It doesnt say in the manual. Id prefer not having the rear brakes drag on track. Turns Brembos to brownbos. theres two buttons ESC & ESC+TC carl

 

I don't think you can turn of PTV in any of the new Porsches. My question is how noticeable is PTV from people that have the GT4 and have pushed it hard in tight corners?

 

My mistake its the ESC button does that disable PTV. carl

 

so it does?

pressing esc off will disable PTV?

 

Someone else needs to confirm but I was under the assumption that ESC is yaw control which will slow the car down if the steering angle sensor and lateral g sensor confirm that you're in a yaw situation and TC will stop using the ABS to control wheel spin via the calipers and rely solely on the mechanics of the limited slip differential in times of wheelspin on power down at corner exit. You can't turn this LSD off though, as it's not an e-diff.

Either way, you can get a 981 sideways and out of shape with those two off way more than any previous generation 987.

And if those road tests and track tests had those both turned on when they complained of the under steer then he car needs even less adjustment of the stock setup. If you guys have understeer with those off, then it's worth adjusting the setup.

Just my $.02.

 

I can confirm understeer In ESC and traction fully off mode. As Well I can mention its same amount of understeer when ESC traction on. At least I cant feel any whats so ever difference, its same understeery what ever off/on.



ESC off mode showing understeer/oversteer




Same track same day, ESC on, green line is ESC triggering. På is on, Av is off, thats swedish

 

Okay. Understood. Makes sense though because if you can't get more than 2.0 degrees stock, it will be much tighter than your car with the modifications. I think I know someone that saw your car over the weekend.

 

No flame, but I believe that he made a comment that Manthey advised him that in his case -1.8 deg was the max with OE parts on the rear. That could very well be on the limit of manufacturing tolerances in order to bring toe into spec. I've been told that on the cars my mechanic has been exposed to -1.6 deg was the max.

What has your experience with these cars taught you regarding OE limitations?

 

I'm finding out all the same stuff you are. Less than 2 degrees is typical if you max out eccentrics and don't change toe links. 1.8 was the number we were told. More than 2 degrees is however possible if you start adding shims and using aftermarket toe links. The car I advised on had 2.5FR / 2.0R and achieved it with a few mm of shim and a set of aftermarket toe links. More up front could have been achieved if they swapped out the OE front tie rod ends and had more outter tire rod length up front.

Is that inline with your findings? I don't think anyone will lower the car to try and gain more so all of this assumes OE ride height.

I thought he went to Manthey and got new parts and has more camber?

 

Mine has been that new toe links are required for camber greater than -1.6 deg on the rear. I was told that parts were needed if I decided to exceed -2.6 deg camber in the front.

If I read his post correctly he hasn't done so yet but is expecting to do so for next season.

 

I picked up some toe links for the front and rear so how much camber can I dial in max front and rear?

 

Here?

 

My understanding from Nur93's other posts on the alignment constraints is that Manthey told him that, even with different toe links and shims in the rear, the rear has an issue with rubbing that limits the rear camber to around -1.5.

In other words, according to Manthey/Nur93, you can't get more than -1.5 in the rear without a different, very expensive, suspension setup. I hope my understanding is incorrect or that Manthey gave Nur93 bad advice.

 

This is what Manthey Said....Here is som hints from manthey...

There are the following options:

# 1.Leave it as it is, just do an alignment:
Max. 2° camber in front, 1°45 in the rear
599€ + adjusting shims.

2.Change the front to:
Part of the toe rod, trailing arm and inner lower arm mixture from 991 RS
and 997 Cup (see the picture, but difficult to see)
No Problem to get 2°50´ camber in the front, still 1°45´in the rear.
Costs 1154,42€ parts
+190,75€ fitting
+ 599€ for alignment
+ adjusting shims

3.Change the whole suspension to KW with adjustable top mounts (in addition to No.2)
No problem to get more than 3° camber all around
Costs:
Please see Position 2
+ around 7000€ for KW 3-way suspension
+ 654€ fitting
Not ready yet, we will get our prototype next week.

It makes no sense to change the rear toe rod with standard suspension. The tire will touch the wheelarch with more than 1°50 camber.
-----------
One more note regarding our phone conversation today.

As I told you, we are limited in camber adjustment with the car in OEM specs in both, front and rear axle.
On the front, we are running out of thread on the steering rod, on the rear, the thrust arm is touching the chassis at a certain stage.

For the moment, solution no. 2 would be the most suitable one offering camber up to 3° on the front and 1°45’ on the rear.
We would choose the balance the car properly comparing front and rear axle.
Further on, corner weight and professional wheel alignment would be a good choice for the car.


For more camber we are pretty sure it’s only possible when switching to another suspension kit incl. adjustable top mounts.
Anything else is just a compromise, i.e. you can get more camber out of the rear when raising the ride height but this is not an option for us....#

Anyway 1°45´in the rear, translate to ap. -1.75 as its 45 min?! Or do I get it wrong?

 

i found exactly the same thing


BBi will tell you. -3F -2.5R is not out of the question


" It makes no sense to change the rear toe rod with standard suspension. The tire will touch the wheelarch with more than 1°50 camber."

i am not sure that's correct
i have way more than 1.5 camber, no rubbing wheel arch