991.1 GT3 with G6
12-20-2022, 02:08 PM
#16
My E1 died end of 2021 and I had an exciting 2022 season with the G6.
If the G6 is flawed because of design, why dindt Porsche reduce the max rpm to 8800 like in the RS? It would be a simple software tune, but instead they kept 9000 rpm, give a 10 years warranty and the option to get 15 years of porsche approved (at least here in Germany)
If the G6 is flawed because of design, why dindt Porsche reduce the max rpm to 8800 like in the RS? It would be a simple software tune, but instead they kept 9000 rpm, give a 10 years warranty and the option to get 15 years of porsche approved (at least here in Germany)
12-24-2022, 09:50 PM
#17
Looks like there’s a new model model in the 991 GT3 range. The 991.1.2 😁 This is the 991.1 GT3 with a G6 engine. Just bought my 2015 in Australia and looking forward to years of enjoyment with it. Have extended Porsche warranty till 2027 which will then go to 2030. Years of worry free driving ahead and, even better, as we push closer to 2030, the 9000rpm N/A experience is likely to become even more of a rare and privileged experience.
The following 3 users liked this post by Kamiffi:
12-26-2022, 12:05 PM
#18
Instructor
As another year passes and another year of tons of collective miles on G6’s, and another year of no evidence that G6’s are not a robust engine and that they stand as a great solution to the issue, I agree there could/should be some explicit acknowledgement in naming this sub-model. It’s painful to read the mis-information posted about the 991.1 engines every time one gets listed on BAT or PCar, or even in repeat threads here on RL. Key points: a) G6 works as well as and is reliable as any 4.0; b) the only way to be sure if a car has one is to drop the pan and look at the engine stamping. FS listings headlines should state “991.1 G6” Kinda like modded Chevs clarifiying the LSx variant.
The following 2 users liked this post by Skid:
blingbling (12-27-2022),
slipaway37 (12-26-2022)
01-10-2023, 11:16 AM
#19
Please link us to the threads documenting where G6 finger followers have failed. This will prove your claim.
Are you confusing the G0 engine with the G6 engine? There are documented G0 finger follower failures but this is not the engine iteration that we are discussing.
The .2 solid lifter top end is a definite durability and performance improvement, and the hydraulic valve lash adjustment on the .1 does indeed increase contact load, frictional heating, and oil wiping at the cam-follower interface. However, if the G6 updates have mitigated the durability impacts of the legacy design, then what is the practical effect to the owner?
Designs improve over time as knowledge improves. Continuous improvement does not imply that the previous articles are "fundamentally flawed." Is your .2 motor fundamentally flawed, since it doesnt have ITBs like the 992 motor?
Are you confusing the G0 engine with the G6 engine? There are documented G0 finger follower failures but this is not the engine iteration that we are discussing.
The .2 solid lifter top end is a definite durability and performance improvement, and the hydraulic valve lash adjustment on the .1 does indeed increase contact load, frictional heating, and oil wiping at the cam-follower interface. However, if the G6 updates have mitigated the durability impacts of the legacy design, then what is the practical effect to the owner?
Designs improve over time as knowledge improves. Continuous improvement does not imply that the previous articles are "fundamentally flawed." Is your .2 motor fundamentally flawed, since it doesnt have ITBs like the 992 motor?
01-10-2023, 03:00 PM
#21
The following 2 users liked this post by slipaway37:
AndrewLakes (01-12-2023),
mtx450 (01-10-2023)