How many 15-16 gt3's have engine replaced?
08-07-2016, 07:25 AM
#1111
white smoke appearing on start has a relation to the problem?
on a cold start I get white smoke (not always) and not as much white smoke as during a cold start after getting washed, I think this can be also from the excess water during a clean
many times I get no smoke at all even sometimes on a cold start but my question is does this have any relation to the problem? I remember reading early on when I first bought the car that this is a normal characteristic of the car
on a cold start I get white smoke (not always) and not as much white smoke as during a cold start after getting washed, I think this can be also from the excess water during a clean
many times I get no smoke at all even sometimes on a cold start but my question is does this have any relation to the problem? I remember reading early on when I first bought the car that this is a normal characteristic of the car
08-07-2016, 07:34 AM
#1112
Rennlist Member
From my understanding, this has no connection to the camshaft/finger follower issue which manifests itself as miss-fires at high revs due to the very small difference in the thickness of the two components as result of the excessive wear. And we are only talking about millimetres of wear here that causes the miss-fires.
My technician told me that according to my log, one of the "reduced power" messages was caused by the ECU detecting 31 miss-fires on cylinder 6 in very rapid succession at revs over 6,500 rpm.
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but the smoke on start up is not related to this problem.
My technician told me that according to my log, one of the "reduced power" messages was caused by the ECU detecting 31 miss-fires on cylinder 6 in very rapid succession at revs over 6,500 rpm.
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but the smoke on start up is not related to this problem.
08-07-2016, 07:41 AM
#1113
Rennlist Member
The garage is going to put early miles on it, change and test the engine oil. Do a few more miles and then hand it back to me. I should get it back within two weeks.
08-07-2016, 08:08 AM
#1114
Rennlist Member
From my understanding, this has no connection to the camshaft/finger follower issue which manifests itself as miss-fires at high revs due to the very small difference in the thickness of the two components as result of the excessive wear. And we are only talking about millimetres of wear here that causes the miss-fires. My technician told me that according to my log, one of the "reduced power" messages was caused by the ECU detecting 31 miss-fires on cylinder 6 in very rapid succession at revs over 6,500 rpm. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but the smoke on start up is not related to this problem.
The wear on the finger followers/levers is actually probably in the micro millimetres of wear. The system is very sensitive to differences...
08-07-2016, 08:12 AM
#1115
Three Wheelin'
This DLC on DLC may seem like a fix, but it does not solve a cold start lack of oiling issue at all. It essentially doubled the thickness of DLC by adding to the other side. We have been led to believe that DLC coating is fine to have floating around the engine. And we know that this engines sensors detect the earliest hint of cam lobe wear and put it into a reduced power mode, which leads to a new Top end rebuild or engine replacement.
What if Porsche has just bought themselves more time, where now they can be sure future engine issues are Top end rebuilds before metal is floating around, as the engine sensors will now detect when the coating dimensions are worn, but only DLC is floating around. Not down to metal being worn yet.
I think Jamie will find out more from the Motorsports engineers on where the fix needs to go (i.e. More like the Motorsports top end)
Just a guess
What if Porsche has just bought themselves more time, where now they can be sure future engine issues are Top end rebuilds before metal is floating around, as the engine sensors will now detect when the coating dimensions are worn, but only DLC is floating around. Not down to metal being worn yet.
I think Jamie will find out more from the Motorsports engineers on where the fix needs to go (i.e. More like the Motorsports top end)
Just a guess
08-07-2016, 08:24 AM
#1116
Rennlist Member
I am going to be very interested to see how the engine performs when I get it back. I wonder if I will notice any difference?? The garage is going to put early miles on it, change and test the engine oil. Do a few more miles and then hand it back to me. I should get it back within two weeks.
As for the part number on the heads. It is very hard for me to read. Regardless of he number differs from those on the latest PET which include the heads for 911R and RS with the new DLC coated cams so I'm unsure what conclusion to draw. The last two digits are usually numbers. As you will see from below the GT3 and RS share the same heads from F 03948 up (basically all G engines). Cylinder bank 1-3 has "911" part number and bank 4-6 has "912". Perhaps your tech has a packing slip from the shipment from PAG that will identify the break out of all parts numbers for us...
