Crown

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

Forum - Thread


    0-60 C4 & C4S

    Hopefully this will be short thread because I'm sure this has already been confirmed, explained and discussed: PAG says both do 0-60 in 4.6 seconds and reports only a 5 mph difference in top speed. So where do I go to learn about this suprising and interesting announcement?

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Its not true, they said that on the US website huh or NA website, yeah they messed up. Its supposed to say 4.9 0-60 for the carrera 4 and 4.6 for the carrera 4S. Every where else its says this, so I'm pretty convince they made a mistake. 6s and 9s can get confusing I guess, ....

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    if i'm not mistaken on our porsche website it says the C4S is a tiny bit slower than the C2S in 0-100, vice versa for the C2 and C4

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    Mike S said:
    if i'm not mistaken on our porsche website it says the C4S is a tiny bit slower than the C2S in 0-100, vice versa for the C2 and C4



    No, the C2S and the C4S are credited the same time 0-100km/h in 4.8
    Between the C2 and the C4 there is 0.1 sec difference, that is : C2 0-100km/h in 5.0
    C4 o-100km/h in 5.1

    I would like to know how the heavyer C4S does the same time as the C2S?

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Here, cut and pasted, is what the North American website says:

    "Powered by the proven 3.6-liter six-cylinder engine, which has an output of 325 hp (SAE), the Carrera 4 accelerates from 0 to 60 mph (0-96 km/h)in 4.6 seconds and has a top track speed of 174 mph (280 km/h). The Carrera 4S is equipped with a larger 3.8-liter engine that develops 355 hp (SAE) and accelerates the car from 0 to 60 mph (96 km/h) in 4.6 seconds and to a top track speed of 179 mph (288 km/h)."

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:

    I would like to know how the heavyer C4S does the same time as the C2S?



    Part of what determines acceleration is power to weight ratio. Another important part is how that power is delivered to the road. The C4S has 4 wheels providing traction, and, perhaps most importantly, fatter rear tires, making for more efficient transmission of the engine's power. Bottom line: I suspect the answer is traction.

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    this was a mistake

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    This exercise in noodling over fractions of tenths of seconds that have more to do with traction and clutch engagement than actual power-to-weight ratio, illustrates perfectly why I find it obscene to use such a weenie measurement as 0-60 mph to compare cars with such herculean power and range. As I've said before, 0-60 mph requires you to stop the watch so soon, that the whole thing is just a function of traction on higher-horspower cars. It's what pimple-faced kids use to magazine bench-race, because they don't know any better. They see a GMC Syclone that can go 0-60 as quick as an F40 Ferrari, and don't realize that after 60 mph the Syclone gets left behind like a discarded burger wrapper. If this was www.miatas-are-us.com or www.I-luv-minicoopers.com , then we could draw some valid conclusions using the 0-60 measurement. But on any site for 997, or Corvette, or Ferrari, or Viper, or ANYTHING where the 1st two gears are more spasm than exercise, you've got to go to at least 100 mph before you've got an accurate picture of how the car accelerates. 0-60 for a 997 is not much different than 0-10 for a Yugo. It's a launch and a gear-snatch. It's a very pivotal few seconds when you're racing to a higher speed, but you don't really know who's got the mucho-power under the hood until you get further down the road. Many a time I've been beaten to the 1/8th mile marker in a drag race (on a sanctioned track) by a traction-superior lesser-power car, only to suck him up and spit him out like spoiled milk in the 2nd 1/8th. It's like the 0-60 sprint for him was just an exercise in wishful thinking..

    Sorry that I'm always such a PITA on this subject, it's just a pet peave that I can't seem to shake!

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    One other point I failed to mention. Due to the fact that there's SO MUCH going on between 0 mph and 60 mph that is dependent on human skill and speed and aggressiveness, it's normal to see 0-60 times that vary wildly. It's not the cars that are different, it's the drivers. When you stretch the measurement out to 100, or 120, or 150 mph, the driver-factor decreases exponentially as a far higher percentage of elapsed time is not affected by the driver (i.e., the more time spent with a gear engaged, and foot to the floor, the less time proportionately that's affected by driver input).

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    Silver Bullet said:
    Here, cut and pasted, is what the North American website says:

    "Powered by the proven 3.6-liter six-cylinder engine, which has an output of 325 hp (SAE), the Carrera 4 accelerates from 0 to 60 mph (0-96 km/h)in 4.6 seconds and has a top track speed of 174 mph (280 km/h). The Carrera 4S is equipped with a larger 3.8-liter engine that develops 355 hp (SAE) and accelerates the car from 0 to 60 mph (96 km/h) in 4.6 seconds and to a top track speed of 179 mph (288 km/h)."



