GT3 engine ruined by single mass lightweight flywheel
#17
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
My local shop has a .2 non-RS GT3 in with devastating engine damage. When the company man came to look at the damage, he said Porsche would not cover it as the dual mass flywheel had been replaced with a single mass LWFW. That I understand. When we go modifying our cars I don't expect Porsche to cover any damage that occurs with non-stock parts. It is what he said next that bothered me: The non-RS GT3 engine is not designed to handle the LWFW and damage can occur. Is there anything different (assuming the clutch, pulley and all other things are appropriately changed) with the non-RS and RS engines that should really make the non-RS not be able to handle a properly-installed LWFW?
if that has happened on a .2 gt3 it only says one more time what a sh$tty assembly quality those cars are now, with all those other issues like bolts coming out by itself from variocam and apparently flywheel as well as somebody posted here, etc. after reading all this I really lost any interest to buy this model, as it simply sucks to shell out $100K+ on a newer car and then give it to the indy shop to take engine apart to make sure it will not die on the next event, I already drive a car like this now, what`s the point to get into other one if it is a same thing?
all in all - this stuff is highly annoying. may be they will eventually figure out what is the problem with assembly quality and in 991.2 or 991.3 models it will be finally over.
#18
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Fact is, the engine has a resonance at about 4K RPM's, all you have to do is install a set of urethane tranny mounts, and you can feel it, very pronounced. The soft, stock tranny mounts mask this harmonic resonance, which seems to be generating from when the cam actuators start coming on at that RPM.
I feel it every time you pass through that RPM range. I purposely avoid that RPM range whenever I drive on the street, and have avoided street driving as much as I can lately, because of this.
The question I have always asked, does this ATI damper absorb this resonance at 4k RPM's for a stock, 3.6L engine (with RS single mass flywheel? If so, and is shown to not introduce any other torsional imbalance, I would be happy to buy the ATI damper and use it in confidence.
I feel it every time you pass through that RPM range. I purposely avoid that RPM range whenever I drive on the street, and have avoided street driving as much as I can lately, because of this.
The question I have always asked, does this ATI damper absorb this resonance at 4k RPM's for a stock, 3.6L engine (with RS single mass flywheel? If so, and is shown to not introduce any other torsional imbalance, I would be happy to buy the ATI damper and use it in confidence.
The following users liked this post:
Robocop305 (11-25-2021)
#19
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I put a light weight flywheel in my 93 RSA and never had an issue. One of the few cars I wish I had kept. It was like a Timex. Took a licking and kept on ticking.
#20
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
it is a simple law of physics at work here that brakes engine apart and from a corporate perspective - number of man hours to test an assembled product.
#21
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
My local shop has a .2 non-RS GT3 in with devastating engine damage. When the company man came to look at the damage, he said Porsche would not cover it as the dual mass flywheel had been replaced with a single mass LWFW. That I understand. When we go modifying our cars I don't expect Porsche to cover any damage that occurs with non-stock parts. It is what he said next that bothered me: The non-RS GT3 engine is not designed to handle the LWFW and damage can occur. Is there anything different (assuming the clutch, pulley and all other things are appropriately changed) with the non-RS and RS engines that should really make the non-RS not be able to handle a properly-installed LWFW?
1.) 4.0 Pressure Plate
2.) 4.0 Clutch
3.) LWFW (3.8RS & 4.0RS are the same)
4.) RS Pulley
5.) RS bolt to hold pulley
Questions:
A.) How many installs had this shop done before?
B.) How many miles (track & street) were on the car after the retro fit?
C.) How many over-revs and what range(s) when the failure occurred?
Thanks
#22
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
You guys can call BS all you want, but the RS 3.8 and RS 4.0 are the least reliable engines of all GT3 mezgers, and many of the failures are attributed to loosening fasteners. Install LWFW - risk goes up.
As long as you're ok knowing that, have fun. I put a LWFW on my 4.0.
If the engine is out, it's good practice to re-torque the cam bolts too.
