Gallardo VS 996TT | LamborghiniChat

Gallardo VS 996TT

Discussion in 'Lamborghini Discussion (not model specific)' started by G-force, Apr 29, 2004.

  1. taken from RENNTEAM.COM:
    The Lambo Gallardo vs. Porsche 996 Turbo as tested by AutoBild Test & Tuning.

    V10 500 hp vs. Boxer 6 420 hp.

    Just look at the difference up to 250 km/h!

    Gallardo 996 Turbo

    0 - 100 4.5 4.6 seconds
    0 - 130 6.5 7.0
    0 - 200 13.8 15.0
    0 - 250 23.0 27.0

    100 - 200 9.3 10.4

    100 - 0 36.8 36.2 meters (warm)
    200 - 0 144.9 144.3 meters (warm)

    Price: 139.200 128.676 (list)
    148.480 130.765 (as tested)

    Oschersleben Track:

    Gallardo: 1:45:20

    996 Turbo: 1:47:40

    Post Extras:

    Pages: 1
  2. To remove this ad click here.

  3. Great stuff Wayne!!Now get one of those WINGS on it.
  4. .,the zero to 100km times seem very slow in both cars..i would expect4.0-4.1-4.2.....
  5. People get waaaaaaaaay too hung up on that particular measurement. It's irrelevant really, since it all comes down to traction and weather conditions.

    Much prefer to see the high speed performance of both cars, which that post has tons of.

    Good post Wayne, nice to see the Gallardo stomping on that 911.
  6. I agree re the over-emphasis on 0-60. If you have any mechanical sympathy for your car at all, you wouldn't treat it like the motoring journalists do. High revs, dumped clutches - what do they care!
  7. To remove this ad click here.

  8. not a very good comparison of cars. The Twin Turbo is some $50 less than a Gallardo. Why not compare an X50 to a Gallardo or a Modded TT.

    The X50 is an additional $24k and will help even the playing field
  9. zero to sixty is not practical for everyday driving....however, it is a good measurement of off the line acceralation, which is why it is used and quoted so widely in the auto press...those are slow times for both those cars and most likely the tested didnt properly launch the cars...going for a 4.5 to a 4.0 usally requires a huge 100 hp increase...not insignicant!!!!
  10. great stuff for lamborghini!!

    ya 0-60 times are usually unnacurate and dont represent reality, there are many cars that should be quicker on paper to 60 but i have beaten them in real life situations

    i remember on top gear with clarkson, a murci and zonda did a race from a standstill and clarkson just barely launched the lambo cuz he said it has awd and not to ruin the clutch while the zonda smoked himmmmmmmm
  11. I like to call 0-60MPH times the "high school" time, because that's where it's most talked about. High school rubes. You need to start looking beyond that scycle2020, it's not a good measurement and tells you nothing about a car.

    No one 8,000rpm clutch drops their car from a stoplight, so its real world applications are useless. A much better test is Car and Driver's 5-60MPH test in which they put the car into first, let it creep forward, and then punch the gas. This exposes a car's lack of torque, or other issues "off the line" MUCH better than any crazy launch technique that depends on traction only.

    It also negates the percieved advantage that 4WD cars have over 2WD cars in 0-60 tests, because again, no 4WD car owner is 8000rpm clutch dropping their car from stop lights.

    Sidenote: I've recently been re-learning 1/4 mile measurements and how they apply to car performance. Meaning that the time in a 1/4 mile rating is also completely useless. What is not useless however is the trap speed that's measured. The trap speed tells you the real story far better than any acceleration test ever could.

    As an example I've seen F355s turn in 1/4 mile times as high as 13.5 seconds. That seems far slower than normal at first glance, and it is. But a look at the trap speed indicated 110MPH for that particular test, and that's right where a F355 should be, one that would duplicate the factory's claim of 12.9 seconds in the 1/4. It means that the driver got a bad launch, or bad traction, which affected the TIME of the test, but not the power of the car.

    I think it was Twain who said that there are "lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics" meaning that you can get the numbers to say anything. Magazine tests are nothing but statistics, so you've got to learn to identify the statistics that are most telling.

    My current favorites are 0-150MPH, 5-60MPH, and the Trap speed in the 1/4. Everything else is worthless or redundant.
  12. To remove this ad click here.

  13. Like someone else about accounting for the $50K USD difference and throwing a GT2 into the equation instead of the regular 996 Turbo.

    It's great to hear how fast the Lambo is......and by no means am I knocking it here.......but apples to oranges is one thing.....and apples to apples another.......regardless of which manufacturer's are involved.
  14. Then email your advice to Autocar, and let's lighten up on the whining, people.

    Last time I checked Wayne was only playing messenger for the board's benefit. He didn't get out the keys and drive both cars with a stopwatch... Though he could have at one point, since he's owned both. Can you say the same? :)

    Thanks for the post Wayne.
  15. Quite right too. Thanks Wayne for bringing the numbers to us.
  16. Okam2000.....

    I've lots of GT2 seat time....but, there's been no Gallardo's delivered here that I've had a shot at yet.......will be soon though I imagine. I'm not unhappy Wayne posted the article either....quite the opposite in fact, but feel the remarks are valid.......because after all, that's why both the OP and my reply were posted here....for general discussion purposes.

    I'm not worshipping at the altar of Lamborghini like others here......but neither am I criticizing them...they make really great cars too.

    And once they win the 24 Hours of LeMans "overall" more times than any other manufacturer in history (Porsche is the current record holder by a large margin) they'll be making even better cars.
  17. I dont understand what that has to do with anything.Im not flaming here,just looking for the reasoning.I owned Porches in the 80's,lambos,F cars,and the same in the 90's.Not once did I think about who had won any race at any time,prior to making my decision.I also own Vipers,not because they won class 3 straight years at Lemans,or The 24hours of daytona overall,but because they are fast,cool,and great real world cars.Please help me with this.I dont get it.
  18. Hi A.J.......

    I guess that the guy to really answer this question would be the one who decided to place the much coveted (apparently from the posts here) "Ferrari F-1 World Champion" plaque on the dash of current 360' tell you the truth.
  19. I agree, particularly when you think about the fact that Audi has dominated multiple classes of racing at various times over the past decade. So by the logic of the average poster in this thread, shouldn't Lambo have inherited all of that racing "experience" and "prestige" the second the deal was done?

    Aren't the German engineering teams that are assisting in the development of new Lambo models the very same ones who helped the R8 own LeMans to the point where it wasn't even a competition?

    lol, racing heritage is meaningless. If it wasn't, we'd all own Fords. The sole major benefit that comes from winning organized competitions is the engineering knowledge that's gained through the process. That in turn filters down to help that company's street products evolve, and thanks to Audi, Lamborghini has it in spades now.

    So lets all celebrate Lamborghini's "racing heritage" now! Woohoo!
  20. I understand.In the 70's,I bought a Spitfire.I am embarrased,but its true.On the dash was a plaque with some ridiculous list of championships on it.72,73,74,76....whatever.I pryed it off and threw it in the first garbage can I drove by.But I guess,somehow it means something to someone,why else would they put it there?

Share This Page