The Base Taycan is a gem... drove it and was blown away

[Rik_CT4s]

Do you do runs with traction control off to develop your own skill at controlling wheelspin and see how much difference it makes?

Otherwise, as long as the car has surplus power, it will just be about tyre and road surface and how well the guy who programmed the car's traction control managed the slip limit.

I generally turn traction off when doing a launch control but very limited wheel spin generally. The 4wd does the work.

Sponsored

 

[Jenner]

I optioned up PDCC in my Turbo S – but I wasn't aware it was a forced option in any markets?

You are correct. I see now that it is an option now on the Turbo S on the current US configurator.

Not sure exactly when that changed. I had a very early allocation for the initial Taycan release and never pulled the trigger due to forced & unavailable options issues.

Back then PDCC was included with the Turbo S and all models (in the US) had the glass roof forced as well as a few other options and there were several options unavailable for instance the 22kw on board charger and no PEC delivery.

 

[Rik_CT4s]

More dragy’s pls, just LC and let Dragy do the talking. curious if the RWD can get below 5sec.

Very likely it will.
I got my 4s CT on 3.8s on relatively wet surface AND with winter tire set up on 20 inch.
Factory claim is 4.1s...well below that. I would assume the base will perform better than the 5.1s as claimed.

 

[f1eng]

I generally turn traction off when doing a launch control but very limited wheel spin generally. The 4wd does the work.

Do you mean when flooring the throttle from a standstill?

Engaging the actual launch control function automatically engages optimum TC for launch so you wouldn’t expect wheelspin, just optimised slip % calculated by the computer.
4WD on its own has no way to optimise wheel slip % so it can’t “work” as you put it.

 

[Rik_CT4s]

Do you mean when flooring the throttle from a standstill?

Engaging the actual launch control function automatically engages optimum TC for launch so you wouldn’t expect wheelspin, just optimised slip % calculated by the computer.
4WD on its own has no way to optimise wheel slip % so it can’t “work” as you put it.

I put it wrongly/not clear....your explanation is spot on. Thanks for clarifying.
Same for me on the RS5. Also a 4WD and on launch mode no wheelspin generally.

 

[slothinker]

Even though I’m sure I can live with the base Taycan, there’s a part of me that would think I paid to much for a car that SHOULD be faster than cars from 1990 from a dead stop, but that’s just me

I'm wondering what cars were that much faster in 1990 ... here's info on the 1990 911 .. I think it was one of the fastest stock cars that year (or any year):

"Complete performance review and accelerations chart for Porsche 911 Carrera 2 Cabriolet (man. 5) in 1990, the model with 2-door convertible body and Boxer-6 3600 cm3 / 220.2 cui, 184 kW / 250 PS / 247 hp (ECE) engine for Europe . According to ProfessCars™ estimation this Porsche is capable of accelerating from 0 to 60 mph in 5.7 sec, from 0 to 100 km/h in 6 sec, from 0 to 160 km/h (100 mph) in 14 sec, from 0 to 200 km/h (124 mph) in 24.3 sec and the quarter mile drag time is 14.2 sec. Below we present more detailed data of the factory claimed performance and the ProfessCars™ estimation, including all detailed acceleration times, with comprehensive graphic illustration, top speed, accelerations on gears, speed vs rpm and overtaking times."

 

[Redhot2474]

I'm wondering what cars were that much faster in 1990 ... here's info on the 1990 911 .. I think it was one of the fastest stock cars that year (or any year):

"Complete performance review and accelerations chart for Porsche 911 Carrera 2 Cabriolet (man. 5) in 1990, the model with 2-door convertible body and Boxer-6 3600 cm3 / 220.2 cui, 184 kW / 250 PS / 247 hp (ECE) engine for Europe . According to ProfessCars™ estimation this Porsche is capable of accelerating from 0 to 60 mph in 5.7 sec, from 0 to 100 km/h in 6 sec, from 0 to 160 km/h (100 mph) in 14 sec, from 0 to 200 km/h (124 mph) in 24.3 sec and the quarter mile drag time is 14.2 sec. Below we present more detailed data of the factory claimed performance and the ProfessCars™ estimation, including all detailed acceleration times, with comprehensive graphic illustration, top speed, accelerations on gears, speed vs rpm and overtaking times."

Vipers, corvette zr1, Lotus esprit, Supras, all had under 5 sec 0-60’s…

 

[tchavei]

I remember the Ford cosworth rs doing 6 sec 0-100km/h if not mistaken.

My fiat uno 45s did 18s from 0-100km at that time. What an animal that car was.

 

[slothinker]

Vipers, corvette zr1, Lotus esprit, Supras, all had under 5 sec 0-60’s…

ok, the 1990 911 was a slug

 

[slothinker]

ok, the 1990 911 was a slug

My other car did this in '91:

6.4 sec

quarter mile: 14.8 sec @ 94 mph

 

[Throb]

Factory claim is 4.1s...well below that. I would assume the base will perform better than the 5.1s as claimed.

It's actually 5.4 claimed, but this is most likely because the person you were replying to is using the 0-60 mph time for the U.S., and the European figures are based on 0-100 km/h, which is 62 mph.

5.4 seconds is clearly nonsense, based on my own experience. I haven't timed it, but I'm confident it's 4.9 or below.

 

[Raphie]

That’s why Dragy is worthwhile, it takes the out ambiguity, guessing and assumptions.
the screens don’t lie.

 

[f1eng]

https://dragymotorsports.com/

Have you tried the Porsche Track Precision app?

Don’t know if it much good but at least it isn’t constrained to only look at straight line from a standstill which is mainly of interest to drivers in countries where drag racing is a “thing” I would have thought.

 

[kempez]

And also, pretty sure 'getting track accurate data' is something you only need on an actual track. Public roads aren't race tracks. I get the odd pull of a line is great fun, and a nice quiet road is just brilliant, but if you really want to free the car and drive it fast, the track is the only place to do it.

 

[f1eng]

ok, the 1990 911 was a slug

I don’t think drag racing was high on the priorities of the engineers designing the 911 (though it may have been high in the priorities of the marketing dept of Porsche North America)

Mind you I was very keen on the 993 styling and tried one and it did accelerate a bit slow compared to the 300kg+ lighter TVR Griffith I owned at the time

Edit:
I should add that around here we have relatively narrow roads with only a few straights long enough for safe overtaking so instant throttle response and acceleration is what I was looking for. I was not concerned with acceleration from a standstill but from, say 40 to 70. Weight and wide power band seemed to be the most important for this to avoid wasted time changing gear.

Sponsored