As long as you're ok knowing that, have fun. I put a LWFW on my 4.0.
If the engine is out, it's good practice to re-torque the cam bolts too.
#24
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Fact is, the engine has a resonance at about 4K RPM's, all you have to do is install a set of urethane tranny mounts, and you can feel it, very pronounced. The soft, stock tranny mounts mask this harmonic resonance, which seems to be generating from when the cam actuators start coming on at that RPM.
I feel it every time you pass through that RPM range. I purposely avoid that RPM range whenever I drive on the street, and have avoided street driving as much as I can lately, because of this.
The question I have always asked, does this ATI damper absorb this resonance at 4k RPM's for a stock, 3.6L engine (with RS single mass flywheel? If so, and is shown to not introduce any other torsional imbalance, I would be happy to buy the ATI damper and use it in confidence.
I feel it every time you pass through that RPM range. I purposely avoid that RPM range whenever I drive on the street, and have avoided street driving as much as I can lately, because of this.
The question I have always asked, does this ATI damper absorb this resonance at 4k RPM's for a stock, 3.6L engine (with RS single mass flywheel? If so, and is shown to not introduce any other torsional imbalance, I would be happy to buy the ATI damper and use it in confidence.
The low-mid RPM resonance is exactly what we designed it for. We've postponed the testing until the new design that fits the .2 is available. We have 4 more of the original here ready to go... I have one on my 4.2 and John Chan installed one on his 3.6 .1 Pumpkin... Have many out there on 3.6L converted to larger displacement (4.0L all bore and 4.0L bore and stroke).
#25
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Is this a known issue on the .1 rs and .1 gt3's with the rs or 4.0 flywheel? I plan to do the 4.0 parts within the next 4-5 months (along with coolant pipe pinning, etc...).
I like the idea of the harmonic balancer but I hate the idea of adding more rotating weight, as the whole point of the mod is to make everything spin up and down quicker. It was an awesome, awesome change on my 996 gt3, and I was hoping for similar results on the gt3.
I like the idea of the harmonic balancer but I hate the idea of adding more rotating weight, as the whole point of the mod is to make everything spin up and down quicker. It was an awesome, awesome change on my 996 gt3, and I was hoping for similar results on the gt3.
#26
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So for .1 you can use an RS pulley and LWFW and you will be good. Many .1 GT3's no issues.
Balancer is 6 lbs. stock gt3 flywheel is 40+ pounds. LWFW is down to a little over 20. The crank shaft and rotating assembly is around 30lbs. Adding 6 lbs won't change anything about how the car feels.
We had a 4.0L engine (bore and stroke) customer go from dmfw, to our damper and 4.0RS LWFW and loved it, rev'd so much faster and has had no issues...
This assumption that a 6 pound damper will adversely affect revs isn't founded...
Balancer is 6 lbs. stock gt3 flywheel is 40+ pounds. LWFW is down to a little over 20. The crank shaft and rotating assembly is around 30lbs. Adding 6 lbs won't change anything about how the car feels.
We had a 4.0L engine (bore and stroke) customer go from dmfw, to our damper and 4.0RS LWFW and loved it, rev'd so much faster and has had no issues...
This assumption that a 6 pound damper will adversely affect revs isn't founded...
The following 2 users liked this post by Jamie_GT3:
Brian Himmelman (05-02-2023),
Robocop305 (01-20-2023)
#27
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So for .1 you can use an RS pulley and LWFW and you will be good. Many .1 GT3's no issues.
Balancer is 6 lbs. stock gt3 flywheel is 40+ pounds. LWFW is down to a little over 20. The crank shaft and rotating assembly is around 30lbs. Adding 6 lbs won't change anything about how the car feels.
We had a 4.0L engine (bore and stroke) customer go from dmfw, to our damper and 4.0RS LWFW and loved it, rev'd so much faster and has had no issues...
This assumption that a 6 pound damper will adversely affect revs isn't founded...