    The North American website is wrong. Here is what they say at the rest of the world's websites:

    "Powered by the proven 3.6-liter six-cylinder engine, which has an output of 239 kW (325 bhp), the Carrera 4 accelerates from 0 to 100 km/h in 5.1 seconds and has a top speed of 280 kilometers per hour. The 4S model, with a 3.8-liter engine developing 261 kW (355 bhp), can reach 100 km/h in 4.8 seconds and has a top speed of 288 km/h"

    Phil

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    Silver Bullet said:
    Quote:

    I would like to know how the heavyer C4S does the same time as the C2S?



    Part of what determines acceleration is power to weight ratio. Another important part is how that power is delivered to the road. The C4S has 4 wheels providing traction, and, perhaps most importantly, fatter rear tires, making for more efficient transmission of the engine's power. Bottom line: I suspect the answer is traction.



    When there is AWD then shouldn't the need for the rear tires to be fatter be less?!

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    Mike S said:
    Quote:
    Silver Bullet said:
    Quote:

    I would like to know how the heavyer C4S does the same time as the C2S?



    Part of what determines acceleration is power to weight ratio. Another important part is how that power is delivered to the road. The C4S has 4 wheels providing traction, and, perhaps most importantly, fatter rear tires, making for more efficient transmission of the engine's power. Bottom line: I suspect the answer is traction.



    When there is AWD then shouldn't the need for the rear tires to be fatter be less?!



    Yes. I wouldn't attribute the C4S's 0-60 ability to the fatter rear tires. I would attribute it to the traction of AWD. The fat rear tires are just overkill to make the styling work, and probably offering up a bit more lateral grip. With this car, the limiting factor in 0-60 is most likely the grip-strength of the clutch!

    And lastly, published times, whether they are factory or independent, are just GUIDELINES. There are so many variables involved that you can't imagine. I've gone to the track in box-stock cars and DEMOLISHED factory-published times in the past. Driver, overall weight, fuel load, humidity, barometric pressure, temperature, wind direction and velocity, elevation, track surface, shift points, shift style, launch technique, etc.etc.etc... Just because Porsche says "0-60 in 4.8 seconds", man, that's just a number for basic reference, using a standardized and easily repeatable testing method they use at the factory. It's not nearly as scientific as the horsepower rating. A magazine could pick up a new C4S tomorrow and run a 4.2 or 4.4, and I'd think nothing of it. It's not as if one set of numbers is GOSPEL, and another is garbage. Two sets of totally different numbers could be totally valid, depending on the variables in play. You can't place much value on those published times, they are just for marketing. The only true way to measure is at a track, on a particular day, with other cars to compare against, everybody dealing with the same variables of weather and altititude, and only the car and the driver's skill and technique to blame in who goes faster and who goes slower.

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    69bossnine, i couldn't agree with you more, but I do have a question re: 0-60 times for the 997s if you don't mind (more for bragging issues with my fellow bimmer, vette & viper friends). Road & Track did a comparison of 10 or so sports cars a month or two ago and they basically tested a 997s with about 5k miles that did 3.8 in 0-60 which is significantly different than what PAG advertise. Do you guys think this is at all possible? Times like these start rank the car in an even higher class. I can specify issue if necessary. Just wonder if its just careless journalism. Knowing the way I drive, I'd be good to get under 6 seconds in 0-60.

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    3.8 seconds is just stupid. R&T is clearly clueless. Please stop this thread now.

    By the way, I read that the 997S does 0-60 in reverse gear in just 2.5 seconds - Isn't that amazing!

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    bluelines said:
    3.8 seconds is just stupid. R&T is clearly clueless. Please stop this thread now.




    Here is what the article in Road & Track said about obtaining the 0 to 60 results:

    "At the test track, the Carrera S posted some awesome acceleration numbers: zero to 60 mph in 3.9 sec. and 12.3 to the quarter (we got a 4.4 and 12.8, respectively, in a previous test). These numbers were so extraordinary that we took the car to MD Automotive in Westminster, California, to measure the Carrera S's output on the dynamometer. No steroid controversy here, the car came away clean. The only explanation for the difference in acceleration times is that this particular engine had a proper break-in period (it had 5400 miles on the odometer as opposed to the 1200 miles on our previous test car)."

    So, even they were surpised by the results.......

    Phil

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    Mike S said:
    When there is AWD then shouldn't the need for the rear tires to be fatter be less?!



