Crown
Board: Porsche - 911 - 997
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
An engine designed in the 90s should be old history and have its place in a museum, for any self-respecting manufacturer.
Now if I was of the opinion that Porsche is not capable of producing a better/stronger/more reliable/cleaner/more economical engine after all these years, I would stop bothering with this marque and move elsewhere.
Simply because, by definition, if they cannot improve on admittedly a good engine in the span of some 15-20 years, it means that they don't have any engineering ability worth spending my money on.
Now if I was of the opinion that Porsche is not capable of producing a better/stronger/more reliable/cleaner/more economical engine after all these years, I would stop bothering with this marque and move elsewhere.
Simply because, by definition, if they cannot improve on admittedly a good engine in the span of some 15-20 years, it means that they don't have any engineering ability worth spending my money on.
Jul 17, 2008 3:28:40 PM
- Turbo4ever
- Senior
-
- Loc: HK , Hong Kong
- Posts: 723, Gallery
- Registered on: Sep 13, 2007
- Reply to: reginos
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Quote:
reginos said:
Now if I was of the opinion that Porsche is not capable of producing a better/stronger/more reliable/cleaner/more economical engine after all these years, I would stop bothering with this marque and move elsewhere.
Simply because, by definition, if they cannot improve on admittedly a good engine in the span of some 15-20 years, it means that they don't have any engineering ability worth spending my money on.
Agreed!
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
You are confusing engine with engine block. Unless they are going to shorten the stroke considerably, I am sure Porsche could have continued to use the old block. I think most of you are aware but this is all about streamlining production flow, reducing parts count and applying modern mass-market production methods to lower cost, not necessarily to make a better or stronger engine block, although it will be marketed as such.
I would hate to see the them use a Nicasil coated bore like the use in the base 997 engine, but I fear that this is exactly what is going to happen.
I realize now it IS the same engine, please say this is not true, I will have to resort to resort to restoring old Porsches instead.
I would hate to see the them use a Nicasil coated bore like the use in the base 997 engine, but I fear that this is exactly what is going to happen.
I realize now it IS the same engine, please say this is not true, I will have to resort to resort to restoring old Porsches instead.
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Well it looks like my GT3 might be a keeper.
Regardless of what level of engineering they use its still a question of design philosophy. The external oil tank is a better design philosophy than the wet sump. Its a cost cutting philosophy and I dont agree with it. It seems to fold in with Porsches profit at all cost. They will come back with "Oh it will be at least as good as the old one."
However most automakers use the external oil tank design in all their most aggressive models and race cars. Its another example of Porsche moving further away from the Race track in order to chase the dollar.
Regardless of what level of engineering they use its still a question of design philosophy. The external oil tank is a better design philosophy than the wet sump. Its a cost cutting philosophy and I dont agree with it. It seems to fold in with Porsches profit at all cost. They will come back with "Oh it will be at least as good as the old one."
However most automakers use the external oil tank design in all their most aggressive models and race cars. Its another example of Porsche moving further away from the Race track in order to chase the dollar.
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Quote:
OldGuy said:
Well it looks like my GT3 might be a keeper.
Regardless of what level of engineering they use its still a question of design philosophy. The external oil tank is a better design philosophy than the wet sump. Its a cost cutting philosophy and I dont agree with it. It seems to fold in with Porsches profit at all cost. They will come back with "Oh it will be at least as good as the old one."
However most automakers use the external oil tank design in all their most aggressive models and race cars. Its another example of Porsche moving further away from the Race track in order to chase the dollar.
Car manufacturers need to reduce production cost to be able to introduce new technologies which also improve emissions, etc. Take the superb V8 and V10 BMW engines used in the current M3 and M5. Both engines will be very likely replaced by twin-turbo charged V6 engines with maximum 4 l capacity by the next model change. This is how it works, no more money for expensive racing technology, products need to get cheaper, more simple to build, etc. Most customers don't have a clue about the engine or technology used in their cars, so I don't think it would have a huge impact on sales figures.
Jul 21, 2008 9:41:16 PM
- cibergypsy
- Pilot
-
- Loc: FL, USA , United States
- Posts: 366, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 21, 2006
-
Reply to:
RC
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
As an off topic (sort of) question, didn't the 944 Turbo Cup cars and the 968 Turbo RS have a wet sump engine? I had a 1988 944 Turbo and a 968 Coupé, both with wet sump motors, and never had any issues at the track. The 944 Turbo Cup cars were the predecessors to the 964 Cup cars and the 968 Turbo RS has a racing history too, as explained in PCA's Panorama magazine. Again, this is off-topic sort off but also may be taken into account since our Carreras don't have a traditional dry sump motor and it seems that, according to what I read here, the Turbo won't have it in the future. Nevertheless, I still prefer to have a traditional dry sump engine like the one in my 87 Carrera than the "integrated" dry sump on my X51 Carrera S. Now that I'm talking about this, would you consider selling an X51 Carrera S model year 2006 in order to replace it with a late model 996 Turbo??? Any advise would be greatly appreciated since this question has been going through my mind for over a year. I mean, I love the driving dynamics of my Carrera S but the GT1 derived motor is way superior and so is the Turbo's transmission. Let me know what you guys think, thanks!
