Fitting a IPD intake plenum and 82mm throttle body

[mneil]

18 minutes ago, map said:

The changed map and headers are essentially sub-systems of a larger machine - improvements to one area will produce gains, improve a second, connected area and you often see gains where "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts".

It maybe that a further tweak of the map now would yield additional improvements.

Regardless it's great to see folk modifying their cars to their own taste 👍

Nice to know it's not just my expectations feeling an improvement. Another tweak to the map would seem to be the next step in the journey; a dedicated Porsche engine specialist, any ideas?

The difference in exhaust tone is pleasant; sounds much deeper and it's as if I can hear every cylinder firing in turn.

I'm unsure weather to proceed with a bespoke cat back sports exhaust now as I really don't want "boy racer" volume ( I don't have, or want pse). 

If only the headers gave as much "bang per buck" as a remap 😭. Another first world problem!

 

[bally4563]

I fitted an IPD plenum and GT3 TB on the RS60..... Took it off and went back to standard, bloody thing just would not run, even after driving it in, would not maintain tick over and felt flat mid range, going back to the original set up made me realise just how good standard  was.........Boxed and sold.

[map]

2 hours ago, mneil said:

Nice to know it's not just my expectations feeling an improvement. Another tweak to the map would seem to be the next step in the journey; a dedicated Porsche engine specialist, any ideas?

The difference in exhaust tone is pleasant; sounds much deeper and it's as if I can hear every cylinder firing in turn.

I'm unsure weather to proceed with a bespoke cat back sports exhaust now as I really don't want "boy racer" volume ( I don't have, or want pse). 

If only the headers gave as much "bang per buck" as a remap 😭. Another first world problem!

Re-Map - either go to the people who did the one you have and get them to update it.  Or let folk know where you're based and then we can make recommendations that are near you.

Bespoke Exhaust - be very careful, you may well open yourself to a world of horrible noise/drone.  Would be worth a call to someone like Turbo Thomas who's well regarded in flat six circles.

[map]

2 hours ago, bally4563 said:

I fitted an IPD plenum and GT3 TB on the RS60..... Took it off and went back to standard, bloody thing just would not run, even after driving it in, would not maintain tick over and felt flat mid range, going back to the original set up made me realise just how good standard  was.........Boxed and sold.

Have had a 74mm IPD/TB on my 986S (68mm originally) and haven't had any of the problems you describe/experience..

Got an 82mm IPD/TB ready to on the 986 this year (along with some other induction tweaks) and don't expect to have any problems with that either - suspect the big difference is that in both cases the IPD/TB upgrade is part of a range of updates, including a dyno remap (+ this time round road mapping sessions) which goes a long way to optimising the setup.

[JohnSyn]

22 minutes ago, map said:

including a dyno remap 

Isn't that problematic with cars fitted with pdk Matthew?

[map]

20 minutes ago, JohnSyn said:

Isn't that problematic with cars fitted with pdk Matthew?

No personal experience I'm afraid - my analogue 986 has no such witchcraft on board.

As I understand it - from this forum and other sources - the problem is that the car's PDK sees the rear wheels turning but not the fronts and goes into some sort of Safe Mode.  

There must be a solution to this - maybe a 4 wheel drive dyno or similar that emulates the road moving under all four wheels.  That said there must be some way to address this via the car's own control units - maybe a search on the US forums might shed some light on the matter.  If I get time I'll ask a few of the nutters I know in the tuning world and see if they have any ideas.

[JohnSyn]

4 minutes ago, map said:

If I get time I'll ask a few of the nutters I know in the tuning world and see if they have any ideas.

That would be great Matthew, thanks. My understanding is there is a dyno mode for the PDK but how this is activated appears to confirm your first suggestion...witchcraft!

[mneil]

@map the folks that did the original map, AET motorsport near Leeds race Ford's and outsourced the map writing for my car via the internet. There were three versions made from the original map.

I live just outside a little village called Birmingham 🤫 but travelling for a top quality tuner is not a problem.

As regards the exhaust, I think you're advice to avoid, is how I'm thinking also. Perhaps some BMC air filters next.

