Mar 13, 2006 8:47:48 AM
Mar 13, 2006 8:51:08 AM
Mar 13, 2006 11:05:14 AM
Quote:
SoCalHoosier said:
I really am trying to understand why some Porschephiles are so quick to accept whatever Porsche puts out and yet dismisses the products of other manufacturers... My feeling is that they don't understand HOW MUCH BETTER the Porsche brand and product would become if we banded together to say... "Hey Porsche... we want you to be on top... stop trying to sell as many cars as BMW and get back to what you do best... building world-class sports cars, not compromised GTs."
Quote:
devo said:
If the time is accurate, it is disappointing. However, how can you say that it is not much better than a 911S?. It's a great deal better than the S.
It takes A LOT to gain a few seconds.
Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
devo said:
If the time is accurate, it is disappointing. However, how can you say that it is not much better than a 911S?. It's a great deal better than the S.
It takes A LOT to gain a few seconds.
If you ask me, the time is great, if it has been achieved by Von Saurma and not by Röhrl. The 7:52 Gallardo time was done with Corsas if I'm not mistaken, so was ther 7:55 time by the F430. The Corvette also IMO won't break 7:50 with a truly stock car, a standing start and a non-racecar driver. I could be wrong though.
Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
devo said:
If the time is accurate, it is disappointing. However, how can you say that it is not much better than a 911S?. It's a great deal better than the S.
It takes A LOT to gain a few seconds.
If you ask me, the time is great, if it has been achieved by Von Saurma and not by Röhrl. The 7:52 Gallardo time was done with Corsas if I'm not mistaken, so was ther 7:55 time by the F430. The Corvette also IMO won't break 7:50 with a truly stock car, a standing start and a non-racecar driver. I could be wrong though.
Quote:
MKSGR said:Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
devo said:
If the time is accurate, it is disappointing. However, how can you say that it is not much better than a 911S?. It's a great deal better than the S.
It takes A LOT to gain a few seconds.
If you ask me, the time is great, if it has been achieved by Von Saurma and not by Röhrl. The 7:52 Gallardo time was done with Corsas if I'm not mistaken, so was ther 7:55 time by the F430. The Corvette also IMO won't break 7:50 with a truly stock car, a standing start and a non-racecar driver. I could be wrong though.
Crash, I agree that 7:49 looks good compared to the Gallardo and F430 time. However, if you consider that the GT2 Mk1 already did 7:46...
I think that 7:49 would be very disappointing given 480hp, VTG, a new 4WD system, PCCB, latest tire technology, etc. etc.
Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
MKSGR said:Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
devo said:
If the time is accurate, it is disappointing. However, how can you say that it is not much better than a 911S?. It's a great deal better than the S.
It takes A LOT to gain a few seconds.
If you ask me, the time is great, if it has been achieved by Von Saurma and not by Röhrl. The 7:52 Gallardo time was done with Corsas if I'm not mistaken, so was ther 7:55 time by the F430. The Corvette also IMO won't break 7:50 with a truly stock car, a standing start and a non-racecar driver. I could be wrong though.
Crash, I agree that 7:49 looks good compared to the Gallardo and F430 time. However, if you consider that the GT2 Mk1 already did 7:46...
I think that 7:49 would be very disappointing given 480hp, VTG, a new 4WD system, PCCB, latest tire technology, etc. etc.
Yes, the thought had crossed my mind. However, we don't know the specs of the car. Did it have LSD or not? Tip or manual? Sport Chrono or not? All these variables are important to me. If it was just the basic car, which my assumption is based on, then the time is very good. The addition of the LSD and the overboost will surely improve the time even further (not to forget that the GT2 weighed 150 kilos less).
Quote:
arakis said:
F430 7:55 time is bougus, It can go way faster then that, that was sandbaging by the SportAuto
Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
MKSGR said:Quote:
arakis said:
F430 7:55 time is bougus, It can go way faster then that, that was sandbaging by the SportAuto
Why would you say so?
Because 'injustice' and 'conspiracy' seem to be very common words in Belgrade right now.
Quote:
turbolite said:
Sorry guys, but why should these 7.49 be a valid time?? we dont know which car spec or setup was used, dont know the driver, dont know the measurement procedures, the tyres etc!!!!
this claim, though it looks realistic at first glance is at least as unsubstantiated as the 7.42 of the z06!
It's waste of energy to write dozen of posts on these kind of rumours. unlike for the z06 we do not even have an objective measurement of the 997tt performance times, only factory claims.
so just relax and wait for a test from a decent magazine, then we'll talk again!
