996 911 vs the rest

Hi there, I am a new member of rennlist, and I was hoping you guys could help me answer some questions. I think the 996 911 is a fantastic car (although the turbo is my dream car) but some articles written by motoring journalists have confused me. I thought it would be able to outrun most other cars- even more powerful ones, due to its light weight and handling. The following articles I have read recently have me baffled. 1) There was a piece on the WHEELS magazine (australian) site on the skyline GTR R33, and it was saying that it was the first production car to break the 8-minute mark around the nurburgring. How can this be, when even the current stock 911's time is over 8 minutes? The article also went on to say that the new skyline's (R34) time was 30 (!) seconds faster than this. How can THIS be?? Surely that would put the R34's time within a whisker of the record set by the RUF 911, which had something like 600 horsepower. Is this article a tad optomistic? I also read somewhere that a stock Acura NSX lapped the nurburgring 9 seconds faster than a 993 911. Once again, the acura is a heavier car with less power. I really dont understand! 2) A couple of years back, MOTOR magazine published a comparo between a pre facelifted 996 911 C4 and a subura impreza sti. It said that the impreza was probably quicker point to point, and even did the quarter mile quicker. How can this be possible for something costing 60,000 australian dollars? Surley the handling would not be as good as a 911, and the presence of turbo lag would make the going slower? How does the 911 really compare to the asian turbo fours? 3) <a href="http://www.roadandtrack.com." target="_blank">www.roadandtrack.com.</a> These guys have just published an article comparing the new NSX, facelifted 911 and Corvette Z06. They concluded that the Corvette was fastest, and that the 911 and NSX were very close, with the 911 slightly ahead. I would have thought that the 911 could beat a corvette. It is possible that they just didnt know how to get the best out of a 911?? 4) Finally, the M3. In my opinion it is a decent sports car with good all round abilities, but its not really the hardcore drivers machine that the 911 is. To me its more of a modified 3-series than a dedicated sportscar. However, in a recent article, MOTOR magazine took the 911 and M3 first to an airfield to clock acceleration times, and then to a circuit to clock lap times. Although the 911 had better 0-100km/h, quarter mile and standing kilometer times, the M3 had a better lap time by almost a second. This seems very weird to me. In a different comparison, WHEELS magazine had a 911, new WRX sti and an M3, and concluded that the 911 was faster. There seems to be some confusion on this issue! Can someone please explain all these conflicting results to me!? (especially the nurburgring times) Thank you!

There's nothing conflicting about the results at all. The fact of the matter is a great many car manufacturers produce fast cars. Some are high quality, like the NSX and some are low cost rockets like the Subaru. There is more to owning any given sports car than its laptimes around a circuit. Driver skill also plays a big factor as do track conditions and weather. Just because some magazine test driver got the best out of a particular car on a particular day doesn't mean that the next magazine will or even that you will once you buy whatever car it is you like. That's why people go racing weekend after weekend, year after year with newer or older cars. That's why there are multiple magazines running multiple tests year after year. Just because something is new doesn't mean it is faster. Just because something is more expensive doesn't mean it handles better. Just because something is Japanese built doesn't mean it isn't quick. etc etc....etc. <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

I am not as well read as you are. The only article I can address for you is the Road & Track article. I have the printed version, and was unable to find it online in the link you provided. The article uses three men with varying degrees of experience (enthusiast, club level racer, professional driver) to test the cars. They each did three laps at the Mazda Raceway at Laguna Seca. They tested the Acura NSX, the Corvette Z06, and the Porsche 911. They are to choose for themselves the best track car, the best touring car, and the best overall car. Now that the scenario is set, I will point out several things. 1. Three laps. This includes the getting acquainted lap, the warm-up lap, and the this is it lap. Right. Perfect. I am sure they were all able to find ALL the nuances of each car, remember them as they moved on to the next car, and still remember them when they got into the final car. 2. Apples and Oranges. The contenders: Acura NSX, the best Acura has to offer; The Corvette Z06, not only the best Chevy, but the best Corvette has to offer; the Porsche Carrera 911, looks simply gorgeous with the face lift. The 911 C2 owners should be happy that their car is so good as to be considered a threat to the best of Acura and Corvette. Acura and Corvette would probably become incontinent if a 2002 911 Twin Turbo or a GT2 showed up at Laguna Seca. Most likely, the only way Acura and Corvette would lend their cars for the test was if the chosen Porsche were the 911 Carrera 2. 3. Despite the above loaded dice, the Porsche put up a great fight. Best overall car for the club racer, and best touring car for the professional driver. Reminds me of how Daniel Webster was able to defeat the devil to save a man�s soul despite all the witnesses, jurors and lawyers being on the devil�s side. I can add several other reasons as to why the above comparison was flawed, but suffice it to say, that after I read the article, I was prouder than ever to own a Porsche. <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

[quote]Originally posted by Palting: <strong>... I was prouder than ever to own a Porsche. <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote> I concur. Also, R&T usually compared cars that are similar in price, leaving the TT 996 out of the running by many $$$. Also, I believe that the track conditions were pretty wet, leading me to believe that a C4 would've have been more appropriate. To address another point raised by Jamberl: There are many cars, Corvettes included, that easily beat Porsche on a "bang for the buck" basis. So you will indeed see many relatively cheap cars that can "hang" with the 911. Many people actually think Porsches are overpriced. I generally don't hang out with these people, however. And new Porsche buyers are buying more than just performance figures.

