Every day tips for living with a 599
Discussion
Cheburator mk2 said:
Cake,
I would not bother with the Motul Transaxle oil and the LSD additive.
Just use MOTUL 300 75w90 LS - it comes with their fancy limited slip additive already in. I use it in my GT3, 928 GTS race car, 944 Turbo Cup and Maserati GranTurismo Sport F1 (identical box to yours). You have a far bigger chance of galling the LSD clutch plates with "pure" MOTUL 75w90 during break in. Just use the factory specified oil with the LS additive.
AMSOIL is good too - have used it in the past with good results, but i am biased towards MOTUL - great product and easily available, and genuinely tested and used in the harshest conditons - 24hr Le Mans/Ring/Spa etc...
Hi Cheburator,I would not bother with the Motul Transaxle oil and the LSD additive.
Just use MOTUL 300 75w90 LS - it comes with their fancy limited slip additive already in. I use it in my GT3, 928 GTS race car, 944 Turbo Cup and Maserati GranTurismo Sport F1 (identical box to yours). You have a far bigger chance of galling the LSD clutch plates with "pure" MOTUL 75w90 during break in. Just use the factory specified oil with the LS additive.
AMSOIL is good too - have used it in the past with good results, but i am biased towards MOTUL - great product and easily available, and genuinely tested and used in the harshest conditons - 24hr Le Mans/Ring/Spa etc...
That's great advice, thank you. My first choice was Motul LS as it is what I'd used in the car before. There was a concern raided that it was allowing too much slip, hence the recommendation for Amsoil.
Your experience and recommendation is highly appreciated and I'll change to that.
Thanks again.
More on the Tillett seats. As previously posted there's no aftermarket option available on the planted website for 599 seat mounts.
Lee took some photos of the seat mounting points in the 599 and I forwarded to Jeff at planted.
This is their reply
I had read somewhere (probably Fchat) that the 430 seat mounts were the same, so I'll order that.
While at Tillett, I was also told that a customer with a 430 had managed to bolt their seats straight in without requiring a subframe to mount to. Only issue was the seat was very low in the car.
Lee took some photos of the seat mounting points in the 599 and I forwarded to Jeff at planted.
This is their reply
I had read somewhere (probably Fchat) that the 430 seat mounts were the same, so I'll order that.
While at Tillett, I was also told that a customer with a 430 had managed to bolt their seats straight in without requiring a subframe to mount to. Only issue was the seat was very low in the car.
Don't you just love how Planted are quoting their measurements to the nearest 1/16th of an inch (in decimals!) which make the metric conversions look spuriously inaccurate 16.125 inches = 40.95755 cm (decimals to 5 places!!!!) I'll take 410mm and be done with it, thanks!
Perhaps someone should remind them that Ferrari engineers in metric, not imperial.
Perhaps someone should remind them that Ferrari engineers in metric, not imperial.
Edited by ANOpax on Thursday 14th May 10:52
ANOpax said:
Don't you just love how Planted are quoting their measurements to the nearest 1/16th of an inch (in decimals!) which make the metric conversions look spuriously inaccurate 16.125 inches = 40.95755 cm (decimals to 5 places!!!!) I'll take 410mm and be done with it, thanks!
Perhaps someone should remind them that Ferrari engineers in metric, not imperial.
It was the holes are oversized for manufacturing tolerance that got me Perhaps someone should remind them that Ferrari engineers in metric, not imperial.
Edited by ANOpax on Thursday 14th May 10:52
Hopefully no drilling required to make it 40.95755 cm
Something very interesting or maybe concerning came out while Mike was processing the 3D scan data.
First scan was done with the car on the floor, this is the initial image.
The car was then lifted on the ramp so the underside and wheel arches could be done. At this point there's no engine or gearbox in the car. There are a several different files that will be stitched together to make the whole car so that CFD analysis can be carried out. These same files will then be used by Robin to make the printed moulds for the aero elements that Édouard will design.
And this is where the interesting or concerning part happened. In the over lap sections of the scan the little dots aren't in exactly the same place. It's only aparent around the jacking points and shows up as surface roughness in the overlap areas of the scan, as below.
The original files (not overlapped) look like this in the same area
Anyway, I'm not sure if it means anything, I'm just going to put it down to there not being an engine and gearbox and ignore that the car is 100s of kilos lighter and I'd expect less 'flex'. Kind of fixing the problem by turning up the radio so you can't hear the funny noise that's telling you something is wrong
First scan was done with the car on the floor, this is the initial image.
