997 carrera S problem
#106
Three Wheelin'
For the record, I am aware of the OP's engine being a 997.1 variant. I made a point about how the IMS/B was dropped and how the cylinder walls were coated in a different material in 997.2 variants.
Both are considered to be improvements over previous designs. Am I going to come out and declare that they are? No... I don't have enough information.
They might very well be improvements and you at Flat6 will very likely still see 997.2's coming in with scoring and other issues (chain issues leading to damage). At the end of the day, all that can be done is mitigating the issues, but I certainly don't expect them to be 100% resolved --- EVER!
.
Both are considered to be improvements over previous designs. Am I going to come out and declare that they are? No... I don't have enough information.
They might very well be improvements and you at Flat6 will very likely still see 997.2's coming in with scoring and other issues (chain issues leading to damage). At the end of the day, all that can be done is mitigating the issues, but I certainly don't expect them to be 100% resolved --- EVER!
.
#107
Three Wheelin'
I've never driven my car in temps under 60 degrees. I know that in 80-degree weather I have to be about 10 minutes into my ride to see oil temps at 175. A few minutes later, it's up to 200+. When it was in the 60's., it was easily 15-20 minutes to get it warmed up. I can't imagine what a 10-degree Fahrenheit morning with howling winds would be like.
I've never driven my car for less than 30 minutes. My oil gets to 220 every time. But it's not DD.
Just knowing how long these engines run cold and that the oil is colder much longer, and the ungodly am't of time it must take in the dead, cold, dark of winter, and with old oil, which probably has some level of water in it... it can't be pretty inside that engine as Joe Porsche is 15 minutes into his ride. The car is toasty and warm inside. His butt is warmed by the seats. All seems right in the world. Cabin is nice. Meanwhile the engine isn't ready... even after 15-20 minutes... or even 25 minutes...
#109
Three Wheelin'
Anyone interested in this thread, you're obliged to read the following, with incredible, upfront and quick insights from Flat6. Here ya go:
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...cylinders.html
.
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...cylinders.html
.
#110
Pro
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA & FL - '12 Carrera GTS
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
So, if the potential for engine damage exists while driving a Porsche in colder climates, then what are the proper RPM shift points before the car warms to optimium operating temps? 3,000 RPMs, under 4,000 RPMs, or under 5,000 RPMs?
#111
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicagoland Area
Posts: 26,141
Likes: 0
Received 5,413 Likes
on
2,516 Posts
Tip. Throw a 100 watt shop light under your car in the garage to warm your oil for cold morning starts. Or get a heated garage.
#113
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Cold engine starts: Last winter I had to park my 2009 C2S outside and drive it on those terrible mornings we had. No choice. I followed the manual advice... drive it. I kept the RPM below around 3500.... let it idle until the engine changed pitch, then off I went. Drove it easy.... but.... had to go.
I will let you know when it blows up!
Peace
Bruce in Philly
I will let you know when it blows up!
Peace
Bruce in Philly
#114
Rennlist Member
This is a 997.1 engine. That said the Lokasil bores of the 997.1 were replaced with a complete Alusil block in the 997.2. Omitting the IMS wasn't smart, and using smaller timing chains and increasing their loads at the same has also proven not to be smart.
The 997.2 engine and their Alusil blocks also have scoring issues.
Here's an example that occurred at 4,165 miles in a 2012 model year engine. No track time, never even had a chance to have the first oil change.
The 997.2 engine and their Alusil blocks also have scoring issues.
Here's an example that occurred at 4,165 miles in a 2012 model year engine. No track time, never even had a chance to have the first oil change.
Sean
#115
With cold weather driving being a theme in this thread I am trying to gather some data to analyze over here:
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-foru...your-data.html
Thanks.
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-foru...your-data.html
Thanks.
#116
Rennlist Member
Cold engine starts: Last winter I had to park my 2009 C2S outside and drive it on those terrible mornings we had. No choice. I followed the manual advice... drive it. I kept the RPM below around 3500.... let it idle until the engine changed pitch, then off I went. Drove it easy.... but.... had to go.
I will let you know when it blows up!
Peace
Bruce in Philly
I will let you know when it blows up!
Peace
Bruce in Philly
Sean
Last edited by Sniff; 09-05-2014 at 04:45 PM.
#117
Three Wheelin'
The thinking behind not letting the engine idle cold (just start and drive) is that idling actually takes longer to warm up an engine, which lets it run rich (cold start comp settings. Rich means wet with fuel, but there is a reason to do this), which isn't nice to cat converters when done too long. Also isn't very friendly to engine combustion.
The thinking is that a faster warm up by controlled, conservative driving gets combustion optimized faster, which is better for everything inside the engine, from internals that might get carbon, to cats and plugs. So, yeah, it is also enviro friendly.
This has been fairly common advice across many brands for decades anyway.
The thinking is that a faster warm up by controlled, conservative driving gets combustion optimized faster, which is better for everything inside the engine, from internals that might get carbon, to cats and plugs. So, yeah, it is also enviro friendly.
This has been fairly common advice across many brands for decades anyway.
Last edited by Philster; 09-05-2014 at 07:29 PM.
#118
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
This is the first commentary I've read that omitting the IMS wasn't smart. According to many posters on this forum, the lack of an IMS bearing in the 997.2 DFI engine was a major improvement. So, is this no longer the case? Jake, can you please expand on your remarks? Much appreciated.
Sean
Sean
1 - Omission of the IMS was a marketing-driving-engineering decision to stop the market chatter and worry about the next gen engines. Remember the "leaked" vids of the then new engine on a test horse being spun around under full throttle?
2 - Eliminating the IMS among other "moving parts" reduced the cost of parts/assembly... it was a pure accounting move
3 - This was a natural evolution of manufacturing and design that resulted in a better, more reliable engine that can be a platform for lower emissions and higher power attainable from DFI and other technologies?
I dunno...... bottom line was Porsche had a real problem with those engines designed when Porsche was failing, it was never race tested, and designed to be cheap to assemble and be a single engine platform for all sports cars.
It was time to dump it and fix it.
Peace
Bruce in Philly
#119
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicagoland Area
Posts: 26,141
Likes: 0
Received 5,413 Likes
on
2,516 Posts
Yes.
And does nothing to warm up the gear box.
#120
This is the first commentary I've read that omitting the IMS wasn't smart. According to many posters on this forum, the lack of an IMS bearing in the 997.2 DFI engine was a major improvement. So, is this no longer the case? Jake, can you please expand on your remarks? Much appreciated.
Sean
Sean