I wouldn't be surprised to see a 10.8 within the first year.

I also think the average trap speed will typically be higher in PDK cars than with manual cars, because the PDK cars don't lose as much boost between shifts.

 

Could be, however I tend not to think it will because it will be getting out of the gates so fast, the trap will be limited. The one lap car ran a 1.5 60". That's crazy, and very hard to maximize trap speed launching that fast.

Heck the 997.1 Manual Turbo could trap 121 or so. Give the 997.2 manual a few mph over that and the PDK would need 128-130 mph on average. Not going to happen.

 

Isn't the PDK 7speed with different gearing than the manual? Doesn't that make a difference in ET and trap?

 

And with a driver with more experience with it. I had never previosuly driven this car prior to the track on Saturday. My first run with the car was a 10.9, then I ran about 8 or 9 more 10 second passes with it, the fastest being that 10.73. Put somebody with some experience with it in it and you may see some 10.6's or even a high 10.5.
I am very interested to know where C&D tests their cars and if it's at a real drag strip and not some sort of GPS device.

 

By the way, the traps were all between mid 129's and 130's on every run. This car was run on crap AZ 91 oct and has only done 550 to the wheels.

 

What makes you think I'm not aware of that? I'm already aware of that. I'm just saying your donkeys vs bananas comparo doesn't apply here. These are both very similar vehicles, weighing within 5 lbs of each other, same power, same torque, etc.

You claimed the conditions were the reason for the Turbo in R&T trapping slower. You haven't made the case, because at every interval outside of one involving a shift, the two cars were very close.

You seriously think the GT-R would be trapping 121 mph without DCT?? You seriously think the Panamera Turbo would be trapping at almost 120 mph without DCT?

Think about it logically for a moment: During the time that the manual Turbo is losing 1-2 mph on the shift (which it will have to repeat again when the gear engages), what do you think is happening to the rest of the car? Is it sitting still? Is it moving away from the 1/4 mile mark?

 

You're not aware of it because you don't know jack about real world experience on the track. Same power and torque, you also realize that cars can vary up to 5% from the factory right.

You realize that a M6 without a DCT and weighing as much as a GT-R traps 118 mph, A CTS-V weighing 200 lbs more than a GT-R traps 120+.

So to answer your question I do think a GT-R would trap 120 with a manual.

Time vs Distance does not equal Speed vs Distance. A point you still have yet to get. 0-60 0-100 etc in most modern high hp cars is down to the traction available. You won't see a lot of variables in that unless the grip isn't there. However a trap speed is not the same.

So don't hand be a bunch of time vs distance and try to claim that the conditions were the same. It's nonsense.

You just won't let the future tell who is right or wrong will you, but just remember that you can formulate all the equations in the world, but all of that typing will be made to ZERO the first time a stock Manual Turbo traps 125+ mph. And it will happen.

 

already happened... you dont know what you are talking...

so if you told that all cars are different in times and trap speeds, you will never see a 997.2tt manual trapping over 125mph...

and never will see a pdk trapping 122...

the PDK already did 128mph trap speed in a mag that i dont remember now...

the pdk is a 3-5mph faster car then the manual. FACT.

 

Wow guys!
I mean, I've no stake in this, but, are we that passionate about transmissions on an otherwise identical car that we start trading thinly veiled insults?!
You're all great guys.
Let's move on.

 

No, I don't need to drive on a dragstrip to know that cars with more grip than others can reach the 1/4 mile quicker but with a lower ET. Errr...are we even talking about that when comparing 997 Turbo manual vs PDK?
While you're at it, why don't you be a champ and tell me exactly how many 1/4 mile passes you have performed in a 997.2 Turbo with PDK. I'm all ears.

Time vs distance does not HAVE to equal speed vs. distance. We can already see that the difference between the two cars in question doesn't have to come down to conditions. In fact, when you consider their in-gear acceleration times (very close, within 1/0ths of a second) and the performances of the other two cars in question, the conditions don't appear to be the variable. In the case of the R&T vs C&D GT-R, it's clear as day that the C&D car was slower. And that's even with C&D correcting for conditions, while R&T does not.

Yes, I'm aware there can be a 5% difference in power. Now you're going to tell me of all the Turbos tested, all of the PDK cars were making 5% more power than the one manual tested car.

Your M5 example is ridiculous. You don't know that the M5 wouldn't be faster with DCT. And I don't see a 122 mph trap for the M5 in any of the mags.
CTS-V weighs 200 more lbs than the GT-R, and it's also packing 50 more horses and a crapload more torque. 7.7 lb/hp vs the GT-R's 8.2 Nice going.
C&D tests of the CTS-V:
117 mph (comparo with E63)
116 mph (1st full test, manual transmission)
119 mph (automatic)
R&T test of the CTS-V: 118.8
Motor Trend: 117.9 (vs E63), 117.0 (vs M5), 114.6 (vs XFR)
edmunds: 115.3 and 115.0
Where are all of these 120+ mph traps you speak of? And again, you haven't made the case that the CTS-V wouldn't be faster with DCT. Nor have you made the case that the GT-R would be a 122 mph car with a standard manual. When you have to bring in the CTS-V, a car with more power, more torque, and a higher hp/wt ratio, then you've pretty much admitted you have no argument. Thanks for dancing around the issue.

