RE: RUF R-Turbo
Thursday 20th December 2001
RUF R-Turbo
520bhp and you could still drive it to work!
Discussion
I thought a linear power delivery was good, and vice versa? that is, if you put your foot down a certain amount, you get a certain amount of engine response, a bit more, a bit more response. linear. it makes for predictability, and as with handling i thought the goal was a predictable car, because then you can dance at it's limits.
but from this review i get the impression the power delivery is anything but linear, a massive boost coming on after a period of relative normalacy. isn't that just like the first porsche turbo 20 years ago, one big turbo charger and lots of lag?
so how is non linearity - or turbo lag - good?
but from this review i get the impression the power delivery is anything but linear, a massive boost coming on after a period of relative normalacy. isn't that just like the first porsche turbo 20 years ago, one big turbo charger and lots of lag?
so how is non linearity - or turbo lag - good?
Uh, right. Perhaps I didn't explain myself properly...
The R-Turbo gives you two hits of linearity: one at lower revs, and then another one higher up the rev range. The transition between the two is seamless.
This is not dissimilar from the standard Carrera. When the cams come on song, the car accelerates faster, but still in a smooth and predictable way. The only thing you notice is that you must ease up on the pedal.
In the R-Turbo, it's the same feeling, except 100X as powerful. You do get a Turbo blast, but it's not like nitrous or the old 911 Turbo. It comes in predictably. It leaves predictably. But it still blows your mind.
It's the best of both worlds IMHO.
www.thetruthaboutcars.com
The R-Turbo gives you two hits of linearity: one at lower revs, and then another one higher up the rev range. The transition between the two is seamless.
This is not dissimilar from the standard Carrera. When the cams come on song, the car accelerates faster, but still in a smooth and predictable way. The only thing you notice is that you must ease up on the pedal.
In the R-Turbo, it's the same feeling, except 100X as powerful. You do get a Turbo blast, but it's not like nitrous or the old 911 Turbo. It comes in predictably. It leaves predictably. But it still blows your mind.
It's the best of both worlds IMHO.
www.thetruthaboutcars.com
Sounds a lot like the 959 in this respect-hardly surprising given the spec. The 959 has an amazing combination of slow traffic tractability and near 200mph performance. Turbo lag doesn't really come into it, you're just aware of a point in the rev range where the turbos really want to play and, of course, there's no possibility of the turbos' shove throwing you off the road, it's far to composed for that.
It's a shame Ruf don't reduce the (considerable) weight of the 996. The 959 manages sub 4 seconds to 60 and 197mph with 70bhp less than the R-turbo.
It's a shame Ruf don't reduce the (considerable) weight of the 996. The 959 manages sub 4 seconds to 60 and 197mph with 70bhp less than the R-turbo.
weight doesn't affect top speed, only acceleration.
Did the 959 have the engine in the middle somehow? That's the one thing I can't get around with Porsches - the engine is in the wrong place. It's like they've never heard of the idea of moment of inertia. The fact that the customer base of Porsche won't have the engine in any other place (for the "real" porsche) shows the level of technical sophistication of the average Porsche driver, in my opinion. Stick that lovely flat 6 in front of the rear axle (if you need to make it shorter to fit use a Scotch Yoke mechanism), ditch the useless rear seats to get the space but keep the overall shape which is quite nice.
They can still say the engine is "in the rear" and the average Porsche driver will be none the wiser. Oh, that and lose about 500 kgs. Wait a minute, I might as well buy a Lotus then. Good idea!
Did the 959 have the engine in the middle somehow? That's the one thing I can't get around with Porsches - the engine is in the wrong place. It's like they've never heard of the idea of moment of inertia. The fact that the customer base of Porsche won't have the engine in any other place (for the "real" porsche) shows the level of technical sophistication of the average Porsche driver, in my opinion. Stick that lovely flat 6 in front of the rear axle (if you need to make it shorter to fit use a Scotch Yoke mechanism), ditch the useless rear seats to get the space but keep the overall shape which is quite nice.
