777mech

From what I understood from the previous owner the car still has stock turbos, what's the easiest way to tell? Are they labeled? If I really get on it in 3rd or 4th gear I can get the boost to peak at 1.1bar. The engine will spool up so incredibly fast I find myself watching the tach more than the speedo. Thank goodness for rev limiters 😎

Jerrett

Welcome to the unofficial Seattle 996tt owners club! We should all meet up as a group sometime if the sun ever returns to Seattle.

Until then, you might have Colin & crew take a look at your transmission mounts. I've been running Kevin's LWFW kit for years. The chatter was noticeable but not bad initially (when the car had around 65K miles) then I had Colin install his green tranny mounts which, while cool, amplified the chatter to a point where I no longer enjoyed driving the car. Based on Kevin's (UMW) suggestion, I swapped those out for 997tt mounts and it made a huge difference in the LWFW noise. Almost non-existent now.

It amazes me how much the tranny mounts can effect the LWFW (and engine) noise that gets transmitted into the cabin.

Would be glad to let you hear my car sometime if you're in the Mill Creek area.

911mhawk

I'm all over the board depending on roads and conditions. There's certainly the "benefit" of more power and thrill on the top end but a few gears of that may get you unwanted attention.

You must use the express lanes at night
https://www.speedinginseattle.com/
Or, take in a session here
http://proformanceracingschool.com/v...ic-raceways-7/
They're actually pretty similar in cost, hard to determine w/o a HR monitor which is more exhilarating.

777mech

If this is the ims shaft causing the rattling does this usually get worse over time? Is it true that it's the gears that run the shaft, or is it the bearing?

"02996ttx50

lwfw rattle is a wholly separate issue from the ims / timing chain rattle we all hear. also the issue is different from the c2 since the ims bearing is a sealed bearing placed into the ims itself. when it wears ( dries out since its "sealed" ) and contaminants get inside it over time, which contributes to the bearing failing and the timing chains to potentially snap. mostly it's an infamous design "flaw" of the 996 c2's. i think all we get is timing chain noise, and yeah, it never gets *better* over time. many of just try and mitigate the noise by running either 5/40 or 5/50 which lessens it considerably.

the lwfw rattle is just that there is less material/mass ( hence faster revving etc..) to absorb vibration as compared to the oem dmfw.

Dock

It's also OK not to do that.

"02996ttx50

you don't say and who knew lol

Dock

So how many people have told him that it's beneficial not to run the 996 Turbo that way?

"02996ttx50

just guessing here, but probably every owner of a dog that chases its tail while pondering which came first.

the chicken or the egg.

Dock

I don't think so.

911mhawk

I'll go there, since I short shift at the track for one particular corner to avoid a gear change mid corner or having to hold high rpm. I figure the engine will last with fewer extended runs near redline and I have plenty of bottom end with Kevins ZC turbos. Once in a while I'll run most the local track in 4/5 just to concentrate more on line or for a cool down lap, car is still lenty fast. Additionally, the prize money for my events is terrible.

There is one particular guy who regularly uses his rev limiter to manage rpm and his friend with a similar style scattered his engine last year. Not sure that contributed but it couldn't have helped. He didn't seem to grasp the concept of a mechanical over-rev when I overheard him discussing the incident.

In an article I read about valvesprings in race engine technology a race team reported valve springs in race engines that were not overreved lasted 10 times as long as those occasionally overreved. One driver went through valve springs regularly, one did not. The other problem is piston g loads that increase exponentially with rpm. One excursion to 8k may not kill it but several might.

Berra

He did say shift at higher rpm's, not shift at redline. Higher rpm's can be 3.5-5k rpm.

Better yet, just drive the car EXACTLY how YOU want and don't listen to people left and right because opinions are like butts...you have two sides of it.

s65e90

Nothing wrong with using the rev limiter as that's what it's designed for. The car will be faster also bumping it versus the shift.

dprantl

I don't want to derail this thread, but that is certainly NOT what the rev limiter is designed for. The rev limter is there to save your (and your engine's) *** when you screw up and don't shift on time. The forces and stresses at play when you are bouncing off the limiter are huge and there is no doubt that doing this regularly will significantly reduce the life of several engine components and can lead to a catastrophic failure. If you don't believe me, feel free to bounce off your limiter in your 996TT every day for 5 seconds non-stop. We can place bets on whether or not your engine will last 30 days.

Dan

manimal

I guess we're now arguing semantics, but I would disagree that 3.5k is "higher RPM."

I shift at high RPM a decent amount of the time but definitely try to avoid hitting the limiter, as it's kinda violent (especially with a tune) and adds overrevs. Even with a tune with stock redline, I see a few Stage 2 ignitions added to the Durametric readout when I bounce off the limiter hard (which is fairly easy to do in second gear -- it runs out quick!).

One of the times I accidentally bounced off the limiter in second, I popped off an intercooler hose and fried the MAF. It didn't turn out to be a big deal, but suffice it to say, on my car, I try to avoid hitting the limiter.