Quote:
rs38 said:
btw: has anyone a street legal car faster that that in the screenshot? )
Jul 21, 2008 7:11:53 PM
Quote:
RC said:
I can't comment too much on the various results but some are a little bit odd to say at least.
Regarding the RS Tuning 993 with 520 HP: one of the Rennteam team members is driving a 993 Turbo modded by RS Tuning with the 520 HP kit. This car was and is as fast as my 997 Turbo STOCK, so I doubt the published figures a little bit. I also met various tuned 993 Turbo with up to 540 HP claimed HP figures and only one was a bit faster than my stock Tiptronic 997 Turbo, so again I doubt the claimed figures. The 993 Turbo RS Tuning mentioned in the performance table is faster than the RUF 550 997 Turbo, this doesn't seem right, sorry.
Btw: the 997 Turbo RUF 550 HP testing has been done with GPS testing equipment, the result is pretty accurate and the 200-300 kph acceleration time has been clocked at precisely TRUE 200 kph and 300 kph, NOT speedo figures!
Quote:
RC said:
Thanks for the clarification, I appreciate it.
Unfortunately everybody who reads the performance table thinks that these very good results are valid for the "standard" 993 Turbo RS-Tuning kit with 520 HP.
Like I said before, this can't be right as I have a real life experience with several tuned 993 Turbo compared to my 997 Turbo and compared to the RUF 550 997 Turbo
Quote:
GT2ETR said:Quote:
rs38 said:
btw: has anyone a street legal car faster that that in the screenshot? )
RS 38
Is that equivalent to a 0-300kph with 5 gears?
What is the weight of that car?
Can you please post a clean run (there are two lines on that graph, confusing)
Can you post all the intermediate times vs speed in 20kph intervals please for that 100-300kph run?
Can you please explain how you calculate the slope impact on times in your model. Isn't a negative number a downward slope?
Thank You
Quote:
TB993tt said:Quote:I am also keen to get RS38s slope program to run over and correct for the slope during my 0-300kph run, it is over 4m up to 280kph.......
RC said:
I can't comment too much on the various results but some are a little bit odd to say at least.
Regarding the RS Tuning 993 with 520 HP: one of the Rennteam team members is driving a 993 Turbo modded by RS Tuning with the 520 HP kit. This car was and is as fast as my 997 Turbo STOCK, so I doubt the published figures a little bit. I also met various tuned 993 Turbo with up to 540 HP claimed HP figures and only one was a bit faster than my stock Tiptronic 997 Turbo, so again I doubt the claimed figures. The 993 Turbo RS Tuning mentioned in the performance table is faster than the RUF 550 997 Turbo, this doesn't seem right, sorry.
Btw: the 997 Turbo RUF 550 HP testing has been done with GPS testing equipment, the result is pretty accurate and the 200-300 kph acceleration time has been clocked at precisely TRUE 200 kph and 300 kph, NOT speedo figures!
There are so many factors to take into account for all the figures in the table which effect the numbers:
Slope
Car running weight ie passengers/fuel load
Aerodynamics ie stock or add on wings increasing CdA
Size of wheels
Gearing (particularly important when comparing in between speeds ie # of gearchanges)
Road surface
Climate on day of the run
Wind on day of run
Speed of gear shifts
Oct 8, 2008 9:57:09 AM
Oct 12, 2008 8:43:21 PM
Oct 13, 2008 11:45:24 AM
Quote:
Alex_997TT said:
This looks frickin awesome!!
http://www.videovbox.co.uk/
Need to find out how much...
Jan 1, 2009 2:48:11 PM
Jan 1, 2009 7:20:10 PM
Maybe this was already discussed but why would the stock Turbo Cabriolet have better times than the Coupe?
Also what happened to the Cargraphic 544#'s? Last time I looked when the #'s were first posted the 544 kit was near the very top of the chart & were even better than the AWE 700. I posted on the first page of this thread at that time that the 544 #'s didnt look right.
Jan 1, 2009 8:56:28 PM
I will try to get some CG544 times later this year when things warm/dry up a bit.
I think the CG544 times were always where they are now. I believe Toby may be right though in that the car testing those times was made lighter by CG and also had CG headers.
Either way the times should be similar to the Ruf550 car tested by RC. I have shown many times that the CG544 pakage produces a little more overall power when added up across the range.
This is a chart I made the other day of the stock Turbo vs CG544 vs stock GT2 official power outputs. You can see the CG544 is making up to 100 bhp more than a stock Turbo throughout the range.
Jan 1, 2009 9:41:49 PM
Feb 16, 2009 9:24:28 AM
Feb 19, 2009 1:48:56 PM
acrobat:
From AutoBild Sportscars:
911GT2:
Test done by MotorTrend.
- 0-50 km/h: 1,4 s
- 0-100 km/h: 3,6 s
- 0-200 km/h: 10,9 s
- 0-250 km/h: 18,7 s
- 0-300 km/h: 36,0 s
- Vmax.: 322 km/h
these numbers are pretty good but in line with previous tests. 100-200km/h of 7.3s puts the stock 997GT2 on par with a stage 2 997TT (ECU/exhaust). Interestingly, the Gt2 is slightly slower to 300km/h in spite of lesser weight, and due to worse aerodynamics.
Standing mile for a stock 997GT2 is 174mph vs 178mph for a stage 2 997TT.
2007 997 TT Protomotive
Feb 25, 2009 11:51:45 AM
Feb 25, 2009 12:34:07 PM
Feb 26, 2009 10:02:41 AM
Mar 20, 2009 1:08:07 PM
tuners uk vs usa vs ger
http://www.cargraphic.de/stepone/data/downloads/22/11/00/911world-0409.pdfApr 29, 2009 6:18:29 PM
Apr 30, 2009 8:12:44 PM
Here we go :-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zWS1orB6Z8
Same car 200-300 in 13.4sec!!
New programme for the TCU comming soon!!! quicker shifting extended up to 7000 RPM
Apr 30, 2009 11:32:32 PM