997.2 · GENERATION 2010 · SPORTS CAR
PorscheICE

911 Turbo

507 hp, 3,5 s 0-100 : among the 29 S 2008–2012, the 911 Turbo ranks 6th of 29 in 0–100 km/h, 5th of 29 in Top speed, 7th of 29 in Power-to-weight, behind the only Lamborghini Aventador LP700. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.

Energy cost · estimate3,78815,000 km · UK mix · home 0,21 £/kWhConsumption →

Power

507hp

700 Nm

0 → 100 km/h

3.5s

VMax 312 km/h

Cons.

12.5L

/100 km

Tank

67.001757L

Technical identity card

Full specifications Porsche 911 Turbo

Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.

Powertrain

ArchitectureAtmosphérique
Displacement3,800 cm³
Puissance thermique507 hp
Combined power507 hp
Combined torque700 Nm
GearboxDouble embrayage
TransmissionIntegrale (AWD)

Consumption

Cons. WLTP12.5 L/100km
Tank67.001757 L

Performance

0 → 100 km/h3,5 s
VMax312 km/h

Dimensions and environment

Length4,477 mm
Wheelbase2,350 mm
Width1,852 mm
Height1,300 mm
Boot190 L
Kerb weight1,570 kg
Cd0.31

Caralogy Methodology

Performance (0-100, top speed) simulated by the Caralogy physics engine (SCx, Crr, real torque curves). Motorway consumption values estimated from the manufacturer WLTP cycle.

See full methodology →

Manufacturer data · WLTP-estimated consumption · Caralogy-simulated performance

Among the 29 S, the 911 Turbo ranks (top 6 in segment) in acceleration. Caralogy simulates its real-world performance: motorway simulation, performance simulation and consumption simulation.

Caralogy Analysis

Tailored to this vehicle?

Caralogy Verdict
Suitable for

Demanding drivers: 6th of 29 in 0–100 km/h (3.5 s), 5th of 29 in Top speed (312 km/h), 7th of 29 in Power-to-weight (323 hp/t). 6th of 29 in 0–100 km/h (3.5 s), 5th of 29 in Top speed (312 km/h), 7th of 29 in Power-to-weight (323 hp/t).

Less suitable for

Frequent urban trips with stop-and-go. At 12,5 L/100 km on the combined cycle, consumption rises in the city without electric assistance. An HEV or PHEV would be more economical for this use profile.

Alternatives to consider

If the priority is 0–100 km/h, the Lamborghini Aventador LP700 (1st with 2.9 s) takes the lead. If the priority is Top speed, the Lamborghini Aventador LP700 (1st with 350 km/h) takes the lead.

Acceleration: 3.5 s 0-100 (6th of 29 in 0–100 km/h)

In pure acceleration, the 911 Turbo ranks 6th of 29 in 0–100 km/h, 0.6 s off the reference Lamborghini Aventador LP700 (2.9 s).

Top speed: 312 km/h (5th of 29 in Top speed)

Top speed of 312 km/h. The segment reference reaches 350 km/h.

Segment positioning

Where the 911 Turbo stands against S

Comparison across 29 S marketed between 2008–2012.

0–100 km/h6e / 29
3,5 s
Min 5,0 s · Porsche Cayman S (Manual)Max 2,9 s · Lamborghini Aventador LP700
Top speed5e / 29
312 km/h
Min 275 km/h · Porsche Cayman S (PDK)Max 350 km/h · Lamborghini Aventador LP700
Power-to-weight7e / 29
323 hp/t
Min 226 hp/t · Porsche 911 Carrera 4 (Manual)Max 444 hp/t · Lamborghini Aventador LP700

Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)

Cross-energy alternatives

Same needs, different powertrain.

Compare

Popular duels involving the 911 Turbo

Frequently asked questions

Porsche 911 Turbo: what you need to know

Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.

Among the 29 S 2008–2012, the 911 Turbo ranks 6th of 29 in 0–100 km/h (3.5 s, behind the Lamborghini Aventador LP700), 5th of 29 in Top speed (312 km/h, behind the Lamborghini Aventador LP700), 7th of 29 in Power-to-weight (323 hp/t, behind the Lamborghini Aventador LP700).

Running costs depend on your profile (mileage, charging type, city/highway mix). Use the Caralogy consumption simulator for a personalised estimate.

The Lamborghini Aventador LP700 leads in 0–100 km/h (2.9 s vs 3.5 s). The choice depends on your priorities: check the 911 Turbo vs Lamborghini Aventador LP700 duel for a detailed comparison.

Caralogy does not reproduce manufacturer figures: we recalculate every number through physics simulation, starting from SCx, mass and the power curve. This is why our figures at 130 km/h differ from WLTP. Full methodology on the dedicated page.