The Corvette may have more turbulence in the back but let the people behind you worry about that. The Corvette has far less drag despite that.<!-- Signature -->
Some corrections: turbo lag has NOT been eliminated from Porsches. Quotes from the Car and Driver, 2001 Porsche 911 Turbo Tiptronic S: "In second gear, before boost has had a chance to build in the 3.6-liter engine, the 3597-pound Turbo's acceleration does not inspire awe." "With twin turbos and intercoolers, variable valve timing and lift, and a lofty 9.4:1 compression ratio, this turbo engine transitions to boost smoothly and quickly. Still, there's a little lag, and to eliminate it completely, it's best to keep the tachometer needle above 3000 rpm." So even today, the only way to get rid of turbo lag is to keep the revs high, or with the exhaust afterburners. Too high of a boost is already ruining the engineŽs efficiency and with the afterburners... Oh well. Why not do better, go to lower boost and bigger engine? Because tradition goes over better engineering solutions. The first Porsche (356) was built in 1948, and it was based on the Volkswagen Beetle and itŽs parts. Hence the rear-mounted engine. And believe me - the Beetle was NOT built with performance in mind. Porsche is not a Beetle, but it is itŽs straight descendant. The 124K $ modding question (a bit stupid though) - if the modding doesnŽt include a change in displacement, the Z06 would win the performance contest hands down with the 5,7L vs the 3,6L. And modding a Porsche is a bit more expensive than modding a Chevy...
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Tim851</i> <b>Why would you want to drive this car and keep the rpm below 3000?</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> It's not a matter of KEEPING the revs below 3000, sometimes you're forced to let the revs drop below 3000. Where did you hear about those electric motors that are supposed to keep the turbines up to speed when the exhaust can't?<!-- Signature -->
For a Porsche 996 TT or GT2 .I undandstand that the turbo starts builting boost below 2000rpm.sure any turbo car will got lag.But those Porsche still got very good power around 2000RPM
On a race track when the rpm goes below 3000 - SHIFT! In the city, when the rpm goes below 3000 - it will have enough power though for city traffic. The only problem could be the highway/autobahn. Once again, it's not that he will drive like a Ford Taurus below 3000 rpm but he will significantly lose acceleration. But this isn't a car for the voyages either. On the other hand, there are hundreds of cars with huge V8s and V12s, why must everybody do the same. Porsche is the only sports car manufacturer to equip F6-Twin Turbos, let them - just for the diversity.
Wheelman I guess you were joking when you were writing about those electric motors? Tim 851 Keeping the revs over 3000 won't eliminate turbo-lag. Turbos need to spin very fast to generate full boost. This only happens with large throttle openings. On a road course, you have to back off the throttle in the turns. Then when you exit the turn, you don't get full boost until the impeller has a chance to accelerate up to top speed. Only then do you get full power. This is not a problem at the drag strip because you're not backing off the throttle. When you compare the acceleration times of a turbo car to a car that is naturally aspirated, you have to keep in mind that it doesn't give a complete picture of how the two cars will accelerate on a road course. When F1 switched from 900 hp turbos to 600 hp atmospheric engines, the trap speed at the end of the longer straightaways was way down, yet the E.T.'s for the duration of the straightaways was also down. Secondly, a tail that sweeps upward increases the distance that the air underneath the car travels while decreasing the distance that the air travels over the top. A tail that sweeps downward does the opposite, thereby increasing the effect of Bernoulli's Principle. Thirdly, I guess I have to start a new topic to get people to address my comments about the Carrera GT vs. the GT2.<!-- Signature -->
@mpg: 1. I don't know the Turbo-lag of a GT2 because I haven't driven one, when I was referring to 3000 rpm I was quoting other posts here. 2. I don't like Turbos as well, but every engine has a curve shaped power line and what I read the turbo-lag in the GT2 is comparable to the normal power growth of non-turbos. 3. I couldn't follow your comments on the BE. what did you mean with a tail that sweeps upward? Tell me a car that looks like what you said so I have a pic.
