Welcome to 911UK
The only place for Porsche, 911uk is the definitive enthusiast and resource site for the Porsche 911.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so join up today for full access to the site and benefit from latest member offers.

Porsche Classifieds
Sell Your Porsche on 911uk
Create a Free Classified Advert
Search Ads
Classified Adverts FAQ
Trade Classified Information
Buyer & Seller Fraud Protection
Consumer Rights Act
Pre Purchase Inspection (PPI)
Porsche Car Sourcing
Porsche Cars Wanted
Official Porsche Centre Reviews
Model
Stock
Porsche 911
992 : 2019- 0
991 : 2011- 24
997 : 2004- 66
996 : 1997-2005 35
993 : 1993-1998 4
964 : 1989-1993 1
Carrera 3.2 : 1983-1989 2
Carrera SC : 1977-1983 2
930 Turbo : 1975-1989 1
Early 911 : 1964-1977 1
Porsche Other Models
Classic : 1950-1965 0
Boxster : 1997- 30
Cayman : 2005- 21
Cayenne : 2003- 6
Macan : 2014- 4
Panamera : 2009- 0
912-914-924-928-944-968 1
959 - CarreraGT - RaceCar 0
Car Parts For Sale & Wanted
Other Items For Sale & Wanted
Wheels Tyres For Sale & Wanted
Number Plates For Sale Wanted

Porsche Services
Porsche Body Shop Repair
Paint Protection & Wrapping
Porsche Classic Insurance
Porsche Classic Parts
Porsche Classic Restoration
Porsche Design Collection
Porsche Engine Gearbox Rebuild
Porsche Heritage & History
Porsche News
Porsche Picture Gallery
Win a New Porsche 911

Porsche Parts
Body Parts, Body Styling
Brakes, Clearance
Electrical, Exhausts
Engine Cooling, Engine Electrical
Engine Rebuild, Heating Cooling
Interior Incar, Lighting
Rubber Seals, Service Parts
Steering, Suspension
Transmission, Workshop Tools
Early 911, 911 - 930, 928 - 968
964 - 993, 996 - 997, Boxster
Cayman, Cayenne, Panamera

Porsche Model Range
911 [992] 2018-Current
Porsche 911 [992]
911 [991] 2011-2019
Porsche 911 [991]
911 [997] 2004-2012
Porsche 911 [997]
911 [GT] GT1-GT2-GT3
Porsche 911 [GT]
911 [996] 1997-2005
Porsche 911 [996]
911 [993] 1993-1998
Porsche 911 [993]
911 [RS] RS-RSR
Porsche 911 [RS]
911 [964] 1989-1993
Porsche 911 [964]
911 3.2 1983-1989
Porsche 911 3.2 Carrera
911 SC 1977-1983
Porsche 911 SC
911 [Early] 1964-1977
Porsche 911 [Early]
Boxster & Cayman
Porsche Boxster & Cayman
Cayenne & Panamera
Porsche Cayenne & Panamera

911uk Site Partners

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
crash7
Hockenheim


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 678



PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dammit: - It makes cira 285 ft/lbs at 4600, its at 250ft/lbs by 2500, and doesn’t drop below this until 6750.


Demon: - Going by your signature we are indeed treading similar pathes. – When I actually think about the resonator, it makes sense, removing it does not increase airflow to the engine, but it does increase the noise, how does it do this, by upsetting the airflow. – You could also question why Porsche would add the resonator if it doesn’t contribute anything.


Jcharalambides: - What is the spec on your engine build? 3.9?


Infra : - The 3.6 comes with less problematic heads out of the boxes and is probably a better place to start than the 3.4, however, and this is personal, I prefer the look of the 996.1 aero which I was set on when I started, being honest I didn’t initially plan on the engine work!


Y2K : – Cheers for the dyno link, this further confirms to me that 275ish, are where the 3.4’s are, interestingly the torque seems low, circa 225 ft/lb - Would be interesting to see what the 3.6 M96 is making.

I was surprised at the weight on mine, and was hoping to be closer to 1250kgs particularly based on the numbers that are banded around the internet, unfortunately not.

