Supra Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was at TWS with a friend this weekend, sorry I didn't take my car (needed rear tires..) but we went along in the 3000GT VR4 Spyder. Here are some pics from the event.
http://cad.mdsog.net/digicam/TWS/

I got to ride along with one of the instructors in her (!) 1995 911 TT AWD.. very nice car, very good driver. Thanks Becky!

Dylan Savage
1994 Supra TT http://cad.mdsog.net/supra/
 
M

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Originally posted by Dylan Savage:
I got to ride along with one of the instructors in her (!) 1995 911 TT AWD.. very nice car, very good driver. Thanks Becky!
From what I understand, Becky is an EXCELLENT driver. She also owns a Purple 911/993 C2 that's basically been converted into a race version (forgot what they're called).

Check out my pics:
http://www.nikonnet.com/album/?id=4293334981 http://www.nikonnet.com/album/?id=4293248667

Cheers!

Michael.

[ February 14, 2001: Message edited by: Michael-Dallas ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
That has got to be one of the nicest VR4s that I have ever seen. That car would really compliment my Supra in the garage. ;)
Later
Donatas :cool:

[ February 14, 2001: Message edited by: donatas ]
 
J

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
those 3000gt vr4 conv are like 65k or something aren't they? I've seen 1 running around austin cant remember what color though possibly red.
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
[Here are some pics from the event.
http://cad.mdsog.net/digicam/TWS/

I see you are dogging the S2000 which is fine. I parked in that area but my car is not in the pics otherwise I would have to take exception as my car turned a 2:06 at TWS that day and the 2001 Twin Turbo Porsche turned a 2:03.
 
N

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
As much as I love the Supra if I could have any car price being no object it would be the Ferrari 360 Modena. I think it is the most beautiful and best sounding car on the planet.
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I was in the Red 911 Turbo when we passed the 360 modena.. let me tell you.. it doesn't sound very good. Kinda like an S2000, actually, with slightly more balls. I wasn't impressed. The 348, however, sounded awesome.

Dylan Savage
1994 Supra TT http://cad.mdsog.net/supra/


Originally posted by Ken:
<STRONG>As much as I love the Supra if I could have any car price being no object it would be the Ferrari 360 Modena. I think it is the most beautiful and best sounding car on the planet.</STRONG>
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
What run group were you in? I didn't see any fast S2000's all day... or ever. :) If yours is fast, thats great, but realize, it's the exception.

Dylan Savage
1994 Supra TT http://cad.mdsog.net/supra/


Originally posted by goonthree:
<STRONG>[Here are some pics from the event.
http://cad.mdsog.net/digicam/TWS/

I see you are dogging the S2000 which is fine. I parked in that area but my car is not in the pics otherwise I would have to take exception as my car turned a 2:06 at TWS that day and the 2001 Twin Turbo Porsche turned a 2:03.</STRONG>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
Originally posted by Dylan Savage:
<STRONG>I was in the Red 911 Turbo when we passed the 360 modena.. let me tell you.. it doesn't sound very good. Kinda like an S2000, actually, with slightly more balls. I wasn't impressed. The 348, however, sounded awesome.

Dylan Savage
1994 Supra TT http://cad.mdsog.net/supra/ </STRONG>
Dylan,

The hearing clinic called and your new hearing aid batteries are finally in. :)

Eric

[ April 03, 2001: Message edited by: Eric ]
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Originally posted by Dylan Savage:
[QB]What run group were you in? I didn't see any fast S2000's all day... or ever. :) If yours is fast, thats great, but realize, it's the exception.

The old guy that give speech on the driver's meeting was in a yellow S2000, he was the fastest S2000 but still not driven to the highest potential. My friend who owns a S2000 and many other cars were embarassed with the showing of the S2000 (He can drive on the road course really well). The car has great handling and like always most people can't drive.