Tim851 Thanks for asking. Here are some pictures that I hope will illustrate my point. The 911 in the first picture sweeps downward while the other three sweep upward in the back. You can see that the tail of the Mosler (the car on the far right), leans backward, away from the tires, while the 911's tail leans over the tires. The back end of the 911 sweeps down toward the ground. This design decreases drag but increases lift when compared to a conventional design. It's the same basic shape as the original VW. The original VW didn't have enough power to worry about aerodynamics. The original Porsche probably retained the shape for drag reduction. Drag reduction is probably more important than lift reduction when you're talking about a car that only has 48 hp and goes 84 mph (I got those #'s from a Porsche ad that was comparing one of their new models to the original 356). Don't forget, doubling your speed quadruples your lift/downforce. So today's more powerful cars strongly need to consider lift reduction/downforce. Very few road cars actually have aerodynamic downforce, but practically all sportscars are designed with lift reduction in mind. F1 cars have far more drag than road cars because they are far more concerned with downforce. The downforce greatly increases cornering speeds and this effects lap times far more than the increased drag on the straightaways. Lift reduction is both a speed issue and a safety issue. Ofcourse the shape of the 911 can be countered with a wing, but this increases drag and most cars don't need it. If the arch shape is so efficient, why doesn't anybody copy it? It seems like some of the people participating in this forum think that they know more than the engineers at Ferrari, Mclaren etc. Notice that two of the other three cars I chose are Porsches. They know that what I'm saying is true. The arch shape, rear mounted engine and the 6 cylinder turbo are there purely for tradition. I admit that turbo engines have plenty of torque and a broad power band, but you have to wait for it, hence the term "turbo-lag". I hope I didn't give too much info. I don't want to make you look like an idiot. Sometimes they call me Cliff Claven at work. Peace bro.<!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from mpg</i> <b>Wheelman I guess you were joking when you were writing about those electric motors? <b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> Yeah, I was joking. It's only an idea that I'm tinkering with in my shop. Wanted to see what kind of reaction it got. So far, I have implemented the 'pre-boost' apparatus in my 94 MR2 test car. In the 8 test runs I have made so far, it completely eliminated the lag. Only problem is that it's on all the time. Once I work out the appropriate timing, it'll be ready. What do you think? Marketable idea? Would you want one in your car? There seems to be an abundace of engineers in this forum, or at any rate people who like to think they're engineers. What are your thoughts? <!-- Signature -->
Okay now I got you "mpg". Well, you're right, but I wasn't saying the 911 shape is the most perfect and of course the cars you pictured are aerodynamically superior. But the 911 isn't a Windchannel-car and though the Carerra GT has the better design my point is that the 911 still has acceptable downforce/drag values. Naturally, a Corvette e.g. is aerodynamically more efficient.
Hm, I wasn't finished, who said "post"...? When I was talking about the 911 I was referring to it as a roadcar. The Corvette was just a quick example for the car shape I ment, the 3-structure. Of course an up-sweeping tail is more advanced, but if all cars would follow the aerodynamical optimum, they'd all look the same. The Turbulances at the rear are not only a matter for the guy behind you. The low pressure it creates causes drag too, that's why race cars avoid them. For turbos: I would go for a 6l V12 too. But for the 911 a 3.6l R6 is almost everything that fits. There's just not enough room for a bigger engine like the 5.5l V10 of the Carrera GT. Last but not least, zillions of successes of 911 cars over the last 20 years show, that the shape isn't all that bad.
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from My911Turbo</i> <b>I seem to have annoyed a few people here. The 'Vette Z06 is a great car I'm sure but you have all probably heard the phrase "You get what you pay for." this is a true statement. I am not saying the Z06 a tin can with wheels but it isn't in the same engineering or quality league as the GT2 and before you all start whinging like 5yr olds I do know that these two cars appeal to different buyers because of their price tags. It is a well known fact that American build quality is not up to scratch on other cars (ie. European and Japanese) everyone knows it. To quote one highly respected auto mag here in Australia "American cars are with their build quality in the same area as Japanese cars were 15 years ago." Also, part of the explanation for price is importation costs - your Vette' is made in your own country and thus doesn't have all the extra costs associated with importation. Yes, the boxer engine design is old too, it is not engine configuration I am talking about. I am talking about technology used in the configuration of an engine (like pushrods). I will agree that the pushrod engine has come a long way and gives impressive results but it cannot compete with something of the same capacity and configuration running quad cams and 32 valves (and cam timing?). Take a look at the 4.3lt V8 that Toyota uses in the Lexus LS430. America does have a lot of heritage in the 60' and 70's but not everyone thinks those cars are anything spectacular, just out-there-in-your-face American styling which didn't look good then and has unfortunately trickled down to the aesthetic eye-sores of most modern American body designs (with a few exceptions of course). Where were Ferarri etc. then - pending their time in Europe winning races and developing cars that were a prelude to the awesome machines they make now. Comparing these two cars is as one person said "comparing apples and oranges" but someone else started this argument and I am just throwing in my opinion. It's a stupid thread but hey - people use it.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->if you get what you pay for there must be at least $120,000 worth of prestige and only about $50,000 in performance because whether you like it or not the ZO6 can keep up with the GT2 and american cars can't be too bad we make multiple cars that can destroy the overpriced european cars like the mosler MT900 or the intruder maybe the callaway tt corvette which costs $87,000 and out performs the mclaren f1 if you want to compare cars at least look at every thing before you speak and then you would realize that america keeps pace with euro pean cars and does it for less money.
