Latest 992 GT3 pictures reveal diffuser and foil
Discussion
The .1 RS has the same funamental engineering flaw.
The hyraullic lash adjusters/tappets "pump down" over 8600 and cant maintain constant linear pressure against the cam lobes via the rocker arms. This causes the scoring. They tried DLC coated cam lobes to address the issue and it was a band aid. The MA175 GT3 engine (.1) later recieved same cams in the G series revision 2 replacement engines. By then Porshce had also changed the variable oil pump to the same one in the RS (higher duty cycle) as well as added oil feed passages in the heads and re calibrated the ECU software that created higher oil pressure as the revs increased. Unfortunately engines are still being replaced. I had 3 but some of my contemporaries who still own the car from new are on their 4th. Running the car in Sport Auto mode (9000 rpm shifts) will cause the engine to fail over time. I was running 12-15 days a year 6 x 15 min sessions hitting redline 8-9 times a lap so 120 times a session or 700 times a day and 8-9000 times a year.
The 991.1 GT3RS and 911R suffer the same design flaw but Porsche realised they were in a hole. They made the 991.1 RS rev to 8800 in 1st gear (it was originally designed to be a 9000 rpm engine like the .1 GT3 and there is an early unedited launch promo video that shows the 9000 limit!). In 2nd - 7th gears the rev limit is decreased to 8700, then 8650 - for the gears youd use on track mostly around 8600. This is easy to confirm if you have a Racelogic Can telemetric system fitted or a Aim Solo DL.
The 911R went one further and just limited the car to 8500 0r 8600 rpm full stop (I cant remember which).
By reducing the revs the hydraullic tappets can draw the oil they need fast enough to create constant tension for the follower when the lobe strikes. So the 991.1 GT3RS and 911R engines are reliable at the rpms they typically operate on track as stated above...
None of the above is fiction. As some on here will confirm I unfortunately know far more than I would like to have on this subject,
Sorry for the off topic. Im pretty sure we have covered this topic before in another thread in any case...
The hyraullic lash adjusters/tappets "pump down" over 8600 and cant maintain constant linear pressure against the cam lobes via the rocker arms. This causes the scoring. They tried DLC coated cam lobes to address the issue and it was a band aid. The MA175 GT3 engine (.1) later recieved same cams in the G series revision 2 replacement engines. By then Porshce had also changed the variable oil pump to the same one in the RS (higher duty cycle) as well as added oil feed passages in the heads and re calibrated the ECU software that created higher oil pressure as the revs increased. Unfortunately engines are still being replaced. I had 3 but some of my contemporaries who still own the car from new are on their 4th. Running the car in Sport Auto mode (9000 rpm shifts) will cause the engine to fail over time. I was running 12-15 days a year 6 x 15 min sessions hitting redline 8-9 times a lap so 120 times a session or 700 times a day and 8-9000 times a year.
The 991.1 GT3RS and 911R suffer the same design flaw but Porsche realised they were in a hole. They made the 991.1 RS rev to 8800 in 1st gear (it was originally designed to be a 9000 rpm engine like the .1 GT3 and there is an early unedited launch promo video that shows the 9000 limit!). In 2nd - 7th gears the rev limit is decreased to 8700, then 8650 - for the gears youd use on track mostly around 8600. This is easy to confirm if you have a Racelogic Can telemetric system fitted or a Aim Solo DL.
The 911R went one further and just limited the car to 8500 0r 8600 rpm full stop (I cant remember which).
By reducing the revs the hydraullic tappets can draw the oil they need fast enough to create constant tension for the follower when the lobe strikes. So the 991.1 GT3RS and 911R engines are reliable at the rpms they typically operate on track as stated above...
None of the above is fiction. As some on here will confirm I unfortunately know far more than I would like to have on this subject,
Sorry for the off topic. Im pretty sure we have covered this topic before in another thread in any case...
Macca993 said:
The .1 RS has the same funamental engineering flaw.
