96rs for sale...
Discussion
Mermaid said:
How so?
like I said all subjective, down to the individual....the 6RS is not traded on any index. No market maker's involved all info in free play, free trade between buyer and seller......Not same as making a "call" on say brent crude..etc with say based on OPEC info, is it.....
Late to the party but going back to 0-60 times discussed a page or so back.
Achieving times of around 2.48s is about the limit of 0-60mph tests using road tyres given the totality of the relationship between tyre and road in such things. Achieving a sustained grip level of approx 1.1G give or take really is the limit of road tyres and as such this governs your acceleration value. At 1.1G sustained it will take 2.48s to reach 60mph from a stand-still. This assumes constant acceleration so there cannot be a gear change in the process.
This should start to turn on some lights regarding the BS that surrounds 0-60 times and their total irrelevance. Jalopnik recently had a rant on the same which some of you may have read. Google should turn it up pretty readily for those that haven't.
Achieving wonderful 0-60 times is simply now a software programmers wet dream (coupled to a suitable 1st gear). Its all about systems controls to ensure that the max G of the tyre is attained but not overstepped. The result is that the better the programming, the closer the result is to this 2.48s/1.1G ceiling.
FWIW, the current Porsche figures for the 918 are 2.5s for 0-60mph ( a drop of 0.1s from 2.6s I believe?).
This has been matched in pretty much every test I have read (though I will admit that I don't go out of my way to read them) but it is unsurprising that this is the case. It is a tightly controlled experiment each time ones uses LC leaving the driver completely irrelevant. What is of interest of course is that a test doing 5-60mph gave a time slower than the 0-60 time just as it does on all cars like this. In the olden days a test with a rolling start would have yielded a faster time.
The reason for the change goes back to the software point. Once moving, the software does not have ultimate control over all aspects of acceleration, instead having to respond to slip as it occurs and the resultant time it takes to hit 60mph is slower than in the condition where it can control every aspect to a predetermined set of parameters.
As for the 2.2s listed previously, achieving 2.2s is beyond the scope of current road tyres.
Anyways, back to regular transmissions..
Achieving times of around 2.48s is about the limit of 0-60mph tests using road tyres given the totality of the relationship between tyre and road in such things. Achieving a sustained grip level of approx 1.1G give or take really is the limit of road tyres and as such this governs your acceleration value. At 1.1G sustained it will take 2.48s to reach 60mph from a stand-still. This assumes constant acceleration so there cannot be a gear change in the process.
This should start to turn on some lights regarding the BS that surrounds 0-60 times and their total irrelevance. Jalopnik recently had a rant on the same which some of you may have read. Google should turn it up pretty readily for those that haven't.
Achieving wonderful 0-60 times is simply now a software programmers wet dream (coupled to a suitable 1st gear). Its all about systems controls to ensure that the max G of the tyre is attained but not overstepped. The result is that the better the programming, the closer the result is to this 2.48s/1.1G ceiling.
FWIW, the current Porsche figures for the 918 are 2.5s for 0-60mph ( a drop of 0.1s from 2.6s I believe?).
This has been matched in pretty much every test I have read (though I will admit that I don't go out of my way to read them) but it is unsurprising that this is the case. It is a tightly controlled experiment each time ones uses LC leaving the driver completely irrelevant. What is of interest of course is that a test doing 5-60mph gave a time slower than the 0-60 time just as it does on all cars like this. In the olden days a test with a rolling start would have yielded a faster time.
The reason for the change goes back to the software point. Once moving, the software does not have ultimate control over all aspects of acceleration, instead having to respond to slip as it occurs and the resultant time it takes to hit 60mph is slower than in the condition where it can control every aspect to a predetermined set of parameters.
As for the 2.2s listed previously, achieving 2.2s is beyond the scope of current road tyres.
Anyways, back to regular transmissions..
fioran0 said:
Late to the party but going back to 0-60 times discussed a page or so back.
Achieving times of around 2.48s is about the limit of 0-60mph tests using road tyres given the totality of the relationship between tyre and road in such things. Achieving a sustained grip level of approx 1.1G give or take really is the limit of road tyres and as such this governs your acceleration value. At 1.1G sustained it will take 2.48s to reach 60mph from a stand-still. This assumes constant acceleration so there cannot be a gear change in the process.
This should start to turn on some lights regarding the BS that surrounds 0-60 times and their total irrelevance. Jalopnik recently had a rant on the same which some of you may have read. Google should turn it up pretty readily for those that haven't.
