Harry's Garage - YouTube

[shalmaneser]

DonkeyApple said:

thegreenhell said:

Err, where are Porsche going to go next after 991, 992...

Totally logical, m'lud.

That's the nerd sub numbering system though. This is more about the stickers on the back. I wouldn't know the need numbers for a Porsche anymore than I do for BMWs or types of 737 planes or the rolling stock of GWR.

I have a vague comprehension of the 911 sub numbering. The 993 is the one people seagull due to being air cooled. The 996 is the lardy looking one. I wouldn't know what the numbers were for 911s prior to the 993 and while I am aware there is a 997 I don't know what it is beyond the logical guess that it is a newish one.

I've had multiple BMWs over the years but never known their sub numbers. I'll recognise roughly what they are in PH posts but I could stand in a car park of BMWs and point out what was what. I have an Audi outside and I could tell you what sub number that is.

In terms of the actual numbers stuck in the back that's all straightforward with Porsches, Audis, BMW etc.

I find the numbers on the McLarens confusing too as there is no link between the sports and super series on the back of the car.

If it was SP570LT and SS760C or whatever I could get on board but changing the numbers all the time does confuse to the casual observer. With the Porsche you know Carrera = rear engine Cayman = mid engine etc.

This thread has helped me straighten it out a bit.

However the Audi numbering scheme means nothing (and I believe has died) other than A4, A6 etc... What is a 35 TFSI or 40 TDI and how does that relate to the engine size? I know more numbers = more power but that's about it.

[Doofus]

shalmaneser said:

I find the numbers on the McLarens confusing too as there is no link between the sports and super series on the back of the car.

Careful....

[otolith]

shalmaneser said:

However the Audi numbering scheme means nothing (and I believe has died) other than A4, A6 etc... What is a 35 TFSI or 40 TDI and how does that relate to the engine size? I know more numbers = more power but that's about it.

Yep, apparently they are abandoning it. No relationship to engine size, just power.

https://www.motor1.com/news/712902/audi-ending-con...

[PlywoodPascal]

shalmaneser said:

DonkeyApple said:

thegreenhell said:

Err, where are Porsche going to go next after 991, 992...

Totally logical, m'lud.

That's the nerd sub numbering system though. This is more about the stickers on the back. I wouldn't know the need numbers for a Porsche anymore than I do for BMWs or types of 737 planes or the rolling stock of GWR.

I have a vague comprehension of the 911 sub numbering. The 993 is the one people seagull due to being air cooled. The 996 is the lardy looking one. I wouldn't know what the numbers were for 911s prior to the 993 and while I am aware there is a 997 I don't know what it is beyond the logical guess that it is a newish one.

I've had multiple BMWs over the years but never known their sub numbers. I'll recognise roughly what they are in PH posts but I could stand in a car park of BMWs and point out what was what. I have an Audi outside and I could tell you what sub number that is.

In terms of the actual numbers stuck in the back that's all straightforward with Porsches, Audis, BMW etc.

I find the numbers on the McLarens confusing too as there is no link between the sports and super series on the back of the car.

If it was SP570LT and SS760C or whatever I could get on board but changing the numbers all the time does confuse to the casual observer. With the Porsche you know Carrera = rear engine Cayman = mid engine etc.

This thread has helped me straighten it out a bit.

However the Audi numbering scheme means nothing (and I believe has died) other than A4, A6 etc... What is a 35 TFSI or 40 TDI and how does that relate to the engine size? I know more numbers = more power but that's about it.

its dead easy

AUDI - the bigger the number, the more it understeers
BMW - the bigger the number, the bigger the grille and the more shiny black plastic tat stuck on
Porsche - the bigger the number the more boring it is
McLaren - the bigger the number, ah I don't really care

[Ken_Code]

PlywoodPascal said:

its dead easy

AUDI - the bigger the number, the more it understeers
BMW - the bigger the number, the bigger the grille and the more shiny black plastic tat stuck on
Porsche - the bigger the number the more boring it is
McLaren - the bigger the number, ah I don't really care

The number refers to the power output of the engine.

[E90_M3Ross]

PlywoodPascal said:

its dead easy

AUDI - the bigger the number, the more it understeers
BMW - the bigger the number, the bigger the grille and the more shiny black plastic tat stuck on
Porsche - the bigger the number the more boring it is
McLaren - the bigger the number, ah I don't really care

BMW 4 series grille bigger than 5 series.....

[PlywoodPascal]

E90_M3Ross said:

BMW 4 series grille bigger than 5 series.....

no I meant like F30/G58 or whatever it is. the letter/number combination, the model code, that's what DonkeyApple was referring to, I believe.