The hyraullic lash adjusters/tappets "pump down" over 8600 and cant maintain constant linear pressure against the cam lobes via the rocker arms. This causes the scoring. They tried DLC coated cam lobes to address the issue and it was a band aid. The MA175 GT3 engine (.1) later recieved same cams in the G series revision 2 replacement engines. By then Porshce had also changed the variable oil pump to the same one in the RS (higher duty cycle) as well as added oil feed passages in the heads and re calibrated the ECU software that created higher oil pressure as the revs increased. Unfortunately engines are still being replaced. I had 3 but some of my contemporaries who still own the car from new are on their 4th. Running the car in Sport Auto mode (9000 rpm shifts) will cause the engine to fail over time. I was running 12-15 days a year 6 x 15 min sessions hitting redline 8-9 times a lap so 120 times a session or 700 times a day and 8-9000 times a year.
The 991.1 GT3RS and 911R suffer the same design flaw but Porsche realised they were in a hole. They made the 991.1 RS rev to 8800 in 1st gear (it was originally designed to be a 9000 rpm engine like the .1 GT3 and there is an early unedited launch promo video that shows the 9000 limit!). In 2nd - 7th gears the rev limit is decreased to 8700, then 8650 - for the gears youd use on track mostly around 8600. This is easy to confirm if you have a Racelogic Can telemetric system fitted or a Aim Solo DL.
The 911R went one further and just limited the car to 8500 0r 8600 rpm full stop (I cant remember which).
By reducing the revs the hydraullic tappets can draw the oil they need fast enough to create constant tension for the follower when the lobe strikes. So the 991.1 GT3RS and 911R engines are reliable at the rpms they typically operate on track as stated above...
None of the above is fiction. As some on here will confirm I unfortunately know far more than I would like to have on this subject,
Sorry for the off topic. Im pretty sure we have covered this topic before in another thread in any case...
Good info to be repeated, as people just keep forgetting the issue's and to say the 991.2 engine is the same by some is daft.The hyraullic lash adjusters/tappets "pump down" over 8600 and cant maintain constant linear pressure against the cam lobes via the rocker arms. This causes the scoring. They tried DLC coated cam lobes to address the issue and it was a band aid. The MA175 GT3 engine (.1) later recieved same cams in the G series revision 2 replacement engines. By then Porshce had also changed the variable oil pump to the same one in the RS (higher duty cycle) as well as added oil feed passages in the heads and re calibrated the ECU software that created higher oil pressure as the revs increased. Unfortunately engines are still being replaced. I had 3 but some of my contemporaries who still own the car from new are on their 4th. Running the car in Sport Auto mode (9000 rpm shifts) will cause the engine to fail over time. I was running 12-15 days a year 6 x 15 min sessions hitting redline 8-9 times a lap so 120 times a session or 700 times a day and 8-9000 times a year.
The 991.1 GT3RS and 911R suffer the same design flaw but Porsche realised they were in a hole. They made the 991.1 RS rev to 8800 in 1st gear (it was originally designed to be a 9000 rpm engine like the .1 GT3 and there is an early unedited launch promo video that shows the 9000 limit!). In 2nd - 7th gears the rev limit is decreased to 8700, then 8650 - for the gears youd use on track mostly around 8600. This is easy to confirm if you have a Racelogic Can telemetric system fitted or a Aim Solo DL.
The 911R went one further and just limited the car to 8500 0r 8600 rpm full stop (I cant remember which).
By reducing the revs the hydraullic tappets can draw the oil they need fast enough to create constant tension for the follower when the lobe strikes. So the 991.1 GT3RS and 911R engines are reliable at the rpms they typically operate on track as stated above...
None of the above is fiction. As some on here will confirm I unfortunately know far more than I would like to have on this subject,
Sorry for the off topic. Im pretty sure we have covered this topic before in another thread in any case...
Every days a school day though as I did not know the R had even a lower limit in revs !!!
Again really highlights how feckin amazing the 991.2 engine is to have the full 9k revs back, also to note for me is how good the mpg is and also within 1/2 a mile you have good oil temps. My GT4 took 6 miles to get oil temp, the GT3 is good to go within a mile, although I don't goto high revs till after 5 miles to let every thing heat up and expand etc etc. But I go above 3k revs after a mile which I did not do in my GT4 with it's cold oil.
Then at 5.5k in the 991.2 GT3 it's smiles as you get the hit no other GT car has ever given you right to 9k !!!
I wish I could fault the 991.2 but bar having PASM which I hate over a nice set of 3 ways, I cannot fault it one bit and Porsche have been fitting PASM since 2007 to GT cars which is a shame as it's s
t and does not belong on a GT car imo.Macca993 said:
The .1 RS has the same funamental engineering flaw.