Check out this link:
http://www.touringcarclub.com/events/events_past010113.htm

The stock S2000 with road course tires smoke all Supras and 98% of the cars that day and the past 2 years with a 1:47. So the car has potential if driven properly. Now that is smoking fast for a stock S2000 and I don't see any Supra TT matching that time over the past few years. In fact very few people ran under 1:47.xx. If the car is slow, why can it beat 98% of all the cars show up? Driver yes, and the car has to handle well, brake well, etc. Note when people come to do time trials, they usually have pretty good amount of experience under their belt. I am not mad or anything, I am just presenting you with fact. If you know any Supra that has run less than 1:47.xx at Laguna Seca, let me know. Remember this is a stock s2000 on race tires it can't be that hard to beat if the car is really slow.

You realize the fastest Supra there was turning 2:15 (with race tires) and he has been to TWS at least 10 times, Porsche Twin Turbos 2:03 and my car was 2:06 (instructor's group). A well driven S2000 will turn less than 2:15 for sure on street tires.

It all comes down to driver and TWS is a fast course and Supra is definitely the faster car given the same driver. On a tight course, it might be a different story.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
Originally posted by goonthree:
<STRONG>
The old guy that give speech on the driver's meeting was in a yellow S2000, he was the fastest S2000 but still not driven to the highest potential. My friend who owns a S2000 and many other cars were embarassed with the showing of the S2000 (He can drive on the road course really well). The car has great handling and like always most people can't drive.

Check out this link:
http://www.touringcarclub.com/events/events_past010113.htm

The stock S2000 with road course tires smoke all Supras and 98% of the cars that day and the past 2 years with a 1:47. So the car has potential if driven properly. Now that is smoking fast for a stock S2000 and I don't see any Supra TT matching that time over the past few years. In fact very few people ran under 1:47.xx. If the car is slow, why can it beat 98% of all the cars show up? Driver yes, and the car has to handle well, brake well, etc. Note when people come to do time trials, they usually have pretty good amount of experience under their belt. I am not mad or anything, I am just presenting you with fact. If you know any Supra that has run less than 1:47.xx at Laguna Seca, let me know. Remember this is a stock s2000 on race tires it can't be that hard to beat if the car is really slow. </STRONG>
I ran a 1:48 at Laguna my first time and only there, and I wasn't pushing my car even close to it's potential since it was wet for a good part of the day and I never got comfortable with several parts of the track. The guy who ran a 1:47 (which is very impressive for that car)is a very good driver with loads of experience at Laguna from what I've heard on another forum. However, an S2000 is not even close to a Supra on a racetrack with a equal drivers. Check out the 1/2001 issue of Road and Track. Even with Steve Millen driving, an S2000 was only able to do a 2:17 at Thunderhill. I've run 2:09 there with a cone chicane on the front straight that cost me one or two seconds compared to the normal configuration Millen ran. Even factoring in 2 or 3 seconds a lap for street tires, a guy who is a lot faster than any of us is considerably slower. Millen was able to turn a 2:08 in a Z06 Corvette there for comparision purposes of what he can do in a fast car. A friend (Kit Wetzler) with similar driving experience to me who used to own a S2000 was 6 or 7 seconds a lap slower than me at Buttonwillow, and was considerably faster than his S2000 times in the 97 M3 sedan he replaced the S2000 with (5 or 6 seconds I think).


<STRONG>
You realize the fastest Supra there was turning 2:15 (with race tires) and he has been to TWS at least 10 times, Porsche Twin Turbos 2:03 and my car was 2:06 (instructor's group). A well driven S2000 will turn less than 2:15 for sure on street tires.
</STRONG>
I've never run at TWS, but from lap times of friends, I know that anybody who runs 2:15s there isn't very fast. A well driven Supra should be a lot faster than that. If you're running 2:06s in a S2000, that's impressive. You'd go faster in a Supra. :)
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Eric:

Thunderhill, TWS and butterwillow are huge tracks and I agree Supra is better there. You ran 1:48 not with a stock Supra, correct, this is a stock S2000. I was there watching the race and could not believe it was stock. It will be really really hard for a stock supra to run 1:47.xx at Laguna Seca as it is not consider a power track.

