When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Has this been done to your car? And you have direct knowledge how? So someone has broken the Porsche encryption? And it's not any of the major tuners? Just some guy in his basement with his laptop?
There's an article on this topic of 991.2 tuning and ECU issues you might find useful.
There's an article on this topic of 991.2 tuning and ECU issues you might find useful.
I get what you are saying but the Powerkit option suncoast is offering is factory warranted, original, installed by Porsche dealerships only and tightly controlled. It is authentic. It's not available on the Base model.
I'm also not sure what you are talking about in your previous post that the factory base 991.2 is already making over 400hp. All the dynos I have seen are supporting Porsche's claim of around 370hp. Maybe I am missing something.
I get what you are saying but the Powerkit option suncoast is offering is factory warranted, original, installed by Porsche dealerships only and tightly controlled. It is authentic. It's not available on the Base model.
I'm also not sure what you are talking about in your previous post that the factory base 991.2 is already making over 400hp. All the dynos I have seen are supporting Porsche's claim of around 370hp. Maybe I am missing something.
Agreed just saying you can purchase this from Suncoast whether or not you have an S. They still get the business and you still get the turbos.
Obviously Porsche will not warranty it but I'm pointing out base cars and T cars will not be left out in the cold and will only become more appealing with the X51 turbos. In essence, they become an even greater performance value.
My own testing on the same dyno type shows the 991.2 base offers 75 horsepower and 100 lb-ft of torque over the 991.1 base.
Furthermore, it matches the 991.1 Carrera S peak output but offers more torque and area under the curve. Right there you know it is making 400+ hp as if the 58 whp on top of the 991.1 Carrera did not already tell you that. Plus the trap speeds...
I am just going by own my dyno testing on a dyno I have used and comparing cars on that same dyno type. 368 whp is extremely conservative as the 991.2 Carrera S for example shows 380 whp stock on a Dynojet. A GTS is obviously making more power and will top 400 whp on a Dynojet. I don't use a MAHA though it's a popular dyno in Europe.
It's important to understand different dynos read differently and for the best comparisons you want the same cars on the same dyno.
You could help add some data as a dyno of your X51 would be interesting to see. Go get a dyno done
P.S.
368 whp from a 450 hp crank rating would be 19% losses and 911's are much more efficient than that. Not sure where you got 'right on the money' from regarding the MAHA whp.
Sticky was a correction applied to the readings for your 991.2? If so the dyno will appear to produce an anomalous high reading. A correction needs to be applied to NA engines for elevation/T/P whereas modern turbos ECUs account for these items already - thus any correction delivers an over read.
Sport Auto are all over this stuff and wrote a fantastic article on this - they then went and ran the same 991TTS on three different MAHA dynos at different altitudes and temperatures.
They found there was less than 3HP (AFW) difference between the dynos all though the dynos read slightly high, yielding values of 3HP, 4HP and 6HP above the official Porsche figures (well within Porsche error margins).
Note Prad WHP is regarded as a minimum at the wheels.
Sticky was a correction applied to the readings for your 991.2? If so the dyno will appear to produce an anomalous high reading. A correction needs to be applied to NA engines for elevation/T/P whereas modern turbos ECUs account for these items already - thus any correction delivers an over read.
Sport Auto are all over this stuff and wrote a fantastic article on this - they then went and ran the same 991TTS on three different MAHA dynos at different altitudes and temperatures.
They found there was less than 3HP (AFW) difference between the dynos all though the dynos read slightly high, yielding values of 3HP, 4HP and 6HP above the official Porsche figures (well within Porsche error margins).
Note Prad WHP is regarded as a minimum at the wheels.
No and I did several runs before and after mods going by average specifically to avoid any outliers. Furthermore, a good operator knows what they are doing.
I'm not sure if you are familiar with Mustang dynamometers which are popular in the USA.
Regardless, I have no idea what would make you think a Mustang is reading high when it is an eddy current dyno known for being more conservative than a Dynojet. They read low.
Have you ever dyno'd any of your cars or studied graphs before?
997.2 GT3 RS 4.0's are known to hit 450 whp on Dynojets. You're trying to tell me the new 991.2 4.0 is making way less power at the wheels?
Clearly the MAHA is conservative and I'm not sure why you think 368 whp is right on the money for 450 crank when that results in 19% losses as stated. Would you please explain your reasoning? Porsche is conservative on hp ratings traditionally.
I wrote an article comparing Dynojet vs. Mustang dyno results if you want to read it to learn more about different Dyno types. As I said, different dynos produce different results so trying to compare different dynos from different machines is an exercise in futility.
It's a shame you didn't get a baseline before getting the X51 kit as you are guessing as to the difference. As you are in Australia you have plenty of dynos available including the Dyno Dynamics which is made there. Go get some runs done and see what you're making for yourself and compare the result to other dynos
I read that in detail and it is a very compelling argument assuming the data is correct. I'd like to see another company do the same comparison.
Of course all the dynos have an assumption on what the losses are between the crank and the wheels - right?. I recall that the newer 911s were around 15%? Applying those loses to the HP at the wheels in your data would suggest about 406HP at the crank of the 991.2. Again - assuming that data is correct to begin with.
I have PSE and PCCB/RAS already, so it's just the turbos and software. 17 hours? Really?
Clock's tickin on the sale price, eh? I'm having a challenge getting a labor estimate from my local dealer (it's the I need to wait to talk to so and so who isn't in until Monday story). My dealer also said: no warranty if I provide the parts - which sounds like BS to me.
Anyone know real world performance data for the X51/GTS? I'm wondering what this would actually provide for my 991.2 CS. For example, I ran a 11.5@120mph bone stock in mine (PDK using launch control), so how much faster are we talking?
Anyone know real world performance data for the X51/GTS? I'm wondering what this would actually provide for my 991.2 CS. For example, I ran a 11.5@120mph bone stock in mine (PDK using launch control), so how much faster are we talking?
Wow, nice! Pls post your time slips to add to the data.
I’d guess x51 would run 11 flat or 11.1 quarter at 123 mph. Plus or minus 1 mph 😈
I read that in detail and it is a very compelling argument assuming the data is correct. I'd like to see another company do the same comparison.
Of course all the dynos have an assumption on what the losses are between the crank and the wheels - right?. I recall that the newer 911s were around 15%? Applying those loses to the HP at the wheels in your data would suggest about 406HP at the crank of the 991.2. Again - assuming that data is correct to begin with.
Of course it's correct.
You have my own independent dyno. You have dynos from others. You have Dynojet runs from Cobb. You have Dynojet runs from GIAC. You have Mustang runs from GIAC too (baseline is almost exactly the same as mine).
It all lines up exactly. It isn't a conspiracy I know some people have trouble believing it but this is why the 991.2 is a whole new ballgame.
Regarding losses, 15% is the traditional rule for a manual RWD car on a Dynojet. The truth is every dyno is going to read differently and losses change from rpm to rpm and gear to gear. It isn't static.
Even going by the conservative Mustang dyno for a 991.2 C2 you would get losses of 7%. Obviously Porsche is sandbagging to not **** people off.
Anyone know real world performance data for the X51/GTS? I'm wondering what this would actually provide for my 991.2 CS. For example, I ran a 11.5@120mph bone stock in mine (PDK using launch control), so how much faster are we talking?
2-3 mph (on stock software).
Nobody has put an X51 on the strip or dyno yet unfortunately but I think 2-3 is about right.
The S is 380 on a Dynojet so I'm guessing the X51 is 400-410 whp.
10-27-2017, 05:13 PM