By reducing the revs the hydraullic tappets can draw the oil they need fast enough to create constant tension for the follower when the lobe strikes. So the 991.1 GT3RS and 911R engines are reliable at the rpms they typically operate on track as stated above...
Macca, I fully agree none of what you mentioned is fiction and it's of course entirely accurate. By reducing the revs the hydraullic tappets can draw the oil they need fast enough to create constant tension for the follower when the lobe strikes. So the 991.1 GT3RS and 911R engines are reliable at the rpms they typically operate on track as stated above...
However, where I disagree is that the RS has a fundamental engineering flaw. You note that the .1 RS and R are reliable at the rpm they operate - engineering flaw about hydraulic tappets working correctly 9k revs or not, the cars are not being asked to do so any longer... As long as the cars are reliable under their operating window, a problem that then happens outside of that window isn't imo a flaw but something it's being asked to do that it isn't supposed to. if you revved the road car engine to RSR type rpm it's going to last RSR hours assuming it could even get there. That wouldn't be a design flaw either in my book....
P.S and long term I'll still like to see if the fixed valvetrain that allows the extra couple of hundred rpm in the .2 really never needs adjustment as there's pretty much no engine with that which doesn't require it....
Edited by isaldiri on Wednesday 21st August 10:37
isaldiri said:
Macca, I fully agree none of what you mentioned is fiction and it's of course entirely accurate.
However, where I disagree is that the RS has a fundamental engineering flaw. You note that the .1 RS and R are reliable at the rpm they operate - engineering flaw about hydraulic tappets working correctly 9k revs or not, the cars are not being asked to do so any longer... As long as the cars are reliable under their operating window, a problem that then happens outside of that window isn't imo a flaw but something it's being asked to do that it isn't supposed to. if you revved the road car engine to RSR type rpm it's going to last RSR hours assuming it could even get there. That wouldn't be a design flaw either in my book....
P.S and long term I'll still like to see if the fixed valvetrain that allows the extra couple of hundred rpm in the .2 really never needs adjustment as there's pretty much no engine with that which doesn't require it....
ofcourse it's a flaw, just Porsche put in rev limits to get round it, so the engines flawed for the intended design, and is now held back from that via software !However, where I disagree is that the RS has a fundamental engineering flaw. You note that the .1 RS and R are reliable at the rpm they operate - engineering flaw about hydraulic tappets working correctly 9k revs or not, the cars are not being asked to do so any longer... As long as the cars are reliable under their operating window, a problem that then happens outside of that window isn't imo a flaw but something it's being asked to do that it isn't supposed to. if you revved the road car engine to RSR type rpm it's going to last RSR hours assuming it could even get there. That wouldn't be a design flaw either in my book....
P.S and long term I'll still like to see if the fixed valvetrain that allows the extra couple of hundred rpm in the .2 really never needs adjustment as there's pretty much no engine with that which doesn't require it....
Edited by isaldiri on Wednesday 21st August 10:37
the RS took a backward step from the GT3 due to an engineering flaw in that engine !
Porsche911R said:
isaldiri said:
Macca, I fully agree none of what you mentioned is fiction and it's of course entirely accurate.
However, where I disagree is that the RS has a fundamental engineering flaw. You note that the .1 RS and R are reliable at the rpm they operate - engineering flaw about hydraulic tappets working correctly 9k revs or not, the cars are not being asked to do so any longer... As long as the cars are reliable under their operating window, a problem that then happens outside of that window isn't imo a flaw but something it's being asked to do that it isn't supposed to. if you revved the road car engine to RSR type rpm it's going to last RSR hours assuming it could even get there. That wouldn't be a design flaw either in my book....
P.S and long term I'll still like to see if the fixed valvetrain that allows the extra couple of hundred rpm in the .2 really never needs adjustment as there's pretty much no engine with that which doesn't require it....
ofcourse it's a flaw, just Porsche put in rev limits to get round it, so the engines flawed for the intended design, and is now held back from that via software !However, where I disagree is that the RS has a fundamental engineering flaw. You note that the .1 RS and R are reliable at the rpm they operate - engineering flaw about hydraulic tappets working correctly 9k revs or not, the cars are not being asked to do so any longer... As long as the cars are reliable under their operating window, a problem that then happens outside of that window isn't imo a flaw but something it's being asked to do that it isn't supposed to. if you revved the road car engine to RSR type rpm it's going to last RSR hours assuming it could even get there. That wouldn't be a design flaw either in my book....