Mar 13, 2006 9:08:07 PM
Quote:
svtrader1 said:Quote:
Carlos from Spain said:Quote:
svtrader1 said:
It also turns out, Von Somra only managed to produde a 0-60mph time of 5.2 sec., while every other mag did it in the mid 4s. Even staff writers at Road and Track beat Von Surma. It should raise some eyebrows regarding his credibility.
So, why are Europeans so fixated with SportAuto? Von Surma is a puppet. Porsche has been pulling his strings for years.
Yes, objective track testing is always a thorn for people like you ... don't play the "if you can't win by the rules, lets shoot down the credibility of the rules" game, we are much too versed on "the rules" and the Ring for your sake...
BTW, as to the difference between acceleration times, let me give you a hint: Saurma (not Somra) does not produce 0-60mph times! (nor does he use powershifting)
Yes, you use the metric system, nevertheless, a pathetic result from a supposed pro driver.
But, really, who cares anymore about ring time? We already know the result as long as Von Surma is driving.
Turbo v. Zo6? Porsche wins every time. Even the Gt3 will beat the Zo6. Porsche wouldn't allow Sport Auto to print it any other way.
Mar 13, 2006 9:08:17 PM
Quote:
Branimir said:
Carlos, I have to correct you little bit...
Lamborghini Gallardo times achived in Supertest(12/2003) were-Hockenheim: 1.11,8min(excellent time!)
-Nordschleife: 7.52min(not 7.50min)
Gallardo was with optional sport setup(different suspension and faster steering-price in Germany 1700Euro).
Ferrari F430F1 Supertest 01/2006
Hockenheim: 1.12,7min
Nordchleife: 7.55min
F430 were with ceramic brakes and Pirell Corsa's.
Porsche 997S(PCCB,-20mm/LSD) Supertest 05/2005
Hockenheim: 1.14,3min
Nordchleife: 8.05min
Note: for the same setup Porsche claimed time around 8.00min in hands of W.Rohrl!
Is 7.49min realistic? Manual(with LSD) or TIP? Driver-W.Rohrl? If this time is set by W.Rohrl then Sport Auto Supertest time achived by Horst von Saurma will not be that good... von Saurma times around Ring were allways little bit slower then factory Porsche times achived by W.Rohrl.
This is the reason why IMO Sport Auto Supertest is the only relatively objective car review on(and not only on) race track.
Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
turbolite said:
Sorry guys, but why should these 7.49 be a valid time?? we dont know which car spec or setup was used, dont know the driver, dont know the measurement procedures, the tyres etc!!!!
this claim, though it looks realistic at first glance is at least as unsubstantiated as the 7.42 of the z06!
It's waste of energy to write dozen of posts on these kind of rumours. unlike for the z06 we do not even have an objective measurement of the 997tt performance times, only factory claims.
so just relax and wait for a test from a decent magazine, then we'll talk again!
It's more valid, since we can compare it to previous Porsche times, such as the 7:56 for a stock Turbo with the mushy suspension (997TT dramatically improved in that area), or the 462 HP GT2 with 7:46. The 7:49 seems entirely realistic, considering the car has more horsepower than the Mk1 GT2, the same brakes, better torque curve and an advanced AWD, which doesn't sap power. On the other hand, we have the C6 Corvette with a time of 8:15, while the claimed time was somewhere in the 7:50's.
Quote:
vinnie said:
Even if the Z06 lap is a flying lap and you add 5 seconds to make up for the lack of a standing start it's a great victory for the Z06!!
If this is true it's very embarrassing for Porsche. To lose in a straight line is one thing but to lose on the track that Porsche design their cars for is nothing short of a complete annihilation. Especially since it's their flagship model which has just been released!!
Quote:
RC said:Quote:
Nic said:
it's offical..
The 997 TT covers the Ring in 7.49!!!
impressive...
Official? By Porsche?
I wait for the Sport Auto time, it could be worse, it could be better. The 7:49 claimed by Porsche were done under not ideal weather conditions, btw.
Quote:
guy2 said:Quote:
RC said:Quote:
Nic said:
it's offical..
The 997 TT covers the Ring in 7.49!!!
impressive...
Official? By Porsche?
I wait for the Sport Auto time, it could be worse, it could be better. The 7:49 claimed by Porsche were done under not ideal weather conditions, btw.
not ideal weather conditions
what could that mean?
now i know! snow and ice pretty impressive