GT3.2 will be Dry Sump
12-19-2008, 02:39 PM
#46
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Tampa
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, no news
no info no questions no discussion
I'm not sure the Pres actually bothered to come as I was told (cannot confirm) he was a last minute cancellation.
Jack
no info no questions no discussion
I'm not sure the Pres actually bothered to come as I was told (cannot confirm) he was a last minute cancellation.
Jack
12-20-2008, 07:54 AM
#47
Rennlist Member
Attachment 322384
Could this be an indication of the dry sumps of the future....??? Recent US patent application by Porsche... No external tank... describes a catchment tank and transfer to an ajoining storage area within the same area...
Could this be an indication of the dry sumps of the future....??? Recent US patent application by Porsche... No external tank... describes a catchment tank and transfer to an ajoining storage area within the same area...
Last edited by 911rox; 04-26-2010 at 08:35 AM.
12-20-2008, 11:45 AM
#49
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Attachment 322384
Could this be an indication of the dry sumps of the future....??? Recent US patent application by Porsche... No external tank... describes a catchment tank and transfer to an ajoining storage area within the same area...
Could this be an indication of the dry sumps of the future....??? Recent US patent application by Porsche... No external tank... describes a catchment tank and transfer to an ajoining storage area within the same area...
12-20-2008, 01:55 PM
#50
Three Wheelin'
^ The patent does speak to an intermediate shaft [0018] for the main oil delivery pump; I thought the A91 did not have any ISs. That said the technology re the integrated dry sump could very well be applicable. Maybe someone here knows for sure.
12-20-2008, 02:24 PM
#51
Rennlist Member
The engine in the patent application also does not have direct fuel injection.
The cross section of the engine also looks nothing like the A91
No electronic controlled variable pressure pump output is mentioned as in the A91.
Also the A91 has no scavenge pumps in the heads as the patent engine does.
The system described seems to be a refined version of the 996 engine with greater separation of the pressure pump's oil source making it sort of a dry sump that is still in a wet space.
12-21-2008, 02:31 AM
#52
Rennlist Member
The publishing date and serial number printed at the top of the application are of late 2008 publication. Would they be lodging a patent application for a 996 engine in 2008? This is what I find strange....
Unless they are obtaining a patent for the concept using older diagrams in an effort to not disclose the current engine design???? If they patent the concept, they could add direct injection, pull out a shaft and the job is done...
Unless they are obtaining a patent for the concept using older diagrams in an effort to not disclose the current engine design???? If they patent the concept, they could add direct injection, pull out a shaft and the job is done...
12-21-2008, 08:14 AM
#53
Rennlist Member
Yes no intermediate shaft in the A91
The engine in the patent application also does not have direct fuel injection.
The cross section of the engine also looks nothing like the A91
No electronic controlled variable pressure pump output is mentioned as in the A91.
Also the A91 has no scavenge pumps in the heads as the patent engine does.
The system described seems to be a refined version of the 996 engine with greater separation of the pressure pump's oil source making it sort of a dry sump that is still in a wet space.
The engine in the patent application also does not have direct fuel injection.
The cross section of the engine also looks nothing like the A91
No electronic controlled variable pressure pump output is mentioned as in the A91.
Also the A91 has no scavenge pumps in the heads as the patent engine does.
The system described seems to be a refined version of the 996 engine with greater separation of the pressure pump's oil source making it sort of a dry sump that is still in a wet space.
12-21-2008, 09:49 AM
#54
Three Wheelin'
Agreed.
I wonder if a separate application will follow re the actual built-out IDS including some of the missing items (electronic controlled variable pressure pump output, cross section of the sump, etc) Cupcar mentioned.
The other side of this would be the marketing angle; that is, patent/trademark IDS lubrication for adverts/literature, etc., and keep the competition from using the phrase.
I wonder if a separate application will follow re the actual built-out IDS including some of the missing items (electronic controlled variable pressure pump output, cross section of the sump, etc) Cupcar mentioned.
The other side of this would be the marketing angle; that is, patent/trademark IDS lubrication for adverts/literature, etc., and keep the competition from using the phrase.
12-21-2008, 12:54 PM
#55
Rennlist Member
Agreed.
I wonder if a separate application will follow re the actual built-out IDS including some of the missing items (electronic controlled variable pressure pump output, cross section of the sump, etc) Cupcar mentioned.
The other side of this would be the marketing angle; that is, patent/trademark IDS lubrication for adverts/literature, etc., and keep the competition from using the phrase.
I wonder if a separate application will follow re the actual built-out IDS including some of the missing items (electronic controlled variable pressure pump output, cross section of the sump, etc) Cupcar mentioned.
The other side of this would be the marketing angle; that is, patent/trademark IDS lubrication for adverts/literature, etc., and keep the competition from using the phrase.
