Bummer that some of the more interesting posts were lost yesterday. Any way, I thought the magazine article was pretty good, unbiased journalism. In fact, I thought they kind of erred on the side of the Porsche in some areas. I owned a Z06 up until I bought the 996TT (I've wanted a 911 Turbo since I was in high school, which is when they first came out... a looooong time ago).

Areas where I think the tests or conclusions were biased toward the Porsche.

1. Road course - they must have run a relatively fast road course. On an autocross course, or a racetrack with shorter straights, the Vette should be quicker.

2. Road noise - the Z06 can actually be made damn near as quiet as the 996TT with a $200 aftermarket partition that separates the cockpit from the trunk.

I think both cars are awesome. In some ways I preferred the Z06. It was more fun to drive in slower speed transitions, it doesn't dent easily since the body is made of plastic (which is a + with a wife that thinks cars are an appliance and a 2 year old that likes to "work on" cars), you can kind of blend in so to speak (not as ostentatious), Chevy's service was better, and I had fewer problems with the car.

On the other hand, I wouldn't go back. The 996TT can put the power down much better. In higher speed maneuvers, the TT handles as well as the Z06 and has a greater margin of safety. The PSM is relatively unobtrusive when I leave it on (which I do about half the time). In contrast, the Chevy traction control is really crappy. At the slightest hint of yaw, the computer all but shuts the car down. The TT looks much nicer IMO. Then there's the exclusivity factor and the cachet that comes with owning a Porsche.

 

what happened to this thread?

 

As I understand it got whacked yesterday when the server crashed.

They appear to have reset the server at an earlier point in time, causing some posts to be lost.

 

When the 996 turbo was first released one of th American magazines, C&D, R&T, Automobile, MT, tested a stock non X-50 at 11.9 with a trap of 116 if I am not mistaken.

 

Motor Trend tested the Turbo in their Nov 2000 issue and recorded an 11.92 at 116.09.

They also did 0-60 in 3.98 sec.

 

Thnks for the reference Dock, I have to dig it up!

 

I wonder if the guys that test the Turbo in acceleration do the 1st-2nd shift early...say 5800-6200 rpm. If I wait past that range (past 6000 really) I'm already in the rev limiter, since the analog tach lags so much behind engine rpm at WOT in 1st gear. It could make a big difference in times.

 

You would have to have a perfect run in a standard 911TT to get an 11.92 quarter. Perfect launch, perfect shifts, and very fast shifts! Its not as hard to do in an X50 or Stage 1 TT.

 

What makes a perfect run nigh -impossible is what Dock reports. The Turbo is so shortly geared in first gear and puts down revs so easily with it's AWD that the analog tach lags so much that you bang the rev limiter even as the needle is somewhere in the high 5 to low 6 range. So you shift earlier sometimes than true redline to avoid the limiter.

 

I know what you mean. If you think its hard to stay out of the limiter in a standard TT. It gets down near impossible in a modded TT!

 

I think it's interesting to look at the results Road & Track has achieved in the 996 Turbo. Obviously the quality of the track (pavement and weather), the car, and of course the driver, make a big difference when it gets down to the tenths of a second.

In the R&T Nov 2000 issue they did a single test on a 996 Turbo. They recorded a 12.4 sec. quarter at a speed of 115.6 mph. The weather was fairly hot (84) and the track was at 1010'. They launched the Turbo at 3000-3500 rpm using the drop clutch technique.

In the same November issue, they had an article called "Automotive Triathlon Plus" where they tested several cars (Z06, Z8, 996 Turbo, Ferrari 550, Lambo Diablo GT, and RUF Turbo R) in several events including 0-100-0 mph. The 996 Turbo recorded a 13.62 sec time in this event. They didn't comment on the weather or their launch techniques. How does this compare to the X50 Turbo?

R&T did a 0-100-0 mph test in their Aug '03 issue where they recorded a time of 13.5 sec for the X50. They didn't publish the times to the hundredths, so the x50 could have been 13.59 or 13.5 flat. They have had a learning curve though, because for this test they did 5000 rpm drop clutch starts in the X50. Talk about the need to be ready for the 1-2 shift!

I think both the X50 and non-X50 are very close in acceleration times. Certainly within the margin of error that the driver brings to the equation.

I would like to know how the non-X50 would run in a magazine test using 5000 rpm launches.

 

Ironically Dock, I have just dug up my August 03 0-100-0 R&D issue, the turbo performed great, especially when compared to the all time list, I actually have a stack of issues(American and Foreign) solely dealing with testing of the 996 turbo I will find them and compare. As for the 11.9, I feel it is achievable if you dont mind toasting the clutch. Not bad for a car thats not meant to be drag raced!

 

Well, I quickly glanced through the article at the newstand, and it seemed okay. Although, after reading the ending paragraph I got a little pissed off! They said something along the lines of "The 911 Turbo is a great car but, the Corvette is what sets the bar for sports cars". Don't quote me on that but, that was the point I understood from what was printed in the article.

The Corvette doesn't set the bar for anything! Don't get me wrong, I do love 'Vettes and I know the Z06 is a great car. However, up until the c4, the Vette has been crap. Don't misunderstand me on that. I know there have been different Vettes that have made lots of power (such as the Grand Sport) and have still been all-around cool cars. Though, lets face it, brakes, suspension, and handling were something the Vette NEVER had until the c4. The C5 is a HUGE improvement over what the Vette used to be. Even with the C5 you see some Porsche influence in the form of a rear transaxle setup, like that of the 928. The Vette has only been a contender for the last ~13yrs, since the ZR-1 came out.

 

Value wise, the Z06 is an incredible car, and they seem like they'd be a fun car to drive. Just pure, simple, naturally aspirated V8 goodness.

But take the two cars into the twisties, and the Vette won't know what hit it

 

Being a Corvette driver with some "twisty driving" experience, I'll happily take you up on that challenge. :-)

And to racer63 who said I guess I don't agree with this one either. Mine's cranking out about 470HP at the the flywheel and keeps its power to the ground quite easily. Remember that the accelerator pedal isn't a binary switch. It's not "ON" or "OFF." If you floor the accelerator in 1st gear, yes, the torque of the small block is going to spin the tires. So don't DO that! :-)

Your complaint about the traction control is noted; did you ever try driving in competitive mode? The traction control is disabled, leaving the yaw control on which isn't nearly as intrusive.

jas