Crown

Board: Porsche - 911 - 997 - Turbo Language: English Region: Worldwide Share/Save/Bookmark Close

Forum - Thread


    Re: Nordschleife 7.49

    Quote:
    Branimir said:
    Very good find Nic!
    So, 7.49min with normal tires and 7.42min(!!) with semi-slicks... In the hand of W.Rohrl I guess? If this times were achived by W.Rohrl that Sport Auto times by Horst von Saurma will be little bit slower(again, I am guessing).
    One other hint according to my friend who works at P. this times are for 997 Turbo manual with optional LSD... And TIP version is few seconds slower on Ring.



    I really hope that all these rumours are unfounded. 7:49 for manual with LSD would be a major disaster.

    The 996TT did 7:56 back in 2001. Now if you add x50 and x73 and recent tire technology the 996TT would be close to 7:50 i bet. This would imply that 7:49 would be no improvement at all

    I hope that all those rumours are wrong. Otherwise my bad feelings about the performance of the 997TT would be confirmed also on the NBR.

    Re: Nordschleife 7.49

    I spoke to an employee of the PAG. He told me that the 997tt covers the PAG test track at the same time as the CGT!
    Isn't this an argue for the performance of the 997tt!?

    don't know the tires, driver, setup etc.

    Re: Nordschleife 7.49

    Quote:
    MKSGR said:
    Quote:
    Branimir said:
    Very good find Nic!
    So, 7.49min with normal tires and 7.42min(!!) with semi-slicks... In the hand of W.Rohrl I guess? If this times were achived by W.Rohrl that Sport Auto times by Horst von Saurma will be little bit slower(again, I am guessing).
    One other hint according to my friend who works at P. this times are for 997 Turbo manual with optional LSD... And TIP version is few seconds slower on Ring.



    I really hope that all these rumours are unfounded. 7:49 for manual with LSD would be a major disaster.

    The 996TT did 7:56 back in 2001. Now if you add x50 and x73 and recent tire technology the 996TT would be close to 7:50 i bet. This would imply that 7:49 would be no improvement at all

    I hope that all those rumours are wrong. Otherwise my bad feelings about the performance of the 997TT would be confirmed also on the NBR.



    Throw in the optional LSD (which was available for the 996TT), along with the X50 and X73 and one can seriously ask himself - where's the improvement?
    MKSGR, save yourself a lot of money and buy the optional LSD for the TT. You'll be just as fast.
    However, if the time is for a totally stock 997TT, preferably with the slower transmission, then it's a very good result.
    Also, not to forget, the 7:52 time for the Gallardo has been achieved with the 500 HP model.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    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.



    As I just said the 997tt time looks very well possible, but it's not proven at all and therefore it's not a valid claim, just speculation.
    As much as the 7.42 of the z06 is speculation (and rather admittedly improbable) as nobody knows the details of that run.
    Still that car at least has proven it's surprising performance against all sceptics in the recent AMS test, a thing which hasnt happened with the 997tt yet. The burden of proof re performance lies with the Porsche this time...



    Why is it that anytime a Vette has a quicker time than a Porsche, it is either unsubstantiated, speculation, improbable, or so on and so forth. As far as the 06 Z06 claim of 7.429 at the ring, let me offer this:
    Read this:
    http://www.supercars.net/Pics?vpf2=y&gID=6&fID=3185&tID=48489&mID=1404211&l=d


    Furthermore, Dave Hill stated both in Corvette Quarterly and in Motor Trend (Sept. 05 issue) that the FINAL tweaking mentioned in the above article(including standard runflats) on the Le mans Blue Z that Magnusson drove was the same (suspension and engine tuning) used to start the building of the production cars. Hill also stated that the achieved time of 7:429 was achieved from a dead start. I guess this is good enough for me, until someone can PROVE otherwise.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    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.



    As I just said the 997tt time looks very well possible, but it's not proven at all and therefore it's not a valid claim, just speculation.
    As much as the 7.42 of the z06 is speculation (and rather admittedly improbable) as nobody knows the details of that run.
    Still that car at least has proven it's surprising performance against all sceptics in the recent AMS test, a thing which hasnt happened with the 997tt yet. The burden of proof re performance lies with the Porsche this time...