The car was then lifted on the ramp so the underside and wheel arches could be done. At this point there's no engine or gearbox in the car. There are a several different files that will be stitched together to make the whole car so that CFD analysis can be carried out. These same files will then be used by Robin to make the printed moulds for the aero elements that Édouard will design.
And this is where the interesting or concerning part happened. In the over lap sections of the scan the little dots aren't in exactly the same place. It's only aparent around the jacking points and shows up as surface roughness in the overlap areas of the scan, as below.
The original files (not overlapped) look like this in the same area
Anyway, I'm not sure if it means anything, I'm just going to put it down to there not being an engine and gearbox and ignore that the car is 100s of kilos lighter and I'd expect less 'flex'. Kind of fixing the problem by turning up the radio so you can't hear the funny noise that's telling you something is wrong
Dear Cake,
This is a wonderful thread and fantastic source of information. I have thoroughly enjoyed reading it this last week. I admire your dedication and the fact you track this car hard. I tracked a Lotus Exige hard, would never have dreamed a 599!! Legend.
The 599 is a Ferrari I really lust after, I almost enjoy the fact it may be slightly unloved vs F12 and others.
Unfortunately, I was not brave enough to join the ride - buying a 2017 Aston Vanquish S instead. Not an awful substitute, however after an event at Nick Cartwright where several 599’s were on display this past weekend, I couldn’t help but fancy a switch. Maybe if a blue one with tan ever came up….
For now, good luck with the rest of your build!
This is a wonderful thread and fantastic source of information. I have thoroughly enjoyed reading it this last week. I admire your dedication and the fact you track this car hard. I tracked a Lotus Exige hard, would never have dreamed a 599!! Legend.
The 599 is a Ferrari I really lust after, I almost enjoy the fact it may be slightly unloved vs F12 and others.
Unfortunately, I was not brave enough to join the ride - buying a 2017 Aston Vanquish S instead. Not an awful substitute, however after an event at Nick Cartwright where several 599’s were on display this past weekend, I couldn’t help but fancy a switch. Maybe if a blue one with tan ever came up….
For now, good luck with the rest of your build!
CM96 said:
Dear Cake,
This is a wonderful thread and fantastic source of information. I have thoroughly enjoyed reading it this last week. I admire your dedication and the fact you track this car hard. I tracked a Lotus Exige hard, would never have dreamed a 599!! Legend.
The 599 is a Ferrari I really lust after, I almost enjoy the fact it may be slightly unloved vs F12 and others.
Unfortunately, I was not brave enough to join the ride - buying a 2017 Aston Vanquish S instead. Not an awful substitute, however after an event at Nick Cartwright where several 599 s were on display this past weekend, I couldn t help but fancy a switch. Maybe if a blue one with tan ever came up .
For now, good luck with the rest of your build!
Hi CM96This is a wonderful thread and fantastic source of information. I have thoroughly enjoyed reading it this last week. I admire your dedication and the fact you track this car hard. I tracked a Lotus Exige hard, would never have dreamed a 599!! Legend.
The 599 is a Ferrari I really lust after, I almost enjoy the fact it may be slightly unloved vs F12 and others.
Unfortunately, I was not brave enough to join the ride - buying a 2017 Aston Vanquish S instead. Not an awful substitute, however after an event at Nick Cartwright where several 599 s were on display this past weekend, I couldn t help but fancy a switch. Maybe if a blue one with tan ever came up .
For now, good luck with the rest of your build!
Thank you very much. A Vanquish S is an awesome car. Fifth Gear did a comparison between the F12 and the Vanquish, really pretty car it is and what a noise
As usual, things are moving at a slow pace with the build. I was hoping to have it finished for the end of June but that is now very unlikely.
I was late getting the gearbox and crank to Mike at GearLab for super finishing and now he's on holiday so everything is on hold for a couple of weeks.
Dark blue with tan is a great combo. Autotop.nl had one, lovely.
https://youtu.be/9vlfpwnkq8w?si=GWy-l1YCuh1_twe5
While I'm waiting on physical progress with the car, Grant from http://www.premieraerodynamics.com/ has been working on putting the scan files together to create an accurate 3D model of my 599 for CFD analysis.