Jul 21, 2008 10:05:33 PM
- Grant
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Denver, CO , United States
- Posts: 12588, Gallery
- Registered on: Aug 21, 2002
- Reply to: cibergypsy
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Quote:
cibergypsy said:
As an off topic (sort of) question, didn't the 944 Turbo Cup cars and the 968 Turbo RS have a wet sump engine? I had a 1988 944 Turbo and a 968 Coupé, both with wet sump motors, and never had any issues at the track.
Yes, and you are lucky if you never had a problem at the track. Do a Google search and you will see many problems under "Porsche 951 Rod Bearing Failure". Many track/race cars have had major engine failures due to oiling insufficiency.
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Quote:
Grant said:Quote:
cibergypsy said:
As an off topic (sort of) question, didn't the 944 Turbo Cup cars and the 968 Turbo RS have a wet sump engine? I had a 1988 944 Turbo and a 968 Coupé, both with wet sump motors, and never had any issues at the track.
Yes, and you are lucky if you never had a problem at the track. Do a Google search and you will see many problems under "Porsche 951 Rod Bearing Failure". Many track/race cars have had major engine failures due to oiling insufficiency.
#2 rod bearings commonly fail after 100k miles, or once put into track duty. Granted, that is a pretty darn good lifespan.
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
I am not at all convinced that the drop of the GT1-inspired/Metzger engine is a big loss. I cannot fathom PAG to design a lesser engine going forward. I have been critical of PAG but I think that clinging to the GT1-inspired/Metzger engine is pure nostalgia. Those engines are good but, like all engines, they are not bullet-proof as people say. They have RMS failures too - less, yes, but they have them.
The new engine is a streamlined, simplified engineering, design - and in engineering simpler designs are a good thing.
The new engine is a streamlined, simplified engineering, design - and in engineering simpler designs are a good thing.
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Quote:
ADias said:
I am not at all convinced that the drop of the GT1-inspired/Metzger engine is a big loss. I cannot fathom PAG to design a lesser engine going forward. I have been critical of PAG but I think that clinging to the GT1-inspired/Metzger engine is pure nostalgia. Those engines are good but, like all engines, they are not bullet-proof as people say. They have RMS failures too - less, yes, but they have them.
The new engine is a streamlined, simplified engineering, design - and in engineering simpler designs are a good thing.
The GT1 motor is not an icon for its resistance to RMS leaks. It can take a level of long-term high-rev abuse with no ill effects that is unmatched in any other motor in current production (and maybe ever).
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Quote:
Grant said:Quote:
ADias said:
I am not at all convinced that the drop of the GT1-inspired/Metzger engine is a big loss. I cannot fathom PAG to design a lesser engine going forward. I have been critical of PAG but I think that clinging to the GT1-inspired/Metzger engine is pure nostalgia. Those engines are good but, like all engines, they are not bullet-proof as people say. They have RMS failures too - less, yes, but they have them.
The new engine is a streamlined, simplified engineering, design - and in engineering simpler designs are a good thing.
The GT1 motor is not an icon for its resistance to RMS leaks. It can take a level of long-term high-rev abuse with no ill effects that is unmatched in any other motor in current production (and maybe ever).
Grant: I mentioned the RMS because that's the most common failure on the current M96/M97 engines. The M96/M97 engines, with their quirky sub-cradle/secondary shaft design (now fixed in the new engine) are actually quite reliable for regular use and occasional track use. They last 200k miles. Anyone can recklessly kill either the M96/M97 or GT1 with a failed downshift overrev type 2.
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Quote:
ADias said:Grant: I mentioned the RMS because that's the most common failure on the current M96/M97 engines. The M96/M97 engines, with their quirky sub-cradle/secondary shaft design (now fixed in the new engine) are actually quite reliable for regular use and occasional track use. They last 200k miles. Anyone can recklessly kill either the M96/M97 or GT1 with a failed downshift overrev type 2.
I understand, but a GT1 motor puts out 90hp more with the same displacement (997 GT3 vs 997 C2) and revs 1,200rpm higher and that results in MUCH more abuse on the engine - yet it carries on without breaking a sweat. I don't think we even know how long they'll last, since they almost never need a rebuild yet...
Re: 997Gt3 Mk2 to have 9A1 engine?
Quote:
Grant said:The GT1 motor is not an icon for its resistance to RMS leaks. It can take a level of long-term high-rev abuse with no ill effects that is unmatched in any other motor in current production (and maybe ever).
Grant - an extremely insightful, articulate and concise post.
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