    As has already been pointed out, 0-60 is a blisteringly quck event. Remember that to transfer more torque to the front wheels, there must be sufficient loss of rear wheel traction to engage the viscous coupling system, and that takes time (development of sufficient heat etc). With the weight of the engine over the rear wheels, and a significant rear wheel bias to the AWD unit used on the C4, I still think fatter rear tires will make a difference in traction. Remember those drag racing machines - HUGE rear tires to maximize contact, minimize wheel spin, and transmit engine torque to the wheel/road interface.

    Yup - I'm still a believer in the fatter rear tires.

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    911Fanatic, to answer your question... The fact that they got 3.9 seconds 0-60 isn't really the critical issue to brag over. It's JUST A NUMBER, and everybody on here who thinks that these numbers are scientific benchmarks needs to get a clue. It has more to do with the driver, the level of abuse aimed at the car, and the conditions, than the car itself. Think of all the variables that could account for that quick number, most of which deal with their instrumentation, the conditions of their launch surface, and the air quality where they were at. If the calibration of their instruments was not accurate, you could come up with abnormally quick times. HOWEVER, ALL OF THE CARS PRESENT would be measured with the same instruments, and would all gain the same benefit of the same margin of error. So, I think that the bragging rights are not evidenced by the numbers themselves, but by the comparison of the numbers from car to car, same day, same track, same conditions, same instruments. Also, I'm not necessarily saying that there was anything wrong with their instruments. As I said before, 0-60 is more a function of launch and traction than of horsepower. The 911 has a distinct advantage, and it's potential is high, it just depends on how abusively you want to whip the driveline on launch (It's like punching your own face, you really have to be nuts to hit yourself as hard as you can possibly hit). We have NO IDEA how aggressively Porsche, or other magazines, launched their cars in their 0-60 tests. But if you're sitting at a track on a cool day with a fully-broken-in 997S, on a launch pad absolutely GUMMY with track glue and old rubber, and you just don't give a **** if the car breaks, and you're WILLING to rev her up to 6,000-6,500 grand and drop the clutch HARD (which I highly DOUBT Porsche would do for it's typically conservative published numbers, as they don't want people gunning for a number that you've got to mangle the car to get), could you get 3.9 0-60?? SURE!! You probably couldn't do it time and time again without breaking the car, but for one going-for-broke test, no problem. The fact that the Enzo is typically published with similar times is irrelevant. As I said, it's more a function of traction and launch dynamics. An Enzo has less weight transfer to the rear wheels, so you can't pop it out of the hole as fast. After 60 mph, then it takes off. Like I said, obsessing over 0-60 is moronic with fast street cars. When I used to race regularly, I could always pick up 2-3 tenths easy in my 60-foot time after the NHRA National event came through town, due to all the fresh rubber laid down at the starting line by all the top-fuel dragsters. 2-3 tenths in 60-feet will extrapolate to 4 tenths by 60 mph. So, in general, conditions and driver-variances and car variances alone can easily account for a 3-4 tenth margin of error, up or down. So guys, take all your magazines, all of your factory literature, and all of those 0-60 times you love to obsess over when you're sitting on the throne, and flush them down the throne where they belong. A properly set-up used 300 h.p. 1988 Mustang with a built Art Carr C4, hot converter, 4-link rear suspension, slicks, drag shocks and 4.30 rear could destroy a 997S, or an Enzo, 0-60 mph. And that's just a cheap old rattly tub. 0-60 has less to do with power and weight than you think..

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Silver Bullet.... You're probably right there. Great post.

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    69bossnine,

    I learn something with every one of your posts.

    Thanks man,

    mcdelaug

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Thank you. I thought the next post on this thread was going to be a group request that I start taking valium. :O

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    the thought did cross my mind... :-)

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    The 0-60 figure supplied by car manufacturers is meant to be the fastest that can be achieved from this car. This means dropping the clutch as extreme revs and having no sympathy in the gear changes (changing without clutching properly).

    You will find very difficult to achieve the figures that the manufacturer has supplied.

    Having said this, the figures only indicate what the car can achieve in relation to other cars, because every manufacturer is trying to achieve the best time with absolutely no mechanical sympathy. So there is some value to see these figures, but bloody impossible to achieve them, if you love your car.

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    Niko said:
    The 0-60 figure supplied by car manufacturers is meant to be the fastest that can be achieved from this car. This means dropping the clutch as extreme revs and having no sympathy in the gear changes (changing without clutching properly).

    You will find very difficult to achieve the figures that the manufacturer has supplied.





    Porsche seems to use conservative numbers. Every auto magazine has achieved faster 0 to 60 numbers that those quoted by Porsche. The most extreme example is Road & Track magazine that quoted a 0 to 60 time of 3.9 seconds for a 997S coupe. Porsche says 0 to 60 in 4.6 seconds. So in this case I don't think the manufacturer achieved the faster speed available from the car.

    Phil

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    PS CA said:
    Quote:
    Niko said:
    The 0-60 figure supplied by car manufacturers is meant to be the fastest that can be achieved from this car. This means dropping the clutch as extreme revs and having no sympathy in the gear changes (changing without clutching properly).

    You will find very difficult to achieve the figures that the manufacturer has supplied.





    Porsche seems to use conservative numbers. Every auto magazine has achieved faster 0 to 60 numbers that those quoted by Porsche. The most extreme example is Road & Track magazine that quoted a 0 to 60 time of 3.9 seconds for a 997S coupe. Porsche says 0 to 60 in 4.6 seconds. So in this case I don't think the manufacturer achieved the faster speed available from the car.

    Phil



    Certainly, it doesn't make sense. Why would Porsche make their cars look slower and not try harder?

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Niko, the manufacturers are VERY CAREFUL about the numbers they publish. They have to be numbers that magazines can at LEAST achieve and confirm and verify, in order for the public to trust that they are genuine. They also don't want to publish a number that requires torturous abuse. They publish times that they believe the "average customer" can "reasonably expect to achieve throughout their ownership of the car". They also do not run their tests using any driving techniques that they wouldn't recommend for their customers, i.e. they don't do overly abusive clutch-drops, they don't do wide-open power-shifts, etc.etc... They use techniques that are repeatable and consistent across their entire product line, so that all the cars and models they make can be measured comparitively with at least SOME level of scientific basis and validity. Without standardization in testing, their performance data, as a whole, would be worthless.

    And think about it, what manufacturer in their right mind would put into print "Our car does 0-60 in X.X seconds.....but don't we don't recommend you try to match it, 'cause you could potentially grenade your clutch, and damage or grenade your driveline..." The performance figures are achieved within the context of how the car can realistically perform on a repeated basis for it's customers, within mechanical limits and warranty concerns.

    You say that Porsche wouldn't want their cars to look "slower", but conversely, they wouldn't want to be promising some hugely quick number, and then all of the customers and all of the magazines not be able to at least achieve that number, which would make Porsche look like a bunch of lying bullsh**ting false advertisers. All manufacturers are the same on this front. If you publish a time, but nobody can duplicate it, or the act of duplicating it seriously risks damage to the car unless you nail the run perfectly the 1st or 2nd attempt, then what were you thinking as a manufacturer?

    I've never owned a car that I couldn't smoke, in 100% stock form, the factory's published straight-line performance figures. Namely, 1/4 mile times. The factory figure is always a relatively easy-to-achieve number, so if customers spend big dough for a car that the factory says will run 13.0 in the 1/4, by gosh, they can go to the strip and run 13.0 once they get the hang of it, weekend after weekend, without leaving a litter of busted and toasted warranted parts in their wake.

    Your original statement that manufactures test straigh-line performance with zero sympathy, without properly clutching on gear changes, and that their figures are difficult to achieve, could not be further from the truth. They test like lab-coated scientists. Magazines go more for broke, but still do things in a standardized way so that comparisons from car to car are valid and fair. Individuals are free to pull out all the stops, and risk their own hardware. I've done some amazing times tossing good sense to the wind! My proudest was 13.02 @ 108.2 mph in my box-stock 6-speed 1993 Corvette!! Had my buddy in the timing tower running down to the pits smiling and asking me "what did you do to that thing?".

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    I have been trying very hard to achieve the manufacturer's 0-60 figures for my 225 TTC. Audi claims that they can do it in 6.6 secs...but simply not possible. I have tested this on a timed track (1/4 track).

    I did rev the engine and dropped the clutch at 3500 revs..but it won't do it. And this is not just me saying this, but other people too. So how can Audi do it then?

    Maybe Porsche is different, but Audi is as described above.

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Don't worry, the only way you reach 60 in 3.8 secs with a 997S is if you drop it from the roof of your garage...

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    bluelines said:
    Don't worry, the only way you reach 60 in 3.8 secs with a 997S is if you drop it from the roof of your garage...




    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    Quote:
    Niko said:
    I have been trying very hard to achieve the manufacturer's 0-60 figures for my 225 TTC. Audi claims that they can do it in 6.6 secs...but simply not possible. I have tested this on a timed track (1/4 track).