I know I can lose more, the standard wheels are heavy, I could save 20kg’s there as an easy win, I have previously had a set of Oz alleggerita, actually had two, but I wanted to stick with the standard look so moved them both on.

I do however have a set of 996 Cup Magnesium E88’s that I will eventually get around to fitting, the saving will be less than the Oz’s, circa 15kg, but I can live with that as I think the wheels rock , out and out weight saving is not the ultimate goal.

Tyres are also a place to save that is often over looked, with most concentrating on the wheels. When the car was weighted it was running Yoko AD08R, which are a great tyre, but heavy, a 225 is heavier than a 245 Cup 2, the E88’s will run with Cup2’s, which are also a quicker tyre.

Lightweight battery, Odessey etc is an easy, cheap, big win on weight, however can be problematic if you dont keep it constantly on a ctech. - Li could be the perfect solution but I have no experience.

The JRZ’s are superb, however, they are an out and out motorsport damper and as such are designed to run with high spring rates on race cars. - As the spring rates are high you also need to run lots of compression and rebound to ensure the damper is damping and your not just sat on the spring, I made this mistake at Thruxton when I had initially fitted them and it led to losing the rear coming out of Village!

All of this means a stiff ride, perfectly compliant on smooth surfaces, but rutted B roads, not so much!

Being transparent the whole suspension setup and geometry does not really lend itself particularly well to large swaths of British roads!

Spring rates for context.,

996 GT3 runs R: 370 F:200 - Revised on the 996.2 GT3 to R: 542lbs F:228

Cup Car: R:1484 F:1370

I run, R:950 F:800 (Main springs, both with 150 tenders)

My fronts are probably a little too stiff, noticeable on track when braking hard on bumpy surfaces, brings in the ABS when the tyres still have traction, most annoying, I can counter via the rebound damping, to an extent, however I think a little softer would dial out a little more understeer and help with the braking.

Your welcome to try it, do you track your car? trackday meet?

Last edited by crash7 on Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:58 am; edited 2 times in total
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
crash7
Hockenheim


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 678



PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pictures, may be of interest to some.,

Engine case being machined for the additional crank shaft bearing. – The crank has a long overhang the additional bearing provides the crank extra support.

To further aid the crank as oppose to the dual mass flywheel, circa 13kg’s, being hung off it, a Lightweight flywheel was fitted, circa 6Kg’s.

This should make for longevity and reliability. – This is the first engine, outside of a few race cars, that Hartech have fitted this to.

That said when the crank was removed the original bearings etc were in good shape and that was without the extra bearing and a dual mass flywheel, the car had covered 90k miles and several trackdays
 



Crank bearing 2.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  28.24 KB
 Viewed:  2664 Time(s)

Crank bearing 2.jpg



Hartech crank bearing.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  37.41 KB
 Viewed:  2664 Time(s)

Hartech crank bearing.jpg


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
crash7
Hockenheim


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 678



PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Block
 



Hartech Block1.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  45.31 KB
 Viewed:  2659 Time(s)

Hartech Block1.jpg


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
Y2K
Montreal


Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Posts: 541
Location: Hampshire


PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the info RE suspensions. I’m a complete novice really so had mine set up by 9E. I had a play with bump and rebound and quite happy with it now, but second opinion always welcome so track meet sounds good.

I got Abingdon this Friday actually, then Oulton in September and Blyton Park in October. IIRC you’re based at Surrey/Sussex? PM me if/when you’re going to Thruxton / Castle Combe / Donington etc, I’ll join you if my schedule allows.
_________________
2005 996 GT3 mk2
1999 Integra DC2
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
Jamesx19
Nürburgring


Joined: 10 Jul 2015
Posts: 476
Location: Brighton


PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 6:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Really interesting read, thanks Crash.

Honest data and feedback is very hard to come b on the internet, so all the more valuable when it's shared.

Nice one. Time to enjoy it now!
_________________
1998 C2 Manual + The Full Hartech.
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
sp1ke
Trainee


Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 82



PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fascinating thread, thanks for sharing.