08-07-2016, 09:05 AM
#1118
Rennlist Member
This DLC on DLC may seem like a fix, but it does not solve a cold start lack of oiling issue at all. It essentially doubled the thickness of DLC by adding to the other side. We have been led to believe that DLC coating is fine to have floating around the engine. And we know that this engines sensors detect the earliest hint of cam lobe wear and put it into a reduced power mode, which leads to a new Top end rebuild or engine replacement.
What if Porsche has just bought themselves more time, where now they can be sure future engine issues are Top end rebuilds before metal is floating around, as the engine sensors will now detect when the coating dimensions are worn, but only DLC is floating around. Not down to metal being worn yet.
I think Jamie will find out more from the Motorsports engineers on where the fix needs to go (i.e. More like the Motorsports top end)
Just a guess
What if Porsche has just bought themselves more time, where now they can be sure future engine issues are Top end rebuilds before metal is floating around, as the engine sensors will now detect when the coating dimensions are worn, but only DLC is floating around. Not down to metal being worn yet.
I think Jamie will find out more from the Motorsports engineers on where the fix needs to go (i.e. More like the Motorsports top end)
Just a guess
Also if a coating is called "diamond like" and it chips from the surface of the metal it is coating (one assumes it "bruises" first before fragmenting) then one assumes it is fine enough to become particulate and work its way through the engine until it is filtered out or creates swarf and runs the risk of damage to bearings and journals like any other metallic based particulate. The fact it may not be metallic or ferrous by nature does not preclude it from being by nature capable significant abrasive properties. The new filter fitted to RS engines and G 991 GT3 engines may be designed to better catch this. Oil samples may not show the materials presence due to its not ferrous nature (I understand its more like a "ceramic" coating).
The interesting thing about going through all this over this weekend, plus talking to a few PAG techs whilst I've been identifying things is that I know KNOW that the G MA175 (GT3) and G MA196 (RS) are essentially identical.
Valves, cams, followers, heads, oil pumps, essentially everything other than the pistons and the case (for the capacity increase) are part for part identical save the crank. At this stage it appears the GT3 crank is more expensive than the RS crank so I cant even say that they are significant differing quality although AP states the RS is a new "space metal".
When the RS was launched it was touted (and Ive re read the original presentations) as having new cams, valves, heads oiling and piston rings.
I can 100% say that today woith the G engine and even more recent updates in teh last few weeks the engines have become literally identical.
Porsche clearly still have a longevity issue on their hands with the 9A1 MA175 & 176 engine and I dont believe they have put this to bed yet. Chris has the very latest update of cams and finger followers, along with 911R owners and the very latest produced 911 RS cars. How many of these will see significant mileage at the track for the remainder of the year is unknown, but Im hoping that at least some of the GT3 updated with these new parts over the next few months can out on some good hard long track miles in teh next 12 months so we can better understand if the changes are holding. It should be pretty easy to monitor by taking the valve covers off after 5 track days then 10, then 15 and checking for the condition of the DLC coating on the followers and the cam lobes - the DLC shows these with much more alacrity than hardened steel.
Maybe this is where PAg chooses to stop with the street GT engines? By that I mean the MA 175 E variant engine was/is good for maybe an average of say 20-25 track hours before the wear issue becomes a problem.
With the F engine changes in Cams, we assume finger followers and perhaps ECU oil pump software have meant that on average we seem to be seeing more like 25-35 track hours before problems persist.
With the G engine (and hence also the MA176 engine for RS but of course with slightly reduced rev limit) the jury is still out in terms of overall longevity. We assume with upgraded oil pump, heads with additional oiling channels, cams, finger followers and valve springs along with re designed oil filter, and updated ECU software to run the oil pump etc we should be looking at a more reliable package again, perhaps 40-60 track hours before the issue arises but this is pure speculation - in reality the engines are too new for us to have a sample yet if this for GT3 or RS.
Now we have what I will call the "H" engine upgrades. These appear to be a new DLC lobe coating cam and possibly an updated DLC finger follower design. Perhaps the aim of this most recent development, is along with additional oil pressure, oiling gallery and all the other aforementioned changes it to get the engine reliable for around 65-85 track hours before again the issue arises.
Remember the issue if caught early requires a replacement of cams and finger followers and then assuming no damage to bearings etc from debris, you are good to go and run another 40-50 track days before having to consider another valve train overhaul.
