Quote:
Porschist said:
Do I know what I am talking about when I talk about reliability of a tuned turbo engine? Probably not, but who does? But "Bitterness or rage" about reliability is hardly a play in this discussions. Clearly I have my doubts about Porsche reliability whereas you don't. And obviously I am now very suspicious about the issue after two engines blowing on me. But more than bitter this makes me weary, certainly weary about tuning one of these engines. Maybe I am wrong, maybe I am not. Nobody knows really because, as you are well aware, even a manufacturer will not make an assumption on the reliability of an engine based on whether a few samples were able to withstand stresses 30 or even 40% above standard. So, statistically (and statistics is the only thing that counts when analyzing reliability, because reliability is a statistical function) I am afraid you just don't know what you talking about either. This because your experience on a few tuned engines is statistically irrelevant. Had you run hundreds or, better, thousands of engines in this configuration then you could make a statement here, otherwise you are just taking chances. Taking chances is ok, but it's not science. And I won't do it with my money because if the engine blows, yes as in my case, it's with my money that I got to buy a new one. And my money always trusts my judgement alone:-). The Porsche warranties department is apparently not interested in experimenting with me either ;-)!
Most racing car these days finish a season without blowing an engine after being driven at the limit for thousands of kilometers. Does that mean that race levels of output are to be reccomended for road use? No.
In my view someone can credibly claim to know about reliability on a Porsche turbo engine when is pushed close to 600hp only if he runs an engine manufacturing concern that has tested several engines to that output level. To my knowledge even the largest tuners in Germany find this hard to do because of the R&D costs involved. They are simply glad to run their test on their customer base.
So in a sense you know what you are talking about, because you are one of the testers on the matter!
By this assumption, if on your 10th tuned engine you blow a crankcase I am right and you are wrong, because that means a one in ten chance to blow an engine in 50 to 100k kms which today is probably sub-par even by racing car standards. Until then, you just don't know. So see you in one million miles then! In the meantime don't expect me to partecipate into your test (which was the point of my posting): again, if I get an urge for 600hp I'll put my money where I also get a warranty and resale value.
There have been several Manthey 700 bhp cars running for several years now, without a single problem. Dozens of RS tuning cars, all of them with 550 bhp or more, all of them without a hitch. Statistically, I'd say that is very commendable, especially with the way these cars are driven. Also, 600 bhp and resale value don't go together too well. The SL65s are taking huge hits, as do many oter cars with similar output levels (barring exotics, which usually aren't suitable for day-to-day use.
Quote:
On the issue of technical advancement instead, there I think I know what I am talking about. I know that a 6.2 v8 turning 8000rpm in a road car was absolutely science fiction until a couple of years ago. I know that a specific output of 100hp per liter (like on the m5 v10) on a large (5.0) engine had never been reached before on a large production car. I know that Bmw and Mercedes Amg have now developed and mass produce engines that reach these levels without being force fed. While I also know that a 50% to 100% of increase in output by force feeding the engine is no technological feat and was done even 50 years ago. Can you imagine what would happen if you turbocharged the Mercedes 6.2 or the Audi 4.2?
I'd like you to consider the above and show me where the Porsche engine technology is superior. When last did you see a brand new engine developed by Porsche except maybe for the Carrera gt v10 (which is not mass produced and which gives an output marginally superior to that of my ML63, which my wife uses to go shopping and which has a torque deliver far flatter). When last did you see a new Porsche engine which broke new ground in terms of configuration, rpm, geometry, output, weight, sound, etc.
C'mon even on the Cayenne they use an old slow Audi engine which couldn't touch the ML's 500hp if it wasn't for the force feeding and which even audi is discontinuing as obsolete!
Now you are talking nonsense. The GT3 engine puts out over 415 bhp at 3.6 litres of displacement, which equals 115,3 bhp per litre (and even more in the GT3RS). Not to mention that it is a race-proven block, with a record of reliability, something which the Mercedes 6,2 and the BMW V10 have yet to demonstrate (and the BMW is failing at it so far). Also, ever heard of displacement? Sure, the Mercedes 6,2 can get 514 bhp, I'd expect it to. The Turbo, on the other hand, is a flat-6 3,6 litre engine. How you expect it to produce the same output with half the displacement is beyond me. I also don't need to mention that this is a Porsche 911, with the flat-6 being its trademark. They can't rig it with a V10 and call it a 911. Also, how many people can really use over 415 bhp, available from the GT3? Not many, I suspect. Regarding the ML63 and the Carrera GT comparison, are you serious? There is a 100 bhp difference between those two engines. How is that marginal?
Regarding Porsche engine innovation, the flat-6 makes great souind (look at the GT3), but when it comes to turbocharged cars, I'm not sure what you expected. Turbochargers ALWAYS muffle the sound, so you can't be that knowledgeable about engines if you didn't know that. Also, innovation for the sake of innovation itself is useless. The VTG technology is a great innovation for turbocharged engines. Just because it doesn't turn at 8500 rpm and explodes like the M5 does, doesn't mean it's a bad engine. Regarding the Cayenne engine, how do you expect 4,5 litres to compete with 5,2 litres without force induction? Also, big and heavy cars are much better suited to forced induction engines than the high-revving nonsense which you have put forth. And I didn't know that the Porsche 4,5-litre V8 was made by Audi
.
Quote:
And, please notice, I made these considerations even before my unit blew. I buy Porsche because the package AROUND the engine goes and handles better than most anything else on the road.
Instead of calling me bitter or enraged consider I may be a discerning customers rather than a blind brand loyalist.
And it's on technical grounds, rather than emotional ones, that I dismiss this technology as no longer cutting edge.
Actually, if emotions were to be part of the equation, then my judgement of my car's engine would be even harsher, now that I think about it.
Emotionally, my 997TT engine hardly keeps me awake at night but I am as excited as a baby about the r8 I ordered just because I heard the noise it makes on the web and it gave me shivers. Racy, deep, thrilling. Even my ml63 has a much better sound and rises in rpm with a better and more involving crescendo! Never, before or after getting the 997tt, I have been excited at the idea of turning the key. Yes, it covers ground as I am in a playstation (but that's more down to the package around the engine rather than the engine itself), but the engine is far from being exciting to run.
Should've bought a GT3, not a turbocharged car...
Quote:
So, yes, let's leave emotions aside and let's talk about facts. Where do you think I got my facts wrong about Porsche being left behind in the engine innovation race? Where, exactly, don't I know what I am talking about?
As long as their engines sound as good as the competition (GT3), consume less than the competition (Turbo - the BMW and MB engines are gas guzzlers) and perform as well as the competition (their entire line-up), I don't think they should concern themselves with innovation for bragging rights' sake.