    Why is it that anytime a Vette has a quicker time than a Porsche, it is either unsubstantiated, speculation, improbable, or so on and so forth. As far as the 06 Z06 claim of 7.429 at the ring, let me offer this:

    Read This:
    http://www.supercars.net/Pics?vpf2=y...=1404211&l =d

    Furthermore, Dave Hill stated both in Corvette Quarterly and in Motor Trend (Sept. 05 issue) that the FINAL tweaking mentioned in the above article(including standard runflats) on the Le mans Blue Z that Magnusson drove was the same (suspension and engine tuning) used to start the building of the production cars. Hill also stated that the achieved time of 7:429 was achieved from a dead start. I guess this is good enough for me, until someone can PROVE otherwise.


    I'm glad you are happy.However,like many others on thios board, I'm sick and tired of the Corvette Vs 997TT back and forth . Each to his own. Time to move on to some other topic.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    crayphile said:
    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    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.



    As I just said the 997tt time looks very well possible, but it's not proven at all and therefore it's not a valid claim, just speculation.
    As much as the 7.42 of the z06 is speculation (and rather admittedly improbable) as nobody knows the details of that run.
    Still that car at least has proven it's surprising performance against all sceptics in the recent AMS test, a thing which hasnt happened with the 997tt yet. The burden of proof re performance lies with the Porsche this time...



    Why is it that anytime a Vette has a quicker time than a Porsche, it is either unsubstantiated, speculation, improbable, or so on and so forth. As far as the 06 Z06 claim of 7.429 at the ring, let me offer this:

    Read This:
    http://www.supercars.net/Pics?vpf2=y...=1404211&l =d

    Furthermore, Dave Hill stated both in Corvette Quarterly and in Motor Trend (Sept. 05 issue) that the FINAL tweaking mentioned in the above article(including standard runflats) on the Le mans Blue Z that Magnusson drove was the same (suspension and engine tuning) used to start the building of the production cars. Hill also stated that the achieved time of 7:429 was achieved from a dead start. I guess this is good enough for me, until someone can PROVE otherwise.


    I'm glad you are happy.However,like many others on thios board, I'm sick and tired of the Corvette Vs 997TT back and forth . Each to his own. Time to move on to some other topic.



    My point is that its the Porschephiles that bring up, on this board, the Z06 Vette, compare the 997TT times to the Z06 Vette, bitch when the 997TT may not be as quick or have as much HP, then say any Vette numbers are not substantiated, and finally bitch when someone such as myself answers back. You can't have it both ways. So I guess the only solution to your problem is to either live with it, or don't read the posts that do not appeal to you, or complain to Porsche that they should build a 997 that can match or beat the numbers posted by the Z06 Vette. There you have it!

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    The zo6 is a great car but

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    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.



    As I just said the 997tt time looks very well possible, but it's not proven at all and therefore it's not a valid claim, just speculation.
    As much as the 7.42 of the z06 is speculation (and rather admittedly improbable) as nobody knows the details of that run.
    Still that car at least has proven it's surprising performance against all sceptics in the recent AMS test, a thing which hasnt happened with the 997tt yet. The burden of proof re performance lies with the Porsche this time...



    Why is it that anytime a Vette has a quicker time than a Porsche, it is either unsubstantiated, speculation, improbable, or so on and so forth. As far as the 06 Z06 claim of 7.429 at the ring, let me offer this:
    Read this:
    http://www.supercars.net/Pics?vpf2=y&gID=6&fID=3185&tID=48489&mID=1404211&l=d


    Furthermore, Dave Hill stated both in Corvette Quarterly and in Motor Trend (Sept. 05 issue) that the FINAL tweaking mentioned in the above article(including standard runflats) on the Le mans Blue Z that Magnusson drove was the same (suspension and engine tuning) used to start the building of the production cars. Hill also stated that the achieved time of 7:429 was achieved from a dead start. I guess this is good enough for me, until someone can PROVE otherwise.



