trackjunky

I'm sure this post is designed to create debate, but this is exactly the question that I am dealing with. Do I make the jump to a 996 or go with an air cooled 911?

The '99's look like they are ones to stay away from, but a 2000 - 2002 might be a great club racer. GTB could be a class for stripped out 996's and develop into a psuedo "spec" class. Can't really do too much to the motor and as long as a minimum weight is specified, it might all be suspension.

You can pick up a decent 2000-2002 for $35K and under, which makes it even the more interesting.

911S3.6

The 996,997, Boxsters, and Caymans all have the "Subaru motor" which is not a dry sump race engine. Only the GT2, GT3 and twin turbo still have the true dry sump motor that is a descendant of the LeMans winning GT1 engine. All 964 and 993 have this same motor sans water cooled heads.

Nick

earlyapex

Please remind all of the teams that have competed with the 996 and now with the 997 in GAC that they cannot hope to finish a race with the poor wet sumped M967/97 motors.

J-RAD

Possibly?! I don't know, that's why I'm asking the question. I'd like to know before I eventually purchase a 997 or GT3 someday for this purpose.

Are there provisions that can mitigate the risk? i.e. Accusump system, etc.?

This is the discussion that is prompting the question:
https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...referrerid=967

I've seen many 996's on the track over the years and I've known of the potential for oil starvation. However, I don't actually know anyone that has run into the issue.

In coming clean, I know the poster in the other thread (although, I didn't know he was going to start a thread here too). I helped him find the car he's having an issue with and he called me to discuss the problem. He's also called around to a number of shops around the country. The statements and title of the thread were intentional to bait responses a bit.

The real basis for the statements in my original post are not mine necessarily but rather the result of some subsequent discussions with very reputable (at a national level) shops. I wanted honest opinions here and, to the greatest extent possible - didn't want to bias the waters of those responding. Thus, this fact wasn't mentioned previously. I found some of the comments coming from these shops to be very interesting, if not enlightening and disturbing. A couple established members here seem to echo those thoughts while others clearly discount them. Thus, it has prompted more questions - for my own information, if nothing else.

When all is said and done (to trackjunky's point), before someone makes a decision to rebuild/replace an engine, I guess the honest question has to be asked and answered as to whether this is truly the correct platform to do so with? From a selfish standpoint, even though my car has the engine in the correct location , it does raise questions for me about any similar potential for issues.

JayP

Then use street tires. Easy.

pu911rsr

People have raced wet sump motors for years. The dry sump system is superior technically but that does not mean a wet sump is inadequate.
Phil

J-RAD

No, but I do know him. See my previous post. I didn't know he was going to post a thread too.

dnitake

Tracking a car means you'll be going fast enough on pavement for it to be considered tracking in the first place. If you're asking these questions, then you can probably drive around the block and save yourself the trouble. Definitely need a wet sump for that.
----
Do I get a rude award? Anybody?

Patrick

Well, read my answer in his thread. I have six years now tracking my 996, and I have several friends who do the same, with no problems. One driver's woes do not make a whole line of cars inadequate.

Larry Herman

Bill, the 996s are great cars and the well setup ones are tough to beat. If I were in your position now, I would wait for the 2008 PCA classes to be finalized. From the looks of it though, a prepared RSA like mine will be at the top of it's class, and with 265 RWHP and 2950 lbs (with driver) slots in nicely to NASAs GTS3 class. A 3.6L 996 maxed out to the limit of the stock rules should be competitive in the new classes too.

J-RAD

I hear ya but see my response in that thread as well as my earlier post here (#19).

It's not one driver's woes that promped that statement. It's the fact that those statements came from shops he's contacted - that's where the concern stems from. He spent a fair amount of time looking at various cars that he could dedicate to DE (including 944's and 968's) before deciding on this one. After two events (well, one and half) with the car, he ran into this unfortunate issue. While calling around to various shops in attempt to figure out how to handle the issue, he heard statements similar to those in my original post. I'm guessing that you could understand how comments such as these, especially to someone that is just starting to get pretty involved in the sport, would be concerning. I've been doing DE's for several years and this was news to me as well (but what do I know, I drove a SC and a Boxster for crying out loud).

He's not bashing anyone or anything. He's simply trying to get a better understanding of the car and it's potential limitationsand options to consider before dropping thousands more into it. Surely, we can all respect that.

Larry:
What are your thoughts or knowledge with supplemental oil systems? Do you use one? Do you know others that do? Has this been a concern for you?

paradisenb:
You made mention of baffling the oil pan. Seems you may be knowledgable on the issue. I'd be interested in knowing more about this.

boze_man

bill...i was thinkin there was something bout the '99s that made them a bit more desirable as a track candidate vs the 00-01...but what do i know, i will have to defer to the experts...good luck with your search

Gator_86_951

I don't think the accusump really does all that much good to be honest. I have some seen some 996s do very well presonally at pca races down here for sure.

boze_man

larry...any class diff in the RSA vs a reg C2? also for someone like Bill wouldnt it be better to start with a cheaper C2 since u r gonna dump money into it? i have an RSA but seems to be best value to keep it as a dual purpose car (DE/street)...if i was to go to track only car i would think it would make sense to sell the RSA and find a C2 project? any thoughts for me and Bill? thanks

CWay27

Congrats on becoming a new instructor. I saw you and your car the very first morning (at the gas station) and found it weird indeed that you didn't have a sunroof without being a GT3. Looks really good for 180K km.