mp:
Hate to repeat myself but I've been always saying how one must be careful putting too much focus on Ring times, for various reasons. Not to mention the fact that over such a long distance, a few seconds is absolutely nothing.
And that I tend to listen to what Porsche declares vs SA and how I focus more of BIG variations in "times" - declared vs tested, as RED FLAGS. Again, I don't care about this stuff that much anyway - I couldn't possibly achieve what these experts do. It is more about how I enjoy driving the car at normal speeds.
Something is definitely going on when I read this stuff about registered speeds on the RING (991 vs 997) while 0-300 times are significantly better for the 991tts???? Time-to-distance is the way to go, IMO. Again, it amazes me how I read about these incredible 0-200 (or 0-125mph) times of 10 or less seconds but then over 1/4 mile the car "only" achieves 11s/128mph. Do the math - these findings just don't measure up. Would it really take an additional second to gain only 3mph???
FWIW, as for hp - rwhp is THE figure to use, not "crank" hp IMHO. What's wrong with comparing figures achieved on the same dyno - even on different days. Sure, there will always be a variation but not much.
I still feel there is something going on with the "over boost" of the new 991tts. Would be extremely easy for Porsche to extend the boost on certain press cars - just can't believe the 31s 0-300 time. Too close of the CGT IMO.
Nothing is going on here, the 991 Turbo S does 0-300 kph in 31 seconds (actually there are other reviews at 30.4 and 29.7 seconds), it is amazingly fast from 0-300 kph and yes, the Carrera GT cannot outrun me up to 300 kph (actually over 315 kph on my speedo) and yes, we tested it. Real life experience. There was no speed range (under the 315 kph on the speedo) where the CGT actually was able to outrun me...or even get closer. In the 30 to 200 kph run (speedo values), the CGT lost about half a car length.
My car is not a press car and I wouldn't even start speculating on Porsche giving me a better car because they don't. It would be way too dangerous if a customer car delivers more power than it should, a liability issue. I cannot exclude that my car runs better than others, it really runs well but this can happen for other customer cars too.
The car tested in Sport Auto had much less power, slightly over 560 hp. Period. You can read into that what you want but the 991 Turbo S really runs well and whoever had met one on the street, actually knows that. Btw: The best quartermile time I've seen on a customer car was 10.63 seconds. Just for the book. Speed was 206 kph or so, I don't remember the precise number anymore.
Dyno measurements are for cracker-barrel discussions, not worth much, unless done back to back under the same conditions in the same day and/or on engine dynos. There is a huge industry however which tells you otherwise...of course. There is an error margin, which needs to be corrected (as far as possible), this is where the error with the 607 hp measurement for the 991 Turbo S in Sport Auto happened but do the math yourself: The 991 Turbo S has claimed 560 hp. 1% of 560 hp is already 5.6 hp. So let's say there is a real error of 3% only, this is already almost 17 hp difference. At 5% error, we are already looking at an error of 28 hp. If those operating the dyno do correction factors wrong (like in the SA test), the results can be even much more higher or lower.
Sorry but dyno measurements are nice for bragging, like in this forum but otherwise, they don't say much. Oh, they help sell aftermarket exhaust systems and tuning stuff.
--
RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 991 Turbo S, Porsche Boxster S (981), BMW X3 35d (2013)