    Unfortunately, Dave Hill stated many things (e.g. the lap time of the C5) which are strongly contradicted by independant test results.

    Dave Hill does not appear to be a credible source

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time


    Dave Hill does not appear to be a credible source



    Exactly. therefore it is needless to discuss times we do not know achieved under conditions we do not know either. Let's wait for some indipendent reviews; none of them will be perfect either, but certainly more credible than manufacturers claims put out there as marketing gimmicks. I'm confident that
    both Porsche and Corvette have done their homework this time and probably will be running head to head for the best time.
    It will then be everybodies own choice where to put his money,

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    rhino said:
    The zo6 is a great car but



    And the optimum setup that GM finally used to get the ring time of 7.429 is the same setup used in the production car!

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    If i remember right, the Z06 uses a different suspension for the european cars?

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    MKSGR said:
    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    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.



    As I just said the 997tt time looks very well possible, but it's not proven at all and therefore it's not a valid claim, just speculation.
    As much as the 7.42 of the z06 is speculation (and rather admittedly improbable) as nobody knows the details of that run.
    Still that car at least has proven it's surprising performance against all sceptics in the recent AMS test, a thing which hasnt happened with the 997tt yet. The burden of proof re performance lies with the Porsche this time...



    Why is it that anytime a Vette has a quicker time than a Porsche, it is either unsubstantiated, speculation, improbable, or so on and so forth. As far as the 06 Z06 claim of 7.429 at the ring, let me offer this:
    Read this:
    http://www.supercars.net/Pics?vpf2=y&gID=6&fID=3185&tID=48489&mID=1404211&l=d


    Furthermore, Dave Hill stated both in Corvette Quarterly and in Motor Trend (Sept. 05 issue) that the FINAL tweaking mentioned in the above article(including standard runflats) on the Le mans Blue Z that Magnusson drove was the same (suspension and engine tuning) used to start the building of the production cars. Hill also stated that the achieved time of 7:429 was achieved from a dead start. I guess this is good enough for me, until someone can PROVE otherwise.



    Unfortunately, Dave Hill stated many things (e.g. the lap time of the C5) which are strongly contradicted by independant test results.

    Dave Hill does not appear to be a credible source



    Isn't it soooo easy just to say that things Dave Hill said in writing have been contridicted by independent test results, and, therefor Dave Hill is not a credible source!
    But instead of saying it, why don't you show me in writing
    all of the "other" contridictory test results. Then I may say that there may be some credibility in what you have to say. The bottom line...

    You can't handle the truth.


    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:

    My point is that its the Porschephiles that bring up, on this board, the Z06 Vette, compare the 997TT times to the Z06 Vette, bitch when the 997TT may not be as quick or have as much HP, then say any Vette numbers are not substantiated, and finally bitch when someone such as myself answers back. You can't have it both ways. So I guess the only solution to your problem is to either live with it, or don't read the posts that do not appeal to you, or complain to Porsche that they should build a 997 that can match or beat the numbers posted by the Z06 Vette. There you have it!



    I stand by my claims. Until we get independent results, I don't buy it. I like the Vette, it's a great straight-line performer, but it's actually the Corvette fans that are blinding yourselves.
    What was the stated Nring time for the standard C6? 7:55? What was the Sport Auto result? Oh, yeah, I remember that one: 8:15 .
    Porsche has always had its times corroborated by independent magazines. Chevy, on the other hand, hasn't. The 7:56 time for the C5 Z06 was claimed by Chevy and never confirmed by an independent test. The C6 time was claimed as somewhere around 7:55 and WAS confirmed by magazines; the confirmation came, that Chevy couldn't estimate the time it takes to boil an egg.
    We have valid previous data to base our hpotheses on. You don't.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    Crash said:
    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:

    My point is that its the Porschephiles that bring up, on this board, the Z06 Vette, compare the 997TT times to the Z06 Vette, bitch when the 997TT may not be as quick or have as much HP, then say any Vette numbers are not substantiated, and finally bitch when someone such as myself answers back. You can't have it both ways. So I guess the only solution to your problem is to either live with it, or don't read the posts that do not appeal to you, or complain to Porsche that they should build a 997 that can match or beat the numbers posted by the Z06 Vette. There you have it!



