997 Turbo TIP drive impression in Auto Bild...
http://www.autobild.de/aktuell/reportagen/artikel.php?artikel_id=11282&artikel_seite=0
May 4, 2006 1:15:28 PM
Quote:
Alan(NJ) said:
seems like they don't like the tip transmission, the engine sound (or lack of it) and the multitude of buttons on the dash
Quote:
Grant said:Quote:
Alan(NJ) said:
seems like they don't like the tip transmission, the engine sound (or lack of it) and the multitude of buttons on the dash
Well, the exhaust sound can be fixed (after the companies learn to make one for the VTG turbos), but I'm not surprised about the Tip. This seems like a big mistake for an enthusiast driver. I think this is only suitable for drag racers or commuters in crowded cities (but why use a TT as a commuter?).
Quote:
Jeannot said:Quote:
SoCalHoosier said:
LOL... that must've been the Burberry edition.
Ahaha, I was thinking the same :-)
Somebody tells us this is not base from factory !!!
Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
Grant said:Quote:
Alan(NJ) said:
seems like they don't like the tip transmission, the engine sound (or lack of it) and the multitude of buttons on the dash
Well, the exhaust sound can be fixed (after the companies learn to make one for the VTG turbos), but I'm not surprised about the Tip. This seems like a big mistake for an enthusiast driver. I think this is only suitable for drag racers or commuters in crowded cities (but why use a TT as a commuter?).
One reason one of the posters here indicated was luck of funds for another car, which would serve as a beater, but with almost the same capability as the Turbo, in case of a dangerous situation on the road.
I find the argument silly, since any half-decent car will handle such situations just fine.
Quote:
xandi911 said:
please anyone could traslate the text to english!? i don't speak deutschland
Quote:
KresoF1 said:
Well... babelfish works as good as it gets.
But, you forget most important part of article:
"Mit der Tiptronic S ist er übrigens schneller als mit Schaltgetriebe. Zu empfehlen ist sie trotzdem nicht. Der Wandlerautomat ist gefühlsmäßig immer noch ein Spaßverderber. "
In free translation: With TIP turbo is faster then with manual gearbox. But, we do not recommend it. The torque converter(or slush box-my free interpretation) is still fun killer.
Quote:
VKSF said:Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
Grant said:Quote:
Alan(NJ) said:
seems like they don't like the tip transmission, the engine sound (or lack of it) and the multitude of buttons on the dash
Well, the exhaust sound can be fixed (after the companies learn to make one for the VTG turbos), but I'm not surprised about the Tip. This seems like a big mistake for an enthusiast driver. I think this is only suitable for drag racers or commuters in crowded cities (but why use a TT as a commuter?).
One reason one of the posters here indicated was luck of funds for another car, which would serve as a beater, but with almost the same capability as the Turbo, in case of a dangerous situation on the road.
I find the argument silly, since any half-decent car will handle such situations just fine.
Rather difficult to predict where/when accids occur. If in a poss collision situation, I suspect most who can actually afford $150K cars would prefer to be in a car w/optimum active safety capabilities to avoid accid (and inevitable litig vs the deeper-pocketed party in US)....and if accid occurs, would certainly want to be in a car that maximizes odds of no injury/surgeries/life-long chronic pain and suffering/death to driver/passgrs....i.e., let the damn insured, easily replaceable car be the "beater", absorbing the crash forces, rather than offering up the affluent owner's body/head/spine as the "beater"....
IMO, safest car on planet is 997TT ....and if 997TT weren't avail, I'd commute via '07 S/CL65, as the only acceptable, though slightly less safe (and much less fun) alternative....
Quote:
RC said: ... But none of the tested cars did the 0-100/125 mph acceleration times achieved in most US magazines, the 0-125 mph was always in the 12-13 seconds range, never below 12 seconds.
Quote:
W8MM said:Quote:
RC said: ... But none of the tested cars did the 0-100/125 mph acceleration times achieved in most US magazines, the 0-125 mph was always in the 12-13 seconds range, never below 12 seconds.
The US magazines seem to have fallen under a spell of "duplicating" formal drag strip conditions.
This means that they program "adjustments" into their VBOX test gear to simulate roll-out and use a minimum speed trigger of 1 or 2 mph. This causes the start of the measurement to "wait" until the car is already moving a little bit. Just like the drag strip!
All sorts of differences in the measurements might result
Quote:
xandi911 said:
THANKS LORANTW! but the last page you repeat with the 3rd!
someone can explain?? "The torque converter(or slush box-my free interpretation) is still fun killer"
Quote:
W8MM said:Quote:
RC said: ... But none of the tested cars did the 0-100/125 mph acceleration times achieved in most US magazines, the 0-125 mph was always in the 12-13 seconds range, never below 12 seconds.
The US magazines seem to have fallen under a spell of "duplicating" formal drag strip conditions.
This means that they program "adjustments" into their VBOX test gear to simulate roll-out and use a minimum speed trigger of 1 or 2 mph. This causes the start of the measurement to "wait" until the car is already moving a little bit. Just like the drag strip!
All sorts of differences in the measurements might result
Quote:
fritz said:Quote:
W8MM said:Quote:
RC said: ... But none of the tested cars did the 0-100/125 mph acceleration times achieved in most US magazines, the 0-125 mph was always in the 12-13 seconds range, never below 12 seconds.
The US magazines seem to have fallen under a spell of "duplicating" formal drag strip conditions.
This means that they program "adjustments" into their VBOX test gear to simulate roll-out and use a minimum speed trigger of 1 or 2 mph. This causes the start of the measurement to "wait" until the car is already moving a little bit. Just like the drag strip!
All sorts of differences in the measurements might result
That would go a long way towards explaining the discrepancies between the 0-60 mph / 0-100 km/h times published by US and European magazines.