I'm just saying perhaps PAG only intend to take us this far? Maybe 80 track hours is deemed enough. And maybe it is for a highly tuned DFI engine in this day and age - Im doubting any of Porsches competitors in this space can produce a reliable 80 hour track engine that doenst require work, especially for the price. I cant see the 458 Speciale managing this for twice the money!
One thing this excerise has meant for me this weekend is that
A). Porsche still havent sorted this problem out
B). this problem is for RS aengines as well as GT3 so no more making the GT3 the leeper as we are porobably all in the same boat
C). based on A above I cannot see that PAG yet have a 100% cast iron reliable solution for 991.2 GT3 engine and they must be now getting very critical to sign off for that unit! My best guess is that they will install the new DLC lobed cams.
Lastly - it occurs to me that PAG will be rebuilding all our engines for quite some time under warranty and later goodwill and that we are part of a rolling test bed for this DFI GT engine wether we like it or not. I have no doubt in 20-30 track days time my new G engine may be in for teh latest version of finger followers and cam lobes they have deemed address better the issue. Such is life, I will loose no sleep, its a minor irritation by the time they get durability to the 80+ track hours for me not to be overly concerned about this and I still have my high revving GT3 engine to enjoy...
08-07-2016, 10:56 AM
#1119
Like you I still have my faith in Jamie/Dundon and their contract engineers in coming up with a workable solution. As much or more faith than I do in Porsche who till this point have not proven a reliable solution (and its WAY too early to call this new development with DLC cams a win until its done some heavy miles).
Also if a coating is called "diamond like" and it chips from the surface of the metal it is coating (one assumes it "bruises" first before fragmenting) then one assumes it is fine enough to become particulate and work its way through the engine until it is filtered out or creates swarf and runs the risk of damage to bearings and journals like any other metallic based particulate. The fact it may not be metallic or ferrous by nature does not preclude it from being by nature capable significant abrasive properties. The new filter fitted to RS engines and G 991 GT3 engines may be designed to better catch this. Oil samples may not show the materials presence due to its not ferrous nature (I understand its more like a "ceramic" coating).
The interesting thing about going through all this over this weekend, plus talking to a few PAG techs whilst I've been identifying things is that I know KNOW that the G MA175 (GT3) and G MA196 (RS) are essentially identical.
Valves, cams, followers, heads, oil pumps, essentially everything other than the pistons and the case (for the capacity increase) are part for part identical save the crank. At this stage it appears the GT3 crank is more expensive than the RS crank so I cant even say that they are significant differing quality although AP states the RS is a new "space metal".
When the RS was launched it was touted (and Ive re read the original presentations) as having new cams, valves, heads oiling and piston rings.
I can 100% say that today woith the G engine and even more recent updates in teh last few weeks the engines have become literally identical.
Porsche clearly still have a longevity issue on their hands with the 9A1 MA175 & 176 engine and I dont believe they have put this to bed yet. Chris has the very latest update of cams and finger followers, along with 911R owners and the very latest produced 911 RS cars. How many of these will see significant mileage at the track for the remainder of the year is unknown, but Im hoping that at least some of the GT3 updated with these new parts over the next few months can out on some good hard long track miles in teh next 12 months so we can better understand if the changes are holding. It should be pretty easy to monitor by taking the valve covers off after 5 track days then 10, then 15 and checking for the condition of the DLC coating on the followers and the cam lobes - the DLC shows these with much more alacrity than hardened steel.
Maybe this is where PAg chooses to stop with the street GT engines? By that I mean the MA 175 E variant engine was/is good for maybe an average of say 20-25 track hours before the wear issue becomes a problem.
With the F engine changes in Cams, we assume finger followers and perhaps ECU oil pump software have meant that on average we seem to be seeing more like 25-35 track hours before problems persist.
With the G engine (and hence also the MA176 engine for RS but of course with slightly reduced rev limit) the jury is still out in terms of overall longevity. We assume with upgraded oil pump, heads with additional oiling channels, cams, finger followers and valve springs along with re designed oil filter, and updated ECU software to run the oil pump etc we should be looking at a more reliable package again, perhaps 40-60 track hours before the issue arises but this is pure speculation - in reality the engines are too new for us to have a sample yet if this for GT3 or RS.
