Porsche 911UK Forum

Welcome to the @Porsche911UK website. Register a free account today to become a member! Sign up is quick and easy, then you can view, participate in topics and posts across the site that covers all things Porsche.

Already registered and looking to recovery your account, select 'login in' and then the 'forget your password' option.

Fastest accelerating Porsche models

me to :grin: :thumb:
 
Me too - one of each of those in the garage wouldn't be too shabby!! :thumbs:
 
Little bit surprised with the GT doing 3.9s, that legit?
 
Turbo S looks like a relative bargain.
 
FZP said:
Turbo S looks like a relative bargain.

And it wouldn't take much to get it to out accelerate the two cars ahead of it :)
 
3.9 seconds from the CGT = very impressive

I'm happy that my car matches that and I had enough money left over to buy a house. :D
 
apollokre1d said:
FZP said:
Turbo S looks like a relative bargain.

And it wouldn't take much to get it to out accelerate the two cars ahead of it :)
Like you'd know anything about it :floor: :floor:
 
T8 said:
3.9 seconds from the CGT = very impressive

I'm happy that my car matches that and I had enough money left over to buy a house. :D

Actually 3.9 seconds is for the manual 997 Turbo, yours is 3.7 seconds if I remember correctly :)
 
Time to go Turbo shopping I wish :grin:
 
The performance figures by Porsche are generally slightly better than those quoted I remember reading. I think at the time, they were using a 997.2 C2S with PDK and found that they were getting 0-100kmh times of 4.2s vs claimed 4.5s.
Anyone vboxtheir own car to see what came up?
 
Unless you are using the absolute top of the range kit with inertial sensors and GNSS you won't get accurate results. The cheap ones are invariably optimistic as they all miss the start. If you use a GPS only system add 0.3-0.4 seconds as a starting point. Some time from 0.5km/h, others at higher speeds and extrapolate backwards. Neither method works well.

MC
 
MisterCorn said:
Unless you are using the absolute top of the range kit with inertial sensors and GNSS you won't get accurate results. The cheap ones are invariably optimistic as they all miss the start. If you use a GPS only system add 0.3-0.4 seconds as a starting point. Some time from 0.5km/h, others at higher speeds and extrapolate backwards. Neither method works well.

MC

That's not my experience of timing. I'm not saying you're talking bollox, it just flies in the face of what I've experienced.
I used a stand alone Aim GPS and recorded 0-60 at 3.16. When I attended a Vmax event MB timing clocked me at 3.02. I'd imagine MB timing was the more accurate method. Whatever that is :dont know:
 
Norfolk & Idea said:
MisterCorn said:
Unless you are using the absolute top of the range kit with inertial sensors and GNSS you won't get accurate results. The cheap ones are invariably optimistic as they all miss the start. If you use a GPS only system add 0.3-0.4 seconds as a starting point. Some time from 0.5km/h, others at higher speeds and extrapolate backwards. Neither method works well.

MC

That's not my experience of timing. I'm not saying you're talking bollox, it just flies in the face of what I've experienced.
I used a stand alone Aim GPS and recorded 0-60 at 3.16. When I attended a Vmax event MB timing clocked me at 3.02. I'd imagine MB timing was the more accurate method. Whatever that is :dont know:

What was the MB timing using? I went to a well known German manufacturer and ran our INS+GNSS system against their 'official' system. It routinely measured 0.3-0.4s longer. It was always at the start. He asked for an explanation. I told him either mine was right, or it knew what he was about to do....
Pretty much nobody gives accurate figures. It isn't in their interest. Not used for any safety figures or homologation, just for magazine and bragging rights. We even added a start trigger mode to replicate what other people do so that manufacturers are happier. They use our kit for brake testing where it does matter. They want to use the same kit for both. Rolling start figures will always be more consistent as there are no jerk rates to take in to account, GPS only handles that much better.

MC
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
124,358
Messages
1,439,468
Members
48,716
Latest member
993gtnut
Back
Top