Crown
Board: Porsche - 911 - 997 - Turbo
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
Rossi said:Quote:
MAVERICK said:Quote:
Crash said:
The 997TT just isn't designed with the Nring in mind anymore it would seem.
With what in mind is it now designed?
To be the egg-laying-wool-milk-pig from Porsche.
Well, yes
.Maverick, the 997TT is still an awesome car, both on country roads and on the Autobahn. It just seems that it wasn't created with the Nring in mind. I think a much better time could have been achieved with a -20 mm type of suspension (note the time differential between the PASM and -20 mm Carrera S). Porsche, however, doesn't even give you a choice. Then again, the car does seem to impress everyone who owns it so I thionk its main purpose is well and truly fulfilled (and it's also a cash cow, like Rossi so eloquently put it
).
Apr 22, 2007 12:20:40 AM
- SoCalHoosier
- Veteran
-
- Loc: California , United States
- Posts: 896, Gallery
- Registered on: Jun 13, 2003
- Reply to: Crash
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Dare I say it? Porsche has made the 997TT faster in a straight line at lower speeds. Thus the happy consumer reaction.
Isn't this what the Vette was good at? Now it seems that GM is breeding their cars to go fast on the ring while Porsche goes drag racing.
Isn't this what the Vette was good at? Now it seems that GM is breeding their cars to go fast on the ring while Porsche goes drag racing.
Apr 22, 2007 12:24:04 AM
- Crash
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Never been to , Antarctica
- Posts: 8287, Gallery
- Registered on: Oct 17, 2002
- Reply to: SoCalHoosier
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
SoCalHoosier said:
Dare I say it? Porsche has made the 997TT faster in a straight line at lower speeds. Thus the happy consumer reaction.
Isn't this what the Vette was good at? Now it seems that GM is breeding their cars to go fast on the ring while Porsche goes drag racing.
Actually, the 997TT is very fast at higher speeds as well (faster than the Z06). The Nring performance, on the other hand... Ouch
!
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
aah986 said:Quote:
KresoF1 said:
...and von Saurma achieved 7.56min in 996tt!
Horst von Saurma is excellent driver and I trust him.
Do you know how many laps W.Rohrl needed to achive that 7.49min? Better not to ask...
Sure, your excellent driver achieved the same time in a car with less weight, 60 hp more and almost 100 ft/lb of torque more (that's 120 Nm for you), explain that to me, maybe he woke up on the wrong foot that day
One thing to think about: How long did it take sportauto to publish the 997TT supertest? The answer: about a year (!)
Why did it take so long? My guess is that they tried to achieve better numbers, maybe even had runs with slower NBR times. Finally, they came up with this reslt which is still better than what they managed to achieve before. Just speculation, of course...
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
Rossi said:Quote:
MAVERICK said:Quote:
Crash said:
The 997TT just isn't designed with the Nring in mind anymore it would seem.
With what in mind is it now designed?
To be the egg-laying-wool-milk-pig from Porsche.
Well, yes
Maverick, the 997TT is still an awesome car, both on country roads and on the Autobahn.
The guys who developed the 997TT without keeping a close eye on the NBR/track performance should be fired immediately. If the developers were forced to focus on other objectives (and making the car slower) during development of the car those who forced them should be fired instead.
One thing is for sure: every manufacturer, if not run by complete idiots, should be aware of the testing practices of the car press. It is widely known, not only in this forum, that track performance of new cars is tested and published nowadays. How could Porsche miss that important point? Very, very strange. As said above some people at Porsche should get fired
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
MKSGR said:Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
Rossi said:Quote:
MAVERICK said:Quote:
Crash said:
The 997TT just isn't designed with the Nring in mind anymore it would seem.
With what in mind is it now designed?
To be the egg-laying-wool-milk-pig from Porsche.
Well, yes
Maverick, the 997TT is still an awesome car, both on country roads and on the Autobahn.
The guys who developed the 997TT without keeping a close eye on the NBR/track performance should be fired immediately. If the developers were forced to focus on other objectives (and making the car slower) during development of the car those who forced them should be fired instead.
One thing is for sure: every manufacturer, if not run by complete idiots, should be aware of the testing practices of the car press. It is widely known, not only in this forum, that track performance of new cars is tested and published nowadays. How could Porsche miss that important point? Very, very strange. As said above some people at Porsche should get fired
We are in agreement. It just seems moronic to me that Porsche, the undisputed king of the Nring would do something this stupid
.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Von Saurma's time is 6 seconds slower than Walter's official time and 14 seconds slower than the Motortrend test. I would tend to view the fastest (MT) and slowest (SA) figures as outliers. SA's number should be judged against other SA tests. For example, SA's GT3/RS numbers of 7:48 are also slower than the official Porsche GT3/RS ring times of 7:39 and 7:42, a difference of 6 seconds on the RS.