    I stand by my claims. Until we get independent results, I don't buy it. I like the Vette, it's a great straight-line performer, but it's actually the Corvette fans that are blinding yourselves.
    What was the stated Nring time for the standard C6? 7:55? What was the Sport Auto result? Oh, yeah, I remember that one: 8:15 .
    Porsche has always had its times corroborated by independent magazines. Chevy, on the other hand, hasn't. The 7:56 time for the C5 Z06 was claimed by Chevy and never confirmed by an independent test. The C6 time was claimed as somewhere around 7:55 and WAS confirmed by magazines; the confirmation came, that Chevy couldn't estimate the time it takes to boil an egg.
    We have valid previous data to base our hpotheses on. You don't.



    Motor Trend Magazine September 05 issue
    Sports Car Magazine Current Issue

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Sorry Ronnie, but you are loosing it a bit here, and actually with two people who probably are more inclined than others to believe that the z06 could pull off a great time. i think it's just plainly logical to wait for some third party test results and to comment then. taking mr. hill statements for granted is as wrong as taking mr wiedekings or röhrls for such...

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    Sorry Ronnie, but you are loosing it a bit here, and actually with two people who probably are more inclined than others to believe that the z06 could pull off a great time. i think it's just plainly logical to wait for some third party test results and to comment then. taking mr. hill statements for granted is as wrong as taking mr wiedekings or röhrls for such...



    Hey, if the Z06 actually pulls off a 7:42.9 in stock form and beats the 997TT (which doesn't seem impossible, we just lack hard data), I'll be the first to congratulate him.

    In any case, Ronnie, you have one hell of a sports car, regardless of what I, or anyone else thinks. Take our opinions with an open mind. We're not here to bash the Corvette.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    Sorry Ronnie, but you are loosing it a bit here, and actually with two people who probably are more inclined than others to believe that the z06 could pull off a great time. i think it's just plainly logical to wait for some third party test results and to comment then. taking mr. hill statements for granted is as wrong as taking mr wiedekings or röhrls for such...



    The bottom line, dudes, is that either Dave Hill (and all of the other folks from Chevy and others whom were at the ring at the time of the test, including Jan Magnusson) are lying or they are not. If they are lying, then all (and I mean at least 6-8 magazines minimum) who printed the results don't have much credibility. But maybe, just maybe, is it possible that the Z ran the ring in 7.429 and everyone there whom witnessed it is telling the truth???
    As I said before...show me one article IN WRITING that showed Dave Hill or anyone else with Chevy stating incorrect data regarding the Z06, C6, C5Z or C5. I OWN a
    C6Z...I KNOW how fast this car is and how great it handles...I have owned Porsches....I have driven my buddys
    05 996 TTS and raced him. The Z BLOWS THE DOORS OFF of the 996 TTS on the straights and curves. I know this is hard to swollow...the plastic yankmobile beating the almighty
    German gold standard! In Germany no less!!! And on the ring!!! But alas....its true.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    Sorry Ronnie, but you are loosing it a bit here, and actually with two people who probably are more inclined than others to believe that the z06 could pull off a great time. i think it's just plainly logical to wait for some third party test results and to comment then. taking mr. hill statements for granted is as wrong as taking mr wiedekings or röhrls for such...



    The bottom line, dudes, is that either Dave Hill (and all of the other folks from Chevy and others whom were at the ring at the time of the test, including Jan Magnusson) are lying or they are not. If they are lying, then all (and I mean at least 6-8 magazines minimum) who printed the results don't have much credibility. But maybe, just maybe, is it possible that the Z ran the ring in 7.429 and everyone there whom witnessed it is telling the truth???
    As I said before...show me one article IN WRITING that showed Dave Hill or anyone else with Chevy stating incorrect data regarding the Z06, C6, C5Z or C5. I OWN a
    C6Z...I KNOW how fast this car is and how great it handles...I have owned Porsches....I have driven my buddys
    05 996 TTS and raced him. The Z BLOWS THE DOORS OFF of the 996 TTS on the straights and curves. I know this is hard to swollow...the plastic yankmobile beating the almighty
    German gold standard! In Germany no less!!! And on the ring!!! But alas....its true.