They can still say the engine is "in the rear" and the average Porsche driver will be none the wiser. Oh, that and lose about 500 kgs. Wait a minute, I might as well buy a Lotus then. Good idea!
quote:
weight doesn't affect top speed, only acceleration.
This we know...
The 959 is, of course, rear engined and like all recent 911 derivatives is a triumph of development over design. Rarely will a reviewer even comment on the supposed instability of the 911, an overhyped problem in the first place and certainly not an issue now.
"The fact that the customer base of Porsche won't have the engine in any other place ... shows the level of technical sophistication of the average Porsche driver, in my opinion"
Bill Gates had the 959 federalised...
I'll leave the last word to Derek Bell (C&SC June 2000) "it is the only car here that you would be able to drive exactly the same in the wet as the dry. That's how incredible good four wheel drives are...you can brake into a roundabout and you know it's going round without the tail wandering out at the back"
In the final analysis in this article the 959 was damned for being too good, ie not the demanding, tempremental "true supercar"
The modern cars tested were the F40, F1, 360 and 959.
As you touch upon, one of the main reasons why the engine is in the rear of a 911 is for packaging... rear seat passengers can sit over the cylinder barrels.
I think this accounts for a lot of the 911's appeal - you can get a couple of kids in if you have to, whereas an Esprit will always cause problems.
Other elements of appeal are:
- the pure character of the 911, which has been unmatched by the relatively anodyne 968, Boxster, 944, 928 etc.
- the unique handling characteristics, which can be used to good effect in terms of early power application out of a corner and standing start traction - despite the overall 'ill effects'.
Also, to claim that the average Porsche owner lack technical understanding is only part true. Porsche is a mass market brand in the sports car world, and in all honesty, a bloody good one. It probably makes ten times the cars that TVR does, and with this lack of 'exclusivity' comes a broader customer base (accountants, yuppies etc) who may not be car enthusiasts. Talk to one of these people and your opinion will be confirmed - they had an Audi, just been promoted, got a Porsche, like waving the key ring about etc. Maybe they'll even say that the only true Porsche is a 911 because they heard Tiff Needell say it once in a soundbite.
However, the 'average Porsche owner' contributing to this site is likely to be an enthusiast, and won't come out with bollocks like that. As they will be the average Porsche owners reading, the comment could be seen as being a bit inflammatory ;-))
Edited by domster on Thursday 20th December 13:08
I think this accounts for a lot of the 911's appeal - you can get a couple of kids in if you have to, whereas an Esprit will always cause problems.
Other elements of appeal are:
- the pure character of the 911, which has been unmatched by the relatively anodyne 968, Boxster, 944, 928 etc.
- the unique handling characteristics, which can be used to good effect in terms of early power application out of a corner and standing start traction - despite the overall 'ill effects'.
Also, to claim that the average Porsche owner lack technical understanding is only part true. Porsche is a mass market brand in the sports car world, and in all honesty, a bloody good one. It probably makes ten times the cars that TVR does, and with this lack of 'exclusivity' comes a broader customer base (accountants, yuppies etc) who may not be car enthusiasts. Talk to one of these people and your opinion will be confirmed - they had an Audi, just been promoted, got a Porsche, like waving the key ring about etc. Maybe they'll even say that the only true Porsche is a 911 because they heard Tiff Needell say it once in a soundbite.
However, the 'average Porsche owner' contributing to this site is likely to be an enthusiast, and won't come out with bollocks like that. As they will be the average Porsche owners reading, the comment could be seen as being a bit inflammatory ;-))
Edited by domster on Thursday 20th December 13:08
!!!In retrospect i was needlessly goading. Not sure about the Bill Gates reference though ...
Porsches are great cars, I just think they are somewhat trapped by their customers. Do many people *really* use the rear seat? It would greatly improve the driving dynamics to move that engine in front of the rear axle. It's already a boxer, so it's got a nice low center of gravity, so its a shame to see the car let down by the engine positioning. They also aren't very innovative when it comes to chassis design, standard steel monocoque. Not my cup of tea I guess, but a great car nonetheless.