There were some initial issues with the model because the suspension was at full droop to scan the wheel arch, as well as the same roughness in overlap areas. I provided Grant with the correct ride height front and rear and the points at which they should be measured and he also 'smoothed' out the roughness.
This is the result:
Initially I thought that the wheel arch gaps were too much but in comparing the model against photos I have, I believe the model is accurate.
I don't know why, but this has got me really excited to see the results.
There were some initial issues with the model because the suspension was at full droop to scan the wheel arch, as well as the same roughness in overlap areas. I provided Grant with the correct ride height front and rear and the points at which they should be measured and he also 'smoothed' out the roughness.
This is the result:
Initially I thought that the wheel arch gaps were too much but in comparing the model against photos I have, I believe the model is accurate.
I don't know why, but this has got me really excited to see the results.
Oldwolf said:
Having a scan of your car is pretty cool!
Another scan will de done once the engine is installed and the Novitec front splitter and rear diffuser wing are mounted.Grant will the run the CFD again to see the effectiveness of the Novitec aero parts and how it changes the aero balance of the car.
When I called Novitec they assured me that all the parts had been 'tested' and were not cosmetic.
cake eater said:
When I called Novitec they assured me that all the parts had been 'tested' and were not cosmetic.
While I absolutely do not doubt Novitec have tested their parts, a lot of stuff is developed with basic physics (make the splitter lower and stick out more) and a development driver telling them "yep, that works".The splitter and side skirts on my A110 haven't been through a CFD simulation, but they're basic parts that work on good solid principles. The objective (laptimes) and subjective (how stable the car feels at high speed) both agree they work, and work well.
That said, I love a simulation, so I do. I'm looking forward to seeing it!
leglessAlex said:
While I absolutely do not doubt Novitec have tested their parts, a lot of stuff is developed with basic physics (make the splitter lower and stick out more) and a development driver telling them "yep, that works".
The splitter and side skirts on my A110 haven't been through a CFD simulation, but they're basic parts that work on good solid principles. The objective (laptimes) and subjective (how stable the car feels at high speed) both agree they work, and work well.
That said, I love a simulation, so I do. I'm looking forward to seeing it!
The 'it looks right, it feels right' is very effective. The splitter and side skirts on my A110 haven't been through a CFD simulation, but they're basic parts that work on good solid principles. The objective (laptimes) and subjective (how stable the car feels at high speed) both agree they work, and work well.
That said, I love a simulation, so I do. I'm looking forward to seeing it!
As I got more interested in aerodynamics I could see just how much the knowledge has changed as well as the affordability of access to that knowledge.
In particular, look at front splitters and how much the have changed from being a flat plate bolted to the bottom of the car, to having a curved underside, strakes and diffuser tunnels.
There's just so much opportunity to improve on what was designed 15 years ago. And it's feels like fun
cake eater said:
Build progress has taken one step forward and two back. The crank rotating assembly and flywheel are back from balancing. I don't have the exact numbers but once I get the report, I'll update but I couldn't resist posting pics.
Connecting rods, it's clear to see how the big ends have been "shaved'
Close up of the little end
Crank
Apparently the balance was quite a bit out, good in relative terms, and easy to work on. Once I get the "numbers" I'll update.
The two steps back are the heads. They were due back at MDL today but turns out the OEM valve guides were out of spec and now need to be sent for finishing. Brand new vales, guides, springs etc were bought from Ferrari and I would have thought everything would just bolt together. I guess not.
I have been told that maybe the valve guides aren't finished to spec because that needs to be done to the valve, that the guides are the same across a range of engines but not the valves? Who knows?
Late update on this with the balancing 'numbers' Connecting rods, it's clear to see how the big ends have been "shaved'
Close up of the little end
Crank
Apparently the balance was quite a bit out, good in relative terms, and easy to work on. Once I get the "numbers" I'll update.
The two steps back are the heads. They were due back at MDL today but turns out the OEM valve guides were out of spec and now need to be sent for finishing. Brand new vales, guides, springs etc were bought from Ferrari and I would have thought everything would just bolt together. I guess not.
I have been told that maybe the valve guides aren't finished to spec because that needs to be done to the valve, that the guides are the same across a range of engines but not the valves? Who knows?
Front rods 14 gramm millimetre @56
Rear rods 13 gramm millimetre @220
Rod weight end over end .2 of a gramm
Flywheel 110gramm millimetre total
G6.3
I didn't understand what the numbers meant so I had to go Googling.
Here's the information that I got back.
