Cayman GT4 - Porsche now accepting deposits. (Jan 2015.)
Discussion
If Autocar are to be believed it looks like Porsche are keeping the 981 "below" the 911 as before. GT4 with a bit less than 400bhp and (presumably) upping the base 911 with a turbo to be just above it again.
Not clear where the turbo 4 fits in. It's bound to have similar power (at least) to the 2.7 981 - so will it replace it? But if it does where does it leave the S - even if the turbo 4 "only" has 275 bhp it's likely to have similar torque to the S, and presumably, a bit less weight. Its real-world performance would be quite close.
All speculation of course, and Autocar may have got it all wrong.
Not clear where the turbo 4 fits in. It's bound to have similar power (at least) to the 2.7 981 - so will it replace it? But if it does where does it leave the S - even if the turbo 4 "only" has 275 bhp it's likely to have similar torque to the S, and presumably, a bit less weight. Its real-world performance would be quite close.
All speculation of course, and Autocar may have got it all wrong.
Glasgow wanted £3000 back last year for a LOI.
Newcastle have my LOI, but now say its all down to how many cars are allocated !!. I was #1 on the list when I gave letter of intent in July.
Edinburgh have LOI and say Im the 1st on list, but have no information other than have a look in this month Top gear Magazine for details of possible spec!!.
Newcastle have my LOI, but now say its all down to how many cars are allocated !!. I was #1 on the list when I gave letter of intent in July.
Edinburgh have LOI and say Im the 1st on list, but have no information other than have a look in this month Top gear Magazine for details of possible spec!!.
I've no idea what Porsche is up to, to be honest.
The guy interviewed in Autocar today says that the engine from the GT3 RS will go into the next gen of 911 but with turbos in that application. Really? So it will be detuned from its power in GT3 RS NA form and then turbod to put back in some of the power it loses?
Unless the blowers are going to be utterly pointless, you'll have to lower the redline a whole load and it will become pointless to rev out the 911.
What a bloody stupid world all this emissions nonsense is creating!
The guy interviewed in Autocar today says that the engine from the GT3 RS will go into the next gen of 911 but with turbos in that application. Really? So it will be detuned from its power in GT3 RS NA form and then turbod to put back in some of the power it loses?
Unless the blowers are going to be utterly pointless, you'll have to lower the redline a whole load and it will become pointless to rev out the 911.
What a bloody stupid world all this emissions nonsense is creating!
bcr5784 said:
fioran0 said:
The setup with the "integrated dry sump" is certainly what I would call a wet sump from looking at the system design and from having seen inside an M96 engine. An advanced wet sump no question but still a wet sump.
While you are correct regarding oil tank location (it can technically be anywhere for a dry sump), Im not convinced that the image you present of oil slopping around in the crankcase is quite precise enough to classify sump designs.
I would be curious to know if you have any examples of a true dry sump oil system utilising an internal engine tank cast into the engine case on a car? I had a think but couldn't come up with one. (for clarity, since some on piston heads enjoy getting wound up, thats not some sort of challenge but an actual question).
Your oil temp warm up statement is a curiously one dimensional one.
Looking at the wikipedia page you linked, its first paragraph is:
"A dry sump is a lubricating motor oil management method for four-stroke and large two-stroke piston internal combustion engines that uses additional pumps and a secondary reservoir for oil, as compared to a conventional wet sump system using only the main sump below the engine and a single pump."
The "integrated dry sump" exactly fits the second description for the wet sump while the dry sump engines most assuredly fit the first.
From what you say I too would classify it as a wet sump, however fancy it is divided from the crankcase. As far as I am concerned, practically speaking unless the tank is connected to the sump via a scavenge pump, and is physically sealed from it, it's wet sump. Baffle and divider plates don't count. (I appreciate my description was - deliberately- simplistic, but lots of posts have focused on the oil tank location as the defining argument)While you are correct regarding oil tank location (it can technically be anywhere for a dry sump), Im not convinced that the image you present of oil slopping around in the crankcase is quite precise enough to classify sump designs.
I would be curious to know if you have any examples of a true dry sump oil system utilising an internal engine tank cast into the engine case on a car? I had a think but couldn't come up with one. (for clarity, since some on piston heads enjoy getting wound up, thats not some sort of challenge but an actual question).
Your oil temp warm up statement is a curiously one dimensional one.