    Again: you have no proof that it actually DID achieve that time in standard conditions. I really wish it would, though. Might give Porsche something to think about. Then again, let's wait for the results.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    Crash said:
    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    Sorry Ronnie, but you are loosing it a bit here, and actually with two people who probably are more inclined than others to believe that the z06 could pull off a great time. i think it's just plainly logical to wait for some third party test results and to comment then. taking mr. hill statements for granted is as wrong as taking mr wiedekings or röhrls for such...



    The bottom line, dudes, is that either Dave Hill (and all of the other folks from Chevy and others whom were at the ring at the time of the test, including Jan Magnusson) are lying or they are not. If they are lying, then all (and I mean at least 6-8 magazines minimum) who printed the results don't have much credibility. But maybe, just maybe, is it possible that the Z ran the ring in 7.429 and everyone there whom witnessed it is telling the truth???
    As I said before...show me one article IN WRITING that showed Dave Hill or anyone else with Chevy stating incorrect data regarding the Z06, C6, C5Z or C5. I OWN a
    C6Z...I KNOW how fast this car is and how great it handles...I have owned Porsches....I have driven my buddys
    05 996 TTS and raced him. The Z BLOWS THE DOORS OFF of the 996 TTS on the straights and curves. I know this is hard to swollow...the plastic yankmobile beating the almighty
    German gold standard! In Germany no less!!! And on the ring!!! But alas....its true.



    Again: you have no proof that it actually DID achieve that time in standard conditions. I really wish it would, though. Might give Porsche something to think about. Then again, let's wait for the results.



    I am more than happy to wait for the results. But if we were in a formal sanctioned debate (and I have studied debate) you would be far behind in points. This is because
    I have writen confirmation of my statements, and you do not have writen confirmation to the contrary. By you stating that i have "no proof that it actually DID achieve that time in standard conditions" would not win you any points.
    A debate judge would take my published statements AS PROOF
    until you can PROVE otherwise.

    GM ads continually stated 4 sec 0-60 for the C5Z

    and every magazine I ever saw or read stated that they could not reproduce those claims

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    Crash said:
    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    Sorry Ronnie, but you are loosing it a bit here, and actually with two people who probably are more inclined than others to believe that the z06 could pull off a great time. i think it's just plainly logical to wait for some third party test results and to comment then. taking mr. hill statements for granted is as wrong as taking mr wiedekings or röhrls for such...



    The bottom line, dudes, is that either Dave Hill (and all of the other folks from Chevy and others whom were at the ring at the time of the test, including Jan Magnusson) are lying or they are not. If they are lying, then all (and I mean at least 6-8 magazines minimum) who printed the results don't have much credibility. But maybe, just maybe, is it possible that the Z ran the ring in 7.429 and everyone there whom witnessed it is telling the truth???
    As I said before...show me one article IN WRITING that showed Dave Hill or anyone else with Chevy stating incorrect data regarding the Z06, C6, C5Z or C5. I OWN a
    C6Z...I KNOW how fast this car is and how great it handles...I have owned Porsches....I have driven my buddys
    05 996 TTS and raced him. The Z BLOWS THE DOORS OFF of the 996 TTS on the straights and curves. I know this is hard to swollow...the plastic yankmobile beating the almighty
    German gold standard! In Germany no less!!! And on the ring!!! But alas....its true.



    Again: you have no proof that it actually DID achieve that time in standard conditions. I really wish it would, though. Might give Porsche something to think about. Then again, let's wait for the results.



    You and I both know that Porsche could care less... unless they could profit from it or charge extra.

    The days where they stood alone as kings (993TT) are long gone... welcome the new BMW/Mercedes.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    I just saw the VID: 997tt at Weissach and that was probably the best testament for Porsches great engineering on the 997TT. Big ups to Pcar

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    These debates are garbage. Just wait it out for comparative independent tests.

    Corvette drivers comming on these forums to bash Porsche drivers about their inferior specs need to spend more time driving their cars instead of talking about their cars.

