996 Turbo / GT2 Turbo discussion on previous model 2000-2005 Porsche 911 Twin Turbo and 911 GT2.

First test drive: RUF RT12. Part II (or how fast is it?)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
  #31  
Old 10-28-2005 | 04:14 AM
robots_are_neon's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 404
From: SoCal
Rep Power: 36
robots_are_neon is infamous around these parts
i'll say it once and I'll say it again: WOW!
 
  #32  
Old 10-31-2005 | 10:49 AM
Erik's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,987
From: Europe/USA
Rep Power: 102
Erik has a spectacular aura aboutErik has a spectacular aura about
Originally posted by Crash
Erik, how was the traction?
I must say traction was not a big issue.

Anyone got more sources for quarter mile times on Enzo and CGT?
The ones I have state 11.5-ish and less ET.
 
  #33  
Old 10-31-2005 | 10:54 AM
Divexxtreme's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,510
From: Virginia, USA
Rep Power: 788
Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !Divexxtreme Is a GOD !
MT ran a 10.8 @ 135 in the Enzo. C&D - 11.2 @ 136.

Best I've seen for a CGT is 11.1 @ 133.
 
  #34  
Old 10-31-2005 | 01:39 PM
Crash's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 454
Rep Power: 0
Crash is infamous around these parts
Originally posted by Divexxtreme
MT ran a 10.8 @ 135 in the Enzo. C&D - 11.2 @ 136.

Best I've seen for a CGT is 11.1 @ 133.
Aren´t MT always overly optimistic with their times?
 
  #35  
Old 10-31-2005 | 08:49 PM
teflon_jones's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,904
From: 8000' up in the Rockies
Rep Power: 147
teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !teflon_jones Is a GOD !
Originally posted by Crash
Aren´t MT always overly optimistic with their times?
Yeah, almost as optimistic as Car and Driver. I don't trust the times either of those mags publishes. Car and Driver quotes the 997S as having a 4.0s 0-60 time. Maybe on slicks it does...
 
  #36  
Old 11-01-2005 | 12:57 AM
Erik's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,987
From: Europe/USA
Rep Power: 102
Erik has a spectacular aura aboutErik has a spectacular aura about
These times will be in Road & Track. Not sure when they will be published. Dec? Jan?
They did 5-6 starts if I remember correct. I think nr 3 was the best.


Performance - RUF RT12 650 hp (RWD):

0-60 mph: 3.15 seconds
0 - 100 mph: 6.62 seconds
0 – 124 mph: 9.7 seconds. (0 - 200 km/h)
¼ mile: 11.0 @ 134 mph (216 km/h)
Highest speed reached: 350 km/h.
Consider the fact that the car was on Pirelli P Zero Rosso street tires. About +15C on a normal piece of street, no drag strip.
Front: 255/35/ZR19 Rear: 305/30/ZR19
Measured with GPS 100 Hz, 1 person in the car.
 
  #37  
Old 11-01-2005 | 02:18 AM
9852147's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 37
Rep Power: 21
9852147 is infamous around these parts
concerning traction here is something that is really interesting:

erik drove the rt12 with 650hp, just RWD and normal street tires (Pirelli P Zero Rosso with 305/30/ZR19 r).

he did 0-60 in 3.15s and 0-100 in 6.62s.
for both times the traction of the car is very important.

now look at these times from the R&T shootout this sept.:

they used a 590hp ruf with 4WD and
Pirelli P Zero Corsa (semi slicks) with P235/40ZR-18 f, P315/30ZR-18 r. so this should have even better traction than the one above.

they did 0-60 in 3.4s and 0-100 in 7.4s.

just a champ car and motorbike had better traction from the start. but look at the times, they are slower than the RT12s. man the new ruf must have serious traction, even with RWD. would like to know how it would perform with the 345er 20" tires
 

Last edited by 9852147; 11-01-2005 at 02:21 AM.
  #38  
Old 11-01-2005 | 05:50 AM
Acropora's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 446
From: USA
Rep Power: 38
Acropora has a spectacular aura aboutAcropora has a spectacular aura about
Sweet car! Think a CGT would be quite a bit quicker at the track though (not 1/4 mile).
 
  #39  
Old 11-02-2005 | 12:47 PM
Crash's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 454
Rep Power: 0
Crash is infamous around these parts
After looking at the numbers at a bit more detail, the car actually seems relatively slow. As witnessed, the car does 0-100 km/h in 3.15 seconds and 0-200 km/h in 9.7 seconds.

The 996 RTurbo supposedly did it in 3.3 and 10.0 seconds respectively.

A Manthey car with a declared value of 685 HP does the standing start to 100 km/h (62 mph) in 3.9 seconds and 0-200 km/h in 9.3 seconds, but this time can be reduced to 8.9 seconds with a launch, instead of babying the car.
 
