911 vs Cobra shootout!

widebody911 · widebody911's Garage

So my boss^2, who's also a track junkie (SCCA, NASA) essentially challenges me to a 0-60 shootout. He has a '99 Cobra, with various go-fast bits on it, ie flowmaster exhaust, some sort of intake, etc, etc.

I weigh about 235, he weighs about 225. All runs were done with the other contestant as a passenger.

The 'judge' was the G-tech.

We took his car out to a back road, did 2 runs; 6.59 and 6.39

We then immediately took my car to the same spot, both of us in the car, and ran 5.45 and 5.40.

So if I suddenly find myself unemployed, you'll know why.

Early_S_Man · 03-12-2002, 11:23 AM

Dammmmmm ...it! I was expecting to see something about a REAL Cobra, like Ol' Shel used to build ... not a pretender on a Fairmont platform!

KTL · 03-12-2002, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by widebody911
.........................He has a '99 Cobra, with various go-fast bits on it, ie flowmaster exhaust, some sort of intake, etc, etc.................

Those go-fast bits are what Ford had to do to the car to shut up the Cobra faithful about the car not producing the factory's claimed 320 HP! I don't think he's done diddly to that thing.

I had a 98 Cobra. It was kinda fun, but definitely no "sportscar."

If you like smoking the tires and a V8 growl, then that's your car. Otherwise, search elsewhere for out-of-the-box fun (a la Porsche).

widebody911 · widebody911's Garage

Fairmont? I thought they were based on the Edsel platform...

Quote:

Originally posted by Early_S_Man
Dammmmmm ...it! I was expecting to see something about a REAL Cobra, like Ol' Shel used to build ... not a pretender on a Fairmont platform!

Kurt B · 03-12-2002, 12:05 PM

Basically a second faster. Very impressive.

Smokin'. I'm surprised that the 'stang did so poorly even with 1 extra person.

With 1 passenger apiece, the difference between the two cars will be even greater as the additional 235 lbs constitutes a greater % increase in weight in your car than it does in his!

NYSCAR · 03-12-2002, 01:48 PM

Strange, a 32V mustang cobra should do better than that...should have been right around where you were (or at least close). The cobras supposedly ran high 5's stock, and much faster with mods. A gtech usually reports a couple of tenths quicker too, so his car *should* have been around 5.4-5.5 if it was running ok.

Brad

WydRyd · 03-12-2002, 02:56 PM

Thom, very impressive figures there. Have you ever gone up against a 930 or C2T?

What about a 993 or 996?

Just curious

widebody911 · widebody911's Garage

Not yet...

A couple of weeks ago I did a 4.91, although my passenger was a 105lb RicerChick.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WydRyd
[B]Thom, very impressive figures there. Have you ever gone up against a 930 or C2T?

What about a 993 or 996?

Just curious

WydRyd · 03-12-2002, 03:23 PM

4.91 ?!?!?!?!?!

That IS fast! Especially WITH another passenger in the car! What do you get alone?

Anything under 5s is just plain FASSSSST in any mans language!

That's my goal with my turbo 3.2 Carrera. If I can get sub 5s with my 380-400HP turbo conversion, I'd be over the moon!

If I can get between 4.0-4.5s, my job is done

PORSHIN · 03-12-2002, 05:06 PM

If you truly are getting 380 to 400 hp in a 911 you should have no trouble AT ALL getting into the mid 4 range...if you can shift it that quick!!! LOL

Bill Douglas · 03-12-2002, 05:16 PM

Good Man! Take him out for a few beers on Friday and tell him how impressive his car is in other ways.

And... If you do suddenly become unemployed we could do with a few more systems engineers out here in the colonies

Kurt B · 03-12-2002, 05:39 PM

Turbo HP isn't going to lower your 0-60 times as much as you think. The higher compression of good HP NA cars will start faster off the line if you get the weight down. And you have to wait for the turbo to kick in.