Achieving wonderful 0-60 times is simply now a software programmers wet dream (coupled to a suitable 1st gear). Its all about systems controls to ensure that the max G of the tyre is attained but not overstepped. The result is that the better the programming, the closer the result is to this 2.48s/1.1G ceiling.
FWIW, the current Porsche figures for the 918 are 2.5s for 0-60mph ( a drop of 0.1s from 2.6s I believe?).
This has been matched in pretty much every test I have read (though I will admit that I don't go out of my way to read them) but it is unsurprising that this is the case. It is a tightly controlled experiment each time ones uses LC leaving the driver completely irrelevant. What is of interest of course is that a test doing 5-60mph gave a time slower than the 0-60 time just as it does on all cars like this. In the olden days a test with a rolling start would have yielded a faster time.
The reason for the change goes back to the software point. Once moving, the software does not have ultimate control over all aspects of acceleration, instead having to respond to slip as it occurs and the resultant time it takes to hit 60mph is slower than in the condition where it can control every aspect to a predetermined set of parameters.
As for the 2.2s listed previously, achieving 2.2s is beyond the scope of current road tyres.
Anyways, back to regular transmissions..
I disagree.. on the 2.2, 0-60Achieving times of around 2.48s is about the limit of 0-60mph tests using road tyres given the totality of the relationship between tyre and road in such things. Achieving a sustained grip level of approx 1.1G give or take really is the limit of road tyres and as such this governs your acceleration value. At 1.1G sustained it will take 2.48s to reach 60mph from a stand-still. This assumes constant acceleration so there cannot be a gear change in the process.
This should start to turn on some lights regarding the BS that surrounds 0-60 times and their total irrelevance. Jalopnik recently had a rant on the same which some of you may have read. Google should turn it up pretty readily for those that haven't.
Achieving wonderful 0-60 times is simply now a software programmers wet dream (coupled to a suitable 1st gear). Its all about systems controls to ensure that the max G of the tyre is attained but not overstepped. The result is that the better the programming, the closer the result is to this 2.48s/1.1G ceiling.
FWIW, the current Porsche figures for the 918 are 2.5s for 0-60mph ( a drop of 0.1s from 2.6s I believe?).
This has been matched in pretty much every test I have read (though I will admit that I don't go out of my way to read them) but it is unsurprising that this is the case. It is a tightly controlled experiment each time ones uses LC leaving the driver completely irrelevant. What is of interest of course is that a test doing 5-60mph gave a time slower than the 0-60 time just as it does on all cars like this. In the olden days a test with a rolling start would have yielded a faster time.
The reason for the change goes back to the software point. Once moving, the software does not have ultimate control over all aspects of acceleration, instead having to respond to slip as it occurs and the resultant time it takes to hit 60mph is slower than in the condition where it can control every aspect to a predetermined set of parameters.
As for the 2.2s listed previously, achieving 2.2s is beyond the scope of current road tyres.
Anyways, back to regular transmissions..
The 918 has almost zero wheel spin on take off. After just one wheel rotation ie 7ft it is at 16mph.
Also in order to achieve this time the 918s G, must achieve a figure above 1.09. The 918 is 1.24g This is due to the required coefficient between the rubber and the road, in order to hit the 2.2, 0-60 time.
I agree that this is on the limit of the application of the tyre..
Yellow491 said:
I agree with apolo for a change.
To achieve more than 1 g from a standing start,you must do less than 2 secs in 64feet to achieve one G.
The modern tyres have come on leaps and bounds in recent years.
The tyre for the 918 was specific for this purpose...The 918 has on demand Launch control in in any one of its 4 drive modes. Even when in e_-mode it is faster over the 1st 100ft than a lexus LFA.To achieve more than 1 g from a standing start,you must do less than 2 secs in 64feet to achieve one G.
The modern tyres have come on leaps and bounds in recent years.
Apart from when in e-mode it has 1280nm of torque, available on take off..in an instant, as above the driver is just a passenger...
APOLO1 said:
I disagree.. on the 2.2, 0-60
The 918 has almost zero wheel spin on take off. After just one wheel rotation ie 7ft it is at 16mph.
Also in order to achieve this time the 918s G, must achieve a figure above 1.09. The 918 is 1.24g This is due to the required coefficient between the rubber and the road, in order to hit the 2.2, 0-60 time.
I agree that this is on the limit of the application of the tyre..
