
Post #9 Fri, Apr 20, 8:28 AM
amenasce
STFU - 64104

 why is it slower than a 996T ?
*****As a gift, for your renewed patience, try our New Forum Search*****
Post #10 Fri, Apr 20, 8:29 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542
Quote from amenasce
why is it slower than a 996T ?
more weight and different Michelin Pilot Cup Sport tyres
Post #11 Fri, Apr 20, 8:41 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542
Quote from HeyHuub
Dissapointing.

2 seconds faster then the much less powerfull 996.
The Hockenheim time is pretty impressive though.

"the 4WD of the Gallardo also makes a difference."
Isn't the 4wd of the Turbo supposed to be much more advanced?
it ahs to due with the weight distribution and set-up, the Gallardo offers jsut more oversteer while the 997 Turbo switches from 1st understeer to oversteer and so offers a different handling at the track.
Post #12 Fri, Apr 20, 5:27 PM
Guibo
- 23272
Quote from ajzahn
more weight and different Michelin Pilot Cup Sport tyres
But aren't these semi-slicks supposed to be better than the tires on the 996 Turbo from 7 years ago?
More weight, but its power/wt ratio is 13% better. Plus the 120 Nm difference in torque. And the old Turbo was on steel discs, not ceramics, isn't that right?

Some of those cornering speeds are downright odd. At Metzgesfeld, for instance, the old Turbo is 38 (?!) km/h faster. It's also faster at
Klostertal 1 (+18km/h)
Klostertal 2 (+6)
Galgenkopf (+9)

The new Turbo is definitely faster on the 200+ kmh sections though.

I'm wondering how the X50 (works tuning kit) Turbo with MPSC's and ceramic brakes would have done...
Post #13 Fri, Apr 20, 5:38 PM
mclaren_v12
Supercar Messiah - 2351

 996 turbo had PCCBs as option, Turbo S as standard. also it is an option on all 997. 997 turbo engine weighs more.
strange results though. i need to see the lap times with regular tyres.
Post #14 Fri, Apr 20, 5:45 PM
GTRfreak
Supercar Messiah - 2197

 GT3>>Turbo
Post #15 Fri, Apr 20, 6:51 PM
Guibo
- 23272

 According to the Track Challenge site, the old Turbo was w/o ceramics.
Post #16 Fri, Apr 20, 8:52 PM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542
Quote from Guibo
But aren't these semi-slicks supposed to be better than the tires on the 996 Turbo from 7 years ago?
More weight, but its power/wt ratio is 13% better. Plus the 120 Nm difference in torque. And the old Turbo was on steel discs, not ceramics, isn't that right?

Some of those cornering speeds are downright odd. At Metzgesfeld, for instance, the old Turbo is 38 (?!) km/h faster. It's also faster at
Klostertal 1 (+18km/h)
Klostertal 2 (+6)
Galgenkopf (+9)

The new Turbo is definitely faster on the 200+ kmh sections though.

I'm wondering how the X50 (works tuning kit) Turbo with MPSC's and ceramic brakes would have done...
depends on whch direction tyre development goes. The new semi-slicks offer a much better wet handling, the rubber compund ahs been changed to achive that and you have to pay a slight decrease in grip and so max. lateral acceleration.
Post #17 Sat, Apr 21, 1:34 AM
Guibo
- 23272
Quote from ajzahn
depends on whch direction tyre development goes. The new semi-slicks offer a much better wet handling, the rubber compund ahs been changed to achive that and you have to pay a slight decrease in grip and so max. lateral acceleration.
Rarely does tire development go backward.
The new semi-slicks offer a much better wet handling...vs traditional semi-slicks (old P Zero Corsa or CSL-era MPSC's) or vs the old Turbo's P Zeros? Not sure if the compound has changed. It's still treadwear 80 as it's been before. The difference (in the sizes used by Porsche) is that an additional longitudinal groove has been added near the outside edge, and the other grooves appear wider than on other MPSC's. So, less of a semi-slick than before, but retaining the grippy compound.
FWIW, the old Turbo was on treadwear 140 tires, 10mm narrower front and rear. I doubt there is much (if any) difference in tire grip; if anything, the MPSC's are probably still grippier. That leaves the matter of 7 years of suspension, steering, braking and electronic stability control development.
Post #18 Sat, Apr 21, 3:15 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542

 never said that it goes backwards

semi-slicks always have to be a compromise between best performance and safety. The former Michelin Pilot Cup Sport tyre was best at the track under dry and warm conditions but lacked in the wet, has always been pointed out by sport auto i.e. in the BMW M3 Supertest.

