Notices
991 GT3, GT3RS, GT2RS and 911R 2012-2019
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

991.1 Finger follower progress

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-21-2018, 05:22 PM
  #16  
ilovecarbs
Instructor
 
ilovecarbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Jamie@dundonmotorsports
The 9A1 engine is pretty great, with a solid lash valve train and proper lubrication it's fantastic, see the 9A2 (2018 GT3 4.0L).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the 9A2 the turbocharged motor in the "regular" 911's?
Old 05-21-2018, 05:57 PM
  #17  
Jamie@dundonmotorsports
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor

 
Jamie@dundonmotorsports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Gig Harbor, Wa
Posts: 1,954
Received 369 Likes on 204 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ilovecarbs
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the 9A2 the turbocharged motor in the "regular" 911's?
Corrected, sorry... A175/176 are the 2014-2016 GT3/RS engines. DGGA is 2018 GT3 and DGGB is 2019 RS...
__________________
Dundon Motorsports
Gig Harbor, WA
253-200-4454
jamie@dundonmotorsports.com

www.dundonmotorsports.com
Facebook.com/dundonmotorsports
Instagram @dundon_motorsports
Old 05-21-2018, 06:10 PM
  #18  
ilovecarbs
Instructor
 
ilovecarbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Jamie@dundonmotorsports
Corrected, sorry... A175/176 are the 2014-2016 GT3/RS engines. DGGA is 2018 GT3 and DGGB is 2019 RS...
Thanks for the correction Jamie. What's the full designation on the 991.2 GT3/RS engines (e.g. MA175/MA176)?
Old 05-21-2018, 10:13 PM
  #19  
Jamie@dundonmotorsports
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor

 
Jamie@dundonmotorsports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Gig Harbor, Wa
Posts: 1,954
Received 369 Likes on 204 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ilovecarbs
Thanks for the correction Jamie. What's the full designation on the 991.2 GT3/RS engines (e.g. MA175/MA176)?
They're the same part number (9A1 100 977 00) delineated by the DGGA (2018 GT3) and DGGB (2019 RS) model descriptors...

Jamie
Old 05-22-2018, 12:32 AM
  #20  
Loess
Three Wheelin'
 
Loess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,300
Received 174 Likes on 94 Posts
Default

Can you run a 4.5 litre 6 cylinder engine at 9000rpm? Has there ever been an engine to do this?
Old 05-22-2018, 03:28 PM
  #21  
Jamie@dundonmotorsports
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor

 
Jamie@dundonmotorsports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Gig Harbor, Wa
Posts: 1,954
Received 369 Likes on 204 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Loess
Can you run a 4.5 litre 6 cylinder engine at 9000rpm? Has there ever been an engine to do this?
it’s just physics. If you manage the mass of the rotating assembly, the side loading, the geometry, the friction etc. then it’s not impossible to get it there. Have to make sure the engine breathes all the way to 9000...

Old 05-22-2018, 06:23 PM
  #22  
Palting
Nordschleife Master
 
Palting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: North Eastern US
Posts: 5,075
Received 238 Likes on 153 Posts
Default

I'd have to with Rob on this one. As I understand it, the current replacement engines no longer have this issue. And if you have the original engine and run out the warranty at 100,000 miles, it would be a stretch to think that something will happen at 110,000 miles. OTOH, I suppose some people will still worry. At least they will have this option.
Old 05-22-2018, 09:26 PM
  #23  
Airbag997
Rennlist Member
 
Airbag997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,236
Received 516 Likes on 270 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Palting
I'd have to with Rob on this one. As I understand it, the current replacement engines no longer have this issue. And if you have the original engine and run out the warranty at 100,000 miles, it would be a stretch to think that something will happen at 110,000 miles. OTOH, I suppose some people will still worry. At least they will have this option.
There have been G engine FF failures. Recorded on Rennlist. As DM stated, the hydraulic lifters are a inherent design flaw. Porsche masked the issue, they didn't resolve it.
Old 05-22-2018, 09:47 PM
  #24  
Petevb
Rennlist Member
 
Petevb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,728
Received 705 Likes on 282 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 0to60
Bye bye 10 year engine warranty.
Why would anyone mod this engine only to forfeit the warranty ?
It seems like a warranty on the upgraded engine which expires coincident with the OEM coverage would be a good way to both demonstrate confidence and address that concern.
Old 05-22-2018, 10:36 PM
  #25  
RobbieRob
Pro
 
RobbieRob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: PA Suburbs
Posts: 577
Received 109 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Petevb

It seems like a warranty on the upgraded engine which expires coincident with the OEM coverage would be a good way to both demonstrate confidence and address that concern.
Absolutely correct and that's how it should be, but since the warranty is a band aid, they can't just throw a G engine in and wipe their hands. Nice job to the OP, Dundon and whoever else was involved in giving customers an option.
Old 05-23-2018, 01:59 AM
  #26  
robmypro
Race Director
 
robmypro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 10,235
Received 1,784 Likes on 1,027 Posts
Default

Porsche provided us with test results clearly showing that the FF problem was fixed. Hydraulic lifters have been around a very long time, so no reason to believe there is an inherent flaw with the design. In fact, the .1 RS shares a very similar design to the .1 GT3, and they don’t have the FF problem. So if Porsche says they fixed it, i have no reason to believe otherwise.
Old 05-23-2018, 01:10 PM
  #27  
ZBR
5th Gear
 
ZBR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by robmypro
Porsche provided us with test results clearly showing that the FF problem was fixed. Hydraulic lifters have been around a very long time, so no reason to believe there is an inherent flaw with the design. In fact, the .1 RS shares a very similar design to the .1 GT3, and they don’t have the FF problem. So if Porsche says they fixed it, i have no reason to believe otherwise.
So you mean that the G engine don't fails?
Old 05-23-2018, 01:42 PM
  #28  
robmypro
Race Director
 
robmypro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 10,235
Received 1,784 Likes on 1,027 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ZBR
So you mean that the G engine don't fails?
They are just as likely to fail as E or F. Porsche made it clear that there are other differences between the .1 GT3 and RS.
Old 05-23-2018, 02:28 PM
  #29  
jadski
Rennlist Member
 
jadski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 189
Received 55 Likes on 26 Posts
Default

I think OP will have business. I have come across at least 5 salvaged .1 GT3’s over the past year that I have considered purchasing and using to build a racecar. However no warranty on a salvage car and the finger follower issues have made me stay away. I think this really opens the door for rebuilding salvage cars as track monsters. Good job. Look forward to seeing examples of these engines in action
Old 05-23-2018, 02:45 PM
  #30  
Airbag997
Rennlist Member
 
Airbag997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,236
Received 516 Likes on 270 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by robmypro
Porsche provided us with test results clearly showing that the FF problem was fixed. Hydraulic lifters have been around a very long time, so no reason to believe there is an inherent flaw with the design. In fact, the .1 RS shares a very similar design to the .1 GT3, and they don’t have the FF problem. So if Porsche says they fixed it, i have no reason to believe otherwise.
It's important to remember F=MA. The 4.0 in the RS has lower redline (8600), and optimized DLC coating and oiling etc. Mitigation vs. resolution. The FF forces experienced are nearly exponential wrt RPM, that extra 400 RPM in the 3.8 is not linear. This topic has been somewhat beat to death, but again, look at any NA high revving motor (Superbikes excellent example with 14-15k RPM limits) they all utilize solid lifter designs due to the intrinsic inertial drag of hydraulic lifters and forces involved. Ducati dominated in the 70's with desmodromic valve trains, because they reduced inertial drag by ditching valve springs and extracting extra RPM and HP. Notice how the 991.2 RS has a 9k RPM limit....because the FF forces are significantly less now with solid lifters.

Porsche did what they could to optimize and mitigate the FF wear within the boundaries of financial limits, but it's still far from a robust design. It pains me because I was dead set on 991 GT3, but even with the 10 yr warranty I'm staying away and holding out for 991.2.


Quick Reply: 991.1 Finger follower progress



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 09:10 PM.