Now we have what I will call the "H" engine upgrades. These appear to be a new DLC lobe coating cam and possibly an updated DLC finger follower design. Perhaps the aim of this most recent development, is along with additional oil pressure, oiling gallery and all the other aforementioned changes it to get the engine reliable for around 65-85 track hours before again the issue arises.
Remember the issue if caught early requires a replacement of cams and finger followers and then assuming no damage to bearings etc from debris, you are good to go and run another 40-50 track days before having to consider another valve train overhaul.
I'm just saying perhaps PAG only intend to take us this far? Maybe 80 track hours is deemed enough. And maybe it is for a highly tuned DFI engine in this day and age - Im doubting any of Porsches competitors in this space can produce a reliable 80 hour track engine that doenst require work, especially for the price. I cant see the 458 Speciale managing this for twice the money!
One thing this excerise has meant for me this weekend is that
A). Porsche still havent sorted this problem out
B). this problem is for RS aengines as well as GT3 so no more making the GT3 the leeper as we are porobably all in the same boat
C). based on A above I cannot see that PAG yet have a 100% cast iron reliable solution for 991.2 GT3 engine and they must be now getting very critical to sign off for that unit! My best guess is that they will install the new DLC lobed cams.
Lastly - it occurs to me that PAG will be rebuilding all our engines for quite some time under warranty and later goodwill and that we are part of a rolling test bed for this DFI GT engine wether we like it or not. I have no doubt in 20-30 track days time my new G engine may be in for teh latest version of finger followers and cam lobes they have deemed address better the issue. Such is life, I will loose no sleep, its a minor irritation by the time they get durability to the 80+ track hours for me not to be overly concerned about this and I still have my high revving GT3 engine to enjoy...
Also if a coating is called "diamond like" and it chips from the surface of the metal it is coating (one assumes it "bruises" first before fragmenting) then one assumes it is fine enough to become particulate and work its way through the engine until it is filtered out or creates swarf and runs the risk of damage to bearings and journals like any other metallic based particulate. The fact it may not be metallic or ferrous by nature does not preclude it from being by nature capable significant abrasive properties. The new filter fitted to RS engines and G 991 GT3 engines may be designed to better catch this. Oil samples may not show the materials presence due to its not ferrous nature (I understand its more like a "ceramic" coating).
The interesting thing about going through all this over this weekend, plus talking to a few PAG techs whilst I've been identifying things is that I know KNOW that the G MA175 (GT3) and G MA196 (RS) are essentially identical.
Valves, cams, followers, heads, oil pumps, essentially everything other than the pistons and the case (for the capacity increase) are part for part identical save the crank. At this stage it appears the GT3 crank is more expensive than the RS crank so I cant even say that they are significant differing quality although AP states the RS is a new "space metal".
When the RS was launched it was touted (and Ive re read the original presentations) as having new cams, valves, heads oiling and piston rings.
I can 100% say that today woith the G engine and even more recent updates in teh last few weeks the engines have become literally identical.
Porsche clearly still have a longevity issue on their hands with the 9A1 MA175 & 176 engine and I dont believe they have put this to bed yet. Chris has the very latest update of cams and finger followers, along with 911R owners and the very latest produced 911 RS cars. How many of these will see significant mileage at the track for the remainder of the year is unknown, but Im hoping that at least some of the GT3 updated with these new parts over the next few months can out on some good hard long track miles in teh next 12 months so we can better understand if the changes are holding. It should be pretty easy to monitor by taking the valve covers off after 5 track days then 10, then 15 and checking for the condition of the DLC coating on the followers and the cam lobes - the DLC shows these with much more alacrity than hardened steel.
Maybe this is where PAg chooses to stop with the street GT engines? By that I mean the MA 175 E variant engine was/is good for maybe an average of say 20-25 track hours before the wear issue becomes a problem.
With the F engine changes in Cams, we assume finger followers and perhaps ECU oil pump software have meant that on average we seem to be seeing more like 25-35 track hours before problems persist.
With the G engine (and hence also the MA176 engine for RS but of course with slightly reduced rev limit) the jury is still out in terms of overall longevity. We assume with upgraded oil pump, heads with additional oiling channels, cams, finger followers and valve springs along with re designed oil filter, and updated ECU software to run the oil pump etc we should be looking at a more reliable package again, perhaps 40-60 track hours before the issue arises but this is pure speculation - in reality the engines are too new for us to have a sample yet if this for GT3 or RS.