You are fully within your rights to disagree on whether the 2.2seconds 0-60 took place. The car and driver time seems to be an anomaly time wise (as were their other times IIRC). I have yet to hear of anyone else close to 2.2 seconds but as I have already admitted, I am hardly looking or keeping abreast of info. To achieve 2.2 seconds time infers a sustained acceleration G of 1.24G. Quite a feat of grip for road rubber on a road and certainly beyond what would be expected. The 918 has almost zero wheel spin on take off. After just one wheel rotation ie 7ft it is at 16mph.
Also in order to achieve this time the 918s G, must achieve a figure above 1.09. The 918 is 1.24g This is due to the required coefficient between the rubber and the road, in order to hit the 2.2, 0-60 time.
I agree that this is on the limit of the application of the tyre..
http://press.porsche.com/news/release.php?id=787
0-62 in 2.8s
Acceleration therefor 1.01G sustained in this instance.
The road a track tested time of 2.5seconds (and which is in line with what I believe to be Porsches claim of an improved time of 2.6 seconds) provide sustained acceleration values of 1.1G and 1.05G accordingly. Right at the limit of the envelope but certainly not beyond it thats for sure.
The point of it all of course was that its fundamentally all BS since trying to maintain constant limit of traction by yourself (or with regular systems rather than LC) is a different affair. The tremendous feats of acceleration shown in 0-60 times are more a tremendous display of software programming against closed variables. Hardly relevant to driving, and thankfully as far removed from anything about the 996 RS as one can get.
fioran0 said:
APOLO1 said:
I disagree.. on the 2.2, 0-60
The 918 has almost zero wheel spin on take off. After just one wheel rotation ie 7ft it is at 16mph.
Also in order to achieve this time the 918s G, must achieve a figure above 1.09. The 918 is 1.24g This is due to the required coefficient between the rubber and the road, in order to hit the 2.2, 0-60 time.
I agree that this is on the limit of the application of the tyre..
You are fully within your rights to disagree on whether the 2.2seconds 0-60 took place. The car and driver time seems to be an anomaly time wise (as were their other times IIRC). I have yet to hear of anyone else close to 2.2 seconds but as I have already admitted, I am hardly looking or keeping abreast of info. To achieve 2.2 seconds time infers a sustained acceleration G of 1.24G. Quite a feat of grip for road rubber on a road and certainly beyond what would be expected. The 918 has almost zero wheel spin on take off. After just one wheel rotation ie 7ft it is at 16mph.
Also in order to achieve this time the 918s G, must achieve a figure above 1.09. The 918 is 1.24g This is due to the required coefficient between the rubber and the road, in order to hit the 2.2, 0-60 time.
I agree that this is on the limit of the application of the tyre..
http://press.porsche.com/news/release.php?id=787
0-62 in 2.8s
Acceleration therefor 1.01G sustained in this instance.
The road a track tested time of 2.5seconds (and which is in line with what I believe to be Porsches claim of an improved time of 2.6 seconds) provide sustained acceleration values of 1.1G and 1.05G accordingly. Right at the limit of the envelope but certainly not beyond it thats for sure.
The point of it all of course was that its fundamentally all BS since trying to maintain constant limit of traction by yourself (or with regular systems rather than LC) is a different affair. The tremendous feats of acceleration shown in 0-60 times are more a tremendous display of software programming against closed variables. Hardly relevant to driving, and thankfully as far removed from anything about the 996 RS as one can get.
Also the press release that you use is out of date. The electric motors were further optimised early this year, to take into account the use of prismatic lithium in the cells, as opposed to the normal 18355 type on other performance HB cars, the result of this is it will now spin up to 22krpm, along with will now put out 1280nm of torque,on demand.
I am sure that the 918 will repeat the 0-60 time of 2.2, time after time under the right conditions. Has it as already done, In addition to the battery life is now expected to last the entire life of the car..
As you say a solar system away from not just the 996RS, but any other production car......
FYI, Car and Driver have also achieved a 0-60 of 2.2, on a 2 way test...
your turn.......
Edited by APOLO1 on Sunday 20th July 16:54
Electric motor optimisation or anything else has nothing to do with tyre adhesion though. You could have 1 million hp in an electric drive with instantaneous and linear delivery and it still needs to transfer this into drive through rubber to the ground. You can only accelerate at the maximum sustained level of G the tyre will provide and no more. Optimisation of electric motors and systems etc all sound very empowering but to improve the actual performance in a 0-60mph test, this needs a tyre with increased adhesion and a reprogramming to take advantage of the new increased limit.
This is why all cars of this ilk approach the same 0-60 time. The tyres ultimately provides X level of grip, the software enables X level of grip to be attained. Nothing else is particularly relevant.