PS my car is not powered by witch craft, so no problems there 😇

[bally4563]

11 hours ago, map said:

Have had a 74mm IPD/TB on my 986S (68mm originally) and haven't had any of the problems you describe/experience..

Got an 82mm IPD/TB ready to on the 986 this year (along with some other induction tweaks) and don't expect to have any problems with that either - suspect the big difference is that in both cases the IPD/TB upgrade is part of a range of updates, including a dyno remap (+ this time round road mapping sessions) which goes a long way to optimising the setup.

Matt what I didn't add was that my local tuning shop tried to make it work, but it was deemed that we just chasing loss power gains, however the remap fuel and advance made a dramatic improvement when reverting back to the original plenum /tb

[map]

7 hours ago, bally4563 said:

Matt what I didn't add was that my local tuning shop tried to make it work, but it was deemed that we just chasing loss power gains, however the remap fuel and advance made a dramatic improvement when reverting back to the original plenum /tb

That's genuinely interesting - appreciate the additional information - the fact that you had it mapped makes a difference to the use case.

Whilst I'm no flow specialist (or even enthusiastic amateur) my understanding is that there's a point where whilst the air capacity goes up the effective air velocity through an increased diameter pipe drops away.  The analogy is putting your thumb over the end of a hose pipe.  

So is there a point with a NA motor that too large a feed pipe sees the air velocity the engine can create (suction through the intake) drop away and effectively reduce the amount of usable air being supplied to the engine?

Looking at some data:

RS60: 3.4l motor revs to 7300rpm with a bore area of 434cm² and a mean piston speed of 16.3m/s (24,820 litres of air per minute at max rpm)

997GT3: 3.8l motor revs to 8500rpm with a bore area of 497cm² and a mean piston speed of 19.4m/s (32,300 litres or air per minute at max rpm)

This illustrates just what a chasm there is between the two engines - the two motors have significantly different overall air pumping capacities once we factor in engine speed as well as swept volume - the 997GT3 pumps around 30% more air per minute at max rpm than the Boxster.

So maybe what your experience has shown is that an intake manifold inlet of 82mm is just too big, even with a remap, for a standard Boxster 986/987 type engine.  If so this experience should save people the time and money associated with this specific modification on these models - it doesn't seem to qualify as an upgrade.

A 981 3.4S (actually slightly more) revs to 7900, bore area is 443cm and will handle 27,144 litres of air per minute at max rpm - so maybe the larger capacity, dual air intakes and a remap to optimise will allow it to support a 82mm TB and so show a performance gain - there are plenty of folk standing on either side of that debate.

[JohnSyn]

57 minutes ago, map said:

there are plenty of folk standing on either side of that debate.

Aren't there just! Which is of course why I posted this thread to start with. 

Thanks for the detailed explanation Matthew, worryingly I understood it! So, for me, put simply there could be some gain from the 82mm throttle body if it is accompanied by a tune and/or remap which is sympathetic to the improved airflow

On another, non-related point, would a smaller cat, rather than the 200 cell which for example @bally4563 has fitted, also improve exhaust flow?

[bally4563]

My exhaust was standard PSE John, all I can definetly say that particular mod on mine was a retrograde step on this engine, however the remap on standard released more rewards especially midrange probably due to Porsche run with a very conservative ignition advance

[JohnSyn]

15 minutes ago, bally4563 said:

My exhaust was standard PSE John, all I can definetly say that particular mod on mine was a retrograde step on this engine, however the remap on standard released more rewards especially midrange probably due to Porsche run with a very conservative ignition advance

Thanks for this, its really interesting. @map suggests with an improved air capacity the 981 3.4 engine may benefit this upgrade, food for thought

[JohnSyn]

Just now, JohnSyn said:

My exhaust was standard PSE John,

Sorry......I meant the exhaust upgrade that @mneil has undertaken!

[zagamuffin]

A quick google gets the answers 

 

https://www.planet-9.com/threads/pdk-dyno.143673/

 

 

[map]

7 minutes ago, zagamuffin said:

A quick google gets the answers 

https://www.planet-9.com/threads/pdk-dyno.143673/

- and specifically this post in relation to 9x1 pdk cars: https://www.planet-9.com/threads/pdk-dyno.143673/post-1682321

So you just need to find someone with the relevant factory kit who is prepared to enable dyno mode and reset afterwards.