Now we have what I will call the "H" engine upgrades. These appear to be a new DLC lobe coating cam and possibly an updated DLC finger follower design. Perhaps the aim of this most recent development, is along with additional oil pressure, oiling gallery and all the other aforementioned changes it to get the engine reliable for around 65-85 track hours before again the issue arises.
Remember the issue if caught early requires a replacement of cams and finger followers and then assuming no damage to bearings etc from debris, you are good to go and run another 40-50 track days before having to consider another valve train overhaul.
I'm just saying perhaps PAG only intend to take us this far? Maybe 80 track hours is deemed enough. And maybe it is for a highly tuned DFI engine in this day and age - Im doubting any of Porsches competitors in this space can produce a reliable 80 hour track engine that doenst require work, especially for the price. I cant see the 458 Speciale managing this for twice the money!
One thing this excerise has meant for me this weekend is that
A). Porsche still havent sorted this problem out
B). this problem is for RS aengines as well as GT3 so no more making the GT3 the leeper as we are porobably all in the same boat
C). based on A above I cannot see that PAG yet have a 100% cast iron reliable solution for 991.2 GT3 engine and they must be now getting very critical to sign off for that unit! My best guess is that they will install the new DLC lobed cams.
Lastly - it occurs to me that PAG will be rebuilding all our engines for quite some time under warranty and later goodwill and that we are part of a rolling test bed for this DFI GT engine wether we like it or not. I have no doubt in 20-30 track days time my new G engine may be in for teh latest version of finger followers and cam lobes they have deemed address better the issue. Such is life, I will loose no sleep, its a minor irritation by the time they get durability to the 80+ track hours for me not to be overly concerned about this and I still have my high revving GT3 engine to enjoy...
Regarding DLC, I made my living depositing these materials for use as dielectrics in the IC industry for some years. Hardness, adhesion and other properties of these coatings can vary depending on the process conditions and resultant chemical structure.
However, these coatings are not miracle coatings and are ultra thin, on the order of angstroms or tens of nanometers. If adequate oiling is not provided, the coatings will be removed by abrasion and/or delamination. DLC ain't gonna help if lubrication is inadequate.
I would also suggest that the abraided DLC particles are not creating any substantial wear because there is a infinitesimal amount of this material being removed that is being constantly washed away by oil as it is removed from the metal surfaces.
I am interested to see what the Dundon guys come up with.
Great thread, thanks.
Last edited by unclejosh; 08-07-2016 at 11:14 AM.
08-07-2016, 11:49 AM
#1120
Race Director
Thanks for looking into this so thoroughly, Macca. While this isn't the complete picture, what you have laid out is the best insight we have into the situation to date. I also agree with your conclusions. Great stuff!
08-07-2016, 12:19 PM
#1121
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Smoke on startup....
As you may or may not know, the piston rings "float" in their groove around the piston, with a very small gap between the ends. So depending on where the gap ends up on engine shut down there is a slight chance a small amount of oil can drip through into combustion chamber and thus cause smoke on start up. It's the rings constantly floating in a complete circle that causes the randomness coupled with the fact that 2 or more rings could be in the same location causing an even great drip....It kinda depends on were all the gaps were located on assembly....
As you may or may not know, the piston rings "float" in their groove around the piston, with a very small gap between the ends. So depending on where the gap ends up on engine shut down there is a slight chance a small amount of oil can drip through into combustion chamber and thus cause smoke on start up. It's the rings constantly floating in a complete circle that causes the randomness coupled with the fact that 2 or more rings could be in the same location causing an even great drip....It kinda depends on were all the gaps were located on assembly....
08-07-2016, 02:03 PM
#1122
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
This DLC on DLC may seem like a fix, but it does not solve a cold start lack of oiling issue at all. It essentially doubled the thickness of DLC by adding to the other side. We have been led to believe that DLC coating is fine to have floating around the engine. And we know that this engines sensors detect the earliest hint of cam lobe wear and put it into a reduced power mode, which leads to a new Top end rebuild or engine replacement.
What if Porsche has just bought themselves more time, where now they can be sure future engine issues are Top end rebuilds before metal is floating around, as the engine sensors will now detect when the coating dimensions are worn, but only DLC is floating around. Not down to metal being worn yet.
I think Jamie will find out more from the Motorsports engineers on where the fix needs to go (i.e. More like the Motorsports top end)
Just a guess
What if Porsche has just bought themselves more time, where now they can be sure future engine issues are Top end rebuilds before metal is floating around, as the engine sensors will now detect when the coating dimensions are worn, but only DLC is floating around. Not down to metal being worn yet.
I think Jamie will find out more from the Motorsports engineers on where the fix needs to go (i.e. More like the Motorsports top end)
Just a guess
I agree that this is an "extend the time before there is an issue" solution.
DLC on DLC with no oil will wear, don't know the length of time until issues, but it will wear...
Guys,
Regarding DLC, I made my living depositing these materials for use as dielectrics in the IC industry for some years. Hardness, adhesion and other properties of these coatings can vary depending on the process conditions and resultant chemical structure.
However, these coatings are not miracle coatings and are ultra thin, on the order of angstroms or tens of nanometers. If adequate oiling is not provided, the coatings will be removed by abrasion and/or delamination. DLC ain't gonna help if lubrication is inadequate.
I would also suggest that the abraided DLC particles are not creating any substantial wear because there is a infinitesimal amount of this material being removed that is being constantly washed away by oil as it is removed from the metal surfaces.
I am interested to see what the Dundon guys come up with.
Great thread, thanks.
Regarding DLC, I made my living depositing these materials for use as dielectrics in the IC industry for some years. Hardness, adhesion and other properties of these coatings can vary depending on the process conditions and resultant chemical structure.
However, these coatings are not miracle coatings and are ultra thin, on the order of angstroms or tens of nanometers. If adequate oiling is not provided, the coatings will be removed by abrasion and/or delamination. DLC ain't gonna help if lubrication is inadequate.
I would also suggest that the abraided DLC particles are not creating any substantial wear because there is a infinitesimal amount of this material being removed that is being constantly washed away by oil as it is removed from the metal surfaces.
I am interested to see what the Dundon guys come up with.
Great thread, thanks.
The company were working with on the design also provides DLC coatings for F1, WEC and other race teams. We've consulted with them on the DLC on DLC modificstion and will see what they come back with, pretty sure that it will extend the life, not fix the issue.
Smoke on startup....
As you may or may not know, the piston rings "float" in their groove around the piston, with a very small gap between the ends. So depending on where the gap ends up on engine shut down there is a slight chance a small amount of oil can drip through into combustion chamber and thus cause smoke on start up. It's the rings constantly floating in a complete circle that causes the randomness coupled with the fact that 2 or more rings could be in the same location causing an even great drip....It kinda depends on were all the gaps were located on assembly....
As you may or may not know, the piston rings "float" in their groove around the piston, with a very small gap between the ends. So depending on where the gap ends up on engine shut down there is a slight chance a small amount of oil can drip through into combustion chamber and thus cause smoke on start up. It's the rings constantly floating in a complete circle that causes the randomness coupled with the fact that 2 or more rings could be in the same location causing an even great drip....It kinda depends on were all the gaps were located on assembly....
My 2014 GT3 definitely not water and you can smell it.
Wonder if we could go back and request a re ring due to excessive smoking from an emissions stand point... Hmmm...
__________________
Dundon Motorsports
Gig Harbor, WA
253-200-4454
jamie@dundonmotorsports.com
www.dundonmotorsports.com
Facebook.com/dundonmotorsports
Instagram @dundon_motorsports
Dundon Motorsports
Gig Harbor, WA
253-200-4454
jamie@dundonmotorsports.com
www.dundonmotorsports.com
Facebook.com/dundonmotorsports
Instagram @dundon_motorsports
08-07-2016, 02:37 PM
#1123
Agreed, I think Tarek's (KSA_GT3) issue is condensation. White smoke is normally water and doesn't really have much of a smell. My 2014 GT3 definitely not water and you can smell it. Wonder if we could go back and request a re ring due to excessive smoking from an emissions stand point... Hmmm...
08-07-2016, 02:54 PM
#1124
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Condensation in the exhaust or water in the exhaust will be white smoke.
The occasional smell is likely from the lack of cats on your Dundon Race headers!