Care to explain away the heavier, DCT-equipped Evo outrunning the lighter, manual-equipped Evo, even in slightly warmer, windier conditions? C'mon, heavy. Try actually answering a question head on for once.

It's pretty incredible that someone with the racing background you claim to have can't even think logically that if a car stops accelerating momentarily, loses 1-2 mph on each shift, while it's still rolling toward the 1/4 mile marker, it might have a slower trap speed at the 1/4.

Consider this. Back in the days of the Gen2 Viper GTS, Motor Trend tested an ACR Plus. This car has 56 horses and 41 lb-ft over the standard 450/490 GTS. Yet the car was slower than standard GTS's. Why?
"It did scorch a 3.9-second 0-60-mph time. But the quarter mile was a 'mere' 12.4 at 117.6. Previous GTS Vipers had run 12.1 to 12.2 seconds and from 117.9 to 120.5 mph.

So despite the added power, torque, and shorter gearing, the more powerful car was slower because of that additional shift. Not just in time, but the trap speed as well.

 

That's all you needed to say, thank you.

Like I said, time will tell. No need in getting hung up on something that time will certainly prove for sure now is it. There is no gray area, either the cars will or won't do what I say or what you say. Simple as that.

Why can't you leave it at that?

You do realize that Corvette's, Mustangs, Porsche's and most everything else under the sun have actually gone faster in real life than the magazines right. Mainly manual cars because journalists generally suck at driving, especially launching. DSG equipped cars don't have that problem because you can throw it in auto and duplicate the results.

No C6 Z06 has trapped 130 in the mags (but it sure has done it in real life).

The FACT is that manuals will have a greater deviation in times/speeds due to driver skill, PDK, DSG, SST etc. will run what they run based on conditions, but you won't see big variations in trap speeds.

This does a whole lot for your data sampling you know......

But you can't know that unless you would actually keep up with the people who actually drag race.

Foot --------> Mouth

(This is at near sea level too, just wait for some worse conditions)




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-6JU...layer_embedded


I guess a manual on this day would trap 117-119. (You are smoking)

 

I'm not leaving it at that because you haven't answered the questions. You've brought up my lack of racing experience, yet where is your own racing experience in a PDK Turbo, heavy? Please provide that information so that others here will know you are speaking from personal experience, which you claim to have and use as a basis for your "authority." Tell me what track it was and post up your timeslip.

Oh, yay. One or two guys on the fastest tracks after how many months of trying? Please.

I'm not saying that 5 mph is all down to DCT. Just like the differences between the M5 w/SMG vs manual isn't all down to the SMG. But I'm saying it can improve trap speeds beyond differences in conditions, while you seem to be saying it does not such thing.

Check these R&T tests.
Boxster Spyder 2940 lbs / 320 hp = 9.2 lb/hp
Boxster S 3210 lbs / 310 hp = 10.4 lb/hp
The Spyder clearly has power/wt advantage, yet look at their 1/4 mile traps:
Spyder - 109.6 mph
Boxster S - 110.2 mph

Are you telling me PDK played no role whatsoever in that outcome? Take look at their performance charts superimposed (blue=Boxster S, red = Z4, yellow = Spyder)


Take a look at their very different shift profiles (the Spyder's graph is shifted over so we can see the Boxster S's more clearly):



While the manual Spyder is clearly losing mph on each shift, the PDK Boxster S appears to gain speed on each shift. This is something Evo mag noted on the GT-R, and was a discussion of some debate on M3 forums before release of DKG, as to how aggressive BMW would implement the DKG shifting characteristics (to provide the "jolt" like you'd get with the SMG). I'm not saying the Turbo's shifting characteristics are as aggressive, but you can't tell me those upward surges in acceleration on the Boxster S are due to conditions.

 

I'll be taking my car up to sacremento in a couple weeks. Completely bone stock.

I'll get some baseline times with report back on all the variables, temp, DA etc.


Just to throw more fire on this silly conversation, I believe better times from the PDK just due to the fact that it holds the boost of the turbos high even when shifting ... no?

 

two guys inside, and STILL if you look CAREFULLY 122,99! so 123...

WEIGHT and 123 trapped... you have no arguments my friend.

 

You must have missed the part about them testing at sea level. Wait until some cars get tested at elevation where they are sure to, it will negate whatever gain will be gotten by passenger removal. And I'm not talking 6,000 ft.

You will certainly see PDK Turbos trapping 122 or less. Watch and see.