[E90_M3Ross]

PlywoodPascal said:

E90_M3Ross said:

BMW 4 series grille bigger than 5 series.....

no I meant like F30/G58 or whatever it is. the letter/number combination, the model code, that's what DonkeyApple was referring to, I believe.

Oh, still doesn't work I don't think as new M5 (G90) has a smaller grille than the G82 M4.

[Quickmoose]

PlywoodPascal said:

its dead easy

AUDI - the bigger the number, the more it understeers
BMW - the bigger the number, the bigger the grille and the more shiny black plastic tat stuck on
Porsche - the bigger the number the more boring it is
McLaren - the bigger the number, ah I don't really care

I think the biggest Porsche number is 997 (?) - that ain't boring

[cslwannabe]

Look what I started!

I do now understand them a wee bit more than I did previously so thanks to those who provided clarification.

Those of you lucky enough to own one - enjoy!

[PlywoodPascal]

well it wss a good way to identify the number nerds
now that we have flushed you out we are going to give you some conversion therapy
it will begin with photos of misbadged cars

[Dashnine]

PlywoodPascal said:

well it wss a good way to identify the number nerds
now that we have flushed you out we are going to give you some conversion therapy
it will begin with photos of misbadged cars

Fill your boots: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

[RSpiston]

Wheelspinning said:

When you have a look at the back catalogue of cars Harry has owned over the years, the 650 is the quickest car that he has now owned.

Hmm. How does the performance of the 650 compare to the Zonda ? Probably one for Harry to answer !!

[Ken_Code]

RSpiston said:

Hmm. How does the performance of the 650 compare to the Zonda ? Probably one for Harry to answer !!

I didn’t know he’d had a Zonda.

It looks as though the Zonda’s quoted as a bit slower. 0-100mph in 7.7 with the 650s doing it in 5.8.

[E90_M3Ross]

RSpiston said:

Wheelspinning said:

When you have a look at the back catalogue of cars Harry has owned over the years, the 650 is the quickest car that he has now owned.

Hmm. How does the performance of the 650 compare to the Zonda ? Probably one for Harry to answer !!

650S in another league. 20% faster to 100mph compared to a C12S. I can't remember whether Harry had a C12 or C12S.

[thegreenhell]

RSpiston said:

Wheelspinning said:

When you have a look at the back catalogue of cars Harry has owned over the years, the 650 is the quickest car that he has now owned.

Hmm. How does the performance of the 650 compare to the Zonda ? Probably one for Harry to answer !!

The McLaren is a lot quicker on paper, and probably even more so in the real world.

1/4 mile in 10.4 vs 11.3

In fact the 650S accelerates faster than a McLaren F1 in all increments up to 140mph.

[Wheelspinning]

RSpiston said:

Wheelspinning said:

When you have a look at the back catalogue of cars Harry has owned over the years, the 650 is the quickest car that he has now owned.

Hmm. How does the performance of the 650 compare to the Zonda ? Probably one for Harry to answer !!

I was allowing for the Zonda!

The 650 spider was an introduction into warp drive for myself.

[Pistom]

Not sure how important overall speed is of his recent acquisition - HM doesn't strike me as a Matt Armstrong looking for the quickest way to launch his car into the nearest hedge.

He seems to enjoy the journey too much to want to get there quickly.

[Isebac]

thegreenhell said:

The McLaren is a lot quicker on paper, and probably even more so in the real world.

1/4 mile in 10.4 vs 11.3

In fact the 650S accelerates faster than a McLaren F1 in all increments up to 140mph.

Numbers are one thing, the sensation is another.

Cars with manual transmissions lose ~0.5s on every shift, while cars with DCTs lose nothing. So of course the numbers for the DCT car will be better. However, that doesn't tell you what the acceleration is in gear - what the magnitude of the push is.

The Zonda is probably around 1400kg, while the 650S is 1500kg. Still, the 650S has 100 more PS, so the power to weight is still greater. The 650S should be the fastest car he's owned, both by numbers and by feel. On the other hand, the F1 would be by far the fastest by feel. And, Harry, we are still waiting for that promised review!

Zonda: 392PS/t
650S: 433PS/t
F1: 550PS/t

[E90_M3Ross]

Isebac said:

thegreenhell said:

The McLaren is a lot quicker on paper, and probably even more so in the real world.

1/4 mile in 10.4 vs 11.3

In fact the 650S accelerates faster than a McLaren F1 in all increments up to 140mph.

Numbers are one thing, the sensation is another.

Cars with manual transmissions lose ~0.5s on every shift, while cars with DCTs lose nothing.

Not in a 1/4 mile drag race they don't. Whilst it might take 1/2 second to change gear, for that 1/2 second the car is still moving....