I note you mentioned you'd found the 997s 3.8 plenum to be the optimum choice.
I'm curious to hear if you tried the 3.6 stock plenum & what the gains where with the 3.8 plenum, as this would be a relatively cheap mod for the rest of us.
Also would you happen to know the difference in dimensions between the 3.6 & 3.8 plenums? & can you share the part number you used?

For completeness I'll add the graph from the original Porsche hardback catalogue for the stock 3.6 as a comparison to the one Dammit shared for the stock 3.4.
_________________
2001 996.2 C2
 



996_36_graph.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  1.85 MB
 Viewed:  2445 Time(s)

996_36_graph.jpg


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
NedHan79
Hockenheim


Joined: 08 Nov 2018
Posts: 681



PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had all the details written out and for some reason I lost the screen. Typical
98 c2 3.4
Hh removal with piper x foam filter
Denso iridium plugs
Surefire coil packs
Unknown ss exhausts, manifolds and cats
97 Ron as in Northern Ireland.
_________________
#modified996mk1
 



FECC3EFF-C36A-4279-89E9-0FD704067FE5.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  1.12 MB
 Viewed:  2412 Time(s)

FECC3EFF-C36A-4279-89E9-0FD704067FE5.png


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
jcharalambides
Newbie


Joined: 14 Jan 2019
Posts: 35



PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2019 1:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@crash7 - my rebuild did not entail a displacement increase. Mods include different cams, ported and flowed heads and valve seats, new liners, pistons etc.

I am still waiting for the Dyno sheet for which the tuner is taking his sweet time to send over to RPM Technik... It will be interesting to see the numbers on this. Ultimately if they are good, you could combine these mods with an upgrade to 3.9 or something.

It's great that you got to try things on-and-off while on the dyno. For some reason there is very little actual science backing a lot of the tuning mods!
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
Dammit
Indianapolis


Joined: 23 Sep 2016
Posts: 2391



PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Schrick cams?
_________________
My 996, AKA Project Ridiculous
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
Jamie Summers
Österreich


Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 905
Location: Esher, Surrey

1992 Porsche 964 RS

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I appreciate it's not quite comparing apples with apples, but I have the original Cayman "RS" development car that Autofarm produced about 10 years ago.

It started life as a regular 987.1 S ie the M97 3.4L lump. Autofarm subjected this to one of their 3.7L Silsleeve engine conversions. In addition to many of the same bits and pieces that Hartech do as standard, Autofarm also fitted the Shrick cams, IPD plenum GT3 throttle body and a custom carbonfibre airbox. It also has stainless decat headers and Miltek back section (also decat).

The engine was dyno-mapped by the now departed Bob Watson and showed 367bhp, backed up by a dyno print from a different dyno a couple of years later showing a very similar number.

The power delivery is very linear with strong low-down torque. Getting the thing to cool properly has been the major challenge, but I think that is as much to do with the mid-engined lay out as the engine itself. I have now also gone down the line of fitting TTP Oilsafer pumps on both banks of heads together with an additional external oilcooler, deep baffled sump and larger 997 water/oil heat exchanger, low temp therm, lightweight clutch and flywheel and under drive pulley.

I think there is still more on the table with a bit more dyno time. Parr had it on their dyno relatively recently and commented that the map was fairly basic and could be improved.

Clearly comparisons with a Hartech M96 3.7 are not entirely fair, but what is interesting is that even with many of the bolt-on "performance" mods eg plenum, throttle body and airbox, which the OP found to be power-reducing, there is still a material improvement in power output over the Hartech M96, which presumably must come largely down to the cams and exhaust ???
_________________
'06 Autofarm Cayman RS Development Car
‘99 996 C2
Ex '92 964 RS
Ex '93 968 CS
Ex '90 Clio Mk1 Cup Racer
Ex '90 964 C2
Ex '89 Carrera 3.2
 
  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
   
Dammit
Indianapolis


Joined: 23 Sep 2016
Posts: 2391



PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting- thanks for posting the details.

