nwGTS

I'm curious why you chose this hill to die on. I think you're the only one arguing that others are calling the 9A1 a dry sump. Maybe I missed it but everyone else here is saying it's an integrated dry sump. I guess we could call that a hybrid. It does have separate oil reservoirs, but they are internal instead of external. I agree that if it actually was a better system (lighter, better performance, etc) we would see it in race cars right? Maybe it's against rules in the major series so it's not worth developing an integrated dry sump race engine? Or maybe it's threshold is just south of that. Worked for Rum Bum though. I don't know. Just thinking.

Here's an insightful comment from the video of that 9A1 spazzing out:


BMW's M3, M4 & M6 and the Nissan GTR uses a modified baffle oil sump system. This baffle system is inferior to the new Porsche INTEGRATED DRY SUMP system which sufficiently provides oil to all lubricating points of the engine across all track load conditions. The system is called "Integrated" because instead of a separate oil reservoir, which is typically external to the engine as with most dry sump systems, this oil reservoir is integrated inside the engine itself.

Ray S

This is a forum and I'm simply commenting on misinformation. In fact a couple of posters have said that the 997.2 Carrera oiling system is a dry sump. Perhaps you should go back and re-read the thread and your own posts as you were one of them. v v v v

Do tell, please describe all the major series in which such a system would be against the rules. You (and others) seem to think the new system is just as effective as the old. I have my doubts. Doubts that seem to be confirmed with things Porsche has said about the new cars. For example they advise the new cars not be tracked with racing slicks. Here is one such disclaimer for an "integrated dry sump" Porsche ("The fitting of racing tires (e.g. slicks) for sporting events is not approved by Porsche. Very high cornering speeds can be achieved with racing tires. However, the resulting transverse acceleration values would jeopardize the adequate supply of oil to the engine.")

Formula One, Indy Car, Nascar, LeMans, series all use dry sump systems in their cars and I really don't think that's an accident. Like I said, time will tell if Porsche's "integrated dry sump" is really an equal of that proven system.

nwGTS

What are you talking about? Don't misquote me. You're creating a narrative in your head that isn't there. I didn't say what you are quoting. What you are quoting came from Porsche. I literally just posted what Porsche said. I had in that post and still have no comment either way.

Again, you're being insulting and flippant in reading things that aren't there. I just posed the question as something to think about why it isn't used in a major race series. If that wasn't clear enough I literally said 'just thinking'.

So, let's get off this hill, back to ground zero and think about why an integrated dry sump might not be used in major race series if it isn't against any governing bodies' rules (and, again, I don't know if it is or isn't I literally just posed the question). If it could be used, the reason teams aren't using it is because it isn't as effective. My guess is a 'proper' dry sump is probably more effective but also probably costs more since it's a completely separate system. The see-saw tips to performance so they still use it. In a production engine, separate parts mean more engineering time, more space needed, more weight, and/or more manufacturing contracts. So, to me, (again, we're just thinking here) if you want 'proper' dry sump performance but reduced costs, you'll need a new system, voila... integrated dry sump. We can't declare if it's as effective or not because no one here, including you or myself, has provided any empirical evidence to show either way. I'd love to see it so we can all be more educated. I bet it's out there somewhere. Anecdotal evidence says it's not as effective. That much is certain. But you need to be open to discourse and stop preaching on blind faith about the merits of the dry sump. This isn't politics its engineering science.

golfnutintib

let this thread die, please

or start a new one called '9a1 dry sump or no, and other bitter ironies of life...'

nwGTS

rodH has the power. I think he just wants to watch it burn. haha

mike9186

+997


I wish I had the opportunity and ability to drive my car at a limit where oil starvation is a real problem...

Ernie J

Hi All, 9A1 is a wet sump. This is by a race industry standard of what a dry sump system is. The Porsche system of wet sump in the 9A1 is very good wet sump, the earlier engines 996/987 up to 2008 had a deficiency in oil control. The Porsche engine development engineer has stated that in a interview recently that @ over .8 g's oil issues would appear.They knew this in 1998.

In 2006 when I purchased a Cayman S to race I looked into the oil system as I had been racing a 1981 911SC with dry sump. I did not like what I saw with the M96 style engine. So I came up with a 2L Deep Sump. I now have 4th design. Using CFD , shaker post, track oil data with AIM I have improved the oiling of the M96 engine with the Mantissport deep sump pan.

9A1 , Porsche spent a great deal more time with this engine. In my opinion it only needs more oil capacity , some of what we have to contend with is, some design issues are driven by " carbon foot print". Extended oil changes, less oil capacity reduce this "foot print", during the life time of the car.

WV997S

"let's givem sumpen to talk about."

dgjks6

.1

phaphaphooey

We get the point after you derailed the thread. All hail your mighty Metzger engine in all of its majesty.

Ray S

Good heavens man, you just don't get it. A poster indicated one the the differences that made the 997.2 better than the 997.1 was that the new car had a "dry sump". I corrected him.

You came by with your marketing material from Porsche saying that the 997.2 utilized Porsche's proven dry sump system and I corrected you.

What you posted was marketing bs, nothing more.

The 9a1 in the Carrera is a wet sump period. You and the marketing geniuses from Porsche can call it a modified wet sump, integrated dry sump or a unicorn sump. It doesn't matter. What does matter is that whatever you call it does not make it a dry sump.

I'm guessing you don't take you car out to PCA track events much. I have spent quite a bit of time at them. I have witnessed cars with Porsche's "integrated wet sump" smoking on the side of the track or limping back to the paddock with engine problems on quite a few occasions. Were they all oil starvation problems, I doubt it. We're some of them? I'd bet money some were. I consider myself lucky that I never had a problem with my Boxster.

Spend some time reading about the issue in the "Racing and Drivers Education Forum". You'll find hundreds of posts about issues and solutions for 986's, 996's, 987's, and 997's and their integrated dry sumps. Look at all the deep sump, improved baffle, or accusump type solutions that are being offered in the aftermarket for folks who track these machines. Coincidence?

Do you find it at all odd or coincidental that Porsche began recommending owners not install slicks on these newer cars?

Finally, I know of no regulations in the major automotive racing series that would disallow a set-up like Porsche's "integrated dry sump". Have I read every line of the sporting regulations that govern these series? Not by a long shot.

Believe me, don't believe me, agree, or disagree, at this point I don't care

^^^

I think this is good information. I agree, wholeheartedly. It appears that the sump in the 9a1 is a huge improvement over the integrated sumps in the older cars and I have seen a lot less chatter about the problem for the new cars at the track and in the racing forum which is a great sign.

nwGTS

I very much 'get it'. I honestly don't think you do. Others may have but I'm not arguing that the 9A1 is a true dry sump and never was. You're making that up. I only questioned without bias the comparable effectiveness of both systems. You're right. I don't care if they call it a unicorn system. And we both agree they aren't the same thing. I just want to know how it works. I don't know why but this was totally lost on you.

And your comment about me not tracking the car at PCA events. Not sure how that's relevant unless you're trying to use anecdotal witness testimony of broken engines as empirical evidence to why it's inferior. Which, again I already established we're clear in the anecdotal part. And, again, means all of nothing when judging the system's effectiveness. I do both track and observe at local PCA Chicago and Milwaukee track days. I'll add that the cars I've see on the side of the road and towed the most are the 944 and 986 track duty cars. I saw one 997 GT3 blow a coolant hose (idiot for not getting it pinned or welded). None of them had to do with oil starvation (yet) but again anecdotal evidence means nothing anyway.

I want to see the data and the only reason I'm still engaging here is because I don't like bullies and you're basically bullying people into believing the dry sump is better. It could be but I'm just saying lets take a step back and see if it really is or no and in what circumstances and why.

I do think this is a worthwhile discussion. It maybe only relates a little to the OPs question but is an important difference IMO in the mezger and 9A1 engines worthy of discussion for which I've only seen anecdotal evidence in the racing forum.
Cheers

Ray S

I'm not making anything up. You posted information that claimed the 9a1 utilized Porsche's "proven dry sump system".

That's 100% marketing b.s. If you were not arguing it why did you post it to refute what I correctly told the other poster? Now you seem to want to amend that post to say that's not what you were arguing. Sorry, the inference is very clear.

If anyone is trying to "bully" misinformation on this topic it is you.

As for my evidence you are correct it's anecdotal. Based on the volume of it I think there is something there.

Again, feel free to disagree.

snake eyes

That guy is such a troll...

Hey genius, I track my car and guess what it works perfectly fine.
Rum bum races their car and it works perfectly fine

Rum bum won a championship with 9a1

All hail your turbo with its cracking coolant pipes.

Ignored now

Had enough

Ray S

That's rich. A user who showed up a few months ago thinks I'm the troll. Please do tell what info I've had wrong in this thread? I've been pretty clear that all of these motors (including the Mezger) have issues.

This is the second time in this thread you've claimed to be leaving. Don't let the door hit your *** as you go.

Post more bs and I'll still be here.