This reminds me of the differences between dynamometer measurements. They are best used for comparisons between the same dyno and the same car over time. Testing parameters would also help explain the discrepancies.
This reminds me of the differences between dynamometer measurements. They are best used for comparisons between the same dyno and the same car over time. Testing parameters would also help explain the discrepancies.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
7.40min in Motor Trend is pure SF!
Or CRAP; BS or whatever... Motor Trend stuff never get to the Nordschliefe with 997tt. Their time(7.40min) is a pure speculation based on the fact that some Porsche guy told them that new 997tt is faster on Nordschleife then old one.
Come on! Motor Trend journalist faster in 997tt on the Ring then von Saurma or W.Rohrl??!!
Pure SF CRAP IMHO!
Or CRAP; BS or whatever... Motor Trend stuff never get to the Nordschliefe with 997tt. Their time(7.40min) is a pure speculation based on the fact that some Porsche guy told them that new 997tt is faster on Nordschleife then old one.
Come on! Motor Trend journalist faster in 997tt on the Ring then von Saurma or W.Rohrl??!!
Pure SF CRAP IMHO!
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
eclou said:
Von Saurma's time is 6 seconds slower than Walter's official time and 14 seconds slower than the Motortrend test. I would tend to view the fastest (MT) and slowest (SA) figures as outliers. SA's number should be judged against other SA tests. For example, SA's GT3/RS numbers of 7:48 are also slower than the official Porsche GT3/RS ring times of 7:39 and 7:42, a difference of 6 seconds on the RS.
This reminds me of the differences between dynamometer measurements. They are best used for comparisons between the same dyno and the same car over time. Testing parameters would also help explain the discrepancies.
eclou,
I do believe that it is possible for the Turbo to break below 7:50 (as WR did), but if it takes even the driver who was present during development of the car dozens of laps to set a good time, it just doesn't fly IMO.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
eclou said:
Von Saurma's time is 6 seconds slower than Walter's official time and 14 seconds slower than the Motortrend test. I would tend to view the fastest (MT) and slowest (SA) figures as outliers. SA's number should be judged against other SA tests. For example, SA's GT3/RS numbers of 7:48 are also slower than the official Porsche GT3/RS ring times of 7:39 and 7:42, a difference of 6 seconds on the RS.
This reminds me of the differences between dynamometer measurements. They are best used for comparisons between the same dyno and the same car over time. Testing parameters would also help explain the discrepancies.
The thing with factory claims (whether from GM or Porsche) is that they cannot be verified and may even be a pure marketing trick.
That's why I personally look only at SportAuto Supertest results in comparing performance cars.
P.S.: Also, we are comparing the 7:54 (based on SportAuto) with the 7:56 of the 420hp 996TT on standard tires (also based on SportAuto). Both figures were derived under comparable conditions. That's why I am so (negatively) surpirsed by the recent Supertest.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
eclou said:
Von Saurma's time is 6 seconds slower than Walter's official time and 14 seconds slower than the Motortrend test. I would tend to view the fastest (MT) and slowest (SA) figures as outliers. SA's number should be judged against other SA tests. For example, SA's GT3/RS numbers of 7:48 are also slower than the official Porsche GT3/RS ring times of 7:39 and 7:42, a difference of 6 seconds on the RS.
This reminds me of the differences between dynamometer measurements. They are best used for comparisons between the same dyno and the same car over time. Testing parameters would also help explain the discrepancies.
eclou,
I do believe that it is possible for the Turbo to break below 7:50 (as WR did), but if it takes even the driver who was present during development of the car dozens of laps to set a good time, it just doesn't fly IMO.
Even if that was possible: WR would probably also get below 7:50 in a F430 and below 7:45 in a Gallardo then
My point is: we are not complaining about the absolute figure but about the relative performance of this car compared to other sportscars. And there the HvS test results can indeed be compared
It's the best objective benchmark available to date 
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
MKSGR said:Quote:
Crash said:Quote:
eclou said:
Von Saurma's time is 6 seconds slower than Walter's official time and 14 seconds slower than the Motortrend test. I would tend to view the fastest (MT) and slowest (SA) figures as outliers. SA's number should be judged against other SA tests. For example, SA's GT3/RS numbers of 7:48 are also slower than the official Porsche GT3/RS ring times of 7:39 and 7:42, a difference of 6 seconds on the RS.
