View Poll Results: Would you build a 996 Spec if this became a PCA Class?
Absolutely! I'm in!
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar2-l.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar2.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar2-r.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/clear.gif)
39
25.16%
Interested, but not right now
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar3-l.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar3.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar3-r.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/clear.gif)
69
44.52%
No
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar4-l.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar4.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/polls/bar4-r.gif)
![](https://rennlist.com/forums/clear.gif)
47
30.32%
Voters: 155. You may not vote on this poll
Would you build a 996 Spec?
#211
The Penguin King
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
A few things I left off:
Third Radiator is allowed.
Brakes are stock, but any one-piece rotor is allowed. No floating rotors.
Stock ECU
LWFW allowed
Mufflers and/or cats can be bypassed
Keep in mind as you look at the suggested rules that the idea is not to build the fastest 996 possible, but to keep build costs "reasonable", and to make the car reliable and safe. We're trying to build cars that cost $40-$45k including the donor, and to keep running costs down (hence the R888 or similar tire NT-01?)
#212
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Us California guys are building as well. I am hoping to have it out by feb 7 to test.
Basically everything you have there, with the PSS10 and 672lb front, 900lb rear springs. The other car being built is already pretty light and I will know the weight of mine shortly.
I am not doing the LWFW but do have an open exhaust. We (the 2 drivers building them here) are hoping for the hooisers since we are going to be in a class with much faster cars for the time being.
Basically everything you have there, with the PSS10 and 672lb front, 900lb rear springs. The other car being built is already pretty light and I will know the weight of mine shortly.
I am not doing the LWFW but do have an open exhaust. We (the 2 drivers building them here) are hoping for the hooisers since we are going to be in a class with much faster cars for the time being.
#213
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The initial thought was to go with the 3.4l because the cars are cheap, and replacement engines are plentiful since it is the same as the Boxster S engine. It keeps things simple by not having to worry about weight handicaps. And if for some reason 3.6 turned out to be a faster car, it would drive the cost up, which is what we're trying to avoid. I'm no expert on this sort of stuff though, and if letting in 3.6's would move things along and not creat havoc, I'd be ok with it. I'll ping the POC guys. Or maybe one of them is reading and will comment...
donor +70k mile 3.4 car $22k + new motor = $34k
donor +40k mile 3.6 car (no new motor necessary = sub $30k
And the used 3.6 is still better than the new 3.4 motor. Seems like a no brainer.
#215
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Yes, to the best of my knowledge, that is the spec suspension. I have been waiting for a long time to buy it until they got the spec more finalized.
And camber will need to be adjusted with the control arms since camber plates don't look like they will be allowed.
So far there are 2 cars here, Doesn't anybody want to build more in SoCal?
And camber will need to be adjusted with the control arms since camber plates don't look like they will be allowed.
So far there are 2 cars here, Doesn't anybody want to build more in SoCal?
#216
Ironman 140.6
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
- The Boxster 3.4 uses the cylinder heads from the 3.6 (Mk I 996 does not).
- Boxster S compression ratio 11.1:1, 996 Mk I 11.3:1
- Their power outputs at the peaks look similar, but I'll bet the power under the curve is significantly different due to Vario Cam plus
I'm not an "expert" either, but a cursory look suggests there are some real differences in these motors
On a side note, I agree with everything you've said about keeping a spec very simple to keep costs down. However I disagree that it would be difficult to incorporate the 3.6 within a simple framework. Bolting lead weight to a 3.6 car would not be costly or difficult and it should be fairly easy to determine a fair weight penalty to carry. If down the road the weight decided on was too little or too much based on results, this could be easily adjusted at the start of the next season.
#217
#219
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Yes, to the best of my knowledge, that is the spec suspension. I have been waiting for a long time to buy it until they got the spec more finalized.
And camber will need to be adjusted with the control arms since camber plates don't look like they will be allowed.
So far there are 2 cars here, Doesn't anybody want to build more in SoCal?
And camber will need to be adjusted with the control arms since camber plates don't look like they will be allowed.
So far there are 2 cars here, Doesn't anybody want to build more in SoCal?
So AST will be the spec as a 1 or 2 way adjustable? If I read correctly the prelim specs allow GT3 rear toe links, GT3 2-pc lower control arms F&R, GT3 adjustable sways, no camber plates, no dog bones, no monoballs.
#220
The Penguin King
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
In my conversations with the Spec guys in California, AST has never come up as an option. I don't know if they have added it to the list, but I've not heard anything about that being the only Spec shock.
#222
Race Car
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
AST's would be cool. But it goes back to how much technology you really want in the suspension of a spec class car.
#223
The Penguin King
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
#224
Drifting
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dallas/FortWorth Texas
Posts: 3,438
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
On a side note, I agree with everything you've said about keeping a spec very simple to keep costs down. However I disagree that it would be difficult to incorporate the 3.6 within a simple framework. Bolting lead weight to a 3.6 car would not be costly or difficult and it should be fairly easy to determine a fair weight penalty to carry. If down the road the weight decided on was too little or too much based on results, this could be easily adjusted at the start of the next season.
Last edited by TR6; 01-15-2009 at 03:00 PM. Reason: spelling