Looking at the wikipedia page you linked, its first paragraph is:
"A dry sump is a lubricating motor oil management method for four-stroke and large two-stroke piston internal combustion engines that uses additional pumps and a secondary reservoir for oil, as compared to a conventional wet sump system using only the main sump below the engine and a single pump."
The "integrated dry sump" exactly fits the second description for the wet sump while the dry sump engines most assuredly fit the first.
Regarding "one dimensional" I assume you mean it warms the oil up when you want it to but doesn't cool it down, which, to some extent an external tank might. While that's true, any engine that we are likely to be concerned about will have an oil cooler which will perform that task. Without one an external tank does have an advantage (and was doubtless a consideration on early bikes).
And other cars with an integrated dry sump - no I can't think of one either - but I would think as much a cost issue as a design one.
ORD said:
I've no idea what Porsche is up to, to be honest.
The guy interviewed in Autocar today says that the engine from the GT3 RS will go into the next gen of 911 but with turbos in that application. Really? So it will be detuned from its power in GT3 RS NA form and then turbod to put back in some of the power it loses?
Unless the blowers are going to be utterly pointless, you'll have to lower the redline a whole load and it will become pointless to rev out the 911.
I also read that but find it very hard to believe.The guy interviewed in Autocar today says that the engine from the GT3 RS will go into the next gen of 911 but with turbos in that application. Really? So it will be detuned from its power in GT3 RS NA form and then turbod to put back in some of the power it loses?
Unless the blowers are going to be utterly pointless, you'll have to lower the redline a whole load and it will become pointless to rev out the 911.
ORD said:
What a bloody stupid world all this emissions nonsense is creating!
Too true... next stop plugin hybrid. Then they'll (finally!) change the testing cycle to start with an empty instead of a full battery and boom, just like that, nobody will build hybrids anymore.
ORD said:
I've no idea what Porsche is up to, to be honest.
The guy interviewed in Autocar today says that the engine from the GT3 RS will go into the next gen of 911 but with turbos in that application. Really? So it will be detuned from its power in GT3 RS NA form and then turbod to put back in some of the power it loses?
Unless the blowers are going to be utterly pointless, you'll have to lower the redline a whole load and it will become pointless to rev out the 911.
What a bloody stupid world all this emissions nonsense is creating!
Unless it's the same engine with a smaller cc ie 3.0 turbo instead of 4.0 n/aThe guy interviewed in Autocar today says that the engine from the GT3 RS will go into the next gen of 911 but with turbos in that application. Really? So it will be detuned from its power in GT3 RS NA form and then turbod to put back in some of the power it loses?
Unless the blowers are going to be utterly pointless, you'll have to lower the redline a whole load and it will become pointless to rev out the 911.
What a bloody stupid world all this emissions nonsense is creating!
And the boxster/Cayman running smaller cc ie 2.0 4cylinder turbo version
Edited by itsybitsy on Wednesday 21st January 13:43
If the new 911 Cayman and Boxster are all turbo and the Gt3 RS / gt4 remain n/a and all share the same new engine then the gt4 could be a smaller capacity RS engine and not a 9a1 engine?only going by what written in autocar if true!
Still think the new "spyder" will be the new fl4 turbo to lead the way!
Still think the new "spyder" will be the new fl4 turbo to lead the way!
p5hrr said:
Glasgow wanted £3000 back last year for a LOI.
Newcastle have my LOI, but now say its all down to how many cars are allocated !!. I was #1 on the list when I gave letter of intent in July.
Edinburgh have LOI and say Im the 1st on list, but have no information other than have a look in this month Top gear Magazine for details of possible spec!!.
It all depends on whether you're intent on getting the first car or just want a car. At the end of the day, you need to decide who you trust to pay a deposit to and decide fast. What I will say is that despite Newcastle being my local dealer, I'm amongst many who are buying new Porsches elsewhere other than JCT600.Newcastle have my LOI, but now say its all down to how many cars are allocated !!. I was #1 on the list when I gave letter of intent in July.
Edinburgh have LOI and say Im the 1st on list, but have no information other than have a look in this month Top gear Magazine for details of possible spec!!.
I put a letter of intent and paid a deposit ( allocated against a gts until the gt4 orders are available) Aug/sep last year ,I paid the deposit on the basis of being number 1 or 2 on the list .
