It's not all about horsepower. Gearing and power curves are equally, if not more important.

The "feels" more powerful impression doesn't make it faster. My neighbor's '03 Cobra "feels" faster than my Turbo because of the torque curve, throttle response, noise, and vibration. It is not even close to the Turbo via the clock.

 

Everyone keeps saying how the E55 can't touch the 996TT....The E55 motor makes a lot more HP and torque than a stock 996. 415 v. 469 and 415 v. 516 is substantial. That torque curve gives the E55 a big advantage. Also, the numbers based on 0-60 and 1/4 mile are within a tenth or two in almost every car magazine. Keep in mind the E55 has nowhere near the grip of the AWD Porsche. This is translates to a faster car once they are rolling. I own both and love both, but I am just stating the facts.

 

It's not all about horsepower and torque. There's the impact of gearing and weight.

It's not the total number, it's area under the curve.

I'm trying to square your "facts" with what others here say. Why is what you say a "fact", and what they say isn't?



The E55 AMG has "bigger" power numbers, but it's gearing and weight sap that power in terms of acceleration performance. Here's why you can't just look at the peak power numbers and not account for gearing and weight...

The total turning force at the wheels is equal to the overall gear ratio (final drive x gear) x power, assuming the rolling radius is 1, and not accounting for transmission losses (but both cars can be assumed to be the same). Looking at the turning force generated at peak torque in 1st gear, the Turbo = 4977 lbs and the E55 AMG = 4909 lbs. The Turbo has to push ~3500 lbs of car with this power, and the AMG has to push ~3850 lbs. The "thrust to weight" of the Turbo is 1.42 and for the AMG it's 1.28. That's a huge advantage for the Turbo. Using the same formula with horsepower, the Turbo's advantage is even bigger...in every gear.

Given a pure world with equal traction and drivers, the Turbo has a distinct advantage when power, gearing, and weight are all accounted for.

 

DAMN DOCK!!!

 

Holy $@T% Doc!! You set the record straight ....

 

Hey Mercy what ever happen to the z07??

 

I sold it to one of the moderators on the Z06 forum. I have my eye on a replacement though. I was going with a Gallardo but ... a Viper SRT-10 with a 522cid stroker motor and a Twin Turbo is calling me.

 

Mercy do you plan on builiding it from scratch..or are you eyeing one?

 

super cool

 

I thinks its funny that both ColorChange and I have 996TTs and E55s...we both KNOW the E55 is faster. Dock can theorize all he wants with formulas and such, but my experience in both owning and racing the cars is the basis for my "facts". The other facts Dock makes mention of is someone saying "there is no way the E55 is quicker". Plenty of fact there, huh? I'm sure an AWD car has more power loss in the drivetrain than a 2WD does. The torque developed by a s-charged 5.4 liter motor occurs at a lower RPM and is flatter than a t-charged 3.6 liter motor. Cubic inches = torque. There are numerous factors that determine speed...we all know that.

Here is more "fact"...The 911 Turbo (non X50) runs roughly a 3.9 sec 0-60 time which is around 4 tenths quicker than the E55, yet the 1/4 mile times are within a tenth. My point...the E55 makes up the ground lost in the beginning due to poor launch traction. I wonder how that happens if it is no match for the 996TT? I guess the guy in the 996TT I toasted in my E55 was a ****ty driver as was th guy in the Gallardo. The Merc makes up the ground because it is quicker...once it is "going".

The 996TT is so much more fun to drive without question. If I had to part with one of my cars it would be the Merc. I prefer the Porsche hands down. I wish the P-car had 500HP stock, but it doesn't. Mine will in a week or so....

 

Yup.... exactly what he said

 

Does anyone have a dyno chart for an E55 and a stock TT?

The figures I found shows TT making 413 lb-ft @ 2700 rpm but a E55 516 lb-ft @ 2650-4500 rpm. TT's 1/4 12.4 sec @ 115.6 mph and E55's 12.5 sec @ 116 mph even the TT's 0-60 is 3.8 vs E55's 4.3 and 0-100 is 9.2 vs 9.9. If we're mag racing from a roll the E55 should be faster. But in the end if we're talking about real world challege then I think I would trust the guy that has actually done it.

 

Saw a Gallardo up close the other day, might go test drive it tomorrow... I really like the way it looks... but, mags are get'n 1/4 trap speeds of only 110~113 mph range... that means either the gearing is really tall or the ~500hp is optimistic. For the price, I'd expect it to trap closer to 120mph... so close, yet so far. Hot car in need of another 100hp. I'd take one over a Turbo in a heardbeat if it'd have a little more *****.

 

Yea---slush box is also substantial as is 4100lbs vs 3450lbs. Let me tell you, I raced a CL55 AMG 3 different times from a stoplight in the Z8 I just got and beat him by two car lengths all three times. No its not an E55, but, has more power and slightly more weight. Point is, how can it even be possible.....Ryan's Turbo walked away from my Z8 which I think will give an E55 a run for its money... I have driven the E55 many many times. The E55 is fast no doubt, but, it can't touch a turbo. A turbo will run at any speed. Ask Shank, he has both, raced an E55 in his RS6, and can tell you emphatically that there is no way an E55 is as fast as a turbo. Look at the 0-100-0 and every single other mag test, the E55 is a good .4 tenths slower in the 1/4 mile.