M97 has 3.2mm larger diameter valves than the M96, not sure which Schrick cams were fitted but they’ll certainly have more lift than the M96 3.2/3.4.

Be very interesting to see what yours makes with a stock 997 intake- although you’d need to do some work to get it in there. From chatting with Wayne it it might produce a surprising amount more.
_________________
My 996, AKA Project Ridiculous
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
Jamie Summers
Österreich


Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 905
Location: Esher, Surrey

1992 Porsche 964 RS

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, going by the OP's experience a stock intake may yield more. Is there much difference between the 987 and 997 intakes ? The Autofarm work had been done on the engine long before I bought it, so I have no real idea what the stock 987 set up looks like.
Interaction between the intake and exhaust sides of the engine is also interesting and untested in this scenario. I wonder if the modified intake side's capacity to flow more air is optimised by a freer flowing exhaust system (like my fully decatted system) ? ie mods on both sides producing a positive result versus the negative experience of just modding the intake side.
I realise I may be clutching at straws !!!
I have long been meaning to visit Wayne, but it's a heck of a long way from me so don't want it to be a wasted trip.
Out of curiosity I've also fitted an IPD plenum, K&N intake kit, under-drive pulley, Top Gear headers and 200 Cell back section to my early 3.4 996. I have no before or after dyno figures to offer, and the car is certainly nowhere near as quick as the Cayman, but it makes a pleasing noise and seems to go very nicely. It does not feel slower than pre modification, but that might just be my wallet deceiving my brain !!!
_________________
'06 Autofarm Cayman RS Development Car
‘99 996 C2
Ex '92 964 RS
Ex '93 968 CS
Ex '90 Clio Mk1 Cup Racer
Ex '90 964 C2
Ex '89 Carrera 3.2
 
  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
   
Dammit
Indianapolis


Joined: 23 Sep 2016
Posts: 2391



PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a 997 intake which you are welcome too if you can collect it.

I’m in Forest Hill, South East London.
_________________
My 996, AKA Project Ridiculous
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
crash7
Hockenheim


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 678



PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Y2K – I would also class myself as a novice, you pick things up as you go, and as with most its trial and error!

I will drop you a PM, currently still running mine in, Castle Coombe, Brands, Silverstone & Bedford are where I end up most,


Sp1Ke - I believe the 3.4/3.6/3.8 plenums are all the same size, however the design of the 3.8 is better in that it the corners are smooth bends as oppose to a ‘T’ shape which improves flow.



The issue with getting HP out of a 3.4 are the heads this is largely because the 996 3.4 evolved from a basic original design of a 2.5 engine.

When Porsche wanted to make a 3.6 and 3.8 they realised they needed to increase the valve sizes and inlet areas to flow enough air at peak revs. They also knew that this would reduce mid-range torque so they made a new head and valve lift and timing system to get it back.

Porsche found this variable valve timing and lift system so effective they found they could use it on a 3.4 engine and still get a good torque curve out of it and hence the Cayman S evolved.

The 3.4 Cayman has variable valve lift and double the variable inlet valve timing (as the lower lift cam is timed differently and both cam lobes have variable timing adjustment). It also has bigger valve diameters and higher gas flow characteristics so can flow more air than a 996 3.4 head at high revs when the amount of time the valves are opened is shorter.

So in essence the 996 3.4 was stretched bigger to its limits while the 3.4 Cayman was reduced down from a head that already had higher flow characteristics.
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
Dammit
Indianapolis


Joined: 23 Sep 2016
Posts: 2391



PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pinched the table below from here: https://newsite.hamheads.com/2016/12/01/m96-m97-porsche-cylinder-head-specifications-and-general-info/
_________________
My 996, AKA Project Ridiculous
 



Screenshot 2019-07-26 at 22.49.43.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  161.67 KB
 Viewed:  2057 Time(s)

Screenshot 2019-07-26 at 22.49.43.png


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
jcharalambides
Newbie


Joined: 14 Jan 2019
Posts: 35



PostPosted: Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Guys,

Have have been through the bedding in process and had 2 track days with the new engine, and just received the Dyno from the initial tune. So thought i would update you and add to the great data here.