Usually I wouldn't trust a dealer ,but they want me back as a customer after my disasters with the 996t and 997t ,so I'm fairly confident they will honor it,
Usually I wouldn't trust a dealer ,but they want me back as a customer after my disasters with the 996t and 997t ,so I'm fairly confident they will honor it,
dreamcar said:
The scoop photos of the GT4 I've seen show the six pot calipers of the current 991/S up front but looks like conventional cast iron discs. PCCB are optional even on the GT3 so I would say no chance of them coming as standard on a "mere" GT4
Wouldn' t spec ceramics on a £65k car anyway......likely to be between 8 and 10 percent of the purchase price which is too much for this type of car.......av185 said:
Wouldn' t spec ceramics on a £65k car anyway......likely to be between 8 and 10 percent of the purchase price which is too much for this type of car.......
Each to their own on that one - I've specified them on my Boxster GTS - quite a few spend the same amount on fancy carbon trim, Burmeister HiFi etc..... It's a sports car so for me I spend money on the brakes, PTV etcJ12KJR said:
Having read a fair bit on PTV and PASM I get the impression that PTV is more track biased and PASM more road biased.
would those of you that have more experience of the Porsche systems agree?
Is the PTV worth it for the LSD alone?
I asked the very same question of the driver consultants at the Silverstone driver experience centre - regarding PTV the view was it is icing on the cake, the LSD is well worth it for improved traction out of bends. With regards suspension I drove both PASM and -20mm sports suspension (with PCCB) at Silverstone and the extra precision of the sports set up was noticeable as was the brake feel of the PCCB over standard. I would have chosen the -20mm suspension as well but SWMBO would not have appreciated the firmer ride on our broken roads.would those of you that have more experience of the Porsche systems agree?
Is the PTV worth it for the LSD alone?
Thanks for the reply Tim.
I can understand your view on the PCCBs but think that for most people who will only ever use the car on the road the steel brakes are probably more than enough.
Like you most of us have to keep the boss happy and it makes for an interesting balancing act when it comes to the options we want and those we can get signed off.
I can understand your view on the PCCBs but think that for most people who will only ever use the car on the road the steel brakes are probably more than enough.
Like you most of us have to keep the boss happy and it makes for an interesting balancing act when it comes to the options we want and those we can get signed off.
J12KJR said:
Thanks for the reply Tim.
I can understand your view on the PCCBs but think that for most people who will only ever use the car on the road the steel brakes are probably more than enough.
Like you most of us have to keep the boss happy and it makes for an interesting balancing act when it comes to the options we want and those we can get signed off.
No question PCCB are very expensive for the gain they offer - still we come this way but once and as an engineer I appreciate the technology inherent with them more than I do other options such as deviated stitching and carbon trim - even if I can understand why some think different. I sold the PCCB's to SWMBO by telling her that the less unsprung weight improves ride quality on bumpy roads......I can understand your view on the PCCBs but think that for most people who will only ever use the car on the road the steel brakes are probably more than enough.
Like you most of us have to keep the boss happy and it makes for an interesting balancing act when it comes to the options we want and those we can get signed off.
dreamcar said:
No question PCCB are very expensive for the gain they offer - still we come this way but once and as an engineer I appreciate the technology inherent with them more than I do other options such as deviated stitching and carbon trim - even if I can understand why some think different. I sold the PCCB's to SWMBO by telling her that the less unsprung weight improves ride quality on bumpy roads......
I thought I was quite good at the man maths etc but I bow to one who is obviously much better at it than me 
As I am in the used market while I can understand your comment on the PCCB's they are a rarely specced option.
J12KJR said:
I thought I was quite good at the man maths etc but I bow to one who is obviously much better at it than me
As I am in the used market while I can understand your comment on the PCCB's they are a rarely specced option.
I've seen quite a few specs on the Interweb for Boxster / Cayman GTS with a bottom line higher than mine even without PCCB!! Mid £70's is relatively common. Even my dealer has said the same.As I am in the used market while I can understand your comment on the PCCB's they are a rarely specced option.
Definitely two camps regarding PCCB, those that don't have them and don't see them as good value or those that have them and wouldn't be without. Neither camp is wrong it's just what floats your boat I guess.
Edited by dreamcar on Monday 26th January 15:14
Gassing Station | Boxster/Cayman | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff