Latest Singer - the real deal now...
11-23-2011, 05:49 PM
#33
Rennlist Member
The thing is gorgeous and probably is a lot of fun BUT it is a Frankenstein hot rod. Bits of this and that welded together. Can't compare to RUF which has the long history, close assocation with Porsche and official manufacturer designation.
This is not and will never be a real collectible and I doubt there is any appreciation to be had over the short or long term
This is not and will never be a real collectible and I doubt there is any appreciation to be had over the short or long term
11-23-2011, 07:39 PM
#34
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's for management to answer. I can only comment on the differences between them. We at Apex built a much more advanced engine-management system; the Cosworth motors feature closed-loop idle air control, dual wideband air-fuel control, closed-loop knock control and a whole lot more in terms of data logging and fault diagnosis abilities.
I do believe that what Cosworth brings to the table as far as development facilities, experience and skill is second to none.
-Neel
I do believe that what Cosworth brings to the table as far as development facilities, experience and skill is second to none.
-Neel
I also noticed that they used an Jenvey ITB system. I was wondering why not a slide throttle body system?
And what type of fuel injectors are those? It says on the blog, better injectors handle higher fuel pressures for better atomization.
11-23-2011, 07:40 PM
#35
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
AutoBlog.com name-drops "Singer" in their recent "DP Motorsport drapes 1973 Porsche 911 in carbon fiber gorgeousness" preview:
Originally Posted by Noah Joseph
Though the modern Porsche 911 has retained much of the same style as the original, there's still something about a classic Carrera that attracts a certain breed of enthusiast.
That's what led to the creation of the Singer 911, and what has apparently motivated a German tuning outfit called DP Motorsport to retrofit a 1973 model to lightweight specification.
The modifications start with a complete carbon fiber rebody. The front and rear bumpers, hood, fenders, doors and whale tail have all been replaced with the lightweight weave, while the windows and lamp covers have all been ditched in favor of lighter-weight replacements. The result is a 870-kilogram (1,918-pound) curb weight instead of 1,080 to 1,335 kg (2,380-2,943 lbs) stock. But that's only half of the less weight, more power ratio equation.
DP Motorsport has also fitted a 3.6-liter flat-six with 310 horsepower, enhanced by a new carburetor and filters, fitted to a G-50 gearbox and limited-slip differential. It rides on 16-inch Fuchs wheels on a coilover suspension with adjustable stabilizers, and they've fitted the brakes from a 964. The interior has likewise been lightened, fitted with bucket seats and swathed in grippy black Alcantara.
In short, the DP 911 is like the air-cooled original, only more so. Check it out in the high-res image gallery.
Cheers --Jäger, AKA JoAnne's "Mr. Pumpkin Head"
11-23-2011, 07:52 PM
#36
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Jason-- In addition to what Neel's shared:
- AutoBlog.com's "Singer teams up with Cosworth as it delivers its third custom 911," and
- the following, from the "Singer 911 on Carolla's Car Cast" thread:
TopGear.com's "Singer 911…now with added Cosworth"
Singer Vehicle Design is the company behind the splendid Porsche 911 you see in the pictures. That, in fact, is the third such type of 911 the company has built, and it is very splendid indeed.
Essentially, SVD takes a 1990-1994 era 964-platformed 911, strips it and fills it with box-fresh bits of new Porsche. And now, the company has announced a partnership with Cosworth - yes, that Cosworth - to help develop the classic air-cooled engine.
Three variants will be available: a 3.6-litre ‘Touring' model with 300bhp, a 380bhp ‘Sport' version and the top-spec 400bhp ‘Cup' unit, in either 3.9-litre or 4.0-litre vintage.
- AutoBlog.com's "Singer teams up with Cosworth as it delivers its third custom 911," and
- the following, from the "Singer 911 on Carolla's Car Cast" thread:
TopGear.com's "Singer 911…now with added Cosworth"
Originally Posted by Top Gear
Singer Vehicle Design is the company behind the splendid Porsche 911 you see in the pictures. That, in fact, is the third such type of 911 the company has built, and it is very splendid indeed.