Dyno chart attached was done when the engine was tuned straight after build so before it was properly run-in (don’t know if it actually makes a difference or not?).

How it feels: will start by caveating that i didn’t actually have a ton of time with the car before the engine had to be rebuilt so i won’t try too compare pre- and post-rebuild.
Overall it feels quite peaky. You really need to get up in the revs to get the power, when it comes in it feels good (which is clear in the chart). I’m a novice on track and focusing on trying to have decent lines so actually staying lower in the revs than you could (higher gear out of certain corners - last track day i was not rev matching, so for example staying in third entering a corner where i could go down to second with heel and toe). To be completely honest, given my skills (or lack thereof..), it’s not a bad thing - i don’t think i really have the smoothness required in throttle application when close (closer) to the limit to handle the full power in the 5500RPM range up. I was considering having it tuned to lower peak power/ more power earlier, but I’ll probably leave as is for now and work on my driving. I suspect when keeping it high in the revs it would feel much faster overall. It feels faster on the straights but it’s so subjective - and having used it only once on track pre-rebuild - that i can’t really say hows much faster. Certainly when coming out of corners and into straights it feels fast enough to put a smile on my face.
The idea with the rebuild was mainly focused on reliability (the brief was: i want to be able to drive to the track, have fun and DRIVE BACK HOME!), and so far i am satisfied.
I did 124 laps at Brands Hatch with the Porsche Club on Monday, had a spin-out, and it didn’t miss a beat all way home under torrential rain.

@crash7 - I saw you were waiting to upgrade brakes to track the car: I also have third radiator, baffled sump, light weight clutch and flywheel, lsd, KWv3 and eibach anti roll bars, braided brake lines and high temp fluid but otherwise standard brakes - very surprised with how good the standard brakes are with decent pads. I’ve looked at upgrades but i can see I’m better off spending the money on tuition for now. I wouldn’t wait for that before tracking it if i were you.

@Dammit - the cams are RPM Technik’s “CSR” Cams, i do not know who manufactures them for them.

Hope this is helpful.
 



AA8396A6-650D-4735-9B99-311341F57AD7.png
 Description:
Dyno chart
 Filesize:  41.34 KB
 Viewed:  1328 Time(s)

AA8396A6-650D-4735-9B99-311341F57AD7.png


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
crash7
Hockenheim


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 678



PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A brief update, performance info to follow, but steering related threads appear to be rife at the moment so..,

What with the Engine, suspension, interior & brake work, there was not much left on the car that had not been replaced or upgraded. – One thing however I did have a nagging sense of dread over was the steering rack.

Search the forums and given that these cars are circa 20 years old age-related steering failures are becoming more and more common.

Then surely enough I heard a screeching from the rear of the car and the steering began to become heavy! -I immediately pulled over suspecting the rack had sh*t itself, upon inspection under the front driver side of the car, LCA area, there was a steady drip of Pentosin.

A call to the RAC and 8 hours later, awful service, the car was on a flat bed on its way home.

While waiting for said flatbed I had a lot of time to reflect, lots of the work I have had done on the car has been to make it more reliable and remove common faults and failure modes.

In essence the steering rack will work and steer the car without fluid, however the power steering pump will not run for long without fluid, it would eventually seize, ok I could potentially live with that, however the issue I see here is that the power steering pump shares a belt with the various items including the alternator and water pump As such I would not want a steering pump failure causing issues with items such as the water pump on my new engine.

Not withstanding the fact that if the power steering pump was not engine driven, I could have probably limped the car home.

I begun to look for solutions, enter the 997 Cup car, which runs a hydraulic rack the same as a 996, but said rack is supplied via a frunk mounted electric power steering pump, as oppose to the engine belt driven one.

Porsche motorsport will sell you the kit for circa £2k – Which consists of the pump, hoses, dummy pulley, belt and electrical connections.

