INTERESTING

[Davey S2]

Just got home to find the new issue of EVO on the doormat.

They have a big test of a Mitsubishi Evo IX, The new 997 Turbo and the Carrera GT. Part of the test is at Bruntingthorpe.

It looks like they didnt have the same type of speed traps as we use, more likely data loggers in each car and the braking point at the end of the runway was just when the driver 'bottled it' but they logged the following speeds:

Mitsubishi Evo IX - 153.5
997 Turbo - 178.3
Carerra GT - 184.6

Not particularly impressive to be honest. Lots of the pokers at VMAX would have posted higher speeds than the 997 and the RUF cars higher than the Carrera GT.

No real way to tell unless those cars ever turned up at VMAX of course but makes interesting reading given the speeds we see at each event.

997 Turbo at £100K suddenly seems expensive compared with a used 996 Turbo X50 at about £40K less

Edited by Davey S2 on Monday 3rd July 19:00

[Podie]

I think it's the relative of the Vmax drivers that get a bit more out of the Porkers

[Davey S2]

Podie said:

I think it's the relative of the Vmax drivers that get a bit more out of the Porkers

I dont think that you can claim the EVO boys are shy of driving the cars they get their hands on to their full potential.

The CGT was the yellow long termer and its owner was there with the car but it looks like that got given the full beans as well.

BTW they did standing starts from the start of the 2 mile straight but that has been proved not to make any difference to the top speed compared with running through the corner.

[nel]

They can't have used anything like the runway length used at VMax if that's all the GT could give! Mind you, I am surprised at the small difference between the 997 turbo speed and that of the GT - a demonstration of the variable geometry turbo technology I guess!

[Podie]

Sorry, was a tongue in cheek comment.

Think it was established early on that the corner didn't add anything - except for more fun....

[superlightr]

and the new 997tt has the same time as a standard 996tt....

[trackdemon]

I'm certain that EVO place their traps further up the runway, no other explanation for the low(ish) speeds...

[markbe]

The 997tt givs similar performance to the Gt2,so it is there abouts.
The CGT has a higher cd than the 911 so would expect it to be slower than the Rufs which have better Power to Weight ratios.
But Remember if they had a reasonable head wind their speeds look about right.

Mark.

[Davey S2]

trackdemon said:

I'm certain that EVO place their traps further up the runway, no other explanation for the low(ish) speeds...

Pretty sure Evo uses portable data loggers which are inside the car as opposed to the traps we use.

[markbe]

trackdemon said:

I'm certain that EVO place their traps further up the runway, no other explanation for the low(ish) speeds...

They aint got no Balls,like us Vmaxers have.

Craig,invite them to the next Vmax.

Mark

Edited by markbe on Wednesday 5th July 14:12

[trackdemon]

Davey S2 said:

trackdemon said:

I'm certain that EVO place their traps further up the runway, no other explanation for the low(ish) speeds...

Pretty sure Evo uses portable data loggers which are inside the car as opposed to the traps we use.

Even more so then, I'll bet they are more conservative without markers (not that the beams are radically far up the numway for vmax)