map
-
Posts
3,886 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
19
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by map
-
-
-
1 minute ago, phazed said:
Exactly. If it doesn’t do much, why not remove it now. Get rid of the air pump and all the tubing. Cap off any open ends. Will that actually make any difference for our MOT tests?
Whether or not it affects the MOT test is probably "secondary" (sorry) to the likely ECU errors caused by the missing equipment.
You can of course get the engine mapped and as part of that have the ECU updated to ignore the missing equipment.
-
Is the roof fabric properly seating in the channels around door frames?
Noticed my 986 roof behave this way and spotted that the fabric wasn’t correctly seated.
-
1
-
-
Is it for the forward plenum?
Not the one with the throttle body - the other towards the front of the car that joins left and right banks.
There’s an ECU trigger vacuum “solenoid” which opens that plenum under given parameters.
-
-
21 hours ago, Christopher2110 said:
After being heavy handed removing the dial fascias and buggering things up I no longer know how fast I am going!
Er….. so heavy handed that you mashed the digital speed display at the bottom of the analogue speedo dial?
If that’s still working you may still have a speed reading available to you.
-
On 4/14/2024 at 8:06 PM, RalphyBMW said:
I spotted a Bosch starter motor for the Porsche at £170 without a core charge.
Assuming they’re still available could you share a link please?
Thanks
map
-
On 4/11/2024 at 11:25 AM, Randeep said:
Alright gents, thought I'd let you know my outcomes with a 987 airbox, 987 MAF, 996 TB and 996 plenum. I have a facelift 2.7 which needed a new engine, so the new to me engine went in with the new to me intake upgrades. A few weeks ago I took it to ChipWizards to get it mapped as Wayne really knows his stuff. So the outcome was 235bhp and 203lbft (I think...will check) torque. Wayne said the intake changes make more of a difference on 3.2 engines and those with exhaust upgrades (I have standard manifolds and exhaust). The difference in drivability however is where its most noticeable, pulls harder low down and revs much faster. The 987 airbox also had the helmholtz resonator removed to make it fit so the induction sound is amazing. All in all I would have liked a bit more power (I'll wait for my exhaust to die) but drivability and sound make it worth while. The 987 airbox makes the most difference, MAF, TB and Plenum are nice to haves on a 2.7, might add a couple more ponies for larger engines with the exhaust mods.
Do you have a Running Report thread?
If not would you consider starting one?
Use copy and paste to make it faster/easier.
There’s much to learn from your experience - consolidating your posts to a single thread makes it easier for folk to find and follow your path.
Cheers
map
-
1 hour ago, Langers said:
Looks great 👏
-
41 minutes ago, Patt said:
yep, but a different connecting pipe. IIRC the 987 angled one, rather than the perpendicular 986 style
Learn something every day - I thought the 550 ran a 74mm TB and Plenum.
-
21 minutes ago, phazed said:
All very good points Map.
👍
Most silicon hoses seem to be aimed at Forced Induction engines where they hold positive pressure rather than withstanding negative/vacuum. On my car the collapse almost closed the hose - no point having a larger TB/Plenum if the feed is so compromised.
In terms of the video - the other standout for me was the cone filter which seemed quite small. On my car we designed the air box to hold a 400bhp cone filter which gives plenty of headroom.
-
7 hours ago, phazed said:
Ditching the 986 airbox, fitting a more free flowing filter in an enclosed box type area and fitting a larger throttle body, and the ancillaries that go with it which in theory should work well actually makes you lose power!
From experience:
Those silicon hoses cannot hold the vacuum:ambient air pressure differential created by the engine from early mid range up.
The hose simply collapses - I know this because I watched it happen to my car the first time it was run with this type of config. Which is why my install uses metal ducting from maf-throttle body.
Having watched the video they do not appear to have remapped the ECU. Nor was there any mention of driving the car on the road far enough to allow the ECU to adjust to the mechanical alterations.
My 3.2 with the equivalent mechanical changes (as described in my thread) and a remap hit 290bhp on Parr’s hub dyno.
As always the Devil’s in the Details.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Bbooxxsstteerr said:
I’ve read your 18 page thread and, that is what I call commitment to a car. And polite - this has to be the most polite forum ever. I won’t be doing all this to mine but I understand the feeling of special.
Thank you. “Commitment” is one way to describe it…..
Mind you wading through all 18 pages takes some doing 👏
-
1 hour ago, phazed said:
Out of interest, more details please.
via search engine….
-
1
-
-
-
-
When my 986 was still a 3.2 it had quite a few “bolt on” tweaks around intake and exhaust. All of which were about improving the engine’s breathability.
The car was then mapped by Parr on their hub dyno to make sure those tweaks were utilised. I do not have the torque data to hand but what I can tell you is that in the real world using 6th at 70mph a 3.6 996 couldn’t get away from it without a downshift and if I did the same whatever gap had opened was promptly closed.
If you’re feeling short changed in terms of torque/bhp then put some proper miles on the car with fresh fuel (98/99) after 200 miles or so the ECU will have recalibrated as far as the factory map will allow.
I’ve just been through this process with mine following some vac system fettling and the gains over time are tangible.
If it’s your track toy then use the engine as you would in that context. You’ll be surprised just how much that built-in tune-up will find you, especially in terms of responsiveness.
More torque/bhp will then only really be found by a mapping session, ideally with someone who understands the idiosyncrasies of the water-cooled F6 architecture.
-
7 hours ago, zagamuffin said:
They are actually in China , did a GT4RS one for my C4S and had some trouble with them ,,,,,,
Ah - what sort of trouble was that?
-
10 hours ago, Bbooxxsstteerr said:
Thanks - Looks very expensive though and really I just want a Porsche oem seat cover.
Have you tried calling your local OPC and asking them?
-
-
39 minutes ago, zagamuffin said:
Wheel was made by the company for me to fit to the 996, no dodgy attachments bar changing from 2 stage bag to 1 stage as mentioned above
Brilliant - can you share the name of the company please?
Or better still do you have a link to their website or socials?
Thanks
map
-
15 minutes ago, Tony Daniel said:
@map I did see an adapter boss once for this but it pushed the steering wheel forward a couple of inches and the airbag and horn did not function.
Thank you - not sure I want to lose the airbag.
EDIT:
Found the company you might be referring to:
https://spacershop.com/categoria-prodotto/distanziali-volante/distanziale-volante-porsche/
Looking at the photos in @zagamuffin’s photo the wheel doesn’t look to be as far from the stalks as the spacershop item is 🤔
Spacershop also commented that the airbag firing tech is single stage in 9x6 whereas later vehicles used a 2 stage system.
-
On 11/5/2023 at 2:40 PM, zagamuffin said:
2 hours ago, map said:This looks very interesting - can anyone tell me where I go to find the what and how for this please?
For clarity I’d like to know how to get this non-multifunction wheel on to a 986 as pictured in @zagamuffin’s post quoted above.
All relevant pointers/links welcome.
Thank you.
map
-
On 11/5/2023 at 2:40 PM, zagamuffin said:
This looks very interesting - can anyone tell me where I go to find the what and how for this please?
Tyres
in 986
Posted
In 986 18” sizes?