Balancer is 6 lbs. stock gt3 flywheel is 40+ pounds. LWFW is down to a little over 20. The crank shaft and rotating assembly is around 30lbs. Adding 6 lbs won't change anything about how the car feels.
We had a 4.0L engine (bore and stroke) customer go from dmfw, to our damper and 4.0RS LWFW and loved it, rev'd so much faster and has had no issues...
This assumption that a 6 pound damper will adversely affect revs isn't founded...
#28
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Thanks Jamie. I wasn't suggesting that the 6 pound difference was something that could be felt on a "butt dyno," only that from a psychological perspective, its too bad to have to add 6 pounds back, making the total weight reduction 20 pounds rather than 26-ish, as the whole point of the lwfw is to reduce weight. Of course, everything is a trade off, and if it helps longevity than its a no brainer.
It's not just the amount of weight, it's also a factor of where the weight is located. Imagine standing in the middle of a merry-go round as a kid, It's very easy to get the merry go round spinning very fast. Now imagine having 2 kids that are 1/2 your weight standing opposite of each other right on the edges of the merry-go-round. It will be dramatically harder to get moving.
This is the difference in weight distribution for a rotating mass. if all the weight it at or very near the center of rotation it has much less effect on the objects resistance to rotation. The damper is 6 lbs and it's concentrated very near the axis of rotation of the crank shaft. The Flywheel is far heavier AND it's weight is spread out farther away from the center of rotation of the crank shaft.
This is why the 20lbs you drop with a LWFW change is so easy to feel. The 6lb's on the damper, really can't even tell it's there...
I've heard this question a few times and wanted to try to put it to bed if I can...
#29
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Heres my take on this.
Porsche as with many OEM are now driven by the profits and the risk factor. As long as they can slide through the warranty period then its up to the customer to pay for repairs. So factor in so many warranty claims and you can cost out the cost. That cost is always lower than actually fixing the problem. Remember when we get these cars new, they are already years old to Porsche, so engineering is done with them and then its up to the warranty dept to deal with it. They are run by directitives from the Attorneys and accountants.
The issues with any bolts coming loose on any engine is never about how tight it should have been. Once you get vibrations happening nothing will stay tight regardless of how tight it should have been. The problem with .1 and .2 engines having bolts come loose is all about the harmonics induced in these engines. The dampener is the solution in my opinion.
Porsche as with many OEM are now driven by the profits and the risk factor. As long as they can slide through the warranty period then its up to the customer to pay for repairs. So factor in so many warranty claims and you can cost out the cost. That cost is always lower than actually fixing the problem. Remember when we get these cars new, they are already years old to Porsche, so engineering is done with them and then its up to the warranty dept to deal with it. They are run by directitives from the Attorneys and accountants.
The issues with any bolts coming loose on any engine is never about how tight it should have been. Once you get vibrations happening nothing will stay tight regardless of how tight it should have been. The problem with .1 and .2 engines having bolts come loose is all about the harmonics induced in these engines. The dampener is the solution in my opinion.
#30
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Jamie - you make a good point regarding the location of the weight, especially in terms of the distance from the axis. I have no idea how well the ATI unit works, but philosophically it still seems undesirable to add six pounds back in when converting to the LWFW.
You've commented on the redesign of the 997.2 pulley to fit without modification to the surrounding engine components; that is important. Has it also been modified to retain the stock pulley diameter? Using a larger diameter pulley would seem to increase the speed and parasitic losses of the auxiliary systems, and would necessitate a longer, non-stock serpentine belt. Perhaps this can be factored into the final design?
When will a 997.2 unit be available?
You've commented on the redesign of the 997.2 pulley to fit without modification to the surrounding engine components; that is important. Has it also been modified to retain the stock pulley diameter? Using a larger diameter pulley would seem to increase the speed and parasitic losses of the auxiliary systems, and would necessitate a longer, non-stock serpentine belt. Perhaps this can be factored into the final design?
When will a 997.2 unit be available?