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.
Googles your friend.
Put an Odyssey in my old air-cooled think it was half the weight
of the Interstate that came out.
Maybe my question was too short, but while the interesting Battery University attachment has a lot to say about AGM, I'm still wondering why AGM and not Lithium Ion?
Here's another cool weight saver is lithium iron phosphate batteries. I can't find the battery tender version I've been buying but here is the WalMart equivalent. I run 1 but Blue Chip runs 2 in parallel. Something about AC in his track car but I can't remember for sure.
LiFePO4-12V-24-35ah-Battery-for-RV
Correct - I run 2 in parallel - total is 7#. Because my car does occasionally see some street use as well as some longer track weekends - I really didn't want to worry about battery life. This works perfect...
Update. I believe I am looking for one more piece and that would be the IPD Plenum. Next I am going to finished up my suspension components. Coil overs, New Engine mounts, tranny inserts, power flex bushings and all the old worn out rubber bushings.
adjusted list:
Top Gear 200 Cell Catalytic crossover pipes. Cost $531 HP: 12 to 15 Claim Wanting these over the X-Pipe design so I can keep low end torque.=Will be purchasing within 1-2 weeks. Purchased today. $624.00 Shipped to my doorstep.
Off shore brand headers. Cost $200 HP: 5-7 Claim=Not going to buy headers, but our Rennlist friend Strathconaman posted x51 headers(pics below). Got me thinking about these. vs. stock 996 headers.
Air Intake (K&N Cold air system or EVOMS) Cost $500 HP: 6-10 Claim=Not going with this. Going with 997 3.6 or 3.8 OEM airbox for aesthetics. Using the OEM paper filter as well.=Purchased the 997 3.8L OEM Airbox and going with OEM paper filter.
Skip the IPD plenum - it makes nice intake noises but time after time people have found that it doesn't do anything for power. Purely anecdotal, I know, but look around and you'll find the same info. I had one on my 2000 (the IPD comp plenum and GT3 throttle body) for a while and it sounded awesome, but I eventually removed it. It is more show than go.
The smaller pulley will give you more usable power to the wheels. Best bang for the $$ on your list and you decided to skip it...
Think about putting that money into more maintenance.
Like cooling flush, shifter bushings, etc.
This is my dyno sheet after spending 5 times your projected budget and video of 3 pulls
Read the bottom signature tag to see the modifications done.
Just my $.02,
"This is my dyno sheet after spending 5 times your projected budget and video of 3 pulls
Read the bottom signature tag to see the modifications done."
Wow, this is very appreciated by all who have similar questions (including me!):
Just a quick follow up question. For the Evoms Stage IV, did you have a before and after dyno pull? Did you feel a major change in acceleration? Thanks!
"This is my dyno sheet after spending 5 times your projected budget and video of 3 pulls
Read the bottom signature tag to see the modifications done."
Wow, this is very appreciated by all who have similar questions (including me!):
Just a quick follow up question. For the Evoms Stage IV, did you have a before and after dyno pull? Did you feel a major change in acceleration? Thanks!
No dyno before modifications
The dyno sheet produced in the video is a very conservative report, according to tuners (tuners did not do dyno, 2000 miles away), The local shop did not have cooling fans positioned properly, and the rear tire placement on the roller was not optimal, Add the dyno was cold, and had not been used in over two weeks, thus all of these items contributing to low PEAK readings.
The part that stands out on the dyno sheets, is the duration of near max torque, look at how wide the torque band is. I point this out, because I went with a 200 cell X pipe and a Comp IPD/GT3 Throttle Body, which this thread has discussed, all of which will hurt low end torque, without a ECU tune. When the tune compensates with more fuel and more ignition timing coming in faster, you don't have the expected drop, as you would without a tune.
As far as revs, nothing has more of an effect on how fast you climb rpms as the LWFW and underdrive pulley working in tandem.
I have had 4 PCA driving instructors behind the wheel of the car, all 4 said the same thing, without any input from me, "WOW, this thing really revs fast"
Low end inertia (torque) to the wheels is loss due to LWFW, no doubt, big difference when utilizing the 5000 rpm launch control and drop the hammer to 12.5" wide rear tires. With the standard dual mass flywheel, the car would ignite the tires, with the LWFW, it can barely turn them over, but once under motion, the acceleration is much faster with LWFW.
Hope this answers your question.
Yes, thanks that answers my questions. I also have a remote tune, and wish I would have done before and after dyno runs. I sincerely doubt I got extra horsepower, but I did seem to get a more linear throttle and smooth response. I am happy with the results, but no way to really tell if anything meaningful was done.
No dyno before modifications
The dyno sheet produced in the video is a very conservative report, according to tuners (tuners did not do dyno, 2000 miles away), The local shop did not have cooling fans positioned properly, and the rear tire placement on the roller was not optimal, Add the dyno was cold, and had not been used in over two weeks, thus all of these items contributing to low PEAK readings.
The part that stands out on the dyno sheets, is the duration of near max torque, look at how wide the torque band is. I point this out, because I went with a 200 cell X pipe and a Comp IPD/GT3 Throttle Body, which this thread has discussed, all of which will hurt low end torque, without a ECU tune. When the tune compensates with more fuel and more ignition timing coming in faster, you don't have the expected drop, as you would without a tune.
The results shown are hp and torque at the wheels, and not estimated engine ouputs, correct? And if so, any idea how much engine hp and torque this corresponds to?
The torque band indeed looks good! Not just down low, but also above 7000.