Now a turbo will come flying after and pass, of course. I'm now of the thinking that you increase NA horsepower and reduce the weight.

The setup he has is an older 911 with already a pretty low weight and a lot of HP. For a heavier car to get the same kind of response is going to require much more HP merely because as you increase the mass and HP, you have to start dealing with tire slippage and will need higher torque just to get it moving off the line as quickly as his does.

WydRyd · 03-12-2002, 05:53 PM

KurtB,

I'm running stock compression of 9.5:1 on my Turbo Carrera. I'm only running 0.7bar, intercooled. This is known as the Protomotive "Stage 1 Upgrade" turbo-system.

Pre-boost acceleration is like a NA Carrera and when boost kicks in, it just feels like a BIG NA engine because lag is hardly noticeable due to the high C/R and pre-boost response.

If I wanna run any higher boost, I then have to decompress my engine and fit 930 P&C's in.

I dont have my car back yet (next week), but other dudes with a similar setup, non-intercooled @ 0.5bar (7psi) dyno at 320-340HP, depending on setup.

JayDarden · 03-12-2002, 07:20 PM

Thom - Not weighing much has its advantages (your car), no comment on your weight.

I once took out a Viper in my 914 - 1/4 mile. A V8 powered teener has a nice lb to hp ratio.

David Bahr · 03-12-2002, 08:44 PM

JayDarden -

Way to go! Show those modern, heavy "sports cars" that it's all about low weight and mid-engine traction. In other words, a 914!

DohcV8 · 03-13-2002, 06:38 AM

I've got a Cobra and a 911 and they're as different as chalk and cheese. The 99 Cobras are generally relatively slow. They had some problems.

The real problem on my live axle Cobra (96) is traction. The Cobra spins it's tires very easily. It's hard to get a clean launch without spinning the tires. Once the tires spin, your run is lost.

If you launch with the revs too low you bog the engine. A good clean start on street tires is done with 1,800 RPM or less to keep traction.

I don't think there's any way I could take your lighter weight 3.6 911 with my Cobra, but I think I could put up a little better showing than your boss. Compared to my own 911SC, the 911 is dog slow.

One of the guys here at work has a 92 C4 cab (very heavy) and I don't think it's any quicker than my Cobra. It just has more traction.

Also, the Ford has a much better shifter and an tranny that Doesn't feel so fragile. It's a lot easier to bang off a quick shift in the Cobra.

jeff91C2T · 03-13-2002, 01:02 PM

I've got a 91 Turbo (with headers and a 1 bar spring). With the G-Tech I ran a couple 4.4 sec's 0 to 60. This was with a 1/2 tank and 100 lb passenger (blonde hottie

).

Getting the launch right was the hardest part. I would slip the clutch just enough so as not to bog the motor. As soon as I had any boost I'd let the clutch out fully and hang on leaving two big black marks through first gear. I probably could do a little better but I didn't want to abuse the car....too much.

On a side note, I ran HP at the same time. Gtech gave me 311 HP. The other day I ran on a dyno and got 313 HP (SAE corrected). Pretty accurate!

WydRyd · 03-13-2002, 02:59 PM

Obviously 313 RWHP? So 368-370HP at the crank!

If you are getting mid 4s with that HP & the C2T's weight (1400kg's I believe), I should be about the same, if not slightly quicker with my lighter 3.2 turbo Carrera! Wooo Hoooooooo!

What width rear tyres are you running Jeff?

I am running 285/30's on 18" rims.

Merv.

stormcrow · stormcrow's Garage

I guess the bottom line is not the HP so much as the Traction and Hp combined together.

Just my thoughts.

Steve

jeff91C2T · 03-13-2002, 04:06 PM

I was running 255 Kumho Victoracers on 17" rims. So smaller rubber but a softer compound.

I think another important area is what torque your making (and how soon). My dyno sheet showed over 300 ftlbs between 3000 and 5500 RPM. I'm at full boost by about 2600 RPM. Probably explains the black marks through first gear!