    Porsche drivers spitting back at them in a condescending matter are only fueling the fire.

    Z06 threads are always the least favorable

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    Hurst said:

    Z06 threads are always the least favorable



    Z06 threads are the universal " worm " of EVERY enthusiast sports car board, it seems .

    BTW , here's the Vette that did the recent 7:42 at the Ring with Jan Magnussen driving . Looks totally stock to me, so the rumors that it was tweaked should finally be laid to rest.


    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Can someone point where I can find the latest times set on the Ring?

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    This Porsche 911SC with a Corvette V8 engine crushes both new Z06's and 996 GT2s.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    JimFlat6 said:
    This Porsche 911SC with a Corvette V8 engine crushes both new Z06's and 996 GT2s.



    is right...you have any more info on this car??

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    What you see in that image is a Corvette LS1 motor installed into a 1980 911SC. Its not rocket science to do. Corvette engines actually weigh less and you can choose factory crate engines between 345hp to 505hp with a GM warranty. With just a 345hp motor the car is very fast, with 500hp it is diabolically fast.

    If you think the Corvette conversion to a 911 is something, the 60's Oldsmobile Toronado 455 cu V8 conversions for 4cyl Porsche 912's were even more shocking for a very bizarre reason-the 3 spd Oldsmobile automatics' transaxle output stubs fit perfectly with 912 halfshafts and the Porsche 912 muffler flanges/bolt hole patterns were a perfect match up with the Oldsmobile V8's two 4 into 2 headers.

    Maybe since Porsche and Chevrolet did the Corvair together, some wierd Porsche cross engineering voodoo on GM parts makes Chevy engines fit so stupidly easy into Porsches.

    There are several companies doing Corvette conversions for Porsches. Google it. The 911/Corvette in the picture is owned by a guy in Texas.

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    Crash said:
    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:
    Quote:
    turbolite said:
    Sorry Ronnie, but you are loosing it a bit here, and actually with two people who probably are more inclined than others to believe that the z06 could pull off a great time. i think it's just plainly logical to wait for some third party test results and to comment then. taking mr. hill statements for granted is as wrong as taking mr wiedekings or röhrls for such...



    The bottom line, dudes, is that either Dave Hill (and all of the other folks from Chevy and others whom were at the ring at the time of the test, including Jan Magnusson) are lying or they are not. If they are lying, then all (and I mean at least 6-8 magazines minimum) who printed the results don't have much credibility. But maybe, just maybe, is it possible that the Z ran the ring in 7.429 and everyone there whom witnessed it is telling the truth???
    As I said before...show me one article IN WRITING that showed Dave Hill or anyone else with Chevy stating incorrect data regarding the Z06, C6, C5Z or C5. I OWN a
    C6Z...I KNOW how fast this car is and how great it handles...I have owned Porsches....I have driven my buddys
    05 996 TTS and raced him. The Z BLOWS THE DOORS OFF of the 996 TTS on the straights and curves. I know this is hard to swollow...the plastic yankmobile beating the almighty
    German gold standard! In Germany no less!!! And on the ring!!! But alas....its true.



    Again: you have no proof that it actually DID achieve that time in standard conditions. I really wish it would, though. Might give Porsche something to think about. Then again, let's wait for the results.



    I am more than happy to wait for the results. But if we were in a formal sanctioned debate (and I have studied debate) you would be far behind in points. This is because
    I have writen confirmation of my statements, and you do not have writen confirmation to the contrary. By you stating that i have "no proof that it actually DID achieve that time in standard conditions" would not win you any points.
    A debate judge would take my published statements AS PROOF
    until you can PROVE otherwise.



    What you have is an article about factory testing, that lasted over TWO WEEKS. I've never studied debate and don't really care for it, but lagging behind isn't what I would describe my arguments. Fact is, Porsche has many cars under 8:00 on the Nring, while there are NO Corvettes. Like I said, it may be as fast, but let's wait for proof. Until then, we'll look at our slow luxo barges .