<img src="graemlins/a_smil17.gif" border="0" alt="[blabla]" /> I like my cars because I like them. Magazines are helpful for some insight but are not the vessels through which the divine word of the automotive gods communicate. As Mick Jagger put it, "a man comes on the radio tellin' me how white my shirts can be" * Performance figures are supposed to be objective but the cars are driven by humans with variables in performance. Also, there's no accounting for taste whether good or bad. Look at a psycho like me: I love my Porsche C4S, my Ferrari 328gts (albeit I may sell it soon ), and really enjoyed the '02 Ford Mustang GT V-8. Dfferent cars. I didn't really care for the '02 BMW M3, Vette Z06, and don't want to drive a Merc because there are no manual trannys in the States. Man, I need some sleep.

It[is not just a question of raw numbers and statistics - it is all a question of charisma, and the 911s have it.

You will see all kinds of numbers with different drivers. I think the best comparison is done with same track, same driver on the same day. Here is such a situation where the 911 did very well: Lap times. Same professional racing driver, same day, same track (Mantorp, Sweden). PRODUCTION CARS Driver: Jan �Flash� Nilsson, Professional racing driver Chrysler Viper GTS 1.31.61 (average 120 km/h =75 mph) Lamborghini Diablo VT 1.31.90 Ferrari F355 F1 Berlinetta 1.33.73 Porsche 911 Carrera Cup 1.35.42 BMW M Coupe 1.35.64 Maserati 3200 GT 1.36.30 Chevrolet Corvette C5 1.37.21 Jaguar XKR 1.39.72 RACING CARS at the same track (Mantorp) GTR (=FIA GT) Viper GTS/R 1.17.95 STCC Sw touring Car Cham Nissan 1.18.78 Formula Ford/Zetec van Diemen RF20001.21.09 GTR (FIA N-GT) Ferrari 360 Modena 1.23.86 Porsche Cup class 1 Porsche 911 Cup 1.27.79 Camaro Cup Chevrolet Camaro1.28.28 Porsche Cup class 2 Porsche 968 1.31.16

Nuerburgring Nordschleife (length 20,6 km): (quoted by German and by an English magazine) Porsche 996 GT3 --- 7 min 56 sec. Nissan Skyline GT-r --- 7 min 59 sec. Ferrari 550 --- 8 min. 07 sec. Lamborghini Diablo SV --- 8 min. 09 sec. Ferrari 360 Modena --- 8 min. 09 sec. Chrysler Viper GTS --- 8 min. 10 sec. Porsche 993 RS --- 8 min. 10 sec Porsche 993 Turbo (430 HP version) --- 8 min. 12 sec. Porsche 996 C2 --- 8 min. 17 sec. BMW M Coupe (321 HP) --- 8 min. 22 sec. Porsche 993 C2 --- 8 min. 28 sec. Hockenheim Kleiner Kurs (length 2,6 km): Donkervort DBR (180 hp! but half the weight of a GT3) --- 1 min. 12,6 sec. Porsche 996 GT3 --- 1 min. 14,9 sec. Porsche 993RS --- 1 min. 14,9 sec. Ferrari 360 Modena --- 1 min. 15,1 sec. Porsche 996 C2 --- 1 min. 15,9 sec. Chrysler Viper GTS --- 1 min. 15,9 sec. Ferrari 550 --- 1 min. 16,1 sec. Lamborghini Diablo SV --- 1 min. 16,4 sec. Nissan Skyline GTR --- 1 min. 20 sec. As you can see, the race track makes a difference too. The Nissan is great on the Ring, but not so great in Hockenheim... And also it pays to be light in Hockenheim! Porsches are not soooo bad after all...

Thanks everyone for your replies, its helped me quite a bit. Just one thing that still confuses me- how is it possible for the skyline to be so fast? It clocked an even faster time than a 993 turbo.....how could a 206Kw car like that beat a 300Kw 911 turbo? I know skylines are fast, but how is that possible?

One point to remember is gear ratios. The Skyline has very short gear ratios. This to detriment of top speed but to the benefit of acceleration... I shortened the gear ratios (between 10 to 15% shorter on 2nd thru 5th) on my car, and it made a noticeable difference..

993RS says: It[is not just a question of raw numbers and statistics - it is all a question of charisma, and the 911s have it. Well said. nothing more to add.!