  #40  
Old 11-02-2005 | 12:50 PM
AdamT's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 600
From: South England/Munich
Rep Power: 47
AdamT has a spectacular aura aboutAdamT has a spectacular aura about
Originally posted by Crash
After looking at the numbers at a bit more detail, the car actually seems relatively slow. As witnessed, the car does 0-100 km/h in 3.15 seconds and 0-200 km/h in 9.7 seconds.

The 996 RTurbo supposedly did it in 3.3 and 10.0 seconds respectively.

A Manthey car with a declared value of 685 HP does the standing start to 100 km/h (62 mph) in 3.9 seconds and 0-200 km/h in 9.3 seconds, but this time can be reduced to 8.9 seconds with a launch, instead of babying the car.
Im sorry this is incorrect, there have been no 996 R turbos built to date which are quicker than this RT12. Even the Black 3,8 996 Rturbo with 690bhp...

As for the manthey car, i cannot comment, but Manthey are really great. However those times are rather quick..

all the best
adam
 
  #41  
Old 11-02-2005 | 02:08 PM
Erik's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,987
From: Europe/USA
Rep Power: 102
Erik has a spectacular aura aboutErik has a spectacular aura about
Manthey is respect. I visted them mid-Oct. Perhaps time to write a story?

Don't know, but I don't think they 'babied' these launches.

I heard (not sure if correct) MR only built 3 of these M700 conversions so far.

Manthey Porsche M700, 595hp, 800Nm, 348km/h
http://www.rs6.com/forum/showthread....hlight=manthey

0-100 kph (0- 60 mph) 3.9 secs.
0-160 kph (0-100 mph) 7.0 secs.
0.200 kph (0-125 mph) 10.0 secs.

Vmax = 348 kph (217 mph)

Manthey M700, 0-200 km/h in 9,2 secs...
http://www.rs6.com/forum/showthread....hlight=manthey

 
  #42  
Old 11-02-2005 | 02:47 PM
Crash's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 454
Rep Power: 0
Crash is infamous around these parts
Originally posted by AdamT
Im sorry this is incorrect, there have been no 996 R turbos built to date which are quicker than this RT12. Even the Black 3,8 996 Rturbo with 690bhp...

As for the manthey car, i cannot comment, but Manthey are really great. However those times are rather quick..

all the best
adam
Adam, I did not imply that the RTurbo was faster, only that the difference between the 590 RTurbo and the 650 Rt12 was only 0.15 second on the 100-200 km/h pull. That´s the thing that strikes me as odd.
 
  #43  
Old 11-02-2005 | 02:59 PM
Crash's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 454
Rep Power: 0
Crash is infamous around these parts
Originally posted by Erik
Manthey is respect. I visted them mid-Oct. Perhaps time to write a story?

Don't know, but I don't think they 'babied' these launches.

I heard (not sure if correct) MR only built 3 of these M700 conversions so far.

Manthey Porsche M700, 595hp, 800Nm, 348km/h
http://www.rs6.com/forum/showthread....hlight=manthey

0-100 kph (0- 60 mph) 3.9 secs.
0-160 kph (0-100 mph) 7.0 secs.
0.200 kph (0-125 mph) 10.0 secs.

Vmax = 348 kph (217 mph)

Manthey M700, 0-200 km/h in 9,2 secs...
http://www.rs6.com/forum/showthread....hlight=manthey

The first car converted, which was tested in Autobild in 2003, is still going strong after three years. Not bad for a car that can seriously embarrass an Enzo...

Btw, Adam, did you know that the black 3.8L RTurbo is for sale for 212.000 Euros?
 
  #44  
Old 11-02-2005 | 03:04 PM
Erik's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,987
From: Europe/USA
Rep Power: 102
Erik has a spectacular aura aboutErik has a spectacular aura about
Originally posted by Crash
the difference between the 590 RTurbo and the 650 Rt12 was only 0.15 second on the 100-200 km/h pull. That´s the thing that strikes me as odd.
You're forgetting something.

The R Turbo and the RT12 was driven at different times, different drivers and different conditions.

The RT12 times will be published in Road & track, and one of their writers drove the car. But it was +10-15C on a normal piece of road. If the R Turbo was on a drag strip or similar there will be a big difference in traction.

Take the times for what they are. If you want a comparable result: have both cars at the same time with the same driver.

At last, these cars are so fast even a tenth of a second might be hard to improve. Look at top fuel cars. Thye are fighting to improve 1/100 of a sec.
 
  #45  
Old 11-02-2005 | 04:17 PM
Crash's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 454
Rep Power: 0
Crash is infamous around these parts
Originally posted by Erik@Cargraphic
awesome write up, awesome pics. Thank you for sharing.

Erik
I have to concur.
 


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

Quick Reply: First test drive: RUF RT12. Part II (or how fast is it?)



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:42 PM.