    I did rev the engine and dropped the clutch at 3500 revs..but it won't do it. And this is not just me saying this, but other people too. So how can Audi do it then?

    Maybe Porsche is different, but Audi is as described above.


    Have to say I agree with Niko here. On my last car (also an Audi TT) I couldn't match the claimed times, and that's despite my version having the DSG gearbox - ie I just put my foot down! I tried it changing gears manually, but still couldn't match the times.

    There was a feature on this many years ago on BBC's Top Gear (before it became the chat show it currently is) and they invited a load of people to try and match manufacturer's times. Nobody could, with the exception of the racing driver who only managed to match the time by seriously abusing the clutch.

    Re: 0-60 C4 & C4S

    I posted a reply, but...now I'm editing it out. Let's just drop it. It's a dead horse. Maybe that's why I sit in the stands and laugh and shake my head on test & tune days watching easy mid-13-second cars run mid-14's in the hands of their owners. Just don't quit your day jobs to become drag racers guys!!

     
    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 I) Thread Closed 9/24/20 12:47 AM
    watt
    621926 2849
    Porsche Sticky The moment I've been waiting for... 12/30/20 9:03 AM
    rhino
     
     
     
     
     
    385941 1279
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: New Porsche 911 Turbo S (2020) 6/8/21 7:15 PM
    JR-550
    89597 1087
    Porsche Sticky Welcome to Rennteam: Cars and Coffee... (photos) 5/12/21 3:30 PM
    WhoopsyM
    47212 344
    Porsche Sticky ROAD TEST: New 992 Carrera 4S 3/3/21 10:57 PM
    Wonderbar
    36314 336
    Porsche Sticky Porsche Taycan Turbo S - Short Review 10/19/20 6:12 PM
    Leawood911
    34206 380
    Porsche Sticky SUN'S LAST RUN TO WILSON, WY - 991 C2S CAB LIFE, END OF AN ERA (Part II) 6/20/21 3:32 PM
    rhino
    18873 392
    Porsche Sticky Porsche extends the Taycan model range (Taycan 2WD) 2/1/21 12:42 PM
    Leawood911
    5177 29
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New 991.2 GT3 (2017) 7/27/20 2:13 AM
    DJM48
    576171 5257
    Porsche Cayman GT4 5/4/21 4:46 PM
    Topspeed
    436046 3586
    McLaren McLaren on a winning streak 4/25/21 4:04 PM
    Topspeed
    370385 3916
    Porsche OFFICIAL: 911 GT2 RS (2017) 5/27/21 6:14 PM
    Topspeed
    370081 3495
    Porsche OFFICIAL: 991.2 GT3 RS (2018) 4/28/21 12:26 PM
    W8MM
    332046 3252
    Porsche OFFICIAL: 911 R (2016) 12/8/20 7:51 PM
    DJM48
    311618 2646
    Porsche Tesla Roadster 9/23/20 8:22 PM
    bluelines
    252252 4279
    Porsche OFFICIAL: The new Porsche 992 – a design icon and high-tech sports car 2/28/21 8:05 PM
    Topspeed
    235016 1542
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New Panamera (2016) 2/11/21 9:22 AM
    Itsme
    162737 1379
    Others Alfa Romeo 4C 9/23/20 10:22 AM
    RCA
    138943 792
    Porsche 992 GT3 6/20/21 6:34 PM
    Boyko23
    137054 2626
    Lambo Lamborghini Huracan and variants 4/9/21 4:32 PM
    Topspeed
    111834 1225
    McLaren F1 2/25/21 11:33 AM
    RCA
    77851 207
    Porsche Welcome to the new Taycan Forum! 5/19/21 5:19 PM
    Leawood911
    76351 1167
    AMG AMG GT R 11/19/20 11:47 PM
    Topspeed
    66208 819
    Lambo Aventador and SV 4/20/21 3:21 PM
    CGX car nut
    65332 683
    Porsche 991 Speedster 9/3/20 4:29 PM
    Topspeed
    61950 878
    Porsche Nürburgring - Tesla vs. Taycan 11/23/20 6:10 PM
    Topspeed
    45990 596
    Others Bugatti Chiron 6/9/21 6:51 AM
    Jean
    37775 479
    Porsche Olive 991.2 GT3 Clubsport 1/1/21 7:58 PM
    throt
    34716 615
    Ferrari Ferrari 812 Superfast 6/20/21 6:30 PM
    bluelines
    34020 523
    BMW M BMW M2 Rumors 3/21/21 5:01 PM
    Topspeed
    29380 385
    270 items found, displaying 1 to 30.