My previous (non-P) car had lots of power at high revs and reved very quickly, but I'd still say it had weak throttle response, because while it would rev when in neutral, when it had to pull the car, pushing the throttle didn't result in the same immediate lunge forward as with my 996. Can you let us know how your mods affected this (particularly the X-pipe and the tune, if you did not make all the changes at once)?
Thanks!
P.S. Nice looking car, by the way! If I were to repaint mine (near the bottom of my possible mod list, but it's there), Orient Red would be on my short list.
Since last visiting this thread, I remembered one theme that featured early on. It sounded like while it is very hard to really improve the engine, improving the suspension is easy.
Well, making the suspension faster is easy. Making it better … .
I don’t mean to highjack the thread, but it is a popular one, and some readers might get the wrong impression. There are lots of things you can do with the suspension to make the car faster on a dry track. Maybe some that make it faster on a wet track too. Doing any of that without having an adverse effect on comfort is hard. Yes, suspension technology has improved. But as (at least) one journalist in a mainstream car magazine has said, “wherever you drive, you get the feeling Porsche’s suspension engineers have been there first”. Other car manufacturers have big teams of suspension engineers trying to beat that and almost without exception, they fail. And if you invest in better damper technology for which the springs, valving, and stroke were not very well chosen, probably you will too.
There may be exceptions. It would be great if there are. And while I don’t know the Feal dampers mentioned above, I had a look at their site after reading about them here and it’s certainly encouraging that, if I recall correctly, they choose the springs, valving, and stroke based on (again, if I recall correctly), the weight of your car, the weight of your wheels, and how you want to drive the car – very different from the norm. Also a possible exception to what I said about comfort (though not necessarily about making a car better), KW makes a coilover series that is specifically designed to make sports cars more comfortable. (No idea if they offer it for 996s.)
In any case, I'd suggest that anyone considering "investing" in their suspension who cares at all about comfort and handling on streets that are not race track smooth do their homework very carefully before pulling the trigger on "easy" suspension improvements.
(On the other hand, you can get much more speed, handling, wet safety, and maybe even comfort from tires. Or at least you could, if Michelin were to offer their excellent PS4 or PS4S in 996 sizes. (Or if someone else offered their latest generation tire, even if not as good as the PS4s.) Why don't Michelin? Making too much money selling overpriced N rated PS2s and excellent but overly focused Cup 2s?
Boycot Michelin until they see the light! I believe the N rated P Zero Rosso is the better choice anyway, and I just bought a set. I know they don't get much love on this forum, but back in the day, Porsche's official tire info showed them as being much better in the wet than the PS2s (the reason the Pirellis are N4). And about 2 years ago, Pirelli changed the compound with Porsche's blessing to give them much better wet grip than they had then. (I inquired with Michelin whether they had done the same with the N rated PS2, and they said no.) At the same time, Pirelli was careful not to significantly change dry grip or handling balance. And they do handle. They were the lauch tire for superbly handling C4S. And in the past few years, Evo wrote several times that they preferred them for 996s.)
Since last visiting this thread, I remembered one theme that featured early on. It sounded like while it is very hard to really improve the engine, improving the suspension is easy.
Well, making the suspension faster is easy. Making it better … .
I don’t mean to highjack the thread, but it is a popular one, and some readers might get the wrong impression. There are lots of things you can do with the suspension to make the car faster on a dry track. Maybe some that make it faster on a wet track too. Doing any of that without having an adverse effect on comfort is hard. Yes, suspension technology has improved. But as (at least) one journalist in a mainstream car magazine has said, “wherever you drive, you get the feeling Porsche’s suspension engineers have been there first”. Other car manufacturers have big teams of suspension engineers trying to beat that and almost without exception, they fail. And if you invest in better damper technology for which the springs, valving, and stroke were not very well chosen, probably you will too.
There may be exceptions. It would be great if there are. And while I don’t know the Feal dampers mentioned above, I had a look at their site after reading about them here and it’s certainly encouraging that, if I recall correctly, they choose the springs, valving, and stroke based on (again, if I recall correctly), the weight of your car, the weight of your wheels, and how you want to drive the car – very different from the norm. Also a possible exception to what I said about comfort (though not necessarily about making a car better), KW makes a coilover series that is specifically designed to make sports cars more comfortable. (No idea if they offer it for 996s.)
In any case, I'd suggest that anyone considering "investing" in their suspension who cares at all about comfort and handling on streets that are not race track smooth do their homework very carefully before pulling the trigger on "easy" suspension improvements.
You make some good points
After investing in engine and suspension and safety modifications.
I think the suspension should be first on the list, for most DD cars, if you are hell bent on modifications.
I did not go with coilovers. I went with Techart / Bilsten. It lowered the car to just what I wanted.
The handing, I just can't say enough. The cars is stable and predictable on the street and on the track. I personally have not done over 135 mph, that was down the main straight at NJMP Lightning, downshifting and braking going into and coming out of turn 1 was as smooth as silk. Generally 127-130 on back straight at WGI, before hard braking and going thru the Bus Stop.
I have been a passenger in my car, when a driving instructor (20 years @WGI) did a half dozen laps at WGI, claiming he was only driving 8/10. I have done a couple hundred laps there. I am in yellow run group with PCA, so it was thrilling to have a ride like that.
Not only were his laps, more than 20 seconds faster than my personal best, but had me hanging on for dear life.
I never had thought my 996 could be that fast and handle in turns like it did.
I am years away from that level of skill, when he told me the suspension works great and the set-up was right on, it made me glad I invested in it. The reason I say this, is that many of us will never reach the potential of what a 996 is capable of, for sure not me.
08-27-2018, 07:06 PM
