The new Porsche 911 Carrera S was tested by Car & Driver. It pulled some amazing #s

Porsche Carrera S
Curb weight : 3290 lbs.
3.8 L Flat 6
350 hp@6600 rpm
295 lb.-ft. torque @ 4600 rpm
0-60 mph : 4.1 sec.
0-100 mph : 10.2 sec.
1/4 mi. : 12.6 sec. @ 112 mph
Street Start (5-60 mph) : 5.0 sec.
Skidpad : .97 g's
Braking 70-0 mph : 154 ft.
Redline : 7200 rpm
Top Speed : 179 mph

For Comparison Sake :

Chevy Corvette Z51 (C6)
Curb weight : 3227 lbs.
6.0 L V-8
400 hp @6000rpm
400 lb.-ft torque @ 4400 rpm
0-60 mph : 4.3 sec.
0-100 mph : 9.9 sec.
1/4 mi. : 12.7 sec. @ 113 mph
Street Start (5-60 mph) : 5.2 sec.
Skidpad : .98 g's
Braking 70-0 mph : 166 ft.
Redline : 6500 rpm
Top Speed : 186 mph (mfr. claim)

I was the first one to harp that the 997 Carrera S needed more horsepower, but either Porsche is sending hopped up test cars to the journalist, or the horses under the Porsche bonnet are a little bigger, or maybe they are fudging those #'s a bit as to not hurt GT3 sales. Maybe fattening the torque curve helped (and the fact that the engine is in the back on top of the drive wheels), but it literally dropped .7 sec. off the 996's 1/4 mi. time from 30 hp ? Maybe different test conditions ? But I thought the Corvette was going to crush the new 911's in straightline speed.

Before some idiot jumps on here and comments on how you will be able to get an Z06 for less $. I am not talking about money, I'm just talking about pure performance (& performance #'s).

 

Just read the article. Bravo Porsche! It may not be the baddest or fastest thing out there for the money, but I want one just like I wanted the 993. Now bring on the turbo! :p

 

That braking number for the vette can't be correct. any car that can do 0.98g lateral acceleration is going to pull at least 1 g under braking, 163 feet from 70.

got to love 40/60 weight distribution, and this is going to get better when porsche gets their own double clutch transmission. Faster and maybe a higher top speed with taller gearing in top gear. A slight improvement in the 1/4, 12.5@115, bring it Porsche.

What's that GM, no camshaft phasing, no camshaft switching, no variable resonance intake manifold. Oh we are so in awe of pickup truck engines that can exceed 6000 rpm.

 

Uh... the corvette engine is a marvel of simplicty, power, and price... You design something better and sell the complete package for under 42.... And I dont even own a vette!

 

YOu can get a Z for less Im sure, but since you want to leave that out.. THe z will crush the porshe...

 

Please read my last sentence.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. In what test would a stock 350 Z crush a stock 997 Carrera S ? The 997 is faster, corners harder, turns better, etc. In all ways it is a superior car. Even the Greddy Twin Turboed 350Z recently ran in the 12.7's-12.8's (though it had 19" rims). Again I'm not talking about $, I'm talking about pure performance #'s on STOCK cars. The Porsche 911 (997) & the Corvette Z51 (C6) are simply on another level.. performance wise.

 

The Z barely beats the RX-8 in most things, it has no chance against the new 997.

 

Don't do drugs!

 

so far, I am liking the 997 alot better than the 996. Those number only help the matter.

 

Although I do like the new Vette, it's no 911. My neighbor works for Porsche and gave me a ride in a new 997. The interior in past versions was really bland but they did a great job on the 997. The exterior looks even better in person than the mag photos. Like a blend of a 996 and 993. Still my favorite car.

 

I think perhaps he was talking about the Z06/07, whatever they're gonna call it, which is going to be one bad machine.

 

you have to love the rear engine setup for launching.

 

hmmmm, could be.

My advice still stands though!

 

Again, read my last two sentences.

This is not a $ for $ shootout. The "regular" Porsche 911 has always been compared to the Corvette, with the 911 TT compared to the Z06. Porsches on the approximate comparison have always been about 2X more expensive than their Corvette counterparts. If you are looking for bang for the buck than a Corvette makes sense, but I was not comparing value, I was looking at performance #'s, and in this case I thought the new Corvette was going to run rings around the 911, it did not.

Again, before some idiot (not you therm8, thanks for expalining what Brian1f might be thinking) brings up price/value again, this is not about price, it is strictly performance #'s. I don't want to go through that slippery slope again, then people will bring up modified EVO's, modded Dodge SRT-4's, 5.0 Mustangs fixed up, etc. next.

 

I've seen a new 911 in person two weeks ago, it's simply a beauty.

Porsche is not about bang for the buck IMHO, the 911 is just a timeless car that was carefully improved over decades.

Concerning the "lack of bang", the new generation Turbo will take care of that. Porsche recently introduced an upgraded Turbo S (996) and they didn't care to announce the 0-60 mph stats - they announced 0-120 instead ...

 

True. 0-60 is an overrated guide , but 1/4 mile matters more.

 

In my office we have 5 porseches (1 boxster s, 3 carrera convertibles and 1 turbo). They are so much fun to drive in/drive. Never driven the turbo though...

 

I saw my 2nd C6 Vette yesterday--a hardtop black one--they remind me of a banshee or some other otherworldly creature--they look bad ***; but given a high budget, i'd still take a 911 over a Vette anyday. I'm more of a Porschephile, the C6 has the advantage of more horsepower and it is a remarkable car; but I can't pass up a 911. Now if I want the most performance bang for my buck, and want something that looks nicer than STis, Evos, and SRT4s then the Vette is the way to go.

 

oh god--959 (drooling smiley)

 

Lindsay Davenport got a Porsche Carrera S just for winning a tennis game (plus $98k pocket money). I read that it's the 3rd Porsche that she's won.
Man, I'll let her do me in exchange for the Carrera S.