kosmo

is there a difference b/w the 2? I've having my oil pan replaced and the part guys mention something about the x51. tks

RollingArt

The X51 pan has baffling built into it. It's not expensive. You should get it if you're replacing your pan.




Phil

JEllis

My understanding is that 997s do not require any baffling in the oil pan like the 996 did. The baffling kit sold by Suncoast is actually the 996 X51 kit and needs to be modified to work on a 997...???

Furthermore, correct me if I am wrong but oil starvation has only proven to be a factor when using R compound tires or slicks while tracking....??

Jason

ADias

Are you sure that is for a 997.2S?

Edgy01

Jason is correct.

This was discussed prior to the release of the 997.2 DI engines. I can't speak for them.

cello

For clarity sake it is probably better to speak to engine designations rather than model designations for this topic. There was a deep sump kit for the M96 engine. LN Engineering makes a deep sump kit for the M97 (997.1/pre-DFI engine) as well. Link is here: http://www.lnengineering.com/deepsump.html .

For an explanation of the same and what problem it addresses, scroll down to the "What is the story..' part. Jake Raby (LN) is a member here (UN: Jake Raby") and is often on the Racing and 996 Forums. You can (and should) send him a PM with your question for an informed answer.

For the LN kit note that the oil pick up tube is extended deeper into the pan. Not doing this would make the mod "cosmetic" . If the mechanic did not also rec this, well.........

It is interesting to note LN does not recommend the X51 pan without the rest of the X51 kit which notably added an extra oil scavenge pick up point to the head with a return feed to the sump.

So,....... all this might be over kill for you unless you are setting lap records at your local track and are worried about severe oil starvation issues.

The other item of note is that LN is fabricating a deep sump for the DFI (A91) engines. I thought that these engines came with multiple oil scavenging pumps/pick up points about the pan to avoid starvation issues. Again, use dependent - slicks/R compounds and fast lap times - , but I guess more oil and deeper pick ups are always OK if running an engine hard.

cbzzoom

From what I've read (Jake and others), the X51 pan by itself won't do much. But it can't really hurt either.

Also, I believe what Jason & Dan said is not correct. The M97 (997.1) engine has the same oil starvation problems as the M96, which happens in a high-G left hander :

https://rennlist.com/forums/racing-a...r-boxster.html

whether or not you can get those G's without slicks is unclear, certainly slicks make it much more likely.

IMO it seems like a bad idea to run these cars on R-comps or slicks without putting in some work on oiling, with either a real x51 kit or an accusump or something similar.

I don't know anything about the 997.2

kosmo

i confirmed w/ my parts dealer today that there is no x51 oil pan offered on the 997.2. tks

Edgy01

For the 997.1 read the owners manual. It refers to the need to deal with oil starvation if slicks are used on that car.

utkinpol

997.2 DFI engine is not a M96 997.1 this oil pan was designed for, so, it may not fit at all. check with suncoast on this.
btw even for m96 engine it has to be cut a bit to fit.

practical difference is that this pan has aluminum baffles with rubber pieces attached to them so when you install it those rubber pieces get pushed to the engine block and keep more oil at around pick up tube. standard m97 pan has very similar baffles but in plastic and they do not contact walls of engine block.

if it does not fit - you can try this (again, if it fits DFI 997.2 engine):
http://www.suncoastparts.com/product//cd2510r9095.html

i had to install x51 pan last season as i was getting consistent knocking from valve lifters running on air. after pan was installed either starvation stopped or oil stopped foaming as much, but knocking stopped.