Essentially, SVD takes a 1990-1994 era 964-platformed 911, strips it and fills it with box-fresh bits of new Porsche. And now, the company has announced a partnership with Cosworth - yes, that Cosworth - to help develop the classic air-cooled engine.
Three variants will be available: a 3.6-litre ‘Touring' model with 300bhp, a 380bhp ‘Sport' version and the top-spec 400bhp ‘Cup' unit, in either 3.9-litre or 4.0-litre vintage.
11-23-2011, 08:11 PM
#37
Track Day
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Singer managment
Could you elaborate more on the Pectel engine management system? What ecu is this? I use a TEC3r ecu by electromotive. It came with the ITB kit from Clewett. I realized its not as up to par with the likes of motec.
I also noticed that they used an Jenvey ITB system. I was wondering why not a slide throttle body system?
And what type of fuel injectors are those? It says on the blog, better injectors handle higher fuel pressures for better atomization.
-Neel
11-23-2011, 08:18 PM
#38
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I had it I'd not hesitate to drop $150-$300 large on one of these. Make mine Zambezi green, with the full-boat 4.0L 400HP mill!
These are the essence of the bespoke automotive art built almost from scratch, with careful design and engineering, hundreds of hours of skilled labor, and absolute top-notch parts and materials going into each one. At, say, $95 per hour labor rates, it's no stretch to understand where the cost comes from. Well worth it for this level of automotive excellence IMO. Badly. Want!!!
These are the essence of the bespoke automotive art built almost from scratch, with careful design and engineering, hundreds of hours of skilled labor, and absolute top-notch parts and materials going into each one. At, say, $95 per hour labor rates, it's no stretch to understand where the cost comes from. Well worth it for this level of automotive excellence IMO. Badly. Want!!!
Last edited by ande5000; 11-25-2011 at 07:52 PM. Reason: typo
11-25-2011, 01:32 PM
#39
Addict
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Would be fun to see 9M do 'full-court' 993 Speedster advertising ^^
_________________
Cheers --Jäger, AKA JoAnne's "Mr. Pumpkin Head"
_________________
Cheers --Jäger, AKA JoAnne's "Mr. Pumpkin Head"
As a matter of interest to all those asking to see power graphs, here is the power curve of the second 9m Racing engine we supplied for Singer #3 (the white car above); I installed the engine into my 993RS to run it on the 9m dyno and map the Motec, the comparison is to a factory 996GT3RS tested under the same conditions. It will be very interesting to see how Cosworth have improved performance and driveability by using the GT3 plenum manifold against the 9m ITB system....
11-25-2011, 06:08 PM
#40
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
^^__________________
Cheers --Jäger, AKA JoAnne's "Mr. Pumpkin Head"
11-26-2011, 07:16 AM
#41
Addict
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Colin-- Hope you liked your requested Rennsport Reunion "advertising photography"
Given our 11th hour decision to shove Marc on the plane I think the results that you and JP achieved were superb and I believe that the Speedsters were very well received by all who inspected them (including Alois Ruf).
11-26-2011, 01:53 PM
#42
Three Wheelin'
The thing is gorgeous and probably is a lot of fun BUT it is a Frankenstein hot rod. Bits of this and that welded together. Can't compare to RUF which has the long history, close assocation with Porsche and official manufacturer designation.
This is not and will never be a real collectible and I doubt there is any appreciation to be had over the short or long term
This is not and will never be a real collectible and I doubt there is any appreciation to be had over the short or long term
11-29-2011, 02:43 AM
#43
Track Day
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Differences
It will be very interesting to see how Cosworth have improved performance and driveability by using the GT3 plenum manifold against the 9m ITB system....