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from K2lu</i> <b>Can we put this engine design thing to bed? Come on, people on these boards like to say how the ZO6 beat a 911 turbo and whatever, but it DOES use a crap-load more petrol doing it. Josh427 - what the HELL are you doing typing "EFFICIENT" when you're talking about American sports cars?!?!? I mean come on - as far as American engines are concerned, they are the engineering equivalent of lighting a fart: Effective, waste of fuel, there are better ways to achieve the same effect, and they're amusing to people that know better. Lingenfelter - that's nice; but we are not in the 60's or 70's anymore... and standard marketting rules dictate, that if American cars had been so good back then and were doing the job well enough, then BENZ, BMW, Ferrari and all of them would not have been able to get a foothold in the market... except, whoops - they did. </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->the gt2 uses more fuel than the ZO6 you must have just guessed that a bigger engine woul automatically have bad fuel economy but you are wrong if you look at it from one view the zo6 is more advanced than the GT2 engine wise the vette has a bigger engine and yet it has better fuel mileage the regulations that force the american carsto have better fuelmileage also forces better engineering. and just like the flat six is porsche heritage so is the american pushrod V8 also by smacking on the ls1/ls6 engines in the zo6 you also are ripping on lotus thats right lotus helped design the ls1. so the zo6 has some european blood.american cars are great so are european cars the thing is that porsche and ferrari and lamborghini and the rest of them makeyou pay for heritage which doesn't help performance at all and if you are buying a fast car what use is a luxory interior but to add weight if you ask me the vette is just right with basic 'creature comforts'please don't say americans have inferior engineering because we have different regulations affecting our designs and also different heritage.
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from mpg</i> <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from TechNspeed</i> <b>A Z06 outrunning a GT2 is pure stupidity</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> Do you realize how important the driver is? I've seen a Corolla beat a 911 turbo, and the 911 turbo driver was pretty good. If Michael Schumacher was driving a Z06, the GT2 would need a world class driver to win. That's how close these cars are. The Z06 might even be the faster car on a track like Lime Rock, where the turns are fast and the straights are short. Did you know that the Z06 has gone head to head with the 996 turbo twice? The Z06 was 2 sec./lap quicker both times. In one of the tests, the Porsche driver was none other than Hurley Haywood himself. 2 sec./lap is huge.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> A drivers capabilities are more relevant if say we were talking about a 911TT vs a Z06. If anything the driver in the Z06 might need to be even more skilled, I dont think I've ever driven a car in which the torque was more volatile than the Z06. In the GT2 we're talking about a car with Diablo/F50ish type speed here. As far as a COROLLA beating a 911 TT, (A) The 911 driver was a good driver dead at the wheel (B) The Corolla had a Lingenfelter engine, or (D) The 911 driver gave him a 400yd headstart. Needless to say, a carolla even lining up next to a 911TT is unimaginable. I own a 993TT and the day I get beat by a Corolla will be the day I marry Rosanne. <!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from TechNspeed</i> <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from mpg</i> <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from TechNspeed</i> <b>A Z06 outrunning a GT2 is pure stupidity</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> Do you realize how important the driver is? I've seen a Corolla beat a 911 turbo, and the 911 turbo driver was pretty good. If Michael Schumacher was driving a Z06, the GT2 would need a world class driver to win. That's how close these cars are. The Z06 might even be the faster car on a track like Lime Rock, where the turns are fast and the straights are short. Did you know that the Z06 has gone head to head with the 996 turbo twice? The Z06 was 2 sec./lap quicker both times. In one of the tests, the Porsche driver was none other than Hurley Haywood himself. 2 sec./lap is huge.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> A drivers capabilities are more relevant if say we were talking about a 911TT vs a Z06. If anything the driver in the Z06 might need to be even more skilled, I dont think I've ever driven a car in which the torque was more volatile than the Z06. In the GT2 we're talking about a car with Diablo/F50ish type speed here. As far as a COROLLA beating a 911 TT, (A) The 911 driver was a good driver dead at the wheel (B) The Corolla had a Lingenfelter engine, or (D) The 911 driver gave him a 400yd headstart. Needless to say, a carolla even lining up next to a 911TT is unimaginable. I own a 993TT and the day I get beat by a Corolla will be the day I marry Rosanne. </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> They didn't line up head to head. To be honest, it wasn't even the same day, but I've been beaten by a STOCK Corolla, and I've beaten a modded 996tt with my MR2. Maybe you don't realize how important the driver is. Have you ever done any autocrossing, or any track racing? Are you saying that the Z06 driver would have to be more skilled to beat a 911tt? I never even heard of the guy who beat Hurley Haywood by 2 sec.<!-- Signature -->
