man, that's gold, even the case is ****!

 

CJV,

I've attached a graph of your HP/TQ curves. They don't look much different than what I've seen for several other modified 996 and 993 cars.

Can S-Car-Go show us what a stock 996TT reads on their dyno? That will help provide a reference so we can compare your car with some others.

By the way, you mentioned your 1/4-mile time to me at the Concorso. Now that the shoot-out is not happening, can you display the slip you received at the track?

Sorry to be so skeptical. However, I just don't see how your car is any faster or more powerful than cars Ruf, RS Tuning, Promotive, Andial and others have been building for years.

 

Bill,

I seem to be the only one providing detailed data. Please show us the numbers of the other modified 996tt's you are talking about. Also, please list the standard used for the dyno numbers (SAE, Standard Corrected. BHP, etc). It can make a difference.

I don't have the 100 rpm increaments at home, however I believe I can get them on Monday. They may have been at 500 rpm increaments at the time. I can tell you maximum hp was 375.8 @ approx. 6700 rpm and maximum torque was 361.0 @ approx. 4100. My base line was not done by S Car Go, in was done by Renntech in Florida. Both dyno's are Dynojet Model 248C Dynamometers and the same correction standards were used (SAE J1439.)

Regarding my 1/4 time slips, I gave them to Dave Colman who has written a soon to be released article on the car. I stated this in a prior post. Sharky (Alex) from this board witnessed the runs and can verify the times. They will also be in the article (without the nitrous/CO2)

I understand some people take longer to convince than others. Until then we look forward to the Ruf (their Godzilla makes 650 @ the crank not rear tires), RS Tuning, Protomotive (I understand Todd @ Protomotive is up there) and Andial (a year ago I talked to Andial and they told me they didn't do 996tt's) dyno runs in the SAE J1439 standard. If the runs you have are not in the SAE 1439 standard, just state the standard used and corrections can be made. Also, we would all would love to see the average power and torque over the 2300 to 7400 rpm range for any of the runs you have.

Who knows, you may have a good point.

 

Chad,

There may be questions. I wish I could tell you how dissapointed I am to learn the Shootout has beencancelled. All this dyno/bench racing stuff is close to boring. Write up of one car? Hmmm.

regards,

Roland

 

Roland,

You are not the only one who was disappointed. It wasn't cancelled on my account. As for questions, whenever you get more than two people together, there will always be questions.

A few posts ago I stated if the ratings on this thread indicated people wanted me to stop posting about the car, I would simply let the thread die. I do have a high regard for your opinion Roland. If you want me to kill it, just say so.

 

Hey who said it was cancelled It's not dead yet and in fact we're trying to get it going again in European Car magazine. So far they said "we're in". We just need to know the details etc...

 

Sharky,

I believe we know you are trying very hard to re set up another one. I was and I believe Roland was also refering to the November 13, 14 and 15 one that was to be written up in Excellence that was canceled.

 

CJV,

I agree with Roland and many others that trying to compare cars by publishing HP and TQ is meaningless. However, I do encourage you to keep posting. Free speech is a great thing.

I just think the readers of your threads need to know the following:

1. Most people that own very powerful turbo cars will not use a chassis dynamometer. This can cause severe damage to the engine, transmission, tires and drivetrain. These people used an engine dynamometer during development.

2. People are reluctant to share their dynamometer results. This is for two reasons: (1) people reach the wrong conclusions by comparing them with different dyno setups and (2) it's not clear what part of the curve the car is operating in and for how long.

3. People ARE willing to share their acceleration numbers. This is the bottom line. Why do you freely publish HP and TQ numbers but refuse to share acceleration numbers?

4. Since distance will prevent some of us from ever meeting, "virtual racing" on the Web can be fun. However, it's a waste of time to do it with HP and TQ numbers. Let's see 0-60, 0-100, 0-150, 1/4-mile, top-speed, etc.