[quote]Originally posted by 993RS: <strong>It[is not just a question of raw numbers and statistics - it is all a question of charisma, and the 911s have it. </strong><hr></blockquote> I'll drink to that! <img src="graemlins/drink.gif" border="0" alt="[cherrsagai]" />

Of course, when our favorite is the fastest, we don't feel the need to mention charisma part.

"Just one thing that still confuses me- how is it possible for the skyline to be so fast? It clocked an even faster time than a 993 turbo.....how could a 206Kw car like that beat a 300Kw 911 turbo? I know skylines are fast, but how is that possible? " Driver, driver, driver...... Some drivers are faster than others, some a lot faster. You really need to have the same driver to compare.....

I don't understand why it's so hard to believe that other sports cars can be as fast or faster then a Porsche 911. There are many fast and desirable cars available today, and the speed capabilities of almost all modern high performance machines is truly amazing. While I am interested in how various sports cars compare in terms of lap times and other performance parameters, I am more interested in how fast *I* am in my car, then how fast the cars are theoretically, given a 'professional' driver. The magazine articles make for interesting reading , and can provide somewhat of a frame of reference, but I don't take them too seriously, especially the often quoted Nurburghring times which seem to be a favorite source for 'bench racing'. Shop around and buy the car you like. Then, find yourself a Porsche club or other Driver's training day and have a blast learning to drive your own car on the track. Jim

My sentiments exactly with above post(JIM). Your best judge is yourself and though mags are great as a starting point but you can't literally base your decision on that. Test drive the cars and see what makes your blood boil. Regards. Mike

Be wary of magazine tests! Every make of car has up to 10% or so hp differences. The manufacturer will always submit one of their very best cars for testing (so if it was a +5-10 percenter and your car is a -5-10 percenter that is quite a difference...) And then. as mentioned above, the driver... And then for the acceleration tests, some guys are very brutal and almost ruin the car... etc.

"Just one thing that still confuses me- how is it possible for the skyline to be so fast? It clocked an even faster time than a 993 turbo.....how could a 206Kw car like that beat a 300Kw 911 turbo? I know skylines are fast, but how is that possible?" It's nothing to do with the driver, circuit or whatever. The Skyline that set that time was a highly modified example (of the GT-R33), not a stock production version. It had about 50bhp more than standard, was stripped out, fitted with race suspension etc. That is why it was faster. A normal R33 would have been much slower (maybe 8'25-30s?). Don't believe everything you read!

"Don't believe everything you read! " Yeah, just like the stripped RaceLogic/Blitz Supra that did 7:49 or somethin' at 2-bar boost. Certainly not your normal production car; at least it did it on street tires. They also recorded an unofficial 7:39 at 3-bar boost. Again, not your normal production car as this thing did 0-200km/hr in 10.5 seconds!

I just enjoy my car! 'nuff said!

jamberl: For more magazine info take a look at the May 2002 issue of Automobile Reader's Choice All-Stars. Best GT - Porsche 911 Carerra Best Sports Car over $40,000 - Porsche 911 Turbo Readers were polled to pick their All-Star vehicles in several different categories. The masses have spoken... Faster isn't always better nor more desirable.

Another consideration is durability and reliability. The 911 has always been a car that you could be driven from the showroom floor to the track and be competitive and reliable all day long. Not all other �performance� cars can do that. Take for example the new M3. Read the BMW boards and you will hear stories of warped rotors and fading brakes after a few laps. This does not happen with 911's. When you go to the track the Porsche guys sit back and watch when their run group is not out while many drivers of other cars are bleeding brakes playing with turbos, etc just so they can go out again. Unfortunately living in the US, I have never had the pleasure of driving a Nissan Skyline (wish I had) but I bet that the original factory brakes would not hold up like the brakes of 911 after a tough track day. I think the head engineer for the Honda Formula One engine said it best recently when talking about the lack of horse power in the Honda F1 engine...he said something to the effect... �The engine can make a lot more HP but we just can�t make it last, so we reduce the HP for durability reasons (which by the way still doesn�t help )� A Porsche has always been about being driven on the road reliably and enjoyed on the track without modifications.

Rock on Brian! My thoughts exactly. Drive to the track with the cruise control on, A/C blasting and the CD player thumpin, thrash it on the track all day, then set the cruise for the trip home. Oh, and the lap times keep getting better and better.....

Brian's comments are spot on. Can't empahsize how fun Porsche's are on the track and driving back home with a grin on my face : ). Regards. Mike

[quote]Originally posted by StephenB: <strong>jamberl:The masses have spoken...</strong><hr></blockquote>The masses are usually a collective bunch of idiots bound to mediocrity by the law of averages. However, this example appears to be exceptional. 1000 mi to go for break-in and then I start to look for PCA events. Even at a 4200 rpm self-imposed limit the car amazes me.