996 C2 performance figures

[leemarkadams]

Hello all, as you may know am looking at getting a 996 in the near future and am trying to see what the performance figures are for a C2, as there seems to be some conflicting reports. I know 0-60 etc does not mean much but it may help in deciding what car to go for etc

Thanks

Lee

[Phooey]

I remember reading an Autocar article (2002 i think) where they timed the revised C2 to 100 in a sniff over 10 seconds!

[Diesel130]

Fast enough ;-) Will depend on manual vs. tip and 3.4 vs 3.6.

My 3.4 manual is 5.0s to 60 and max of 173mph iirc.

But what is far more interesting (to me) is the instant response of the na engine (compared to previous (non-porsche) turbos I've owned in the past) - and the wonderful steering / brake / gearchange feel.

Edited by Diesel130 on Friday 27th August 09:00

[911perv]

http://www.porschepassion.com/996.htm

[Ian_UK1]

This is the figures page from the Autocar test of a 2002 C2:



Sorry about the quality - if you enlarge the page, it's readable.

[leemarkadams]

Thanks all, just looking at other options too, (Noble M12 being one) and they are quicker on paper, but then again the 996 would be a LOT easier to live with.

Lee

[Phooey]

Ian_UK1 said:

This is the figures page from the Autocar test of a 2002 C2:



Sorry about the quality - if you enlarge the page, it's readable.

That's the one

I can stop looking for my copy now

[Ian_UK1]

Phooey said:

Ian_UK1 said:

This is the figures page from the Autocar test of a 2002 C2:



Sorry about the quality - if you enlarge the page, it's readable.

That's the one

I can stop looking for my copy now

I'm just worried at how sad I am to have found my copy so quickly

Autocar got some incredible figures from that car - it was quicker in almost every important metric than the later gen-1 997S. I always wondered if it was a specially-fettled car - the almost identical-spec '02 C2 I used to have was definitely never that quick.

Ian

[Phooey]

Ian_UK1 said:

Phooey said:

Ian_UK1 said:

This is the figures page from the Autocar test of a 2002 C2:



Sorry about the quality - if you enlarge the page, it's readable.

That's the one

I can stop looking for my copy now

I'm just worried at how sad I am to have found my copy so quickly

Autocar got some incredible figures from that car - it was quicker in almost every important metric than the later gen-1 997S. I always wondered if it was a specially-fettled car - the almost identical-spec '02 C2 I used to have was definitely never that quick.

Ian

Autocar always seem to achieve *incredible* figures for their cars. I had 2 Subaru's - neither felt as quick as Autocar tested them at. I'm not saying they were slow, but i doubt they hit 60 in 4secs!! Certainly not with me driving them

Come to think of it, i do remember having a play off the traffic lights with a 996 C4S about 7 or 8 years ago. He had 2 people in the car, just me in my PPP'd Imprezza, and he licked me . The 996 is a quick car.

[s_mcneil]

Phooey said:

The 996 is a quick car.

And often put down, I love mine...

[JamesG]

Very interesting stats. I love my C2, but there's no way it's as fast as those figures suggest. I owned a Supra Twin Turbo a few years ago that pretty much matched those Autocar figures, and the C2 feels quite a bit slower than that.

[lynchygt3]

this is in my old 3.4 c2 it went to 179 before i lifted as it didnt seem to have anything left, but this is the fastest clear pic we got i know the speedo can be out but it still looks good (6 year ago when the car was 3 year old with 20k on it, stripped out interior with gt3 buckets so a little lighter)

[mark seeker]

s_mcneil said:

Phooey said:

The 996 is a quick car.

And often put down, I love mine...

+1 you forget how hreat they really are, compared to a turbo or a gt3, maybe less so..........but in it's own right..

[Phooey]

JamesG said:

Very interesting stats. I love my C2, but there's no way it's as fast as those figures suggest. I owned a Supra Twin Turbo a few years ago that pretty much matched those Autocar figures, and the C2 feels quite a bit slower than that.

This is interesting - 997 GT3, Harris manages 0-60 in 4.7, 100 in 9.6 ( forward clip to 3:30 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IMWhKciBDs ). Autocar in 2002 recorded the C2 0-60 in 4.6, 100 in 10.1

I still stand by the 996 being a quick car, a C4S licked my PPP'd Impreza from a standing start, but one set of them figures has to be wrong. Could it be modern technology of the equipment used to record this data is more accurate?

[JamesG]

Phooey said:

JamesG said:

Very interesting stats. I love my C2, but there's no way it's as fast as those figures suggest. I owned a Supra Twin Turbo a few years ago that pretty much matched those Autocar figures, and the C2 feels quite a bit slower than that.