    Re: here's one source for the Z06 time

    Quote:
    RonnieC6Z said:

    Dave Hill does not appear to be a credible source



    Isn't it soooo easy just to say that things Dave Hill said in writing have been contridicted by independent test results, and, therefor Dave Hill is not a credible source!
    But instead of saying it, why don't you show me in writing
    all of the "other" contridictory test results. Then I may say that there may be some credibility in what you have to say. The bottom line...

    You can't handle the truth.





    You can simply buy the relevant issue of sportauto. You do not appear to be too well informed

     
    Edit

    Forum

    Board Subject Last post Rating Views Replies
    Porsche Sticky SUN'S LAST RUN TO WILSON, WY - 991 C2S CAB LIFE, END OF AN ERA (Part II) 3/28/24 3:21 AM
    watt
    689325 1780
    Porsche Sticky Welcome to Rennteam: Cars and Coffee... (photos) 2/19/24 11:51 PM
    Wonderbar
    409088 564
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Cayman GT4 RS (2021) 5/12/23 12:11 PM
    W8MM
    255697 288
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Porsche 911 (992) GT3 RS - 2022 3/12/24 8:28 AM
    DJM48
    234946 323
    Porsche Sticky The new Macan: the first all-electric SUV from Porsche 1/30/24 9:18 AM
    RCA
    65500 45
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Taycan 2024 Facelift 3/15/24 1:23 PM
    CGX car nut
    4644 50
    Porsche The moment I've been waiting for... 2/1/24 7:01 PM
    Pilot
     
     
     
     
     
    857898 1364
    Porsche 992 GT3 7/23/23 7:01 PM
    Grant
    773904 3868
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New Porsche 911 Turbo S (2020) 4/6/23 7:43 AM
    crayphile
    447864 1276
    Porsche Welcome to the new Taycan Forum! 2/10/24 4:43 PM
    nberry
    378856 1526
    Porsche GT4RS 2/22/24 5:16 AM
    tso
    365598 1424
    Porsche Donor vehicle for Singer Vehicle Design 7/3/23 12:30 PM
    Porker
    360777 797
    Others Tesla 2 the new thread 12/13/23 2:48 PM
    CGX car nut
    354709 2401
    Lambo Aventador and SV 3/30/23 1:59 PM
    CGX car nut
    279145 724
    Ferrari Ferrari 812 Superfast 4/21/23 8:09 AM
    the-missile
    275519 550
    Porsche Red Nipples 991.2 GT3 Touring on tour 3/14/24 8:55 PM
    blueflame
    272523 658
    Porsche Collected my 997 GTS today 10/19/23 7:06 PM
    CGX car nut
     
     
     
     
     
    248215 812
    Lambo Huracán EVO STO 7/30/23 6:59 PM
    mcdelaug
    225063 346
    Others Corvette C8 10/16/23 3:24 PM
    Enmanuel
    217918 488
    Lotus Lotus Emira 6/25/23 2:53 PM
    Enmanuel
    196717 101
    Others Gordon Murray - T.50 11/22/23 10:27 AM
    mcdelaug
    155309 387
    Porsche Back to basics - 996 GT3 RS 6/11/23 5:13 PM
    CGX car nut
    126885 144
    Ferrari [2022] Ferrari Purosangue (SUV) 4/15/23 5:20 AM
    watt
    120468 141
    BMW M 2024 BMW M3 CS Official Now 12/29/23 9:04 AM
    RCA
    105964 303
    Motor Sp. 2023 Formula One 12/19/23 5:38 AM
    WhoopsyM
    102503 685
    Others Valkyrie final design? 4/28/23 2:45 AM
    Rossi
    97645 219
    Porsche 2022 992 Safari Model 3/7/24 4:22 PM
    WhoopsyM
    81039 239
    AMG Mercedes-Benz W124 500E aka Porsche typ 2758 2/23/24 10:03 PM
    blueflame
    74333 297
    Porsche 992 GT3 RS 3/3/24 7:22 PM
    WhoopsyM
    52115 314
    Motor Sp. Porsche 963 3/16/24 9:27 PM
    WhoopsyM
    23091 237
    133 items found, displaying 1 to 30.