This reminds me of the differences between dynamometer measurements. They are best used for comparisons between the same dyno and the same car over time. Testing parameters would also help explain the discrepancies.
eclou,
I do believe that it is possible for the Turbo to break below 7:50 (as WR did), but if it takes even the driver who was present during development of the car dozens of laps to set a good time, it just doesn't fly IMO.
Even if that was possible: WR would probably also get below 7:50 in a F430 and below 7:45 in a Gallardo then
My point is: we are not complaining about the absolute figure but about the relative performance of this car compared to other sportscars. And there the HvS test results can indeed be compared
Definitely true. Although it probably also depends on how accessible the performance is to the driver (it seems that the Turbo is notoriously hard to drive at the limit, not sure how things stand with the 430 and the G).
Apr 22, 2007 9:11:39 PM
- Dock (Atlanta)
- Pilot
-
- Loc: Atlanta, Georgia
- Posts: 386, Gallery
- Registered on: May 1, 2002
- Reply to: SoCalHoosier
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
SoCalHoosier said:
You honestly believe that these guys wouldn't know. Or is it the Porsche kool-aid speaking.
What I do know is that none of us know enough about the test specifics to be able to say anything definitive about the lap time. There are SO many variables that could account for the particular lap time that assuming none of them altered the outcome would be short sighted.
Apr 22, 2007 10:11:48 PM
- LoranTw
- Senior
-
- Loc: Canada
- Posts: 569, Gallery
- Registered on: Apr 14, 2006
- Reply to: Dock (Atlanta)
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
Dock (Atlanta) said:Quote:
SoCalHoosier said:
You honestly believe that these guys wouldn't know. Or is it the Porsche kool-aid speaking.
What I do know is that none of us know enough about the test specifics to be able to say anything definitive about the lap time. There are SO many variables that could account for the particular lap time that assuming none of them altered the outcome would be short sighted.
The funny thing is the mood changes here from euphoria to despodency everytime a new artcicle or piece of information gets posted. Winter has finally subsided here and I have been driving my car now for three days after 5 1/2 months in the garage, sport auto or no sport auto this is one hell of a car, perhaps not everyones cup of tea
But those of us lucky enough to have one, I suspect aren't hanging on the next jouranlists words... Time to go and wash it now and put in away for the night.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Wao, still shocked.
Porsche lost me sale anyway, no PDK -> no 997TT. Here comes the AMV8.
But after these numbers, I might have cancelled my order for a TT if I had one.
BTW the AMV8 is said to do 8:03 vs 7:54 in the same tires vs 997TT. That's with 100 less hp and 100 more kg. This put the 997TT to shame IMHO. They are 10 secs of the time they should have acheived.
Porsche lost me sale anyway, no PDK -> no 997TT. Here comes the AMV8.
But after these numbers, I might have cancelled my order for a TT if I had one.
BTW the AMV8 is said to do 8:03 vs 7:54 in the same tires vs 997TT. That's with 100 less hp and 100 more kg. This put the 997TT to shame IMHO. They are 10 secs of the time they should have acheived.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
KresoF1 said:
7.40min in Motor Trend is pure SF!
Or CRAP; BS or whatever... Motor Trend stuff never get to the Nordschliefe with 997tt. Their time(7.40min) is a pure speculation based on the fact that some Porsche guy told them that new 997tt is faster on Nordschleife then old one.
Come on! Motor Trend journalist faster in 997tt on the Ring then von Saurma or W.Rohrl??!!
Pure SF CRAP IMHO!
The MT time is super crap. Its just fantasy speculation on their part and they should stick to writing about cup holders in Suzukis.
As for the SA test, Maybe it shows the TT has hit a brick wall. Sure it has the latest VTG/PASM/Networked systems etc., but maybe the results of all of that are the best the TT can do considering emission needs and vehicle mass.
BUT, I never thought I would see the day when a SA test would give a C6 Vette (not the bigger tired Z06) higher marks than a AWD 997TT for handling in the WET. That is just bizarre and completely unexpected.
FWIW department, MY2008 Corvettes begin production this April 28th. The standard Corvette C6 gets its optional sport suspension improved and also a slightly bigger 6.2 litre engine that makes 435 certified hp with std exhaust and approx 450hp with the optional sport exhaust. It also weighs a few hundred pounds less than a 997TT. Price with the sport exhaust and sport suspension will be roughly $48,500 in the US.