Just as a sanity check for everyone (we must talk acceleration!), your reading of 376 RWHP on a stock turbo implies a X 1.1 correction to get flywheel HP. So, given your HP is under 600 most of the time while accelerating, your flywheel HP will be under 660 HP most of the time. There are many 993 TTs and 996 TTs with more flywheel HP then this. Note that this 1.1 correction factor is consistant with other chassis dyno tests I've seen.

Also, your torque is not that impressive. Assuming your shifting near redline, you spend most of your time with torque under 500 lb-ft. If you shift lower, your HP is not that great.

Your engine modifications are not as impressive as what I've seen from Ruf, Andial and Promotive. I've seen your intake and exhaust. It's very restrictive compared with others I've seen.

In summary, if you want to hear more from others with very fast cars, PUBLISH YOUR ACCELERATIONS NUMBERS!! It would be more fun for them, and probably more fun for you also!

Best regards,

Bill

 

Hey Dean, I have no problem giving Chad the title of fastest car on this board. My car is still a work in progress, but I really like the way it runs now, even with my boost dialed back a bit.

In a strange way, Chad's car and similar underpinnings with the Protomotive software. In fact, a lot of development was done on my car and benefitted Chad in his software revisions. Probably vice versa. We have different approaches to tuning, but in the end the results aren't that far off from each other. At least in theory...

Anyway... as for the bench racing...

I'll say this once and I'll say it again.

I want to do a Shootout, regardless of press coverage or lack thereof.

Why are you guys so eager for magazines to cover this Shootout? All of us have enough money not to turn our cars into press ******.

I say **** it, let's rent a track and run. As far as I know, the fastest 996TT's are in California, so if our out of state brethren can't make it, so be it. If they want to play, that's even better.

I would like to run with you guys before I begin the next round of mods... I am in full agreement with Roland, Bill, and Dean, this bench racing **** is even beginning to bore ME! Dyno figures only tell a small part of the story, it's actual performance that counts.

Chad with all due respect, your car is great on paper, but it basically lives on the dyno. While Roland's car may not have 900hp, it does hold several open road racing championship titles as well as sustained average speeds of over 185mph. How many other people can say that?

My point is, let's just get together somewhere and run the **** out of our cars already. Win or lose, I just want to be able to drive my car and have fun with other Turbo owners.

 

Hammann,

I am with you brother I could care less about having my car in a mag. Let's pick a date, book a road course and drag strip and let's:

GET READY TO RUUUUUUUMMMMMMMBBBBBBBLLLLLLLEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

 

Bill,

I all due respect, you keep refering to comparisons or numbers you have seen, please just show us the numbers. In addition, these numbers you have seen do not refer to the "standard" being used. There is a very good reason why manufactures and tuners do not identify the standard being used. Their numbers look far better with certain standards.

I have to disagree with the statement about any damage a Dynojet 248 Dynomometer will cause. I believe you are confusing the Dynojet with certain 4wd dyno's.

As for acceleration runs, they are great. Been there done that with a magizine writer doing the driving along with board witnessess. I know I will never convince all the people. That really doesn't bother me either. The car was built for me. I know it isn't the fastest on the road. I have been beat by a 980 hp Supra and a 1000 hp Viper from a rolling 80 mph start. Now you take that start to 0 or just rolling and it is a whole new ball game up to the time their boost really comes on.

One other thing, my car was built for balance, not just top end, acceleration or handling. With my gearing, a stock 996tt just might have a better top end. It would have a better top end at it's red line of 6700 for sure. I know Rolands car has a better top end period. That being conceded, don't forget, the same gearing gives my car an advantage equilivent to about another 50 hp in any acceleration contest. As for handling, I have not seen any street legal 996tt or GT2 with like or better suspension system or weight to power ratio.

Regarding your above 1.1 ratio statement. Are you sure? You know my test standard is SAE J1439, what is theirs? Is it bhp maybe? Temperature and Atmospheric Pressure used in the standard can sway numbers 30-40 hp and more. So can the equipment (alternators, pumps etc) being used or not used on an engine dyno, sway the figures. I guess this does make a point for your acceleration tests. But then again, this would introduce the same confusions if not conducted on the same cars, same place, same day, same conditions. So what good are posted acceleration runs?

As for your statement, "Also, your torque is not that impressive. Assuming your shifting near redline, you spend most of your time with torque under 500 lb-ft. If you shift lower, your HP is not that great, " you are very observant. With cams and motors I know, you can have a mild all around motor, one that is very good from approximate 2000 to 5000 rpm's or 4000 to 7000 rpm's or wherever you want that approximate 3000 rpm spread. It has alot to do with your cam, intake, turbo size, impellers etc. You cannot have it all. With that said, most 996tt's won't want to engauge my car from approx. 3800 rpm's on up. This was the intent. If your car was to engauge my car, you should not assume that my car would be in any other rpm range. Below that range and you would have caught me with my pants down so to say.

Refering to your statement about my intake and exhaust, " Your engine modifications are not as impressive as what I've seen from Ruf, Andial and Promotive. I've seen your intake and exhaust. It's very restrictive compared with others I've seen." Hmmm, by looking at my exhaust you know the backpressure before and after the kats? Come on now, you are pulling my leg? As for my intakes, what do you really know? I know nothing about Andial's, but as I said prior, I originally went to Andial for work on my car and I was told they do not work on 996tt water cooled motors. I was told their expertise was with the air cooled motors, not the water cooled ones. Ruf intakes, I am familiar with. I learned from Ruf. Why do you think Ruf always had better torque numbers than others a year or two ago? One of the reasons was they enlarged the intake in certain areas. I can tell you, not only are the S Car Go intakes larger and less restrictive, they conduct far less heat into the induction air. Now Protomotive and Todd. There is a very good intake. It is short, drawing air from the rear fenders. The draw back is you have all the turbo noise in your cab and the hot air from the turbo's and intercoolers. Other than that, a great system. May even be better than S Car Go's. The S Car Go intake air tube is larger and conducts far less heat due to the carbon fiber construction and draws upon a cooler air source. The Protomotive is very short and doesn't require as large of tubes. It definitely has less restriction due to it's developed lengh. All in all, is it better, quite possibly yes. It would be close with all factors considered. The again, for me, my car is a street car and I do enjoy my Reus SST sound system very much. That was the decidingfactor for me.

Now don't forget the air passages of the compressed air after the turbo's and the intercoolers. S Car Go has hugh intercoolers and the tubing fom the intercoolers to the the throttle body is far larger than any of the above mentioned. So is the throttle body and the splitter that follows.

Your last statement, " My point is, let's just get together somewhere and run the **** out of our cars already. Win or lose, I just want to be able to drive my car and have fun with other Turbo owners." I could not agree with more. I am truly sorry if this thread turned into a my dog is bigger than your dog. That was not the intent. The intent is to share information and have fun.

 

Chad,

My apologies to you and the board for any misunderstanding resulting from my recent post about dyno data.
I certainly did not suggest you remove the thread. Hell no,no need to take it down.
I shall continue to observe but I will not be submitting further replies to the thread.
Tyson, thank you for the kind words but lets not confuse issues. I make no claims about owning a super car. I simply do what I do.

Roland
AKA CFR

 

OK buddy, is your car ready to rumble yet? I know, that was a low blow. We all share in the same frustrations of the procrastionating tuner's at these power output ranges.

 

Roland, no need to retire. The thread was getting off base and it took your's and Bill's input to bring it back to earth. The "my dog is bigger than your dog " mentality is pure BS. Nothing is going to be the best in all contests and besides there are other important considerations for every 996tt owner unrelated to power. As I said earlier, your input is valued and respected.

 

Well, I'm sorry gang, but until I hear some real stories about cars getting together, this thread gets 1-star from me.

To be perfectly honest with all of you, I am not sure what I believe on this board anymore.