cheap weight loss
02-11-2018, 08:59 PM
#76
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
No question Porsche had some reason for putting in the steel version, and no one should ever modify their cars in a way their not comfortable with, but it's a bit hard to logically reason why it would be important on a Turbo, but not GT2 and not a 997 C4S...
You frequently see replies in other modification threads along the lines of 'so you think you're smarter than a Porsche engineer?' But Porsche engineers heel to several masters... Cost, regulatory, performance, marketing, etc. and often their choices aren't driven by 'best'.
You frequently see replies in other modification threads along the lines of 'so you think you're smarter than a Porsche engineer?' But Porsche engineers heel to several masters... Cost, regulatory, performance, marketing, etc. and often their choices aren't driven by 'best'.
"The rear suspension starts off with a multi-link control arm configuration affixed to a pair of massive cast-aluminum abutments. An aluminum crossmember links the two sides; this is changed from the steel component used in the 911 Turbo, as the absence of AWD in the GT2 changes the loads carried by this component."
02-11-2018, 09:01 PM
#77
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
02-11-2018, 10:52 PM
#80
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I would bet the steel version is used with AWD because of a front collision issue. The steel unit can probably better control the force/mass sent rearward via the front dif and drive shaft. Keeping those components from possibly thrusting upward into the passenger compartment.
02-11-2018, 11:21 PM
#81
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I would bet the steel version is used with AWD because of a front collision issue. The steel unit can probably better control the force/mass sent rearward via the front dif and drive shaft. Keeping those components from possibly thrusting upward into the passenger compartment.
02-12-2018, 04:21 PM
#83
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
As I’ve said several times in this thread, my guess is that it’s due to the heavy weight and/or the awd system. Greater vehicle mass of the TT will naturally result in a greater load imparted on the structure and it’s components in a crash. It’s just a guess. Interpret it how you see fit or whatever will put you at ease. It honestly makes no difference to me. If you wanna argue semantics as you so often love to do, then you’re simply barking up the wrong tree...
Last edited by powdrhound; 02-12-2018 at 04:37 PM.
02-12-2018, 04:37 PM
#84
Rennlist Member
Not to beat a dead horse, just the engineer in me coming out a bit. I'm comfortable putting on the aluminum part, and plan to do so before spring.
It appears from John's first post and from looking at PET part lists. that:
- 996 generation. All non-GT get steel. All GT get Aluminum
- 997.1 generation. Turbo retains steel. All others, including C4S get Aluminum.
- 997.2 generation. All, including turbo, Aluminum. Same part.
- 991.1 generation. All, including turbo, Aluminum. Same part.
Draw whatever conclusions you prefer...
It appears from John's first post and from looking at PET part lists. that:
- 996 generation. All non-GT get steel. All GT get Aluminum
- 997.1 generation. Turbo retains steel. All others, including C4S get Aluminum.
- 997.2 generation. All, including turbo, Aluminum. Same part.
- 991.1 generation. All, including turbo, Aluminum. Same part.
Draw whatever conclusions you prefer...
Last edited by pfbz; 02-12-2018 at 05:24 PM.
02-12-2018, 04:54 PM
#85
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
At least you posted up information that seems to indicate that the steel unit is there because of the AWD (as possibly indicated through the GT2 information) and how the AWD system crash engineering may be the focal point of the substantial steel member; you and Carlo seem to have settled closer to this instead of the Porsche engineers just being over zealous in their engineering. People can obviously choose to blow off engineering information, but it seems the OCD (my tag) weight reduction bandwagon may sometimes need to be considered in terms of something other than "this is lighter". At least one person here has decided against the aluminum piece because of the additional information. Maybe he can recoup his money.
So yes, words do matter.
02-12-2018, 05:36 PM
#86
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Not to beat a dead horse, just the engineer in me coming out a bit. I'm comfortable putting on the aluminum part, and plan to do so before spring.
It appears from John's first post and from looking at PET part lists. that:
- 996 generation. All non-GT get steel. All GT get Aluminum
- 997.1 generation. Turbo retains steel. All others, including C4S get Aluminum.
- 997.2 generation. All, including turbo, Aluminum. Same part.
- 991.1 generation. All, including turbo, Aluminum. Same part.
Draw whatever conclusions you prefer...
It appears from John's first post and from looking at PET part lists. that:
- 996 generation. All non-GT get steel. All GT get Aluminum
- 997.1 generation. Turbo retains steel. All others, including C4S get Aluminum.
- 997.2 generation. All, including turbo, Aluminum. Same part.
- 991.1 generation. All, including turbo, Aluminum. Same part.
Draw whatever conclusions you prefer...
The conclusion I draw is that the engineers had concerns with the strength of the aluminum version early in the developement of the water cooled 911 chassis. Over time, and with a plethora of real world crash data, they concluded the aluminum version was more than adequate.
02-12-2018, 05:52 PM
#87
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The conclusion I draw is that the engineers had concerns with the strength of the aluminum version early in the developement of the water cooled 911 chassis. Over time, and with a plethora of real world crash data, they concluded the aluminum version was more than adequate.
02-12-2018, 06:03 PM
#88
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
So PAG gets a plethora real world crash data? Do they get the crashed cars and the dynamic crash data so that they can run their own calculations? Maybe this happens in Europe, but I'd be surprised if they get accident reconstruction data and/or the accident cars here in the U.S.
02-12-2018, 06:22 PM
#89
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The last time one of my vehicles was totaled, it was simply hauled off to the crash lot to be crushed or sold for parts. There was no accident reconstruction. No one on Earth has any idea what happened to the car or its individual parts as a result of the crash, meaning there is absolutely no data regarding the consequences that the impact may have had on any part of the car.
02-12-2018, 06:34 PM
#90
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
So how do they get the accident reconstruction data? My neighbor is an engineer who works at a company that among other things does accident reconstruction. The data they gather and engineering they do, for legal purposes, is very complex and takes a lot of on-site work, vehicle assessment and overall engineering to produce relevant data.
The last time one of my vehicles was totaled, it was simply hauled off to the crash lot to be crushed or sold for parts. There was no accident reconstruction. No one on Earth has any idea what happened to the car or its individual parts as a result of the crash, meaning there is absolutely no data regarding the consequences that the impact may have had on any part of the car.
The last time one of my vehicles was totaled, it was simply hauled off to the crash lot to be crushed or sold for parts. There was no accident reconstruction. No one on Earth has any idea what happened to the car or its individual parts as a result of the crash, meaning there is absolutely no data regarding the consequences that the impact may have had on any part of the car.