Apr 23, 2007 6:40:37 AM
-
MKSGR
- Rennteam Moderator
-
- Loc: Germany , Germany
- Posts: 8098, Gallery
- Registered on: Jun 17, 2002
- Reply to: Dock (Atlanta)
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
Dock (Atlanta) said:Quote:
SoCalHoosier said:
You honestly believe that these guys wouldn't know. Or is it the Porsche kool-aid speaking.
What I do know is that none of us know enough about the test specifics to be able to say anything definitive about the lap time. There are SO many variables that could account for the particular lap time that assuming none of them altered the outcome would be short sighted.
In theory you are right. However, I consider it very likely (if not certain...) that sportauto, after noting the rather poor performance figures of the 997TT, tried to achieve better numbers before publishing the unfortunate test result...
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
My car purchasing decision is never based on someone else's test drive, let alone a journalist.
I'm not familiar with the relevance of the N'bg test but personally, there are more important considerations for my use of the car on the steet.
I think I care more about how much I (an above average driver) can get out of the car as opposed to the professional drivers.
For day to day enjoyment, the 997TT is hard to beat.
I'm not familiar with the relevance of the N'bg test but personally, there are more important considerations for my use of the car on the steet.
I think I care more about how much I (an above average driver) can get out of the car as opposed to the professional drivers.
For day to day enjoyment, the 997TT is hard to beat.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
It really does probably come down to the new AWD system as so many have already said. The electronic AWD has made the Turbo a more sporty drive, which is great for most drivers that never go beyond 8/10s or so, but its just damn tricky beyond that. In other words, the AWD drive system of the 996 car may have been a bit understeery and dull, but its handling at the limit was much more predictable and composed. Personally, I'll still take the new car every time, but that's only because I think there are better Porsche's for track work anyway, ie. GT3. 
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
As a recent owner of a 997tt, I too am disappointed with SA's test results. However, I did not buy it based on any particular performance parameters but on what it offers overall. IMO, many other "owners" would say the same thing.
Now that I got that out of the way, let's review what is being opined here.
It seems we all "want our cake and eat it too" - just an English expression for "we want it all".
Is it realistic for the Turbo, a fairly comfortable, daily driver, with rear seats and all wheel drive (read: all weather), to outperform cars like the f430, gallardo se, GT3/RS around the Ring? All of which are "track focused" vehicles - high revving, low, 2 seaters, summer drivers etc. Most are also significantly lighter or have even more hp than the 997tt. IMO, it really isn't.
Just look at which vehicles have managed to break the 7'50" barrier at the Ring - CGT, McLaren F1, LP640, Koenigsegg, Pagani Zonda, 996GT2,997GT3/RS. Even the f430, 360 Modena, Gallardo Se failed to do so. Look-up the Ring times to see what I mean. IMO this barrier appears to be extremely difficult to better/achieve. And to do so, a car must be set-up accordingly, certainly not for 99% of us average consumers, looking for many other attributes besides a car's Ring time potential.
I haven't read comments about the questionable times between the 996GT3 RS/997GT3 RS. Here are some examples:
1. 7'42" 997GT3 RS Sport Auto - Walter Rohrl
2. 7'43" 996GT3 RS - again by WR
Again, no measurable improvement!
It would appear the 997 models aren't providing better Ring times but seem to be more "driver friendly", with better straight line performance. Isn't this better for us - the consumer? Porsche's sales figures appear to confirm this theory.
As someone else said, Porsche may have reached a plataue. Don't forget, the CGT (basically a racing car) achieved a time of 7'36", marginally better than the 997GT3 RS's 7'39". And don't forget, the CGT is not for amateurs - only racing car drivers need apply (re: Ring). Does that make CGT owners lose sleep at night - surely NOT. But it demonstrates the REALITY of what is achievable vs what we desire.
Now that I got that out of the way, let's review what is being opined here.
It seems we all "want our cake and eat it too" - just an English expression for "we want it all".
Is it realistic for the Turbo, a fairly comfortable, daily driver, with rear seats and all wheel drive (read: all weather), to outperform cars like the f430, gallardo se, GT3/RS around the Ring? All of which are "track focused" vehicles - high revving, low, 2 seaters, summer drivers etc. Most are also significantly lighter or have even more hp than the 997tt. IMO, it really isn't.