This is interesting - 997 GT3, Harris manages 0-60 in 4.7, 100 in 9.6 ( forward clip to 3:30 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IMWhKciBDs ). Autocar in 2002 recorded the C2 0-60 in 4.6, 100 in 10.1

I still stand by the 996 being a quick car, a C4S licked my PPP'd Impreza from a standing start, but one set of them figures has to be wrong. Could it be modern technology of the equipment used to record this data is more accurate?

It's probably best not to read too much into the figures. There's too many variables - measuring equipment, driver, fuel, road temperature, tyre compound, air temperature etc..

In any case, I think it's more important that the C2 is quick enough. As with Diesel130 above, I'm more bothered about the throttle response and steering feel. You can get more power for a lot cheaper than a non-turbo Porsche, but power is just one part of the story.

[Niffty951]

Phooey said:

JamesG said:

Very interesting stats. I love my C2, but there's no way it's as fast as those figures suggest. I owned a Supra Twin Turbo a few years ago that pretty much matched those Autocar figures, and the C2 feels quite a bit slower than that.

This is interesting - 997 GT3, Harris manages 0-60 in 4.7, 100 in 9.6 ( forward clip to 3:30 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IMWhKciBDs ). Autocar in 2002 recorded the C2 0-60 in 4.6, 100 in 10.1

I still stand by the 996 being a quick car, a C4S licked my PPP'd Impreza from a standing start, but one set of them figures has to be wrong. Could it be modern technology of the equipment used to record this data is more accurate?

"I got quite a lot of wheel spin off the line there, I think you could knock 3-4 10ths off that 0-60 time" - Chris Harris in the GT3 when doing 4.7s

Also for my 2 pence on this thread. I owned an early 996 turbo, which I did a few bits to (gt3 linkage, 997 turbo brakes, gt2 intercoolers, re-map etc) after this I spent a long time feeling I couldn't own a 'lesser' M96 engined 996. I felt like the only way was to wait until I could get into a GT3.. but as prices continued to go the wrong way for a non owner and 996/997 base model prices continued to tumble I finally found them too tempting not to buy.

I can honestly now say what a fool was I to try getting my kicks in non P cars. My current 996 C2 absolutely stands on it's own as an ownership experience, it can't be compared to the turbo at all for despite the looks it is a completely different car to own and drive.

The car is just so perfectly judged in terms of it's performance. The brakes, grip, power are just so perfectly in tune that no one feature of the car dominates the experience and they all work together to form a kind of driving nirvana that is such a pleasure to enjoy on an open road.

Sure the giggle worthy explosion of torque that lights up the wheels out of a 3rd gear bend and pins you to the seat or shrinks anything the instant they pull over are not the same as the turbo, but it is replaced by a soundtrack and gearing to die for as you work up and down the gears ringing out those high revs. Lack of power has never felt an issue in the car it's still capable of eating roads and straights at a pace few cars ever could hang onto and because you don't have to scrub off speed quite so often you find yourself finding a flow more often.

You can just lift the throttle to rebalance the car for most bends and stomp on it through the apex enjoying aural extacy as you exit feeling the weight settled firmly on the outside rear.

The suspension is softer than the turbo/C4s setup too and where the stiffer cars feel like they are on rails, almost unstickable and always egging you on for more. The softer standard car gives more feedback to the drivers backside. You get a greater feeling of the weight moving around and feel more like you are the one doing the work 'taming the beast'. It's still very flattering and confidence inspiring compared to something like a quick BMW, not edgy at all and forgiving beyond the limit if you do get a little oversteer moment but you feel absolutely like you are involved in the process. An integral part of the speed you extract.

The steering after modern electric systems is worth shedding a tear of joy for. If only we appreciated this when it was the normal. I know instantly if the tarmac I've just arrived at has more or less grip than the last, even without turning the wheel or loading up the tyres in a turn. It is beautiful.

I think as an overall experience my back to basics 3.6 C2 may be one of my favourite, if not my favourite drive I've ever owned.

[p4cks]

It's a ten year old thread

[Niffty951]

p4cks said:

It's a ten year old thread

Was

[IceBoy]

I don't think the 996.1 c2 manual coupe could do a 4.6 unless you fully dump the clutch and then not using the clutch for snatching 2nd.

They are quick even by modern day standard and if 0-60 is important then I would say it is a 4.9-5.1 sec car to 60.

1317 kg is fairly lightweight.

Iceboy

[jimPH]

Seconds were longer ten years ago