P.S and long term I'll still like to see if the fixed valvetrain that allows the extra couple of hundred rpm in the .2 really never needs adjustment as there's pretty much no engine with that which doesn't require it....
Edited by isaldiri on Wednesday 21st August 10:37
the RS took a backward step from the GT3 due to an engineering flaw in that engine !
SFW there appears to be plenty of people buying .1 RS at the moment who don’t appear bothered Juno said:
200RPM’s SFW there appears to be plenty of people buying .1 RS at the moment who don’t appear bothered
not may people know it then drops to 8600 :-) or even if there is a flaw Porsche had to move the operating window round to not blow up !. SFW there appears to be plenty of people buying .1 RS at the moment who don’t appear bothered as the 991.2 GT3 is the same price, it makes me wonder who is the market for the .1 RS over the .2 GT3.
Edited by Porsche911R on Wednesday 21st August 12:47
Porsche911R said:
Juno said:
200RPM’s SFW there appears to be plenty of people buying .1 RS at the moment who don’t appear bothered
not may people know it then drops to 8600 :-) or even if there is a flaw Porsche had to move the operating window round to now blow up !. SFW there appears to be plenty of people buying .1 RS at the moment who don’t appear bothered as the 991.2 GT3 is the same price, it makes me wonder who is the market for the .1 RS over the .2 GT3.
I bought my .2 GT3 knowing it was for the short term as the .2RS was coming,however if I had been buying for the longer term I would have bought a .1 RS and put a Porsche warranty on it while I owned it
Edited by Juno on Wednesday 21st August 12:30
How many people regularly rev their cars to the limit? I hardly ever shift at the limiter in my Cars - rarely on the Autobahn and on track, but I can not remember the last time I changed gear at the rev limit on a country road. Especially if that limit is above 8,000rpm in a reasonably fast car/powerful engine.
or is it just for bragging at the pub, my car revs to 9k while yours only does a puny 8.5k / the latest is the holy grail, everything before it was just a dress rehearsal kinda thing
or is it just for bragging at the pub, my car revs to 9k while yours only does a puny 8.5k / the latest is the holy grail, everything before it was just a dress rehearsal kinda thing
MDL111 said:
How many people regularly rev their cars to the limit? I hardly ever shift at the limiter in my Cars - rarely on the Autobahn and on track, but I can not remember the last time I changed gear at the rev limit on a country road. Especially if that limit is above 8,000rpm in a reasonably fast car/powerful engine.
or is it just for bragging at the pub, my car revs to 9k while yours only does a puny 8.5k / the latest is the holy grail, everything before it was just a dress rehearsal kinda thing
Exactly,20kgs 500 revs here and there so what!or is it just for bragging at the pub, my car revs to 9k while yours only does a puny 8.5k / the latest is the holy grail, everything before it was just a dress rehearsal kinda thing
I’ve ordered the WP because I like the look of it not because I will cut 0.0001 of my lap time or 0-60
and NO manual option 
MDL111 said:
How many people regularly rev their cars to the limit? I hardly ever shift at the limiter in my Cars - rarely on the Autobahn and on track, but I can not remember the last time I changed gear at the rev limit on a country road. Especially if that limit is above 8,000rpm in a reasonably fast car/powerful engine.
or is it just for bragging at the pub, my car revs to 9k while yours only does a puny 8.5k / the latest is the holy grail, everything before it was just a dress rehearsal kinda thing
well to be fair, it's a question of being able to do what it says on the tin. Porsche were rather cheeky to lower the .1rs rpm from 8800 to 8600 after 1st gear to be honest having stated the rev limit was at 8800. Lowering to 8800 from 9000 was simply maintaining mean piston speed with the stroke being increased over the .1 gt3 though so imo not really an issue despite losing the headline number of 9000. or is it just for bragging at the pub, my car revs to 9k while yours only does a puny 8.5k / the latest is the holy grail, everything before it was just a dress rehearsal kinda thing
But overall yes while it's always nice to have an engine that can rev higher, it's not always the be all end all. the performante v10 has a lower rev limit than say the 458 speciale or the .2 gt3 but it's still much the better engine overall than either imo.
isaldiri said:
Macca, I fully agree none of what you mentioned is fiction and it's of course entirely accurate.