Not it offers a much better handling in the wet but loses marginally at the track wehn it is directly compared to the predecessor. Both tyres behave different, hard to say which is the better one.
Post #19 Sat, Apr 21, 6:10 AM
HeyHuub
Supercar Messi - 3504

 I think ajzahn made a typing error, seeing as the 996 Turbo did a 1:14.6 on Hockenheim. The only 996 that is faster is the GT3 RS.
You're hitting a hell at the edge of the stage and you are trying to kill me.
Post #20 Sat, Apr 21, 7:19 AM
BMWM3
Supercar Messiah - 1362
Quote from ajzahn
next is the Corvette Z06
may,18
finally.


thanks for the article scan
"If you no longer go for a gap that exsists,you are no longer a racing driver"
Ayrton Senna
Post #21 Sat, Apr 21, 9:08 AM
bentheswift
New Member - 26

 Who wrote that blurb in English? Is that a translation from the article?

It sounds made up, it's pretty unbelievable in several ways.
"Ferrari V8s are officially made by god, because the sound could only come from them."
-F1GTRueno
Post #22 Sat, Apr 21, 9:17 AM
ajzahn
Posts - 62542
Quote from bentheswift
Who wrote that blurb in English? Is that a translation from the article?

It sounds made up, it's pretty unbelievable in several ways.
transcription was provided by me, just some excerpts as sport auto are praising it to the highest level
Post #23 Sat, Apr 21, 9:30 AM
HeyHuub
Supercar Messi - 3504
Quote from bentheswift
Who wrote that blurb in English? Is that a translation from the article?

It sounds made up, it's pretty unbelievable in several ways.
You can do it better?
You're hitting a hell at the edge of the stage and you are trying to kill me.
Post #24 Sat, Apr 21, 9:52 AM
Guibo
- 23272
Quote from ajzahn
never said that it goes backwards

semi-slicks always have to be a compromise between best performance and safety. The former Michelin Pilot Cup Sport tyre was best at the track under dry and warm conditions but lacked in the wet, has always been pointed out by sport auto i.e. in the BMW M3 Supertest.

Not it offers a much better handling in the wet but loses marginally at the track wehn it is directly compared to the predecessor. Both tyres behave different, hard to say which is the better one.
But that was the implication.

That's all and well, but you'll notice I didn't say anything to the contrary (old vs new MPSC). So that brings the question: why do we keep comparing new vs old MPSC's? Are you saying the old Turbo was tested on the old Pilot Sport Cups?

"why is it slower than a 996T ?"
--amenasce

"more weight and different Michelin Pilot Cup Sport tyres"
--you
Post #25 Sat, Apr 21, 10:17 AM
HeyHuub
Supercar Messi - 3504
Quote from Guibo
But that was the implication.

That's all and well, but you'll notice I didn't say anything to the contrary (old vs new MPSC). So that brings the question: why do we keep comparing new vs old MPSC's? Are you saying the old Turbo was tested on the old Pilot Sport Cups?

"why is it slower than a 996T ?"
--amenasce

"more weight and different Michelin Pilot Cup Sport tyres"
--you

It isn't slower then the Turbo, it's slower then the 996 GT3 RS
You're hitting a hell at the edge of the stage and you are trying to kill me.
Posted: Today
Superbot
Posted: Today
Superbot
All Forums > European Cars > sport auto Supertest Porsche 997 Turbo > Post Reply
1 2 3 4 [Newer >>]