I guess my point for us normal drivers to go fast on the road course the car has to give you confidence and S2000 does which enable you to extract higher percentage of the car's performance.

No I didn't run a 2:06 in a S2000 at TWS as that is probably impossible. I would think S2000 driven properly can turn 2:10 or so, which is beating 90% of the people out there and beating the red porsche twin turbo the guy rode with.

Comparing Thunderhill time of S2000 to your car is not fair. Steve is a better driver than you (I would think so) so advantage S2000, you car is BPU which makes around 100 more hp than stock Supra, you probably have suspension mods, race tires and brake mods.
What do you think you can turn with stock Supra at Thunderhill, I bet it is in the range of Steve Millen. Also wouldn't you agree the time turned for the S2000 at Laguna seca should beat 99% of all stock Supra driven by their owners?

I ran a 1:48 at Laguna my first time and only there, and I wasn't pushing my car even close to it's potential since it was wet for a good part of the day and I never got comfortable with several parts of the track. The guy who ran a 1:47 (which is very impressive for that car)is a very good driver with loads of experience at Laguna from what I've heard on another forum. However, an S2000 is not even close to a Supra on a racetrack with a equal drivers. Check out the 1/2001 issue of Road and Track. Even with Steve Millen driving, an S2000 was only able to do a 2:17 at Thunderhill. I've run 2:09 there with a cone chicane on the front straight that cost me one or two seconds compared to the normal configuration Millen ran. Even factoring in 2 or 3 seconds a lap for street tires, a guy who is a lot faster than any of us is considerably slower. Millen was able to turn a 2:08 in a Z06 Corvette there for comparision purposes of what he can do in a fast car. A friend (Kit Wetzler) with similar driving experience to me who used to own a S2000 was 6 or 7 seconds a lap slower than me at Buttonwillow, and was considerably faster than his S2000 times in the 97 M3 sedan he replaced the S2000 with (5 or 6 seconds I think).


quote:


I've never run at TWS, but from lap times of friends, I know that anybody who runs 2:15s there isn't very fast. A well driven Supra should be a lot faster than that. If you're running 2:06s in a S2000, that's impressive. You'd go faster in a Supra.
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
So which is it? You said this:

Originally posted by goonthree:
<STRONG>I parked in that area but my car is not in the pics otherwise I would have to take exception as my car turned a 2:06 at TWS that day and the 2001 Twin Turbo Porsche turned a 2:03.</STRONG>
Then this:


Originally posted by goonthree:
[QB]Eric:
No I didn't run a 2:06 in a S2000 at TWS as that is probably impossible. I would think S2000 driven properly can turn 2:10 or so, which is beating 90% of the people out there and beating the red porsche twin turbo the guy rode with.

So what'd you run?

Dylan Savage
1994 Supra TT
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
[Dylan:

I just said I parked in the S2000 area as that was probably the last spots open.

So what'd you run? What do you think, if a S2000 can't turn a 2:06, what Honda can?

Dylan Savage
1994 Supra TT[/QB][/QUOTE]
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I ran a 1:58.5 on a CBR600F4 :) I haven't timed any laps in the supra, but since I've been on that track a bit, with a clean lap on the street tires I was running before with me driving, probably 2:05-2:08 or somewhere in there. It was running pretty well, I am pretty sure I could keep up with Becky in her stock 911TT. That is, my car has more power, she's a better driver :)

Dylan Savage
1994 Supra TT

Originally posted by goonthree:
<STRONG>[Dylan:

I just said I parked in the S2000 area as that was probably the last spots open.

So what'd you run? What do you think, if a S2000 can't turn a 2:06, what Honda can?