Sadly this includes the driver and unfortunately, an accurate representation of what can be achieved under conditions where LC is not in control. Not that any of it matters of course.
So it all comes right back to what is possible in terms of sustained acceleration G from the tyre. At 2.2 seconds that equates to 1.24G sustained.
FWIW, the only 2.2s time I have seen is in fact the car and driver one. Have you another published result where the same 2.2s was attained?
This is why all cars of this ilk approach the same 0-60 time. The tyres ultimately provides X level of grip, the software enables X level of grip to be attained. Nothing else is particularly relevant.
Sadly this includes the driver and unfortunately, an accurate representation of what can be achieved under conditions where LC is not in control. Not that any of it matters of course.
So it all comes right back to what is possible in terms of sustained acceleration G from the tyre. At 2.2 seconds that equates to 1.24G sustained.
FWIW, the only 2.2s time I have seen is in fact the car and driver one. Have you another published result where the same 2.2s was attained?
Edited by fioran0 on Sunday 20th July 17:24
fioran0 said:
Electric motor optimisation or anything else has nothing to do with tyre adhesion though. You could have 1 million hp in an electric drive with instantaneous and linear delivery and it still needs to transfer this into drive through rubber to the ground. You can only accelerate at the maximum sustained level of G the tyre will provide and no more. Optimisation of electric motors and systems etc all sound very empowering but to improve the actual performance in a 0-60mph test, this needs a tyre with increased adhesion and a reprogramming to take advantage of the new increased limit.
This is why all cars of this ilk approach the same 0-60 time. The tyres ultimately provides X level of grip, the software enables X level of grip to be attained. Nothing else is particularly relevant.
Sadly this includes the driver and unfortunately, an accurate representation of what can be achieved under conditions where LC is not in control. Not that any of it matters of course.
So it all comes right back to what is possible in terms of sustained acceleration G from the tyre. At 2.2 seconds that equates to 1.24G sustained.
FWIW, the only 2.2s time I have seen is in fact the car and driver one. Have you another published result where the same 2.2s was attained?
Don't wish to sound rude but you talk crap. A certain amount of G is required to achieve a 0-60 of 2.2, Through the optimisation of the e-motor the 918 can achieve this.....This is why all cars of this ilk approach the same 0-60 time. The tyres ultimately provides X level of grip, the software enables X level of grip to be attained. Nothing else is particularly relevant.
Sadly this includes the driver and unfortunately, an accurate representation of what can be achieved under conditions where LC is not in control. Not that any of it matters of course.
So it all comes right back to what is possible in terms of sustained acceleration G from the tyre. At 2.2 seconds that equates to 1.24G sustained.
FWIW, the only 2.2s time I have seen is in fact the car and driver one. Have you another published result where the same 2.2s was attained?
Edited by fioran0 on Sunday 20th July 17:24
Scroll down to the last Car and Driver Part. The time beams don't lie...
http://teamspeed.com/forums/gt/37685-official-team...
Not doing very well on this are you....?
APOLO1 said:
Don't wish to sound rude but you talk crap. A certain amount of G is required to achieve a 0-60 of 2.2, Through the optimisation of the e-motor the 918 can achieve this.....
Scroll down to the last Car and Driver Part. The time beams don't lie...
http://teamspeed.com/forums/gt/37685-official-team...
Not doing very well on this are you....?
You aren't really trying to understand what fioran0 has wrote are you and simply repeating your 2.2 as the uncontestable truth (and i thought you didn't care for magazine reviews gt3 car of the year vote apart....) He is saying the tyres are the limiting factor and no matter what electric motor optimisation has happened, it cannot do more than the tyres.Scroll down to the last Car and Driver Part. The time beams don't lie...
http://teamspeed.com/forums/gt/37685-official-team...
Not doing very well on this are you....?
To repeat his other point, sure car and driver might have achieved a 2.2 but no other magazine test has achieved anything like it which suggest car and driver is an anomaly, probably on the roll out used.
APOLO1 said:
fioran0 said:
Electric motor optimisation or anything else has nothing to do with tyre adhesion though. You could have 1 million hp in an electric drive with instantaneous and linear delivery and it still needs to transfer this into drive through rubber to the ground. You can only accelerate at the maximum sustained level of G the tyre will provide and no more. Optimisation of electric motors and systems etc all sound very empowering but to improve the actual performance in a 0-60mph test, this needs a tyre with increased adhesion and a reprogramming to take advantage of the new increased limit.
