10 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHAverage Driver 0-60 Times
Leading reported evidence
Run 8.20 in the wife's automatic 325 convertible
Suggestion or failed attempt
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 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
Thought I would try it out a couple of times with the C4s (also ran 8.20 in the wife's automatic 325 convertible which seems pretty accurate).
Leading evidence: 'Run 8.20 in the wife's automatic 325 convertible' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Run 8.20 in the wife's automatic 325 convertible' (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 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
ya i agree with ettsn, i tested my stock 99 c2 cab really hard when i first got it and i actually got 4.6 for my best run but then i needed a new clutch just 2 months later, but i was also told it was not a good clutch from the factory that was put in them anyways and they supposedly gave me the updated clutch which i have not had problems with yet, my wife and i raced the other night up to about 100 on a desserted stretch of road over here in her slk 32 amg and it was almost dead even to 60mph, i might have had a bumper length on her but they are rated around 4.8 and their auto's so im sure they turn it consistantly under the right circums.
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
ya i agree with ettsn, i tested my stock 99 c2 cab really hard when i first got it and i actually got 4.6 for my best run but then i needed a new clutch just 2 months later, but i was also told it was not a good clutch from the factory that was put in them anyways and they supposedly gave me the updated clutch which i have not had problems with yet, my wife and i raced the other night up to about 100 on a desserted stretch of road over here in her slk 32 amg and it was almost dead even to 60mph, i might have had a bumper length on her but they are rated around 4.8 and their auto's so im sure they turn it consistantly under the right circums.
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
If you care about your car, just be happy with the performance you get from it and use the quoted numbers to compare it to other car's quoted numbers.
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
ya i agree with ettsn, i tested my stock 99 c2 cab really hard when i first got it and i actually got 4.6 for my best run but then i needed a new clutch just 2 months later, but i was also told it was not a good clutch from the factory that was put in them anyways and they supposedly gave me the updated clutch which i have not had problems with yet, my wife and i raced the other night up to about 100 on a desserted stretch of road over here in her slk 32 amg and it was almost dead even to 60mph, i might have had a bumper length on her but they are rated around 4.8 and their auto's so im sure they turn it consistantly under the right circums.
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
ya i agree with ettsn, i tested my stock 99 c2 cab really hard when i first got it and i actually got 4.6 for my best run but then i needed a new clutch just 2 months later, but i was also told it was not a good clutch from the factory that was put in them anyways and they supposedly gave me the updated clutch which i have not had problems with yet, my wife and i raced the other night up to about 100 on a desserted stretch of road over here in her slk 32 amg and it was almost dead even to 60mph, i might have had a bumper length on her but they are rated around 4.8 and their auto's so im sure they turn it consistantly under the right circums.
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.
10 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: 20261026T165820Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Ok, no street racing. But, I picked up an electronic g-force 0-60 time machine (supposed to be pretty accurate). Thought I would try it out a couple of times with the C4s (also ran 8.20 in the wife's automatic 325 convertible which seems pretty accurate).
I consider myself to be an above average driver.
I did 2 runs with decent shifting.
5.76 & 5.87
I know Porsche claims 5.1 to 62 mph which should equate to 4.9 or so to 60.
Is adding about 8/10 of a second to the Porsche time about right for a decent driver?
It is also 100 degrees out too - that proably slowed the car down a bit?
Thoughts?
Did the same thing last month. Here's my post from that day:........
So I just got a performance acceleromter (the Bel one), and took it out to play. Very sad. First run was 7.25, 3rd was 5.85. That's the best I got.
Wondering why it would be so slow compared to the claims? Maybe some of the environmental factors were affecting the results? Car is a stock 99 C2 cab w/PSE:
1) Was 90 degrees. I assume that this could affect performance (air-conditioning was off for the good runs).
2) Gas tank 3/4 full, with 220 pounder driving (weight factors).
3) Driving 91 octane (how much would 93-100 affect this?).
4) Not sure how to best launch the car. Don't want to burn out the clutch, so I was getting it to about 2500rpm and then dropping the clutch. No clutch burn at all, but lagging starts.
The launch is a lot of it. The only way you'll duplicate what the magazines do is to flog your clutch within an inch of it's life. If you care about your car, just be happy with the performance you get from it and use the quoted numbers to compare it to other car's quoted numbers.
-Paul
ya i agree with ettsn, i tested my stock 99 c2 cab really hard when i first got it and i actually got 4.6 for my best run but then i needed a new clutch just 2 months later, but i was also told it was not a good clutch from the factory that was put in them anyways and they supposedly gave me the updated clutch which i have not had problems with yet, my wife and i raced the other night up to about 100 on a desserted stretch of road over here in her slk 32 amg and it was almost dead even to 60mph, i might have had a bumper length on her but they are rated around 4.8 and their auto's so im sure they turn it consistantly under the right circums.
I think the gtec is probably not that accurate. You should be able to achieve much closer to a 5.0 even if you are not that great of a driver. I was able to achieve within a tenth of a second of published 1/4 mile times (published by the magazines not porsche which give considerably faster rating for all the pcars) in a boxster s.
lol
you couldn't have said it any better.
I took my friends Gtec on my SLK back when it was stock, and
it claimed i was pumping 225 HP's on the scale when the rating
for that car is only 189BHP.
zero to 60 times depend greatly on the launch you get and most people don't know how to properly launch the car from a dead stop to achieve the factory numbers. If you did not smell your clutch and loose 5k in tread you did not launch your car the same as the factory or the magazines.
Actually porsche numbers I think are fairly attainable without professional driver or blatant abuse (they're pretty conservative). Magazine numbers are a different story.
"I took my friends Gtec on my SLK back when it was stock, and
it claimed i was pumping 225 HP's on the scale when the rating
for that car is only 189BHP."
first, you have to make the right weight, etc imputs into g-tech. second, i didn't personally find the hp readings all that accurate. third, BUT the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times were LESS than .10 different than certified drag strip times! the acceleration IS accurate IMO.
Are you sure? Did you break out the laser level??
I would agree, but ONLY if the directions are followed very carefully! MOST important is to do the 0-60 on a flat road. If the road is slightly up hill the 0-60 times will look much better then actual. {and visa versa if on a downhill}.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.