Image of Porsche 911 Turbo S

Porsche 911 Turbo S (996) specs

Car type Coupe
Curb weight 1540 kg (3395 lbs)
Power / weight 292 ps (288 bhp) / t
Torque / weight 403 Nm (297 lb-ft) / t
Introduced 2004
Origin country Germany
Views 36.3k

Performance

Top speed 307 kph (191 mph)
0 - 50 kph 1.9 s
0 - 80 kph 3.4 s
0 - 100 kph 4.1 s
0 - 200 kph 13.1 s
0 - 100 mph 8.5 s
Est. 1/8 mile 8.0 s @ 96.3 mph
1/4 mile 11.9 s
Est. 1/2 mile 19.3 s @ 142.9 mph
Est. 1 mile 32.0 s @ 164.7 mph
Est. 1000 m 22.6 s @ 242.0 kph
Est. 100 - 200 kph 8.9 s
Est. max acceleration 0.84 g (8 m/s²)
100 kph - 0 36 m (117 ft)

More acceleration times

Porsche 911 Turbo S acceleration graph

Powertrain

Engine type Boxer 6, Twin Turbo, 24v
Displacement 3.6 l (220 ci)
Power 450 ps (444 bhp / 331 kw)
Torque 620 Nm (457 lb-ft)
Power / liter 125 ps (123 hp)
Transmission 6 speed manual
Layout rear engine, all wheel drive

Laptimes

User avatar

User avatar

Georg  11y ago

no... the Leistungskit is a engine perfromance option package that was avaible as option for the standart 996 Turbo (order code X50) from 2002... the 2005 Turbo S has exactly the same engine but it came standart with other stuff that the 996 Turbo did not had in stock trim, like PCCB (ceramic brake).


User avatar

Anonymous  11y ago

Is the Porsche 996 Turbo Leistungskit same as this car?
Here is a link about the 996 Turbo Leistungskit (Choose the 2003 Porsche 996 Turbo Leistungkit):
http://www.einszweidrei.de/


User avatar

Georg  11y ago

added


User avatar

Anonymous  11y ago

Please add these datas:
0-100: 4,1 s
0-160: 8,5 s
0-200: 13,1 s
Reference: Auto Zeitung 08/2005.
http://www.einszweidrei.de/
Choose the 2005 996 Turbo S
Thanks!


User avatar

FastestLaps  12y ago

Because, apparently, the track they used in 2003 was shorter than that of all the other tests.


User avatar

Heyhuub  12y ago

why?


User avatar

FastestLaps  12y ago

I removed 996 Turbo S Bedford time along with others from this http://www.radicalsportscars.com/media/trackdaycar03/index.php test. Because, apparently, the track they used in 2003 was shorter than that of all the other tests.


User avatar

Anonymous  12y ago

EVO from October 2004 has new times and says that the track was recently revised and is now up to 1.8 miles from 1.7


User avatar

A156  12y ago

The link says about the Trackday Car of the Year 2003. Are you sure about the track length? In that case we must delete that 1:19.5 or (better) make a new form of Bedford circuit and adding the cars from that event.


User avatar

Anonymous  12y ago

It was probably set on the 2004 track. I have an old EVO from then and the track was slightly shorter. That time is between Porsche 911 GT3 1:19.40 and BMW M3 CSL 1:19.95


User avatar

A156  12y ago

Anybody knows something more about that time at Bedford?



User avatar

A156  12y ago

The reference is good but I also can't belive that 1:19.5. Maybe the conditions were perfect or EVO had a better driver to test the cars. I also suspect that the track was a bit shorter or somehow different from the track where Enzo and GTR were tested; I saw the times in that article http://www.radicalsportscars.com/media/trackdaycar03/index.php and all cars were about 2-3 seconds faster than I would bet! Btw, many cars from that link are not on FastestLaps in Bedford Autodrome West Circuit (pre 06/2008) list.


User avatar

Anonymous  12y ago

is this bedford autodome time the real deal? cause i find it a lil hard to believe this 996 911 turbo beat the Porsche Carrera GT Mclaren F1 and a Ferrari Enzo and a Nissan GT-R R35 round that track, it just seems a lil odd.


User avatar

GTR  13y ago

1/4 Mile: 11.9 sec. http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suv/163_0310_porsche_cayenne_turbo_9
11_x50/specs_price.html#Scene_2