Dylan Savage
1994 Supra TT</STRONG>
[/QB][/QUOTE]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
Originally posted by goonthree:
<STRONG>Eric:

Thunderhill, TWS and butterwillow are huge tracks and I agree Supra is better there. You ran 1:48 not with a stock Supra, correct, this is a stock S2000. I was there watching the race and could not believe it was stock. It will be really really hard for a stock supra to run 1:47.xx at Laguna Seca as it is not consider a power track.
</STRONG>

Actually, I think Laguna is a very much a power track. Other than turns 8 and 9, the track is almost entirely straight with flat out acceleration, brake, turn 90 or 180 degrees, straight with flat out acceleration repeat. Add to the fact that many of the straights are uphill, and I'd definitely call it a power track. Cars that are power deficient like S2000s do better on tracks where you're not slowing down a lot and speeding up all the time. Sears Point would be a good example of a non-power track.

<STRONG>
I guess my point for us normal drivers to go fast on the road course the car has to give you confidence and S2000 does which enable you to extract higher percentage of the car's performance.
</STRONG>

One of the great things about a Supra is that it is extremely easy to drive near the limit. Very easy to rotate where you want it and very easy to recover if you exceed it's limits. If you're stupid with the throttle on low speed corners, you can spin the car pretty fast, but that's true of any RWD car with some power. I've never driven an S2000, but I doubt it's much easier to drive near it's limits than a Supra.

<STRONG>
No I didn't run a 2:06 in a S2000 at TWS as that is probably impossible. I would think S2000 driven properly can turn 2:10 or so, which is beating 90% of the people out there and beating the red porsche twin turbo the guy rode with.

Comparing Thunderhill time of S2000 to your car is not fair. Steve is a better driver than you (I would think so) so advantage S2000, you car is BPU which makes around 100 more hp than stock Supra, you probably have suspension mods, race tires and brake mods.
What do you think you can turn with stock Supra at Thunderhill, I bet it is in the range of Steve Millen. Also wouldn't you agree the time turned for the S2000 at Laguna seca should beat 99% of all stock Supra driven by their owners?
</STRONG>

Yeah, I think Steve Millen is probably a better driver than me. :) I don't know what a stock Supra could do at Thunderhill with him driving, but judging by the 2:08 he turned in a Z06 and the 2:16 he was able to turn in a Z28, I'm very confident it would be significantly faster than 2:17. A SWAG is that it would be 3 or 4 seconds slower than a Z06.

My car is BPU, but I only run 14-15 psi on the racetrack, and I'd be surprised if I made more than 340-350 rwhp in that configuration, so my power advantage isn't that great over stock.

1:47 probably would beat 99% of stock Supras at Laguna, but that's a reflection of the driver rather than the car. I doubt there are many people capable of running 1:47 in a S2000. I think S2000s are nice cars for what they are, but they just aren't as fast as bigger horsepower cars on a racetrack given equal drivers. If Honda would combine VTEC with more displacement or a turbo, their engines would be more impressive in the real world, but as it is, they are severely lacking in usable power. 240 hp sounds impressive, but if you look at a dyno chart for an S2000, you realize it makes that for about 30 rpms. A Supra has a powerband of nearly 3000 rpms where the car is making near peak power. Comparing the NSX's laptime of 2:14 to the Z06s 2:08 speaks volumes about that.
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
[probably 2:05-2:08 or somewhere in there. It was running pretty well, I am pretty sure I could keep up with Becky in her stock 911TT. That is, my car has more power, she's a better driver :)

Well, if you can run 2:05 to 2:08 that is very good. I would think red Porsche twin turbo was running in the 2:10+ range, I know the 2001 Yellow 01 Twin turbo was running 2:03 was blowing everyone away and I was in cars going 2:06 and 2:11 and we were blowing everyone away in the instructors group including the white twin turbo (can't drive or something). I am pretty sure even the Ford Cobra is running 2:10+ as we were on his tail but he would not wave us by, he let the 01 Porsche turbo go bye immediately, though.

If Becky has a video cam in the car, she can tell what she was running, I know the yellow Porsche Carrera 2 is really slow (same driver as the 01 Porsche Twin turbo) as I have video of passing him easily. I didn't see the red twin turbo porsche on track, so I don't know how fast she is.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top