1. Individual coil-on-plug ignition which allowed us more accurate timing control and better spark energy which showed in the ability to run a leaner idle and part throttle cruise.
2. Dual wideband NTK L1H1 O2 sensors with the ability to trim fuel bank to bank with much faster response and accuracy than the old Bosch LSM-11's on the 9M.
3. Closed loop idle-air control using a larger-than-stock Bosch dual-driver IAC valve results in better constancy in startup and idle.
4. MAP/TPS blend calibration for more consistent and accurate fueling during idle & part throttle operation.
5. Closed loop knock control with an individual sensor on each bank.
6. The fuel delivery system less pressure pulsingl through a damper and more modern injectors.
On the dyno, you don't see a big difference, but on the road, the newer car is more civilized and more responsive at the same time. There is a startup idle of 1200RPM that drops to 900 depending on oil temp, cylinder head temp and run time. Turning on lights/AC/etc doesn't effect it. The motor lugs incredibly - someone can loaf around at 1500RPM and plant the throttle with no drama. The motor pulls cleanly & slowly at first, picking up revs quickly over 3000 until it nails the limiter. Since it builds power all the way to the limiter, and the limiter is progressive and forgiving, you find yourself touching it (7600 right now) all the time. The engine is more responsive to throttle and more "crisp." The knock control only pulls timing out of the cylinders that need it, which combined with the leaner mixtures results in improved part-throttle response.
I don't want to take away anything from what 9M did - their motors are incredible. If one of the older cars come back, it would be nice to retrofit it with the system we've now developed to get a proper A/B comparison.
I find injected air-cooled Porsche flat 6's really benefit from the more modern fuel injection systems as they are fairly knock limited (especially on pump gas.) More accurate ignition & fuel control allow one to run near the limit with a larger margin of safety. Turbo motors even more so - some of the 993 turbo motors we did were much more responsive and clean off boost after similar upgrades. I've been hoping someone comes to us with a higher compression turbo build just to see if we could manage it.
-Neel
11-29-2011, 03:08 AM
#44
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've driven both cars, and touched up the tune on the 9M motors after the cars were built - we have crap 91 octane fuel here. I also tuned the Cosworth motors and supply all the electronics, so I am pretty biased. I think the 9M motors were fantastic; the builds were beautiful with a lot of attention to detail. There wasn't any more power in the Cosworth motors, but the driveability was improved. The manifold did allow for a flatter torque curve, and the motor is production-car consistent. I can only accurately comment on the engine management differences and our reasoning/benefits:
1. Individual coil-on-plug ignition which allowed us more accurate timing control and better spark energy which showed in the ability to run a leaner idle and part throttle cruise.
2. Dual wideband NTK L1H1 O2 sensors with the ability to trim fuel bank to bank with much faster response and accuracy than the old Bosch LSM-11's on the 9M.
3. Closed loop idle-air control using a larger-than-stock Bosch dual-driver IAC valve results in better constancy in startup and idle.
4. MAP/TPS blend calibration for more consistent and accurate fueling during idle & part throttle operation.
5. Closed loop knock control with an individual sensor on each bank.
6. The fuel delivery system less pressure pulsingl through a damper and more modern injectors.
On the dyno, you don't see a big difference, but on the road, the newer car is more civilized and more responsive at the same time. There is a startup idle of 1200RPM that drops to 900 depending on oil temp, cylinder head temp and run time. Turning on lights/AC/etc doesn't effect it. The motor lugs incredibly - someone can loaf around at 1500RPM and plant the throttle with no drama. The motor pulls cleanly & slowly at first, picking up revs quickly over 3000 until it nails the limiter. Since it builds power all the way to the limiter, and the limiter is progressive and forgiving, you find yourself touching it (7600 right now) all the time. The engine is more responsive to throttle and more "crisp." The knock control only pulls timing out of the cylinders that need it, which combined with the leaner mixtures results in improved part-throttle response.