However, where I disagree is that the RS has a fundamental engineering flaw. You note that the .1 RS and R are reliable at the rpm they operate - engineering flaw about hydraulic tappets working correctly 9k revs or not, the cars are not being asked to do so any longer... As long as the cars are reliable under their operating window, a problem that then happens outside of that window isn't imo a flaw but something it's being asked to do that it isn't supposed to. if you revved the road car engine to RSR type rpm it's going to last RSR hours assuming it could even get there. That wouldn't be a design flaw either in my book....
P.S and long term I'll still like to see if the fixed valvetrain that allows the extra couple of hundred rpm in the .2 really never needs adjustment as there's pretty much no engine with that which doesn't require it....
You are absolutely correct and that was careless of me. The 991.1 GT3RS and 911R MA176 engines are reliable units as they stand in those vehicles.However, where I disagree is that the RS has a fundamental engineering flaw. You note that the .1 RS and R are reliable at the rpm they operate - engineering flaw about hydraulic tappets working correctly 9k revs or not, the cars are not being asked to do so any longer... As long as the cars are reliable under their operating window, a problem that then happens outside of that window isn't imo a flaw but something it's being asked to do that it isn't supposed to. if you revved the road car engine to RSR type rpm it's going to last RSR hours assuming it could even get there. That wouldn't be a design flaw either in my book....
P.S and long term I'll still like to see if the fixed valvetrain that allows the extra couple of hundred rpm in the .2 really never needs adjustment as there's pretty much no engine with that which doesn't require it....
Edited by isaldiri on Wednesday 21st August 10:37
Apologies as I always remeber the 991.1 GT3RS as the 9000 rpm car it was meant to be as I was following the cars developemnt very closely back before it was launched. The flaw prevented PAG from launching it in the specification they intended...
PS The thing people most confuse (because Porsche were needing to try and cover themselves here) was that this isnt really a 8800 rpm engine in the RS its actually an 8650 rpm engine (later down graded 100 rpm for the R). It revs only to the "headline" figure in first (a gear rarely used and never on the track). The gears used on the track (typically 3,4,5) are all rated at just over 8600 by the ECU....
MDL111 said:
How many people regularly rev their cars to the limit? I hardly ever shift at the limiter in my Cars - rarely on the Autobahn and on track, but I can not remember the last time I changed gear at the rev limit on a country road. Especially if that limit is above 8,000rpm in a reasonably fast car/powerful engine.
or is it just for bragging at the pub, my car revs to 9k while yours only does a puny 8.5k / the latest is the holy grail, everything before it was just a dress rehearsal kinda thing
reving to 9k without loosing power gives the driver options to stay in gear if needed.or is it just for bragging at the pub, my car revs to 9k while yours only does a puny 8.5k / the latest is the holy grail, everything before it was just a dress rehearsal kinda thing
I change lower normally but my cars hits 9k out of bends and in some areas due to not taking my hands off the wheel at that time.
On track the 9k is even more helpful for this. No one wants to change gear mid bend really, the 9k give the driver options, in the PDK cars who cares it just shifts gear where it feels like.
it's about enjoying the car and it's pretty much faultless.
as for "everything before it was just a dress rehearsal" the 991.1 reved to 9k also !!! the RS Revs was cut due to that operating window and flawed engine, it is what it is.
.1RS didn’t put a smile on my face like the .2 3 manual does. Yep maybe not as quick but sounds superb and just pulls through to 9k with ferocity.
Not lucky enough to have a Ferrari or Lambo ilk car but I don’t think I need one with the .2 manual.
Still say my GT4 sounded better than the .1RS that I had at the same time.
As for the new looks will see but the price of a new GT3 which in essence could possibly 20% more
Not lucky enough to have a Ferrari or Lambo ilk car but I don’t think I need one with the .2 manual.
Still say my GT4 sounded better than the .1RS that I had at the same time.
As for the new looks will see but the price of a new GT3 which in essence could possibly 20% more
Edited by RoamingBull on Wednesday 21st August 17:33
Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff