200.77 mph K16 Tiptronic.
#1
11-05-2011, 05:09 PM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,454
Rep Power: 95 
200.77 mph K16 Tiptronic. P box verified
Just got back form Bruntingthorpe (uK) with my 996tt.
update on mods:
New development in the UK K16/39 hybrid turbos that flow 39lb air.
911 Tuning 3 1/2" IC
911 Tuning soft intake
911 tuning tune
60 lb injectors
k&N
Racing dV's
Miltek 100 cell m/sport exhaust.
MKB BOX and TCU
PSS10's all round.
I'm waiting for Ken at Nine Excellence to send me the full download of Pbox and durametrics. but here are a few times from Brunters which IIRC has a 1.5 deg incline and is ( edited) 1.4 miles. ( Ken knows the exact track details)
0-60 3 seconds
0-100 6.5
0-300kph 26.91
0-200 mph 34.17
I then ran the car lap after lap over 190mph on full boost 1.5 bar, All durametrics were well in tolerance and IAT's were fine. maxed a few times at 60deg but I did put a lot of runs in.
All ran on UK 99 shell V Power=94 US Ron.
Ken might come on, I hope and post all the verification data.
Basically, on my bequest, I got Ken and a very good friend Turbo builder together and they have come up with Hybrid K1639 Turbos. I get all the K16 low spool but now get just near K24 18g performance. Remember K24/18g flow 40 lbs and the K1639 flow 39 lbs. Almost the same. The car is a monster. there is no sign at all of the hot side choking
update on mods:
New development in the UK K16/39 hybrid turbos that flow 39lb air.
911 Tuning 3 1/2" IC
911 Tuning soft intake
911 tuning tune
60 lb injectors
k&N
Racing dV's
Miltek 100 cell m/sport exhaust.
MKB BOX and TCU
PSS10's all round.
I'm waiting for Ken at Nine Excellence to send me the full download of Pbox and durametrics. but here are a few times from Brunters which IIRC has a 1.5 deg incline and is ( edited) 1.4 miles. ( Ken knows the exact track details)
0-60 3 seconds
0-100 6.5
0-300kph 26.91
0-200 mph 34.17
I then ran the car lap after lap over 190mph on full boost 1.5 bar, All durametrics were well in tolerance and IAT's were fine. maxed a few times at 60deg but I did put a lot of runs in.
All ran on UK 99 shell V Power=94 US Ron.
Ken might come on, I hope and post all the verification data.
Basically, on my bequest, I got Ken and a very good friend Turbo builder together and they have come up with Hybrid K1639 Turbos. I get all the K16 low spool but now get just near K24 18g performance. Remember K24/18g flow 40 lbs and the K1639 flow 39 lbs. Almost the same. The car is a monster. there is no sign at all of the hot side choking
Last edited by Frank ( Sunnyside ); 11-29-2011 at 12:34 PM.
#2
11-05-2011, 05:23 PM
Basic Sponsor
Congrats..
so you kit 200 mph in a mile? or is that top speed?
so you kit 200 mph in a mile? or is that top speed?
__________________
2001 996TT 3.6L and stock ECU
9.66 seconds @ 147.76 mph 1/4 mile click to view
160 mph @ 9.77 seconds in 1/4 mile click to view
50% OFF ON PORSCHE ECU TUNING BLACK FRIDAY SPECIAL
2001 996TT 3.6L and stock ECU
9.66 seconds @ 147.76 mph 1/4 mile click to view
160 mph @ 9.77 seconds in 1/4 mile click to view
50% OFF ON PORSCHE ECU TUNING BLACK FRIDAY SPECIAL
#3
11-05-2011, 05:37 PM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,454
Rep Power: 95 I'm still waiting Ken to publish the results. Either way 0-200.77 mph in 34.17 says it all. There has never been another K16 that we know of over here to run that time. If I had 6 pots and bigger brakes instead of the standard ones stopping at the end of the airfield would be less traumatic and I would definitely have had a better top speed. braking was a problem.
We also ran Toby's 997 720 bhp beast, a K24/18g car and a K24/20 car t cross reference my times and have a benchmark to work on. It was a great day and my first ever 200 mph in any car
#4
11-05-2011, 06:41 PM
This is very believable. My 16/16g TIP that flowed way less air and stock gear box did 197mph in only ONE mile. I have no doubt, I could hit 200 in much less distance than 1.8 miles.
That's a strong car.
That's a strong car.
Thats 200.77 mph on brunters Airfield which I think is 1.8 mile.
I'm still waiting Ken to publish the results. Either way 0-200.77 mph in 34.17 says it all. There has never been another K16 that we know of over here to run that time. If I had 6 pots and bigger brakes instead of the standard ones stopping at the end of the airfield would be less traumatic and I would definitely have had a better top speed. braking was a problem.
We also ran Toby's 997 720 bhp beast, a K24/18g car and a K24/20 car t cross reference my times and have a benchmark to work on. It was a great day and my first ever 200 mph in any car
I'm still waiting Ken to publish the results. Either way 0-200.77 mph in 34.17 says it all. There has never been another K16 that we know of over here to run that time. If I had 6 pots and bigger brakes instead of the standard ones stopping at the end of the airfield would be less traumatic and I would definitely have had a better top speed. braking was a problem.
We also ran Toby's 997 720 bhp beast, a K24/18g car and a K24/20 car t cross reference my times and have a benchmark to work on. It was a great day and my first ever 200 mph in any car
#5
11-06-2011, 06:13 AM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,454
Rep Power: 95 also 60-130 7 seconds
#6
11-06-2011, 06:17 AM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,454
Rep Power: 95
One of the durametric logs: http://thumbsnap.com/f/7VawtdjK
Last edited by Frank ( Sunnyside ); 11-06-2011 at 06:19 AM.
#7
11-06-2011, 06:31 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Warwickshire, England
Age: 41
Posts: 1,751
Rep Power: 139 Trending Topics
#8
11-06-2011, 06:35 AM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,454
Rep Power: 95
Cheers ant.
Here are the first 53 minutes of testing;
http://thumbsnap.com/E7LgyFqfigh
And 6 laps at high speed:
http://thumbsnap.com/f/dnS5J8pZ
Here are the first 53 minutes of testing;
http://thumbsnap.com/E7LgyFqfigh
And 6 laps at high speed:
http://thumbsnap.com/f/dnS5J8pZ
#11
11-06-2011, 07:36 AM
Hi,
So the car ran 200.77 in 1.4 miles. The problem with Bruntingthorpe is that it is on an incline of 1.4% all the way to near the mile marker and traction is a major issue. To give you some idea on a normal run with 2 people in the car, 1/2 tank of fuel we were running 7.00 second dead from 60-130. I know the car will do mid 6s 60-130mph on nice road with just me in the car. At Brunters I don't think we managed more 8 seconds 60-130. From 0-300kph the track is around 3 seconds slower than a good surface.
Anyway, since we run there we can compare against other cars and it is the same for all of us. We run using vpower 99 which is the same as US 93. The car ran 190 at the mile marker but with better conditions we could run faster - our 0-100 time was a second slower than normal road conditions.
The issue as always with larger 16s is the heat generation, but we have minimised that as much as possible.
These turbos hit hard and stay longer than the 16gs we have tested before. One of our shop cars has these 16gs and it is no where near as quick as these turbos.
I am not disputing the 197mph in the mile for the 16/16g, but remember what fuel we are running here - 93, not race gas etc.
To give you some comparison, not one k16 based car has EVER hit 200gps at Brunters. The k24 based hybrids struggle as well. My k24/20g has many times at Brunters but that is a lot more power - and the best I have achieved in the mile there has been 198. So slow surface.
As frank posted some of the testing we did, we ran for 53 minutes of hard testing, and ran track laps as well. So not one of runs or anything like that - they have been tested to their limits in the time we had available.
This car beat our k24/18g from 0-300kph. However from 240-320 the 18g car pulled back a slightly better time.
Ken
So the car ran 200.77 in 1.4 miles. The problem with Bruntingthorpe is that it is on an incline of 1.4% all the way to near the mile marker and traction is a major issue. To give you some idea on a normal run with 2 people in the car, 1/2 tank of fuel we were running 7.00 second dead from 60-130. I know the car will do mid 6s 60-130mph on nice road with just me in the car. At Brunters I don't think we managed more 8 seconds 60-130. From 0-300kph the track is around 3 seconds slower than a good surface.
Anyway, since we run there we can compare against other cars and it is the same for all of us. We run using vpower 99 which is the same as US 93. The car ran 190 at the mile marker but with better conditions we could run faster - our 0-100 time was a second slower than normal road conditions.
The issue as always with larger 16s is the heat generation, but we have minimised that as much as possible.
These turbos hit hard and stay longer than the 16gs we have tested before. One of our shop cars has these 16gs and it is no where near as quick as these turbos.
I am not disputing the 197mph in the mile for the 16/16g, but remember what fuel we are running here - 93, not race gas etc.
To give you some comparison, not one k16 based car has EVER hit 200gps at Brunters. The k24 based hybrids struggle as well. My k24/20g has many times at Brunters but that is a lot more power - and the best I have achieved in the mile there has been 198. So slow surface.
As frank posted some of the testing we did, we ran for 53 minutes of hard testing, and ran track laps as well. So not one of runs or anything like that - they have been tested to their limits in the time we had available.
This car beat our k24/18g from 0-300kph. However from 240-320 the 18g car pulled back a slightly better time.
Ken
#12
11-06-2011, 07:36 AM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,454
Rep Power: 95
Hi Nola,
MKB box and TCU upgrade.
The 200.77 was not open road, IIRC the 0-200 mph were done in ( edited) 1.4 miles including coming to an almost stop. Next time I will have better brakes and will be trying for faster.
It was still pulling strong right up to the point I had to hit the brakes. I feel it could be good for well over 200 if the road was unlimited length.
the track is aslo 1.5 geg incline and not flat.
MKB box and TCU upgrade.
The 200.77 was not open road, IIRC the 0-200 mph were done in ( edited) 1.4 miles including coming to an almost stop. Next time I will have better brakes and will be trying for faster.
It was still pulling strong right up to the point I had to hit the brakes. I feel it could be good for well over 200 if the road was unlimited length.
the track is aslo 1.5 geg incline and not flat.
Last edited by Frank ( Sunnyside ); 11-29-2011 at 12:36 PM.
#13
11-06-2011, 07:47 AM
Hi Nola,
MKB box and TCU upgrade.
The 200.77 was not open road, IIRC the 0-200 mph were done in 1.5 miles including coming to an almost stop. Next time I will have better brakes and will be trying for faster.
It was still pulling strong right up to the point I had to hit the brakes. I feel it could be good for well over 200 if the road was unlimited length.
the track is aslo 1.5 geg incline and not flat.
MKB box and TCU upgrade.
The 200.77 was not open road, IIRC the 0-200 mph were done in 1.5 miles including coming to an almost stop. Next time I will have better brakes and will be trying for faster.
It was still pulling strong right up to the point I had to hit the brakes. I feel it could be good for well over 200 if the road was unlimited length.
the track is aslo 1.5 geg incline and not flat.
Did you calculate the theoretical top speed if you had unlimited road?
#14
11-06-2011, 07:56 AM
Of course there are many other factors - e.g. how high IATs would rise and impact timing.
Ken