I don't want to take away anything from what 9M did - their motors are incredible. If one of the older cars come back, it would be nice to retrofit it with the system we've now developed to get a proper A/B comparison.
I find injected air-cooled Porsche flat 6's really benefit from the more modern fuel injection systems as they are fairly knock limited (especially on pump gas.) More accurate ignition & fuel control allow one to run near the limit with a larger margin of safety. Turbo motors even more so - some of the 993 turbo motors we did were much more responsive and clean off boost after similar upgrades. I've been hoping someone comes to us with a higher compression turbo build just to see if we could manage it.
-Neel
1. Individual coil-on-plug ignition which allowed us more accurate timing control and better spark energy which showed in the ability to run a leaner idle and part throttle cruise.
2. Dual wideband NTK L1H1 O2 sensors with the ability to trim fuel bank to bank with much faster response and accuracy than the old Bosch LSM-11's on the 9M.
3. Closed loop idle-air control using a larger-than-stock Bosch dual-driver IAC valve results in better constancy in startup and idle.
4. MAP/TPS blend calibration for more consistent and accurate fueling during idle & part throttle operation.
5. Closed loop knock control with an individual sensor on each bank.
6. The fuel delivery system less pressure pulsingl through a damper and more modern injectors.
On the dyno, you don't see a big difference, but on the road, the newer car is more civilized and more responsive at the same time. There is a startup idle of 1200RPM that drops to 900 depending on oil temp, cylinder head temp and run time. Turning on lights/AC/etc doesn't effect it. The motor lugs incredibly - someone can loaf around at 1500RPM and plant the throttle with no drama. The motor pulls cleanly & slowly at first, picking up revs quickly over 3000 until it nails the limiter. Since it builds power all the way to the limiter, and the limiter is progressive and forgiving, you find yourself touching it (7600 right now) all the time. The engine is more responsive to throttle and more "crisp." The knock control only pulls timing out of the cylinders that need it, which combined with the leaner mixtures results in improved part-throttle response.
I don't want to take away anything from what 9M did - their motors are incredible. If one of the older cars come back, it would be nice to retrofit it with the system we've now developed to get a proper A/B comparison.
I find injected air-cooled Porsche flat 6's really benefit from the more modern fuel injection systems as they are fairly knock limited (especially on pump gas.) More accurate ignition & fuel control allow one to run near the limit with a larger margin of safety. Turbo motors even more so - some of the 993 turbo motors we did were much more responsive and clean off boost after similar upgrades. I've been hoping someone comes to us with a higher compression turbo build just to see if we could manage it.
-Neel
11-29-2011, 05:46 AM
#45
Addict
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
I've driven both cars, and touched up the tune on the 9M motors after the cars were built - we have crap 91 octane fuel here. I also tuned the Cosworth motors and supply all the electronics, so I am pretty biased. I think the 9M motors were fantastic; the builds were beautiful with a lot of attention to detail. There wasn't any more power in the Cosworth motors, but the driveability was improved. The manifold did allow for a flatter torque curve, and the motor is production-car consistent. I can only accurately comment on the engine management differences and our reasoning/benefits:
1. Individual coil-on-plug ignition which allowed us more accurate timing control and better spark energy which showed in the ability to run a leaner idle and part throttle cruise.
2. Dual wideband NTK L1H1 O2 sensors with the ability to trim fuel bank to bank with much faster response and accuracy than the old Bosch LSM-11's on the 9M.
3. Closed loop idle-air control using a larger-than-stock Bosch dual-driver IAC valve results in better constancy in startup and idle.