Porsches are great cars, I just think they are somewhat trapped by their customers. Do many people *really* use the rear seat? It would greatly improve the driving dynamics to move that engine in front of the rear axle. It's already a boxer, so it's got a nice low center of gravity, so its a shame to see the car let down by the engine positioning. They also aren't very innovative when it comes to chassis design, standard steel monocoque. Not my cup of tea I guess, but a great car nonetheless.
stevenrt
This is what the Boxster is all about.
Mid-engined, two seat practicality and fantastic handling.
What annoys me is that Porsche hamstring the wonderful car by not giving it the grunt that it puts into its 911s.
I HAD a 911 (wonderful but old) and it WAS great but its handling was certainly "unique". I suppose thats the attraction - and its not a bad thing. You just have to want thet car to be like that...
Personally I'd enjoy a RUF Boxster more.
At the moment that is...
This is what the Boxster is all about.
Mid-engined, two seat practicality and fantastic handling.
What annoys me is that Porsche hamstring the wonderful car by not giving it the grunt that it puts into its 911s.
I HAD a 911 (wonderful but old) and it WAS great but its handling was certainly "unique". I suppose thats the attraction - and its not a bad thing. You just have to want thet car to be like that...
Personally I'd enjoy a RUF Boxster more.
At the moment that is...
quote:
In retrospect i was needlessly goading.
All good fun
quote:
Not sure about the Bill Gates reference though ...
Well no, I wasn't convinced but the person who told me this was head of US customer relations for Porsche throughout the 80s, so I'm forced to give it some credence...
quote:
Porsches are great cars, I just think they are somewhat trapped by their customers.
Mmm, for every one enthusiast there do seem to be ten poseurs. I suppose all these sales (and its more like 200x those of TVR) pay for the awesome level of integrity inherent in Porsche products (though what the Cayenne's about goodness knows !)
quote:
It would greatly improve the driving dynamics to move that engine in front of the rear axle. It's already a boxer, so it's got a nice low center of gravity, so its a shame to see the car let down by the engine positioning.
Its become a trademark and has been engineered round so effectively that to throw away the heritage of the most famous model would be madness.
quote:
They also aren't very innovative when it comes to chassis design, standard steel monocoque.
Quite true, even the 959 is a steel monocoque underneath the composites. There's an argument for "if it aint broke..." but I'd like to see some innovation (perhaps more composite panels, the 996's getting a little lardy)
I went to have a look at it. Shame it's LHD and its previous owner felt the need to raid Halfords for the bodywork and stickers. It also seemed too cheap, which worried me, for a Boxster+12k in other costs. The origin of the engine seemed a little vague too !
Gruppo Stolla have built a 996 turbo engined Boxster-now that would be fun- but they're not building any more
I'm erring towards a 993 C2 (poss. LHD) to use as a trackday car.
Gruppo Stolla have built a 996 turbo engined Boxster-now that would be fun- but they're not building any more
I'm erring towards a 993 C2 (poss. LHD) to use as a trackday car.
You are aware that RUF's 3400S Boxster has a 3.4 litre 996 engine? (See: review) They have a lhd demonstrator with a few miles on the clock that you could pitch for. It's the one in the pictures, and there's nothing dodgy about it.
Also, RUF is working on the dream 911 wished for here: a 3.6 litre, twin-turbo car with the engine mounted midships. It will look like a shark, whatever that means.
It's also rumoured that Porsche's new 911, the 997, will use the Cayenne's V8, mounted in the traditional place. That would mean at least a 3.4 for the Boxster, probably appearing when they launch the hardtop.
Also, sources say the 997 will not look like a Carrera! That makes sense: the shape is about as clean as it can get without turning into a suppository.
Exciting days! But a Porsche pickup? Gag.
www.thetruthaboutcars.com
Also, RUF is working on the dream 911 wished for here: a 3.6 litre, twin-turbo car with the engine mounted midships. It will look like a shark, whatever that means.
It's also rumoured that Porsche's new 911, the 997, will use the Cayenne's V8, mounted in the traditional place. That would mean at least a 3.4 for the Boxster, probably appearing when they launch the hardtop.
Also, sources say the 997 will not look like a Carrera! That makes sense: the shape is about as clean as it can get without turning into a suppository.
Exciting days! But a Porsche pickup? Gag.
www.thetruthaboutcars.com
Has Porsche lost the plot? Whats going on? The new 997 that doesn't look like a carrera, V8's instead of the famous flat 6, off roaders etc. What next? Perhaps a people carrier. It looks like Porsche will stop at nothing to expand into America at the expense of all else.
I'm going to buy the very best 993 turbo I can find in the summer. I think people will look back on these cars in years to come as the best, and sadly the last, from a great era.
I'm going to buy the very best 993 turbo I can find in the summer. I think people will look back on these cars in years to come as the best, and sadly the last, from a great era.
quote:
I need to contact someone on the Gumball rally TODAY for a short piece on the subject. If you can help, please e-mail cgreenhouse@sfreporter.com or call (505) 988-5541, ext. 219. Thanks much!
Cheers,
Carol Greenhouse
Staff Writer
Santa Fe Reporter
Well that gets today's award for the most random post
Well somebody has it right!
Quote:
I'm going to buy the very best 993 turbo I can find in the summer. I think people will look back on these cars in years to come as the best, and sadly the last, from a great era.
My Ruf Turbo R is definitely the best choice for me! I have driven my Ruf ninety miles through the Nevada in less than 29 minutes.The car has more than 150 runs above 205 mph and continues to function as a daily driver.The Ruf factory has been incredibly supportive.Alois takes great delight in my open road racing hobby which is 100% legal.Take a peek at openroadracing.com for details.
Cheers,
R
Quote:
I'm going to buy the very best 993 turbo I can find in the summer. I think people will look back on these cars in years to come as the best, and sadly the last, from a great era.
My Ruf Turbo R is definitely the best choice for me! I have driven my Ruf ninety miles through the Nevada in less than 29 minutes.The car has more than 150 runs above 205 mph and continues to function as a daily driver.The Ruf factory has been incredibly supportive.Alois takes great delight in my open road racing hobby which is 100% legal.Take a peek at openroadracing.com for details.
Cheers,
R
I do love the air cooled beast but have recently moved my goalposts in favour of the GT3. My reasoning was based on a slight concern (possibly irrational) over the very complicated nature of the turbo. Upgrades aside, they're almost identical to 100. With the GT3 I wouldn't have to worry about the following components wearing out and requiring expensive replacement: the twin turbos, intercooler, extra plumbing of oil coolers etc, the first gear issues, extra stress on clutch, centre & front differential, front CV joints etc. Am I being overly safe?
Also it seems the GT3, as in the previous RS models, will hold it's value better than any other 911. Might change my mind if I feel more reckless nearer the time though....
>> Edited by Roadrunner on Tuesday 7th May 10:20
quote:
Hi,
That was a quote from me. Do love the air cooled beast but have recently moved my goalposts in favour of the GT3. My reasoning was based on a slight concern (possibly irrational) over the very complicated nature of the turbo. Upgrades aside, they're almost identical to 100. With the GT3 I wouldn't have to worry about the following components wearing out and requiring expensive replacement: the twin turbos, intercooler, extra plumbing of oil coolers etc, the first gear issues, extra stress on clutch, centre & front differential, front CV joints etc. Am I being overly safe?
Also it seems the GT3, as in the previous RS models, will hold it's value better than any other 911. Might change my mind if I feel more reckless nearer the time though....
Hi Roadrunner
I have driven the GT3 and have the 996 Turbo the Turbo is so much faster than the GT3, if you can afford the extra 20k go for the Turbo you wont't regret it, if you do get the GT3 you will enjoy it anyway a win win.
Thx
Lee.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff