Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Closed TopicStart new topic
> '87 Ruf ctr "Yellowbird"
The Ruf ctr "Yellowbird"
It was the fastest production roadcar of it's time, but is it cool?
Ice cold [ 39 ] ** [90.70%]
cool [ 4 ] ** [9.30%]
uncool [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
Understeered of the 'Ring uncool [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
Total Votes: 43
  
marcos_eirik
post Dec 3 2005, 12:39 PM
Post #1


Grease Monkey
**

Group: Members
Posts: 447
Joined: 22-December 04
From: Norway
Member No.: 1,263




QUOTE(Knowledge)
In 1987 the newest RUF high speed sports car, the CTR, received its certification for normal road use. This incredible car, a 469 bhp twin turbo coupé, exceeded the top speed world record for production cars on the Nardo Racetrack at a rate of 342 km/h!! It was at the time, and still today, a truly astonishing pace. In addition, this same year RUF Automobile GmbH became an approved manufacturer with the U.S. authorities for safety and emissions (NHTSA and EPA).

QUOTE(Specs)
Miles Per Gallon: 10/21 mpg
Curb Weight: 3040 lbs
Layout: Rear-Engine/RWD
Transmission: 5-Speed Manual

Engine
Type: Twin-Turbo Flat-6
Displacement: 3600 cc
Horsepower: 469 bhp @ 5950 rpm
Torque: 408 lb-ft @ 5100 rpm
Redline: 6800 rpm

Performance
0-60 mph: 4.0 sec
0-100 mph: 7.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.7 sec @ 133.5 mph
Skidpad: .90g
Top Speed: 211 mph

More pics here...

A video of the ctr being driven to its limits around the Nordschleife here and here...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PBB
post Dec 3 2005, 12:43 PM
Post #2


Aeternum vale
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,810
Joined: 6-March 04
Member No.: 636



I Can Cut Glass With My Nipples Frozen!!

The world's greatest (only?) yellow car, just as desirable today as nearly two decades ago.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DZ302
post Dec 3 2005, 12:53 PM
Post #3


International Superstar
*****

Group: Banned
Posts: 5,021
Joined: 6-February 05
From: SF Bay Area, CA
Member No.: 1,467



ice cold, but those numbers are wrong. it's literally impossible for a 3000lb car with 470hp to trap 133mph
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
arnge
post Dec 3 2005, 01:02 PM
Post #4


Merc. and porsche no. 1 fan
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,847
Joined: 31-January 05
Member No.: 1,454



A legened and one of the best porsches EVER.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
marcos_eirik
post Dec 3 2005, 01:57 PM
Post #5


Grease Monkey
**

Group: Members
Posts: 447
Joined: 22-December 04
From: Norway
Member No.: 1,263



QUOTE(DZ302 @ Dec 3 2005, 12:53 PM) *
ice cold, but those numbers are wrong. it's literally impossible for a 3000lb car with 470hp to trap 133mph

The weight is wrong, it's actually 1100kg...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TrueSlideXL
post Dec 3 2005, 03:15 PM
Post #6


Pornography Quality Control
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,491
Joined: 18-October 03
Member No.: 125



The tank car RUF was frozen, this is just cool.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Black RSX
post Dec 3 2005, 05:04 PM
Post #7


HONDA - BOY
****

Group: Banned
Posts: 3,653
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Chicago Burbs, IL
Member No.: 35



This is one of the top cars ever made.... FROZEN!! Pee Yellow Frozen!!


(Going to go drive my own on The Ring right now... Love GT4!!)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jordan
post Dec 3 2005, 07:14 PM
Post #8


Porsche. There is No Substitute. But a swedish brick can fill in
****

Group: Banned
Posts: 4,729
Joined: 22-December 04
Member No.: 1,266
Car: 1982 Volvo 240 Turbo sedan.



slap my ass and call me susy, this car is fantastically frozen
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DZ302
post Dec 3 2005, 08:33 PM
Post #9


International Superstar
*****

Group: Banned
Posts: 5,021
Joined: 6-February 05
From: SF Bay Area, CA
Member No.: 1,467



QUOTE(marcos_eirik @ Dec 3 2005, 01:57 PM) *
The weight is wrong, it's actually 1100kg...

so like 2400lbs...sounds about right then
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Dec 3 2005, 08:39 PM
Post #10


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



I can't find any specifications that say 1100 kg...everything I find says 3040 pounds.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PBB
post Dec 3 2005, 08:53 PM
Post #11


Aeternum vale
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,810
Joined: 6-March 04
Member No.: 636



QUOTE(http://www.supercarworld.com/cgi-bin/showgeneral.cgi?265)
The fastest car of the 1980's at a genuine 213mph, just 25 of these startling Ruf CTR 'Yellowbirds' were produced.

Based on Porsche's 964 turbo, the CTR featured carbon body panels (almost unheard of in the 1980s) to keep weight down to a mere 1100kg. All 462bhp was transmitted to the rear wheels through an in-house 6-speed gearbox, again a rare sight in 1988. This combination of high power and low weight meant slingshot acceleration. 60mph arrived in just 3.7sec, with 100mph coming up 3 seconds later - both world records at the time, and still incredibly fast even today.

Clark, I think the problem with the weight issue is that the original 25 Yellowbirds were CF and all following Yellowbirds and variants were heavier.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Dec 3 2005, 08:57 PM
Post #12


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



BS, the CTR had a 5-speed. The CTR-2 had a 6 speed, yeah, but the original did not.

You might be right about the weight, but 620 pounds is a MASSIVE discrepancy, even considering CF body panels.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PBB
post Dec 3 2005, 09:02 PM
Post #13


Aeternum vale
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,810
Joined: 6-March 04
Member No.: 636



Upon furthur research, yeah, that 1,100 kg figure has to be BS.

http://www.fast-autos.net/ruf/rufctr.html
3,040 pounds.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Dec 3 2005, 09:06 PM
Post #14


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



See, that's the only number I found too, but I only found it from those car specification sites, and all they do is copy the data from each other...so if one site made an error, than so did all the others. I don't consider that conclusive, but considering how it doesn't conflict with any other sane numbers, it makes the most sense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PBB
post Dec 3 2005, 09:18 PM
Post #15


Aeternum vale
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,810
Joined: 6-March 04
Member No.: 636



OK, this is just getting confusing...

1,150 kg

http://www.forbes.com/global/2003/0915/116.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PBB
post Dec 3 2005, 09:22 PM
Post #16


Aeternum vale
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,810
Joined: 6-March 04
Member No.: 636



http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/default...2321&optionID=0

But this one seems the most credible, detailed specs, listing the top speed at the actual 212.6 mph instead of the 215!!PMH!! as everyone else.

1,222 kg / 2,695 lb

I can believe those numbers. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CRiZO
post Dec 3 2005, 09:40 PM
Post #17


A little about me...
***

Group: Members
Posts: 842
Joined: 25-September 05
From: Marina del Rey, CA
Member No.: 1,973



My friend works for RUF... bastard.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Dec 3 2005, 09:42 PM
Post #18


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



2695 pounds sounds right...3040 sounded fat for an '80s turbo, particularly one with lightweight body panels, but 2420 and 2530 were suspiciously low.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_PAULIE_D_*
post Dec 3 2005, 10:57 PM
Post #19





Guests






Ice cold! One of my all time faves!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
marcos_eirik
post Dec 4 2005, 03:25 AM
Post #20


Grease Monkey
**

Group: Members
Posts: 447
Joined: 22-December 04
From: Norway
Member No.: 1,263



QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Dec 3 2005, 09:42 PM) *
2695 pounds sounds right...3040 sounded fat for an '80s turbo, particularly one with lightweight body panels, but 2420 and 2530 were suspiciously low.

According to Porsches own numbers a standard '87 911 Carrera weighs in at 1210kg (2667lb). I seriously doubt that a lightweight stripped down version of that is any heavyer than the standard car... huh.gif The factory 'Club Sport' version weighs 1160kg (2557lb)...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Closed TopicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd August 2019 - 03:23 AM
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here