This is why all cars of this ilk approach the same 0-60 time. The tyres ultimately provides X level of grip, the software enables X level of grip to be attained. Nothing else is particularly relevant.
Sadly this includes the driver and unfortunately, an accurate representation of what can be achieved under conditions where LC is not in control. Not that any of it matters of course.
So it all comes right back to what is possible in terms of sustained acceleration G from the tyre. At 2.2 seconds that equates to 1.24G sustained.
FWIW, the only 2.2s time I have seen is in fact the car and driver one. Have you another published result where the same 2.2s was attained?
Don't wish to sound rude but you talk crap. A certain amount of G is required to achieve a 0-60 of 2.2, Through the optimisation of the e-motor the 918 can achieve this.....This is why all cars of this ilk approach the same 0-60 time. The tyres ultimately provides X level of grip, the software enables X level of grip to be attained. Nothing else is particularly relevant.
Sadly this includes the driver and unfortunately, an accurate representation of what can be achieved under conditions where LC is not in control. Not that any of it matters of course.
So it all comes right back to what is possible in terms of sustained acceleration G from the tyre. At 2.2 seconds that equates to 1.24G sustained.
FWIW, the only 2.2s time I have seen is in fact the car and driver one. Have you another published result where the same 2.2s was attained?
Edited by fioran0 on Sunday 20th July 17:24
Scroll down to the last Car and Driver Part. The time beams don't lie...
http://teamspeed.com/forums/gt/37685-official-team...
Not doing very well on this are you....?
APOLO1 said:
screwloose said:
I guess I must be the only one that thinks: does it really matter...?
Sorry, its your thread....no not really unless you are into the 918, which like the 930 Turbo was for a while, the worlds fastest accelerating production car.....screwloose said:
I'm not being precious about the thread: I just think it's all semantics that you're discussing of which I would waiver nobody in this thread has the driver skill required to extract or determine therefore rendering it a pointless discussion....IMO of course.
Due to PEM, Porsche electronic traction management, zero driver skill is required,Point Closed....
screwloose said:
I guess I must be the only one that thinks: does it really matter...?
Am I the only one who thinks Apolo is going to do another U turn as soon as Fioran (Neil?) decides to take the bait?It's been said before, it'll be said again, but a bit of humility occasionally old boy.
APOLO1 said:
Don't wish to sound rude but you talk crap. A certain amount of G is required to achieve a 0-60 of 2.2, Through the optimisation of the e-motor the 918 can achieve this.....
Scroll down to the last Car and Driver Part. The time beams don't lie...
http://teamspeed.com/forums/gt/37685-official-team...
Not doing very well on this are you....?
One mans crap is another mans fertilizer I think Titchmarsh once said. Let there be roses where there once was pong.Scroll down to the last Car and Driver Part. The time beams don't lie...
http://teamspeed.com/forums/gt/37685-official-team...
Not doing very well on this are you....?
In actual fact, it doesn't sound like you are grasping what I am trying to say at all. I must assume some responsibility of course since I am the one trying to put forth a point but I think it was clear enough and, with certainty that neither of us care very much, I don't see much value in flogging this horse much further.
Its nothing to do with how much acceleration potential the 918 has. Infact I am sure that the 918, just like the veyron could pull much more sustained acceleration G given appropriate rubber. It would be interesting to put it onto slicks with updated software to allow for the higher grip levels these tyres maintain and see how close to the 1.6G+ potential of the tyre it could get.
The nub of the issue is that in order to achieve the car and driver time of 2.2 seconds the 918 has to accelerate with a sustained G of 1.24G. This means that the tyre has to maintain grip at a sustained level of 1.24G. To achieve this would require the tyre to perform at a level higher than the expected performance level of current street tyres.
What adds to the interest is that all other published times that I have seen, including the ones from Porsche (both original and post update) require tyre performance at levels that very match expectations of tyre performance. The fastest at 2.5 seconds requires 1.09G of sustained acceleration. An incredible feat with out a doubt but not a feat that raises any questions.
Do you understand what I am getting at.
Alpinestars said:
Am I the only one who thinks Apolo is going to do another U turn as soon as Fioran (Neil?) decides to take the bait?
It's been said before, it'll be said again, but a bit of humility occasionally old boy.
No U turn required, been involved on the 918 for the past 3-4 years in at DNA level..It's been said before, it'll be said again, but a bit of humility occasionally old boy.
very naïve comment above taking into account that we are just one model away from...
"My battery wont charge"....."or how fast can I go in e-mode"
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff