993C2 Vs 996C2 straight line speed

[bumcrack]

Hi

Now I'm aware this thread could turn into an awful mess. ;)

I’d like to know if there's any difference in straight line speed between the 993C2 and the 996C2 once rolling, I'm not interested in official figures, I mean in the real world.

Has anyone gone head to head from a rolling start?

I'd guess the two cars would be very evenly matched, because you usually need a lot more power and torque to make any significant headway once on the move.

Please try to be objective, this means you sideways and Dom! :soapbox:


Regards

[BCA]

for the 996: 3.4 or 3.6?

[bumcrack]

BCA said:

for the 996: 3.4 or 3.6?

Good point sir!

Both

[BCA]

Actually im not sure that it is, the difference is slight (the 3.6 has more power and torque and the 3.4 is lighter IIRC? 20kilos?) so in the real world theres nowt in it, probably.

[rumplestiltskin]

Any magazine road test figures will have the 996 C2 (3.4 or 3.6) faster than a 993C2, well faster top speed, faster 0-60 & faster 30-70 anyway.
On the road probably not a lot in it, never driven a 993 so cannot comment.
Have had a 3.4 & a 3.6 996 though & if we are just talking performance then the 3.6 feels faster mid range, and is a few mph faster top end (extra power & better aerodynamics) though again in the real world probably not a lot in it at all.

[Thunderfoot]

I've never compared them directly. However, when I had my STi Type R (310ish BHP) I could outrun my friends early 993 C2 at any speed. Not with ease, but was faster non the less.

When I tried it with a 996 (not sure if it was 3.4 or 3.6, only saw the back of it), I lost nothing to 80/90mph then the 996 very slowly edged away.

I've never had a play with a 993 since I've had my 996, but my unscientific experiences have lead my to believe that the 996 is faster on paper and in the real world.

[cyrus1971]

I understand your question but add IMHO it's also how it goes fast, not just how fast it goes. At the upper ends 140mph+ I feel the 993 is more stable in the first 20% of movement, I.E a bump in the road, camber, tramline, but then goes a bit wobbly after that point. The 996 is less planted at the same speed but is consistently that way and so past that first 20% of movement it maintains it's manageability better. Overall is more predictable and hence usable to the non expert (which is definitely me) 996 has more poise to overall.

[spenny_b]

Interestingly, Jethro Bovingdon makes a comparison on "his" newly aquired 993C2 long-termer versus what he's experienced to date, which has been 996 derivatives, in this months Evo.

He does say that the steering doesn't feel quite so responsive, amongst other things, but, the overall impression in his first month with the 993 is extremely positive.

Unable to offer an objective opinion as I haven't driven a 993, in fact my first ever 993 experience (sit-in, passenger, etc) came yesterday courtesy of Mr VS in his TT at Virginia Water (cheers VS, btw!).

[verysideways]

Spence, my pleasure. Have you recovered yet?

[danww]

Sounds to me like a question to resolve at the next VMax.

(The straightline speed one, not the have you recovered yet one)

Dan

[abarber]

In my experience the 996 3.4 is faster than a Varioram G21 993C2 from 5 - 7k, no question. It seems quite a bit less torquey low down and needs a little more revs. This is masked somewhat by the much lower gearing on 996s.

3.6 996 still has softer throttle response, but is quicker everywhere than my 993.

Having said this, 171mph delievered in a *much* more involving manner is fine for me

>> Edited by abarber on Monday 31st October 11:07

[spenny_b]

verysideways said:

Spence, my pleasure. Have you recovered yet?

Haha, er yup...had a very "inspired" run back home thanks Pete!....BTW...the Paragon 993TT has gone already!...it was labelled as "Due In Soon" on Friday!