Crankshaft balance:
Front rods 14 gram-millimetres @ 56°
Rear rods 13 gram-millimetres @ 220°
This is the residual imbalance left in the crank after balancing.
A balance machine measures imbalance as:
Imbalance = Mass × Radius
Units are usually gram-millimetres (g·mm).
For example:
14 g·mm could mean 1 gram located 14 mm from the centreline or 0.5 g located 28 mm away
The angle (56° and 220°) simply tells the machinist where that residual imbalance is located around the crank.
For a Ferrari V12 crank, 14 g·mm front and 13 g·mm rear are extremely small residual values.
To put it into perspective:
OEM passenger-car balancing can be 50–100 g·mm or more.
Rod weight end-over-end:
Rod weight end over end 0.2 gram
Connecting rods have two separate masses:
Big end and Small end.
The balancing shop weighs each end independently.
0.2 g means the rods were matched to within ±0.2 gram
For reference:
Quality level End-to-end matching from factory is 1–3 g
Flywheel
Flywheel 110 gram-millimetre total
Again, this is residual imbalance and though much bigger than the crank is actually considered a 'good' number.
G6.3
This refers to the balancing standard used:
ISO 21940 Grade G6.3
The numbers suggest the shop achieved a balance quality that is likely better than the minimum G6.3 requirement
t Based on Porsche cranks, rods and pistons I have seen factory gives numbers like +/-5g for rods etc. but in reality what comes out from engines is almost always within one gram. Basically someone at the factory grouped parts together with much tighter tolerance than what they find acceptable. Every part they sell will meet larger range and can be put into any engine but they do it better when they can choose from large pile of parts. Cranks tent to be on heavy side compared to what "race" shops do when they balance engines.
928 GTS said:
Based on Porsche cranks, rods and pistons I have seen factory gives numbers like +/-5g for rods etc. but in reality what comes out from engines is almost always within one gram. Basically someone at the factory grouped parts together with much tighter tolerance than what they find acceptable. Every part they sell will meet larger range and can be put into any engine but they do it better when they can choose from large pile of parts. Cranks tent to be on heavy side compared to what "race" shops do when they balance engines.
The guy who did the balancing said that the Ferrari parts are better than what he normally sees (for variance in weight) but still not great. He also said that the parts were easy to work on so I guess there was plenty of 'meat' that could be removed.Porsche do have a reputation for being very well engineered.
When I raced bikes there was an option to buy blue printed parts from the dealer, which was basically that, someone at the factory spending some time to weight and match standard parts. Unfortunately 3 times the price of an off the shelf bit.
If anybody is *really* interested (hint: you won’t be, it’s really dull), given that we are in the most worshipful brotherhood of 12 (ok 928 isn’t, but a GTS is one of my cool cars, so he gets a pass), I could tell you how the old fashioned ICE blue printing techniques are still done in the battery world. It’s actually v v closely aligned!
DeejRC said:
If anybody is *really* interested (hint: you won t be, it s really dull), given that we are in the most worshipful brotherhood of 12 (ok 928 isn t, but a GTS is one of my cool cars, so he gets a pass), I could tell you how the old fashioned ICE blue printing techniques are still done in the battery world. It s actually v v closely aligned!
That would be interesting to nerd out on.P.S. I think you are wrong about Mr 928GTS - he worships at both churches, being the proud owner of a 550 alongside a great 928 GTS 5-spd. It is me who is more of a sinner, since I am more partial to the older sibling from Bologna/Modena and another 928 GTS 5-spd
Cheburator mk2 said:
DeejRC said:
If anybody is *really* interested (hint: you won t be, it s really dull), given that we are in the most worshipful brotherhood of 12 (ok 928 isn t, but a GTS is one of my cool cars, so he gets a pass), I could tell you how the old fashioned ICE blue printing techniques are still done in the battery world. It s actually v v closely aligned!
That would be interesting to nerd out on.P.S. I think you are wrong about Mr 928GTS - he worships at both churches, being the proud owner of a 550 alongside a great 928 GTS 5-spd. It is me who is more of a sinner, since I am more partial to the older sibling from Bologna/Modena and another 928 GTS 5-spd
Lots of nerdy details on this thread so more of it welcome. One of my favourite threads is the FF owner who had to put new mounting bolts in his CCM discs and I completely nerded out on single use 8 nm bolts
Gassing Station | Ferrari V12 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff