40 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH0-60 with stock set up, how fast?
Leading reported evidence
Replace pressures, tires, etc
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
you probably mean that you use the G-timer to measure performance after you have changed pressures, tires, etc.
Leading evidence: 'Replace pressures, tires, etc' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'better measure of peak torque than hp' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace pressures, tires, etc' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that suspect a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suspected cause
This is probably a better measure of peak torque than HP, but will tell me if I'm going in the right direction.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
How much quicker than 5sec have you guys ran 0-60 with a stock set up?
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
The only down side is that it really wears out your clutches, because doing accelleration testing can be fun and addicting.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
40 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T220748Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I've read that the 5.0 sec 0-60MPH is conservative data from the factory. How much quicker than 5sec have you guys ran 0-60 with a stock set up? I know it all comes down to the driver's shifting talents.
Shifting talents? You shuld be able to get to 60 in first gear or just 2 gears at the most. The former requires picking up your transmission when you are done.
Porsche's figures are generally for 0 - 62 mph because that corresponds to 0 - 100 kmh, so 0 - 60 will be a tiny bit quicker. Shortly after I got my 2002 C2 Car & Driver did a brief write up on the changes to the 2002 over the earlier 996. They mentioned that they'd gotten the 300 hp car to 60 in 4.8 seconds and estimated the 320 hp car would do it in 4.6...........
Also, FWIW the service writer at my dealer said the times published by Porsche tend to be conservative as the company wants every car to meet/exceed the figures they put out.
I thought the 99-01 and 02+ times were the same even though they were 20 horses different b/c of weight and gearing, etc? 0-60 Faster? No. Better handing due to increased torsional rigidity? Yes.
Manual says 5.2 coupe and 5.4 cabriolet.
PCNA website state 02+ 996 times are 5.2 targa 5.1 C4S coupe and 5.3 cabriolet
Manual for the 02+ states 5.0 coupe 5.2 cabriolet/targa 5.1 C4S coupe
So.....I do stand corrected.
Besides the 20 hp increase in the 3.6 over the 3.4, there is also 15 lb/ft more torque. The torque peaks in the 3.4 at 4600 RPM and 4,250 in the 3.6.
The 2002 MY car weighed about 55 pounds more than its predecessor, but even so it had a better power to weight ratio and torque characteristics than the earlier cars.
I've played around with 3.6L 996s (C4Ss and Targas I don't I've ever "played" with a C2) on the freeway and they can't pull away from me. After driving a 997S my car felt slow, but light
true... but if he's dropping the clutch he has no wheelspin and instantaneous takeoff... so other will be only slightly faster (depending on launch technique)
Mine's a narrow body C4 cab, a C4S cab weigh about 120 lbs more.
I found a smooth launch yielded the best times.
A C4S is only 1 lb heavier then a Targa, factor in the cab and it's 177 lbs heavier.
I pretty much saw consistent 4.6 to 4.8 in my wife's 2004 C2. Launching the car is not that difficult. The best launches though are kind of a feathering of the clutch launch. Hard to explain. Clutch basically spins at 4k or higher until the rear wheels catch up and the rear wheels never break lose. Horrible on clutches, but gets good times. Much better than any tire spin or wheel hop starts.
My C2 had the lightweight Carrera wheels and was a very consistent sub 5 car on G-Tech Pro. Although I did not run my C2 at the strip, I run a couple of my other car at the strip and my G-Tech is very accurate at the track in those cars.
If you're correct that a C4S weighs 120 pounds more than your car, that would certainly put a dent in the power and torque gains of the 3.6 engine. Another factor is transmission - you're running a manual and if the other guy has a tiptronic he'll be slower. While performance comparisons conducted on public roads may leave one feeling warm and fuzzy about a car's apparent capability, there's too many variables to make such "playing" truly meaningful. A track or the dragstrip is a better yardstick.
The 2001 C2 weighs about 2923 pounds and has 300 hp. The 2002 C2 weighs about 2978 pounds and has 320 hp, so power to weight has gone from 9.74 lb/hp to 9.30 lb/hp in the 2002 car, plus 15 addition lb/ft of torque that peaks 350 RPM lower than the earlier car.
Hey Neil. Thanks. I like the G-Tech alot. I had both models and the G-Tech pro is definitely the way to go. It is hard to believe how accurate they really are. I used mine alot when I was redoing my 90 Ruf motor with new heads, new pistons, titanium connecting rods, valves, valve spirngs and all that stuff. I was trying different combinations on the exhaust, like cat bypass, pirmary bypass, secondary bypass or combinations of the above. I also had about 5 different chips and several different intakes we went through. I then went with a fuel management system with a lot of tuning points. Anyway, it was fun throwing something on and then going to my favorite spot and running 5 or 6 0 - 60s, a couple of quarter miles (late at night on wide open highway), and comparing the graphs on the computer. I was also doing dyno runs back then and it was amazing how the G-Tech could kind of follow and was in the same ball park as the dyno for hp and torque readings.
Fun toy. I dropped mine and need to get a new one. The only down side is that it really wears out your clutches, because doing accelleration testing can be fun and addicting. I got really good at launching all of my cars.
I would love to hook one up to my new to me 2001 Diablo, but I would probably break something in my Diablo if my G-Tech still worked. You have a tendency to push your car to its limits when that thing is hooked up and giving you read outs.
You don't really have to fry the clutch every time. What I do is just use peak G's in first gear. It's very repeatable, and you can do this practically anywhere. This is probably a better measure of peak torque than HP, but will tell me if I'm going in the right direction. I've been collecting datapoints at all sorts of temperatures and gasolines/octane. I use mine all the time to check tire pressure, alignment, swaybar settings, tires, brake pads, etc., etc.
You can check out where I mount mine over in the G-Timer thread from a couple days ago.
Porsche's website claims 0 - 60 of 4.8 seconds for a manual 997, and 5.2 seconds for a tiptronic. The differential is probably similar for a 300 hp car.
No "save it for the track" sermons or the "Porsche is not a 1/4 mile track car" rule?
The hardest part is the launch, IMO which I haven't had time to practice.
How can it measure tire pressure and brake pads without sensors?
EDIT: forget it. you probably mean that you use the G-timer to measure performance after you have changed pressures, tires, etc. My fault. Ignore me.
EVO magazine tested a 3.4L C2 at 4.6sec 0-60.
My car, a 99 C2, has 17" wheels and it feels very fast from a stop (or a roll, for that matter). People don't realize how much of an effect wheel weight has on peformance.
It is much more than just the extra total weight of the wheels, it's the increased Rotational Intertia that basically robs you of your torque. Not only that, but when you "upsize" your wheels, the weight is concentrated further away from the rotation center than before, and increases the effects even more. Same goes for tires- some tires weigh considerably more than others of the same size. These extra few pounds are located far away from the rotation center, so the weight effect gets really amplified.
Keep this in mind when you are blinging down the road in your 19's. People think that a few pounds don't matter, but they really do!
I agree - but actually, I would want to have both.
I'm going to get some 18" wheels in the next few months, but they have to have all the goodies: looks, strength, and light weight. Of the types out there that have them, I'm leaning toward the BBS line and they are right around 20lbs or so.
AMEN!
I used to tune helicopter main and tail rotor blades. 2 ounces of balancing washer(weight) equates to several lbs of weight when rotating at only 298rpm
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