4. MAP/TPS blend calibration for more consistent and accurate fueling during idle & part throttle operation.
5. Closed loop knock control with an individual sensor on each bank.
6. The fuel delivery system less pressure pulsingl through a damper and more modern injectors.
On the dyno, you don't see a big difference, but on the road, the newer car is more civilized and more responsive at the same time. There is a startup idle of 1200RPM that drops to 900 depending on oil temp, cylinder head temp and run time. Turning on lights/AC/etc doesn't effect it. The motor lugs incredibly - someone can loaf around at 1500RPM and plant the throttle with no drama. The motor pulls cleanly & slowly at first, picking up revs quickly over 3000 until it nails the limiter. Since it builds power all the way to the limiter, and the limiter is progressive and forgiving, you find yourself touching it (7600 right now) all the time. The engine is more responsive to throttle and more "crisp." The knock control only pulls timing out of the cylinders that need it, which combined with the leaner mixtures results in improved part-throttle response.
I don't want to take away anything from what 9M did - their motors are incredible. If one of the older cars come back, it would be nice to retrofit it with the system we've now developed to get a proper A/B comparison.
I find injected air-cooled Porsche flat 6's really benefit from the more modern fuel injection systems as they are fairly knock limited (especially on pump gas.) More accurate ignition & fuel control allow one to run near the limit with a larger margin of safety. Turbo motors even more so - some of the 993 turbo motors we did were much more responsive and clean off boost after similar upgrades. I've been hoping someone comes to us with a higher compression turbo build just to see if we could manage it.
-Neel
1. Individual coil-on-plug ignition which allowed us more accurate timing control and better spark energy which showed in the ability to run a leaner idle and part throttle cruise.
2. Dual wideband NTK L1H1 O2 sensors with the ability to trim fuel bank to bank with much faster response and accuracy than the old Bosch LSM-11's on the 9M.
3. Closed loop idle-air control using a larger-than-stock Bosch dual-driver IAC valve results in better constancy in startup and idle.
4. MAP/TPS blend calibration for more consistent and accurate fueling during idle & part throttle operation.
5. Closed loop knock control with an individual sensor on each bank.
6. The fuel delivery system less pressure pulsingl through a damper and more modern injectors.
On the dyno, you don't see a big difference, but on the road, the newer car is more civilized and more responsive at the same time. There is a startup idle of 1200RPM that drops to 900 depending on oil temp, cylinder head temp and run time. Turning on lights/AC/etc doesn't effect it. The motor lugs incredibly - someone can loaf around at 1500RPM and plant the throttle with no drama. The motor pulls cleanly & slowly at first, picking up revs quickly over 3000 until it nails the limiter. Since it builds power all the way to the limiter, and the limiter is progressive and forgiving, you find yourself touching it (7600 right now) all the time. The engine is more responsive to throttle and more "crisp." The knock control only pulls timing out of the cylinders that need it, which combined with the leaner mixtures results in improved part-throttle response.
I don't want to take away anything from what 9M did - their motors are incredible. If one of the older cars come back, it would be nice to retrofit it with the system we've now developed to get a proper A/B comparison.
I find injected air-cooled Porsche flat 6's really benefit from the more modern fuel injection systems as they are fairly knock limited (especially on pump gas.) More accurate ignition & fuel control allow one to run near the limit with a larger margin of safety. Turbo motors even more so - some of the 993 turbo motors we did were much more responsive and clean off boost after similar upgrades. I've been hoping someone comes to us with a higher compression turbo build just to see if we could manage it.
-Neel
Thanks Neel, interesting points.
To me the idle control and MAP correction are the main advantages of the new installation, we discussed the use of this on the ITB set up and actually supplied all the parts to fit to the development ITB system but obviously there were bigger questions to be answered before we could make it happen.
The other improvements look to be advantages of the Pectel system in comparison to the limited Motec M48 ecu that was used on the first 9m engines - and I hasten to add that the M48 was selected for commercial reasons at the prototype stage. We've investigated alternative systems for future 9m air & water cooled engine projects and have decided to work with a specialist to custom code a new ecu specifically for flat 6 applications. It will be interesting to compare notes some time next year!
The only aspect I would have concerns over is the use of a COP system in an aircooled application; we could not find coils rated for continuous use with cylinder head temperatures of 200C.
Have fun!
