Motor trend reports 7:40 at the ring
#16
02-07-2006, 06:48 PM
Originally Posted by Dock (Atlanta)
And don't forget that the 7:56 was with 415 hp on the OEM stock suspension. Add both X50 and X73 and the 996 Turbo would probably be in the low 7:50 to high 7:40 range.
Originally Posted by NAPO
The old 360 Challenge Stradale did the ring in 7:56 (which is a sad time, considering the non-X50 996TT without the X73 suspension, gets that time)
#17
02-07-2006, 07:03 PM
Originally Posted by NAPO
Yep... I included that.
#18
02-07-2006, 07:28 PM
Originally Posted by NAPO
You guys need to give Porsche some credit! The 996 GT2 did the Ring in 7:46 and the old 996TT did it in 7:56... The 997TT will do atleast a tenth of a second faster than the 996 GT2 without the cup tires. That's a HUGE improvement! Kudos to Porsche!
Let us compare this to the Ferrari F430... The old 360 Challenge Stradale did the ring in 7:56 (which is a sad time, considering the non-X50 996TT without the X73 suspension, gets that time) and the new F430 does it in 7:55... That's a pathetic improvement!
Yea.... PORSCHE RULES ALL!
Let us compare this to the Ferrari F430... The old 360 Challenge Stradale did the ring in 7:56 (which is a sad time, considering the non-X50 996TT without the X73 suspension, gets that time) and the new F430 does it in 7:55... That's a pathetic improvement!
Yea.... PORSCHE RULES ALL!
#19
02-07-2006, 08:27 PM
Originally Posted by Dock (Atlanta)
I understand. My point was to indicate that given Porsche's best "parts", the 996 Turbo would probably run the times I indicated.
#20
02-07-2006, 09:01 PM
i think the time is very impressive especiallty being that it shaved so much time off the 996tt time.
#21
02-08-2006, 12:39 AM
Originally Posted by NAPO
Let us compare this to the Ferrari F430... The old 360 Challenge Stradale did the ring in 7:56 (which is a sad time, considering the non-X50 996TT without the X73 suspension, gets that time) and the new F430 does it in 7:55... That's a pathetic improvement!
thanks for posting them!
#22
02-08-2006, 02:35 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 664
Rep Power: 47 
MotorTrend running the Turbo with cup tires is like Auto Motor & Sport running the car on Hankook space savers. If you want the best 0-60 times MotorTrend is your rag. So, I think the time is very representative of the Turbo's potential.
Also, I don't think there has been an official independent Z06 Ring time yet.
Also, I don't think there has been an official independent Z06 Ring time yet.
#24
02-08-2006, 06:31 PM
I am amazed at the "ring times". A 8 min drive that is so consistant that any test drivers numbers are comparble to anothers? I don't get it. Isn't it possible that there could be a 5-10% difference among accomplished drivers in the same vehicle (Think of the wide range of performance in races where everybody has to drive the same car)?
8 minutes is 480 seconds. 10% faster or slower would be 4.8 sec variance.
People report ring times from different drivers as if 1-2 sec diffferences are repeatable and representative. Please tell me why I am wrong on this account.
8 minutes is 480 seconds. 10% faster or slower would be 4.8 sec variance.
People report ring times from different drivers as if 1-2 sec diffferences are repeatable and representative. Please tell me why I am wrong on this account.
#25
02-09-2006, 12:11 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Los Angeles, Stockholm
Posts: 358
Rep Power: 35
Originally Posted by brnsrgn
I am amazed at the "ring times". A 8 min drive that is so consistant that any test drivers numbers are comparble to anothers? I don't get it. Isn't it possible that there could be a 5-10% difference among accomplished drivers in the same vehicle (Think of the wide range of performance in races where everybody has to drive the same car)?
8 minutes is 480 seconds. 10% faster or slower would be 4.8 sec variance.
People report ring times from different drivers as if 1-2 sec diffferences are repeatable and representative. Please tell me why I am wrong on this account.
8 minutes is 480 seconds. 10% faster or slower would be 4.8 sec variance.
People report ring times from different drivers as if 1-2 sec diffferences are repeatable and representative. Please tell me why I am wrong on this account.
But I agree with you that the best Ringtimes are very driver dependant. Although some drivers will be pretty consistent in their times, lap to lap. (ie Rohrl, Von Saurma etc)
#26
02-09-2006, 04:57 PM
Typo sorry. Though that explains why I get 10% raises on a regular basis
But then these ring time numbers probably are only meaningful when a manufacturer says we compared a to b, and see a 5 sec improvement. Comparing Chevy's report with Porsche's should not be meaningful, and will have to wait a direct comparison.
But then these ring time numbers probably are only meaningful when a manufacturer says we compared a to b, and see a 5 sec improvement. Comparing Chevy's report with Porsche's should not be meaningful, and will have to wait a direct comparison.
#27
02-09-2006, 07:05 PM
thats why i still say CGT's "record" is BS when compared to many other times, Rohl had a lot of play time with the car beforehand and spun it on several occasions, then posted a best of whetever it ran, thats a huge advantage with him behind the wheel, porsche clearly needed to make sure the cgt gets all the help it could get.
#28
02-09-2006, 07:07 PM
Originally Posted by NAPO
You guys need to give Porsche some credit! The 996 GT2 did the Ring in 7:46 and the old 996TT did it in 7:56... The 997TT will do atleast a tenth of a second faster than the 996 GT2 without the cup tires. That's a HUGE improvement! Kudos to Porsche!
Let us compare this to the Ferrari F430... The old 360 Challenge Stradale did the ring in 7:56 (which is a sad time, considering the non-X50 996TT without the X73 suspension, gets that time) and the new F430 does it in 7:55... That's a pathetic improvement!
Yea.... PORSCHE RULES ALL!
Let us compare this to the Ferrari F430... The old 360 Challenge Stradale did the ring in 7:56 (which is a sad time, considering the non-X50 996TT without the X73 suspension, gets that time) and the new F430 does it in 7:55... That's a pathetic improvement!
Yea.... PORSCHE RULES ALL!
#29
02-09-2006, 08:23 PM
Incidentally, the 2002-UP "385 HP" Z06 Corvette matched the 996 TT's nurenburgring lap time* (which isn't even the fastest iteration of the C5 Z06)Quite impressive in my opinion. An X73 X50 TT maybe be quicker but arguably thats a modded up model which is A LOT more expensive than a regular 996TT for that spec...at significantly less than half of the price a Z06 could do a reliable N/A head/cam package worth an extra 100+HP with a few cheap chassis tweaks to make it a track monster too.....all in all VERY impressive for the --> $ <-- if you ask me. The competition has caught up with the heavier turbo Porsche's IMO... (sans GT2)
--- Kevin
2001 385 HP Z06 Nurenburgring lap time : 7:56
2002 405 HP Z06 Nurenburgring lap time : Who knows, never tested...
--- Kevin
2001 385 HP Z06 Nurenburgring lap time : 7:56
2002 405 HP Z06 Nurenburgring lap time : Who knows, never tested...
Last edited by Kevin D; 02-09-2006 at 08:28 PM.
#30
02-09-2006, 09:05 PM
Originally Posted by Kevin D
An X73 X50 TT maybe be quicker but arguably thats a modded up model...