greg schroeder

I didn't want to bring up the other giant turbo, front mount IC, full exhaust, 1600cc secondary, PFC, FD I raced three times that same night because I figured I would be tortured here worse about that series of races than I have about the 911 turbo. I realize with all of the mods of the other car, when dialed in, it would beat my car. We did race three times from about 55mph or 60mph. I'm assuming he was able to select the starting gear, but may have missed third for all three races. I pulled from the punch and before the shift either way.



The other guy was very nice and pleasant to talk with previous to the three races. Perhaps next time I will get my butt kicked.



That same night I also followed out three 750ish HP Supras and a new Viper. The Supras kicked my butt as well as the new Viper.

greg schroeder

No offence taken. My information is accurate and the account of the race is accurate.



The 911 turbo lost three times. The times you offer about the 911 turbo are from magazines, with cars suplied by Porsche, with most often a Porsche factory driver, and represent near optimum driving conditions. Also, if you were to take the time to read the data in the Porsche link I provided, you would see the regular 911 turbo with auto(triptronic) only does a 4.9 second 0-60, and that's according to Porsche. That's the same time as what Mazda offered for the FD stock in 1993. If you look closer at the Porsche site you would also see the weight per HP is to the advantage of my slightly modified FD over even the regular 911 turbo with even the manual. Do the math.



The X50 package for the 911 turbo is 450HP instead of 420HP. That's fly wheel HP. Take time to review the regular 911 turbo information from Autothority for wheel HP data. I posted the link in one of my previous posts. The regular 911 turbo is putting down 330HP. If a slightly modified FD loose to a Porsche 911 turbo it probably isn't running right.



The guy I raced was in his mid 30s and was racing. It was obvious by the waving, and general body language.



The track is not the best tool for determining rolling punch information of who might win a street race. There's huge variation relative to 60ft times at the track. I have been to the track however, as well as use my gtech meter. Stock FDs that run correctly with cool intake temps run about 13.9 at 101mph with an average launch and good shifts. If yours doesn't it probably doesn't run right or you're loosing time somewhere. Slightly modified FDs are capable of high to mid 12s.



As I stated in my pervious post above, my friend has a 911 turbo with X 50 package. That's the 450HP Porsche upgrade. We tested it using my same gtech meter that reads, under good driving conditions, mid 12 1/4s and 4.2 second 0-60s for me. The Porsche didn't break a 13 second 1/4 and its best 0-60 of two runs was 5.18 on a very hot day with the two of us in the car. (poor testing conditions) My friend races Formula Mazda for kicks, so I'm assuming he is able to drive.



My name isn't Jose. LOL

Triniwarrior31

I believe you man , after all that explaining.

FudD

i bet it was a carrera 4s..........same body mods as the turbo minus the wing. be capable of a mid 13 sec pass and carrying all that AWD equipment down the interstate



oh and a new 911 is quicker to 100 than a viper that you lost too



sorry man, i dont mean to rain on your parade but i have a dp and the same cat back and i know im not gonna stand a chance against something as big and bad as a 911 turbo

BigTurbo74

haha this **** is funny

greg schroeder

I don't recall saying I lost to a new Viper. I do recal posting that a new Viper was dropped by 750HP Supras just like I was while driving on the freeway. I did cruise beside this new Viper and punched it from about 60mph while all the freeway punch activity was going on. I'm not sure if he was racing, but he didn't pull ahead of me. Maybe he was breaking in his new engine.



No, the 911 turbo is not faster to 100 mph than a Viper. A Porsche manufacture supplied 911 turbo with X50 upgrade package, driven by a professional driver with 5000 rpm clutch dump for a Road and Track magazine article was. The regular 911 turbo is slower than the new Viper as well as being slower than the 911 turbo X50. The regular 911 turbo with auto(triptronic) is heavier and slower yet.



The car I raced three times was a 911 turbo with the hole in the upper rear fenders in addition to the lower vents behind the rear wheels. The 911 S4 does not have the upper hole, but does have the lower rear vents. I have no idea if the car I raced was the X50, if it was manual, or if it was triptronic. It was a 911 turbo.

Rotorfreak

I say just one thing... I love it when someone tells me a car same as mine can take a Porsche.... Oh by the way i have the Bathurst edition... Named because it took the Porsche at the track in Australia... That too for three years i think... if my information is not wrong.... please don't flame me... i mean i might be wrong... i don't even know if the Porsches the FD raced at BATHURST were turbo or not....



But i have seen amazing things happening...

MonsterMR2

It still amazes me, that people see a certain car in a magazine, run really good number's, and assume it's %100 the car. Sure, ANY Porsche turbo is fast, even with a poor driver, but don't expect to run magazine quoted number's.



Without proof, there will alway's be people who will question you. If you did beat a 996turbo, good job. If you didn't, I could care less.