9A1 Turbo engine
10-10-2009, 03:45 AM
#16
Drifting
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seriously, you'd pay more for the same engine as a lowly boxster??Seriously?
When they start racing it at LeMans, I'll drink a freakin pitcher of the Kool-Aid!
Don't believe the hype.
When they start racing it at LeMans, I'll drink a freakin pitcher of the Kool-Aid!
Don't believe the hype.
10-10-2009, 10:15 AM
#17
Super Moderator
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Why can't internal combustion engines, like nanoelectronics, become faster/cheaper/better over time? ...because the technology is so mature that changes are mostly evolutionary rather than revolutionary. There is no Moore's law for the otto cycle. That being said, 40% less moving parts in a lighter, lower-placed engine for the new turbo sounds revolutionary to me. Also, the DFI engine cycle must be more thermodynamically efficient in order to increase power, torque, and fuel efficiency simultaneously---truly revolutionary, in my humble opinion as a former mechanical and aerospace engineer.
I'll be willing to pay more for such advances in technology once it is time to get a new turbo.
I'll be willing to pay more for such advances in technology once it is time to get a new turbo.
Design a single engine for both the Carrera and GT/Turbo cars (secondary post machining operation on the same block castings), eliminate the M64 (parts and labor).
The M64 has a very long heritage (AFAIK, longer than any other production Porsche engine by a large margiin) in both production cars AND race cars.
It has continued to allow increases in performance over its life....truly an impressive design.....if you like to view that as continuous improvement than fine.
The new engine MAY in fact live up to this heritage....but I am at least skeptical, knowing a bit of how and why it came into being.
BTW, there are some 'standards of design' that don't need to be improved upon...like a true dry sump lubrication system.....
10-10-2009, 04:41 PM
#18
Rennlist Member
I agree with all of you gentlemen, and would prefer paying even more for race-derived technology. Also, rather than more power, I would much prefer lighter weight. This would help acceleration and handling, as well as fuel economy. I don't care about saving fuel so much as I value efficiency. Weight reduction is much more expensive.
A race-derived Porsche turbo would be rare, expensive, and so much more desirable---something Porsche needs to emphasize more in the future or risk brand-dilution. Don't go the way of Mercedes!
A race-derived Porsche turbo would be rare, expensive, and so much more desirable---something Porsche needs to emphasize more in the future or risk brand-dilution. Don't go the way of Mercedes!
10-10-2009, 04:48 PM
#19
Super Moderator
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Weight reduction in a 99x Turbo?
Not likely, given their 'GT class" curb weights today... we're not talking about a 73 RS here.
Under the leadership of the evil Dr W. , marketing reigned supreme. Engineering took a back seat at all times. Marketing studied the 'new' Porsche demographic and learned that most people wouldn't know a dry sump if it fell on their foot, let alone could identify the 911 variants thru the years (re: Cayenne and Panamera demographic).
Similarly, the Motorsports group was simply allowed to exist, no real development/expenditures (outside of a nice new building...that helps on track)....again, the new demographic wouldn't know a LeMans winning GT1 if it was parked in their parking spot.
The M64's days were numbered under the evil Dr. W and we're just now seeing it thru. That's OK, I can still walk out into the garage and look at an M64 and wooden floorboards and 'remember when'.....
Not likely, given their 'GT class" curb weights today... we're not talking about a 73 RS here.
Under the leadership of the evil Dr W. , marketing reigned supreme. Engineering took a back seat at all times. Marketing studied the 'new' Porsche demographic and learned that most people wouldn't know a dry sump if it fell on their foot, let alone could identify the 911 variants thru the years (re: Cayenne and Panamera demographic).
Similarly, the Motorsports group was simply allowed to exist, no real development/expenditures (outside of a nice new building...that helps on track)....again, the new demographic wouldn't know a LeMans winning GT1 if it was parked in their parking spot.
The M64's days were numbered under the evil Dr. W and we're just now seeing it thru. That's OK, I can still walk out into the garage and look at an M64 and wooden floorboards and 'remember when'.....
10-10-2009, 04:49 PM
#20
Super Moderator
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I agree with all of you gentlemen, and would prefer paying even more for race-derived technology. Also, rather than more power, I would much prefer lighter weight. This would help acceleration and handling, as well as fuel economy. I don't care about saving fuel so much as I value efficiency. Weight reduction is much more expensive.!
10-18-2009, 06:32 PM
#21
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-20-2009, 02:22 AM
#22
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Doug the 9A1 motor is not a boxer motor. I dont know where you got that. I have the new motor and its fabulous. Stonger than the 993TT I had and the 996 GT3 I had.
You better start mixing up some kool aid bra.
You better start mixing up some kool aid bra.
10-20-2009, 07:39 AM
#23
Super Moderator
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
10-21-2009, 12:00 AM
#24
Advanced
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I remember correctly from my early Porsche education in the seventies, flat, opposed engine is not necessarily a boxer configuration. In a boxer, opposing pistons simultaneously run toward bottom and top dead ends, i.e. they rush apart toward top end and rush toward each other to bottom dead end. This motion causes pressure waves in the crankcase and reduces possible power output. The Porsche 6 cylinder engines don't operate this way.
10-21-2009, 12:29 AM
#25
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
So I cant spell Boxster? I am an engineer with 170+ college credit for which 3 were in English. Aycronym is my first language English is my 2nd language.
