uh, yah, and you keep on telling yourself all the BS you wish to hear, ok.

 

Are you seriously suggesting that mid-engined cars arose because of the influence of rear-engined 911?

Why didn't they just make them rear-engined?

Was Herr Rumpler influenced by the 911 back in 1921? Why didn't Porsche make the 1923 Tropfenwagen rear-engined? Was the 550 Spyder a dead-end?

 

nope did not suggest it all, you just did. In fact, where do you think the mid engined grand prix car came from? Talk about experience with mid and rear engined designs hmmm, who has most of it.

I do believe that the mid engine design is a better balanced design from a center of balance standpoint and way better than a front engine design. I also believe that porsche has taken the rear engine to it's ultimate development and as Heavy Chevy has already said it is engineered well enough to compete against anything including mid engined designs. I don't think the front engine design is better, however, weight over the front with drive wheels over the rear is not conducive to good traction. But many companies have succeded in making it work as well. So now we have two less than ideal designs that seem to work well. Oh and the mid engined design is not truly mid engined. Mid engined would put the driver over the front wheels or over the rear wheels as in the old Cheetah of the late 60's.

So the GTR is definitely not an advanced design.

 

That's true for conventional AWD systems that dont delegate much power if any to the front wheels if there is no slippage from the rear. The result is a RWD car unless there is a loss of traction from the front and less drivetrain loss on a dyno where there is no slippage.

Look in the 996 TT section and see dont most people claim 580-600 hp with a ecu/exhaust on a K24 turbo car. That amounts to 500-530 rwhp with a 15% drivetrain loss.

The 996 TT came out in 2000, and only exhibits such a little drivetrain loss, I dont think it's out of the realm of possiblility that it has been improved on.

This is the reason you cant test a 996 TT on any AWD dyno, if the drums are not linked the front wheels dont have enough power to turn the drum by themselves, and you'll burn the coupler. I put mine on a dyno dynamics because we werent sure if it was linked or not, and sure enough it wouldnt turn the front drum so we had to abort and make it rwd for the dyno.

The technology has been around for a while to eliminate the AWD factor when it comes to hp loss and only using it when neccessary. 18-22 % is Evo, Sti territory and old news.

 

makes sense, and good info on why the 996tt has to be on linked drums, I have been wondering why, and now I know.... But I don't think that a front engined mostly rear wheel drive is going to have that efficiency with two drvieshafts and an auto tranny....

 

I said 10% OFF stupid. Which means 10% deviation from the claim which is what YOU are claiming. You're claiming 100 more hp and 10% more drivetrain loss and dont have the slightest evidence (MEANING ACCLERATION RESULTS) to back any of it.

My claim for Nissan's lying is based on some evidence from lap times and clocks with acceleration and various independant tests not to mention Nissan's lying history. You're basing it on heresay from people who havent even put the engine on a dyno to see how much is being lost and based on ancient AWD rules which have been offset by new technology which isnt present JUST in the GT-R.

But like I said we can argue this till the cows come home but the

FACTS

The GT-R accelerates like a car with a 7.6 - 7.8 weight/power ratio!!!!!!

PERIOD!!!!!

And since we know the weight of the car, the only calculation is hp.

3800/7.6= 500 hp!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


M6 3900 lbs/500 hp = 7.8 = 119 mph trap speed

GT3 3250/415 hp = 7.8 = 120 mph


MATH ******** ITS ALL IN THE MATH!!!!!!!!!!!


GT-R @ 570 hp = 6.66 which is almost equal to a Z06 (6.36)

 

What are you talking about, all of the faster classes are prototypes. Not production chassy cars.

Name series where there are production based GT cars and the 911 cant hang.

The only limitation of the 911 is it's ability to add more power in the back with space and weight confines. But the judge of a chassy is in it's ability to go fast with LESS hp. Anything can go fast with 800 hp. But going within a few seconds of the GT1 cars which are in fact 550+ hp and prototype cars doesnt sound like slow to me.

The 911 is not the end all of anything, but it's not the gigantic lead weight that the pundits want it to be and it's proven that over and over and over and over again. I'd like for you to substantiate your claim with some real information that shows the 911 being the weak link in production based cars since that is the racing that resembles most what we drive on the street.

There are a lot of doubters, and Porsche has been beating them all for decades with the engine in the "wrong place".

 

+1meellion

 

The DSG now and PDK in the future do not feature automatics in the sense of a torque converter. They use the computers to essentially paddle shifter the car for you. In auto mode and cruising, the car will have you in 6th or 7th gear by the time you reach 60 mph. There is no torque converter and the like which is what saps the power.

I dont know all the details on how it works, but it's even more advanced than the first generation SMG's from bmw. I'm sure porsche has some details floating around, but per our talk at the Petit Lemans with a Porsche rep, the PDK follows the same pattern. The bmw smg 1 was figured to be in the 12% loss range. This is supposed to be better in most every way.

 

SMG is just an automated-change manual box; the clever thing about the dual-clutch transmissions is the way they have a separate clutch for odd and even gears, so the next gear is pre-selected and the change can be instant with no interruption in power.

 

Hell, I saw in person the 917 win the 24 hours of Daytona in 1970 and 1971. The good old air cooled 911S was there too running against the likes of Ferrari, Lancia, BMW, Corvette, etc. What the hell is he talking about? In fact, the good old normally aspirated flat 6 has won Daytona overall on more than one occasion in the 911 style body (non-prototype). Forgive my non-technical language, I'm speaking from the experience of having been there and seen them win overall with non-prototypes.

 

OK, a little more technical: The Carrera RSR won Daytona overall 3 times, and a 911 GT3 RS won overall once. I would not call that competing with slow cars.

 

nothing like the voice of experience huh....

 

Here's the first one.

Here's another:
Here's my respond to this one^^

 

More like voice of an old dog.