 

[map]

1 hour ago, JohnSyn said:

Aren't there just! Which is of course why I posted this thread to start with. 

Thanks for the detailed explanation Matthew, worryingly I understood it! So, for me, put simply there could be some gain from the 82mm throttle body if it is accompanied by a tune and/or remap which is sympathetic to the improved airflow

So have been reading around this and it seems that the 981 does not use a MAF (Mass Air Flow) but instead utilises a MAP (Manifold Absolute Pressure) sensor - more stuff about MAP sensors here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAP_sensor

When people install the 82mm IPD on the F6 981 they often get "out of range" warnings and CELs - this is interesting not because it happens but because of something I read that suggests the ECU "manipulates" the engine's map based on MAP sensor data to constrain performance but maintain good running characteristics.

Reflecting on all this for a F6 981 I'd be inclined to look at exhaust and ECU tuning ahead of a larger TB/Plenum.  One thing I would do is have before and after dyno plots for each stage of development - just to make sure it's all good.

1 hour ago, JohnSyn said:

On another, non-related point, would a smaller cat, rather than the 200 cell which for example @bally4563 has fitted, also improve exhaust flow?

Would a 100 cell cat pass the MOT?  If it doesn't there's the annual exhaust clamp faff simply to pass the test - from my own experience well designed aftermarket cats provide better flow and don't adversely impact emissions meaning the car will pass an MOT "straight off the street".

[JohnSyn]

2 minutes ago, map said:

1 I'd be inclined to look at exhaust and ECU tuning ahead of a larger TB/Plenum

Yes Matthew I think thats where my head is, there is too much conflicting data about the plenum etc upgrade.

[JohnSyn]

6 minutes ago, map said:

Would a 100 cell cat pass the MOT?

Hadn't thought of that! Doh....yes 200 cell cat it is! Although I do like the fabspeed and akrapovic systems. 

[JohnSyn]

38 minutes ago, zagamuffin said:

A quick google gets the answers 

 

https://www.planet-9.com/threads/pdk-dyno.143673/

 

 

Thanks...whats more worrying  is that I looked on the planet-9 site! Must enhance my browsing skills!

So, either a 4 wheel dyno or you use a PIWIS tester and set in dyno rolling mode.  

[mneil]

https://www.topgear.co.uk/porsche-boxster-cayman-981-manifolds-with-sports-cats?search=boxster manifolds

Bought these as they are half the price of Fabspeed 😃. 

I'm not going down the full bespoke cat back system now, fear of too much noise and exhaust drone. I shall replace the T section leading to the exhaust tips with 90 degree bends coming out of each back box with new tips. That's got to improve the has flow a little, if not just in my imagination 🙄.

 

[map]

3 minutes ago, mneil said:

replace the T section leading to the exhaust tips with 90 degree bends coming out of each back box with new tips. That's got to improve the has flow a little....

You may find that separating the engine banks like that affects performance and may do odd stuff to noise. 

Linking the banks’ exhaust systems provides some “scavenge” effect which can aid performance. 

Give it a go - you can always go back to stock. 

[JohnSyn]

9 minutes ago, mneil said:

Bought these as they are half the price of Fabspeed

I saw this from your earlier post, thanks its really helpful. It's the exhaust system I was referring to as opposed to headers. It's just the boy in me loves the sounds of those exhausts. My head will intervene at some point and I'll stick just with headers and the standard GTS exhaust system! 

[mneil]

8 hours ago, map said:

You may find that separating the engine banks like that affects performance and may do odd stuff to noise. 

Linking the banks’ exhaust systems provides some “scavenge” effect which can aid performance. 

Give it a go - you can always go back to stock. 

Went to a bespoke exhaust specialist this afternoon in Walsall. At first he was unsure about removing the link, however there is another link behind the one with the tips. He was more concerned about the increase in the noise level. The car is booked in first thing Tuesday. I will mention the possibility of creating a link at the rear of the two new tips should the experiment not work.

Fabspeed do sell the exact same thing that I am having made but charge a princely sum 🙄.

Keep your 🤞.

[edc]

100 cell cats passed on my 986 for 3 years or so. Now on 200 cell ones.