Thanks for clearing up the Corolla / TT situation. No, I'm not saying that a Z06 driver would have to be more skilled vs. a 911TT, I've been beaten 3 times by new Z06's in my 993TT. Im saying that with two realtively equally matched drives, a run between the Z06 and GT2 would realistically yield the GT2 as the winner. Driving ability is very important, but its much more of an issue on the track vs. the street in my opinion. Thanks<!-- Signature -->
the GT2 is not faster than the vette, porsches website has the list time at 4.1 seconds to 60, supercars.net has it at 4 flat, the Z06 posts 4 flat to 60 as well. To 60 is the only thing that really matters, b/c thats where you win street races. Sure driveability is an issue, but these cars are so close to 60 that its quite sad for porsche condisering they charge over 100,000$ more for the GT2 (vette z06- 50,000$, porche gt2- 179,000$). If you put the extra 100 grand into the vette, the vette would eat the GT2 so bad it wouldn't even be funny, but the funniest thing to me is that you don't have to, the vette will already run with the GT2 in the numbers. I'm sorry if you paid too much for your porsche, GO ZO6!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~quote from hsckris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ the GT2 is not faster than the vette, porsches website has the list time at 4.1 seconds to 60, supercars.net has it at 4 flat, the Z06 posts 4 flat to 60 as well. To 60 is the only thing that really matters, b/c thats where you win street races. Sure driveability is an issue, but these cars are so close to 60 that its quite sad for porsche condisering they charge over 100,000$ more for the GT2 (vette z06- 50,000$, porche gt2- 179,000$). If you put the extra 100 grand into the vette, the vette would eat the GT2 so bad it wouldn't even be funny, but the funniest thing to me is that you don't have to, the vette will already run with the GT2 in the numbers. I'm sorry if you paid too much for your porsche, GO ZO6!!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i like porshes and hell of lot,but i will have to agree with this quote,their way too damn expensive when you can buy other chevys that wil beat it!130 thousand is crazy! i mean what the #^&* kinda dumbass will pay that much for a car that'll loose on the street?
if you are a supercar buyer then you wouldnt care about how much the GT2 or vette costs unless you cant offord them or you can barely get the money to get a vette then I can see why you would say a vette is better then a ZO6 but literally a GT2 can go around the ZO6 in circles on the road. I cant believe you guys are comparing a ZO6 to a GT2. You vette dudes go to every forum and say "oh this sux and the vette is better" I like the vette but you guys are talking shit all the tie trying to even compare them. WHo #$%#ing cares how much the vette costs??!!!! just because it's american and youguys are american doesnt mean you have to defend it with all your life! grow up..<!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Turbo FREAK</i> <b>if you are a supercar buyer then you wouldnt care about how much the GT2 or vette costs unless you cant offord them or you can barely get the money to get a vette then I can see why you would say a vette is better then a ZO6 but literally a GT2 can go around the ZO6 in circles on the road. I cant believe you guys are comparing a ZO6 to a GT2. You vette dudes go to every forum and say "oh this sux and the vette is better" I like the vette but you guys are talking shit all the tie trying to even compare them. WHo #$%#ing cares how much the vette costs??!!!! just because it's american and youguys are american doesnt mean you have to defend it with all your life! grow up..</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> You don't have to be American to like the Z06. Maybe most aren't American. Maybe they prefer it for other reasons.<!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Turbo FREAK</i> <b>if you are a supercar buyer then you wouldnt care about how much the GT2 or vette costs unless you cant offord them or you can barely get the money to get a vette then I can see why you would say a vette is better then a ZO6 but literally a GT2 can go around the ZO6 in circles on the road. I cant believe you guys are comparing a ZO6 to a GT2. You vette dudes go to every forum and say "oh this sux and the vette is better" I like the vette but you guys are talking shit all the tie trying to even compare them. WHo #$%#ing cares how much the vette costs??!!!! just because it's american and youguys are american doesnt mean you have to defend it with all your life! grow up..</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> i hope this guy is kidding. even if i had the money to buy any car in the world (bill gates or something) i would still look at value for the dollar. for the 130,000$ difference in price one could sure do a hell of alot to the vette, or even buy a small house, perhaps another vette, maybe they would buy 4 other average cars, etc. etc. If you say money doesn't matter, i say you either waste yours or have no concept of economics, perhaps both
why dont americans export becuase noone wants their crap yes the peice of shit 1950 technology pushrod engine would cost alot more in over head cam form......but americans are lazy...... plus they dont have enough tech to make a overhead cam engine(not literally.)