Just look at which vehicles have managed to break the 7'50" barrier at the Ring - CGT, McLaren F1, LP640, Koenigsegg, Pagani Zonda, 996GT2,997GT3/RS. Even the f430, 360 Modena, Gallardo Se failed to do so. Look-up the Ring times to see what I mean. IMO this barrier appears to be extremely difficult to better/achieve. And to do so, a car must be set-up accordingly, certainly not for 99% of us average consumers, looking for many other attributes besides a car's Ring time potential.
I haven't read comments about the questionable times between the 996GT3 RS/997GT3 RS. Here are some examples:
1. 7'42" 997GT3 RS Sport Auto - Walter Rohrl
2. 7'43" 996GT3 RS - again by WR
Again, no measurable improvement!
It would appear the 997 models aren't providing better Ring times but seem to be more "driver friendly", with better straight line performance. Isn't this better for us - the consumer? Porsche's sales figures appear to confirm this theory.
As someone else said, Porsche may have reached a plataue. Don't forget, the CGT (basically a racing car) achieved a time of 7'36", marginally better than the 997GT3 RS's 7'39". And don't forget, the CGT is not for amateurs - only racing car drivers need apply (re: Ring). Does that make CGT owners lose sleep at night - surely NOT. But it demonstrates the REALITY of what is achievable vs what we desire.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
mp said:
1. 7'42" 997GT3 RS Sport Auto - Walter Rohrl
2. 7'43" 996GT3 RS - again by WR
Again, no measurable improvement!
As someone else said, Porsche may have reached a plataue. Don't forget, the CGT (basically a racing car) achieved a time of 7'36", marginally better than the 997GT3 RS's 7'39". And don't forget, the CGT is not for amateurs - only racing car drivers need apply (re: Ring). Does that make CGT owners lose sleep at night - surely NOT. But it demonstrates the REALITY of what is achievable vs what we desire.
I never heard about 7.39 GT3 RS time....and also 7.42 is too optimistic....
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Quote:
andrea said:Quote:
mp said:
1. 7'42" 997GT3 RS Sport Auto - Walter Rohrl
2. 7'43" 996GT3 RS - again by WR
Again, no measurable improvement!
As someone else said, Porsche may have reached a plataue. Don't forget, the CGT (basically a racing car) achieved a time of 7'36", marginally better than the 997GT3 RS's 7'39". And don't forget, the CGT is not for amateurs - only racing car drivers need apply (re: Ring). Does that make CGT owners lose sleep at night - surely NOT. But it demonstrates the REALITY of what is achievable vs what we desire.
I never heard about 7.39 GT3 RS time....and also 7.42 is too optimistic....
Actually made a small error. Both 7'39" & 7'42" times are mfr claim, which I intended to exclude. Let me try again:
1. 7'43" 996GT3 RS - Motor Magazine - Walter Roehrl
2. 7'48" 997GT3 RS - Sport Auto 03/07
3. 7'48" 997GT3 - Sport Auto 07/06
I do find these figures rather interesting. Not only has the 996GT3 RS posted faster times but the 997GT3 & RS seems to be equals.
Finally, the GT3's are (and should be) faster around the Ring. They are race bred vehicles, while the Turbo is more of a GT.
Re: 997 turbo Supertest in Sport Auto...
Very interested thing is that nobody seems to mentioned Hockenheim time with normal Michelin Pilot Sport N1 tires...
That time is 1.13,7min and do all of you know(well, some members actually do know!) what is Sport Auto Hockenheim time for 997 Carrera S(X51, PCCBs, -20mm/LSD, normal Michelins)?
1.13,7min!!!
So, if we add Cups to that car what will be the difference between it and 997 turbo? None I guess...
Also, wet road handling is really very slow. So, PTM is not working as Porsche promissed to us.
Is it really possible that 997GT3, 997GT3RS and Audi RS4 are faster on wet handling track then 997 turbo? According to the results as Jim noticed it is the case.
Point is 997 turbo is very good car indeed! But, best car in its class? Well, I would still say yes-but only if you need 2+2 seater!
That time is 1.13,7min and do all of you know(well, some members actually do know!) what is Sport Auto Hockenheim time for 997 Carrera S(X51, PCCBs, -20mm/LSD, normal Michelins)?
1.13,7min!!!
So, if we add Cups to that car what will be the difference between it and 997 turbo? None I guess...
Also, wet road handling is really very slow. So, PTM is not working as Porsche promissed to us.
Is it really possible that 997GT3, 997GT3RS and Audi RS4 are faster on wet handling track then 997 turbo? According to the results as Jim noticed it is the case.
Point is 997 turbo is very good car indeed! But, best car in its class? Well, I would still say yes-but only if you need 2+2 seater!
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
