991

Numbers don't make sense...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
  #1  
Old 10-07-2012 | 04:59 PM
eg9's Avatar
eg9
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 45
From: Fresno
Rep Power: 16
eg9 is infamous around these parts
Numbers don't make sense...

If a 997.2 C4S w/ PDK shows on several magazines as slightly quicker than a 997.2S w/PDK than how can a 991C2 w/PDK show on the Porsche site as slightly quicker than a 991C4 w/PDK. What would you guys guess as the 0-60 on a 2013 C4 w/PDk and Chrono really be?

Thanks
 
  #2  
Old 10-07-2012 | 06:36 PM
SM_ATL's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,164
From: Brussels
Rep Power: 157
SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !SM_ATL Is a GOD !
Just my 2 cents here.The 4 wheel drive may help at take off, but in the end, all things being equal, the C4 is always heavier than a C2 and has the same engine. You should logically always be faster (on the dry) with a C2, whether it is a 997 or a 991.
 
  #3  
Old 10-07-2012 | 06:38 PM
TwelfthTangent's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 0
TwelfthTangent is infamous around these parts
Maybe the new PDK is so good that the added traction of the all-wheel drive is not really needed and the added weight just slows it down.
 
  #4  
Old 10-07-2012 | 06:59 PM
hepmonk's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 51
From: Seattle
Rep Power: 16
hepmonk is infamous around these partshepmonk is infamous around these parts
eg9 has a point, something is strange:
c2 is _faster_ than c4: c2 4.2s vs c4 4.3s (pdk sport+ 0-60)
BUT
c2s is _slower_ than c4s: c2s 3.9s vs 3.8s (pdk sport+ 0-60)
This info is from the US website.

Perhaps the rear-wheels are sufficient to use the 350bhp whereas you really need all four wheels to exploit the 400bhp?
 
  #5  
Old 10-07-2012 | 07:01 PM
AG991's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,479
From: New Jersey
Rep Power: 100
AG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond repute
I would not trust numbers that close too heavily. I agree with SM_ATL (congrats on the Falcons by the way) stricktly on a logic assumption. Also, I question all the numbers that come from the Porsche engineers. After Ll, they think the next number after 997 is 991
 
  #6  
Old 10-07-2012 | 07:02 PM
AG991's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,479
From: New Jersey
Rep Power: 100
AG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond reputeAG991 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by AG991
I would not trust numbers that close too heavily. I agree with SM_ATL (congrats on the Falcons by the way) stricktly on a logic assumption. Also, I question all the numbers that come from the Porsche engineers. After Ll, they think the next number after 997 is 991

That was supposed to be "after all...". iPad autocorrect issue. Sorry!
 
  #7  
Old 10-07-2012 | 08:14 PM
TwelfthTangent's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 0
TwelfthTangent is infamous around these parts
Agreed. Numbers that close generally aren't considered significant unless statistically verified (eg. an appropriately powered analysis of the average of something like thousands of runs in many different examples of the same cars).
 
  #8  
Old 10-07-2012 | 08:23 PM
Rocket_boy's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 172
From: DFW
Rep Power: 20
Rocket_boy has a spectacular aura aboutRocket_boy has a spectacular aura about
If history is any indication, the "C4" models are usually the same from 0-60 as the C2, (a little more weight but better traction) but the C4's are usually a tick or two slower and trap a few MPH slower in the 1/4 mile,....the added weight plays on them here.

However with the advent of the 997.2 I believe Porsche has officially stated that the C4s are faster around any track compared to the C2s. I'm sure this will remain the same on the 991.
 
  #9  
Old 10-08-2012 | 12:48 AM
Elias74's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 158
Rep Power: 0
Elias74 is infamous around these parts
More, a C4 or C4S, are not full 4WD always on.
the 4x4 traction is not always present. It goes, for example, from a 100% rear - 0% front, t a 60% rear - 40% front and so on for example. It depends on how the car spare the traction depending on needs...

Anyway often 4wd are slower than 2wd. Wheigt, machanics, and other reason involved...
 
  #10  
Old 10-08-2012 | 04:17 AM
VikingMariner's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 317
From: USA
Rep Power: 27
VikingMariner is a jewel in the roughVikingMariner is a jewel in the roughVikingMariner is a jewel in the rough
Wonder if PDCC is the key variable in the difference of numbers.
 
  #11  
Old 10-08-2012 | 06:59 AM
heavychevy's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,934
From: ga
Rep Power: 551
heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !heavychevy Is a GOD !
1ft rollouts by the magazines will help with this.
 
  #12  
Old 10-08-2012 | 08:34 AM
Haku's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,564
From: TN
Rep Power: 161
Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !
Originally Posted by hepmonk
eg9 has a point, something is strange:
c2 is _faster_ than c4: c2 4.2s vs c4 4.3s (pdk sport+ 0-60)
BUT
c2s is _slower_ than c4s: c2s 3.9s vs 3.8s (pdk sport+ 0-60)
This info is from the US website.

Perhaps the rear-wheels are sufficient to use the 350bhp whereas you really need all four wheels to exploit the 400bhp?
It really doesn't matter a whole lot but I did just check the Porsche USA site and the figures for PDK with Sport Plus for both the C2S and C4S are identical:

3.9 secs (PDK Sport Plus)

Their top speeds do vary C2S 187 mph, C4S 184 mph both pdk.
 

Last edited by Haku; 10-08-2012 at 08:37 AM.
  #13  
Old 10-08-2012 | 08:39 AM
Haku's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,564
From: TN
Rep Power: 161
Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !Haku Is a GOD !
Originally Posted by VikingMariner
Wonder if PDCC is the key variable in the difference of numbers.
On a track I would say yes. In a straight line, I'm not sure.
 
  #14  
Old 10-08-2012 | 09:31 PM
ChuckJ's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,806
From: Dallas
Rep Power: 175
ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !ChuckJ Is a GOD !
Originally Posted by hepmonk
eg9 has a point, something is strange:
c2 is _faster_ than c4: c2 4.2s vs c4 4.3s (pdk sport+ 0-60)
BUT
c2s is _slower_ than c4s: c2s 3.9s vs 3.8s (pdk sport+ 0-60)
This info is from the US website.

Perhaps the rear-wheels are sufficient to use the 350bhp whereas you really need all four wheels to exploit the 400bhp?
Christophorus Aug/Sep 2012 has the following PDK 0-60 times:
C4: 4.5 sec
C4S: 4.1 sec

Where did the 3.8 sec and other data come from?

ChuckJ
 
  #15  
Old 10-08-2012 | 10:08 PM
hepmonk's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 51
From: Seattle
Rep Power: 16
hepmonk is infamous around these partshepmonk is infamous around these parts
Chuck, I got them by using the comparison tool, by comparing the C2S with the C4S (click on Compare Models on the left of the main page):

Top Track Speed 187 mph 184 mph
Acceleration 0 - 60 mph 4.1 sec (3.9 sec Sport Plus) 4.0 sec / 3.8 sec (PDK with Sport Plus)

See attached screenshot

But the data page for the C4S:
http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/91...turesandspecs/
says:
Acceleration 0 - 60 mph:
Manual: 4.3 sec
PDK: 4.1 sec / 3.9 sec (PDK with Sport Plus)

Clearly not very reliable.
 
Attached Images  

Last edited by hepmonk; 10-08-2012 at 10:20 PM. Reason: updated data


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: Numbers don't make sense...



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:36 PM.