Crown
Board: Porsche - Cayman
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Re: Cayman non S? when????????
Quote:
Grant said:
Somewhere I read that there may be a new 3.0L motor (undoubtedly so they can price it well above the base 987)...
My guess is they use the 3.0L, 260hp engine and price it at just under 50K, with the same price difference as between the 987S and the 987C7S.
They cannot get much more out of the 2.7L reliably with it being naturally aspirated. And if they did, it would be just a little bit of hp way up in the rev range. They would get almost no additional torque.
BMW finally implemented valvetronic (similar to variocam) on their 3.0. It's awesome technology but that mainly got them peak HP, not really much torque.
Porsche has ALREADY implemented that technology on the 2.7L, so they are pretty much all done with the 2.7L, particularly torque-wise. And the 2.7L is already pretty low on torque. There is no replacement for displacement. Especially when it comes down to low-end torque, which is what most of us use most of the time.
I, and many other potential and existing customers, don't want Porsche to offer an S2000-type engine. And they wont.
Re: Valvetronic v Variocam ?
Quote:
KenH said:
I don't think that Valvetronic is at all similar to Variocam.
Surely the BMW equivalent to Variocam is Vanos?
That may be. I thought Porsche had a Valvetronic equivalent already implemented. Regardless, the point remains: Porsche has already squeezed a lot out of the 2.7L. They'll need to bump displacement on a base Cayman to justify the premium pricing for it.
Re: Valvetronic v Variocam ?
If the 2.7 litre Boxster engine had the same specific horsepower rating as the BMW M3 it would have about 280 - 285 bhp (depending on which standard you use) instead of the current 240 bhp (SAE).
So one might say that there is still a lot left to be squeezed out, should Porsche care to do things that way.
So one might say that there is still a lot left to be squeezed out, should Porsche care to do things that way.
Re: Valvetronic v Variocam ?
Quote:
KenH said:
If the 2.7 litre Boxster engine had the same specific horsepower rating as the BMW M3 it would have about 280 - 285 bhp (depending on which standard you use) instead of the current 240 bhp (SAE).
So one might say that there is still a lot left to be squeezed out, should Porsche care to do things that way.
And I know MANY BMW M3 owners that lament the disproportionately low torque of that engine. It also revs to 8000rpm (not necessarilly a bad thing). Finally, it is a very heavy engine because it is an iron block because it had to withstand the tremendous stresses it was subjected to. This explains why they are stuffing an aluminum V8 in the next generation. (I wont even mention all the problems BMW had with the engine)
I never said Porsche couldn't spend tremendous amounts of R&D (like BMW did on the M3 - one of BMW's flagshhip engines for one of their flagship cars) to squeeze more power out of the 2.7L, an engine that would go into one of their "entry-level" cars. I just do not think it is worth their time when they can just use the same block at 3.0L and get as much (if not more) than they would have with very little effort. Also, Porsche is proud in their marketing materials of having a broad torque low in the rpm range (indeed a VERY good thing). To make a peakier engine would make no sense.
Re: Valvetronic v Variocam ?
Hmm. Well I am the owner of an M3 as well as a 997. I don't think that one can say that the M3 has disproportionately low torque. Nor is the fact that the block is iron especially related to the bhp or rev limit. Other engines manage similar specific bhp figures with aluminium blocks.
BMW do seem to have solved the M3 big-end bearing problems whereas the 996 RMS problem is still happening on the 997, what seven years after it first appeared? Check out the 997 forum.
I suggest that the fact that the next M3 will have a V8 is more to do with the new M5 having a V10 than anything else.
But I do agree that the Porsche approach is more likely to be to increase the capacity. Although why everyone picks on 3 litres is beyond me. why not 2.8 or 3.1? I very much doubt that Porsche will re-cycle an old engine block, it is not really their style nowadays. And the base Cayman, when it appears, will be a big seller, enough to justify a completely new engine. And no doubt the 987 Boxster face-lift will pick it up in due course.
BMW do seem to have solved the M3 big-end bearing problems whereas the 996 RMS problem is still happening on the 997, what seven years after it first appeared? Check out the 997 forum.
I suggest that the fact that the next M3 will have a V8 is more to do with the new M5 having a V10 than anything else.
But I do agree that the Porsche approach is more likely to be to increase the capacity. Although why everyone picks on 3 litres is beyond me. why not 2.8 or 3.1? I very much doubt that Porsche will re-cycle an old engine block, it is not really their style nowadays. And the base Cayman, when it appears, will be a big seller, enough to justify a completely new engine. And no doubt the 987 Boxster face-lift will pick it up in due course.
Re: Valvetronic v Variocam ?
Quote:
KenH said:
BMW do seem to have solved the M3 big-end bearing problems whereas the 996 RMS problem is still happening on the 997, what seven years after it first appeared? Check out the 997 forum.
Not to mention intermediate shaft failures, etc. At least BMW did acknowledge that there was a problem, issued a recall and gave owners of these cars a 100K mile engine warranty to boot. Most Porsche officials still proclaim that the RMS issue is really not a problem and happens to only a few cars. Tell that to the 996 and Boxster owners that have had 3 or more RMS failures and more than one rebuilt engine installed.
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