The pump is a TRW pump and as well as being man enough to steer a 997 Cup car on slicks, its also fitted to the Vauxhall Zafira! – And as such can be purchased without the Porsche price tag. – The same TRW electric pump is also used a lot in drift cars, hydraulic pumps are not designed to be driven on full lock for any prolonged duration.

Be sure to get the correct pump, there is an old and new version, they do look very different.

I did as much research as I could, however, apart from a few threads on random Boxster forums there was very little info available on retro-fitting this kit to a 996.

To start, I removed the old rack to see what failed, the cross lines, which are a common failure, were very badly corroded.

The rack can be removed via the driver side wheel arch without dropping the sub-frame, provided the supply and return lines into the rack have not suffered from dissimilar corrosion and welded themselves to the rack! – Which is common. - The UJ can be a little tricky but is not difficult.

You can see that the corrosion has eroded part of the aluminium rack casting away and seized solid, there was no way the pipes were coming out of the rack.

Prior to this I had already decided that I would be fitting a new rack, something had failed, everything in the rack is the same age and as such just replacing the failed item for me was not an option, in fact using any of the original circa 20 year old parts was a non-starter.

To get the rack out, I cut the supply and return lines due to the corrosion, if I were not going the 997 Cup route there was no way I would have gotten these lines out of the rack and would have been faced with a circa £1k bill from Porsche for new steering pipes.

I then set about removing the rest of the power steering lines, which run from the rack, driver side front, across the width of the car, up the passenger sill and eventually into the engine bay to the pump, some of the lines were in decent shape, some were ropey and looked prone to future leaks, removing them and the risk of future leaks felt satisfying.

Once the lines were out I removed the Power Steering pump, which was actually fine, spinning freely without issue, not difficult to remove but you need to get other stuff out of the way first, namely airbox and a/c compressor, you do not need to remove the alternator as some suggest, access to the rear a/c compressor bolt is awkward.

The pump is bolted to the top of the engine, it and its fluid, get very hot during operation, Cayman are fitted with power steering fluid coolers to try and alleviate the heat soak. – Again, I see the removal of the heat soak, to and from the engine as a bonus.

When out I also stripped the PS pump to inspect, there was no damage or wear to the internals, I then gutted it, binned the internals and the reservoir, my initial thinking was that I would need to reinstall the the gutted pump to utilised the pulley as another idle pulley in the belt circuit, the 997 Cup pulley is different as it’s not designed for an M96– However as fortune would have it Tarrett had just begun to produce a 996 Power Steering delete pulley, its vastly over priced for what it is, however it is a lighter and more elegant solution, so I bought one.

The Tarrett pulley mimics the size and position of the original PS pump pulley and allows me to maintain the same belt size and routing as previous, (RSS underdrive pulley & a/c) with the pulley installed the engine was now free and disconnected from the Power Steering system.
New power steering rack, including inner tie rods and outer track arms were installed. Custom hoses would be required to install the electric pump.

The pump needs to be frunk mounted, and subsequently needs a support bracket, I investigated various options, Cup cars have a basket welded to the frunk floor, others have made custom brackets. – I figured that if TRW make the pump would TRW also make a bracket, they do, for the Zafira. TRW part number 000.0285.002.020 – I was able to modify this bracket to get it to hold the pump in a location I was happy with, I wanted to maintain as much frunk capacity as possible and keep the wiring and hydraulic hose lengths to a minimum.

One of the tricky parts is making up the hoses that connected into the rack, Porsche use a Porsche specific push fit end that is held in place with a tension shackle, the original steel power steering pipes are flared to fit and are bespoke as oppose to a standard JIC, AN fitting.

Where I have seen this retro-fit else where there have been solutions that involve cutting the Porsche PS lines, maintain the end fitting and welding on a JIC / AN / BSP thread, picture included, I was not keen on this, although it works, its all a little heath Robinson for me. – Enter Rebel Motorsports in the USA whom produce a bespoke item, it mimics the Porsche ends, utilizes the OEM Porsche seals, but allows the connection of AN fittings.

Next you need hoses, calculating the length prior to having everything installed (rack & pump) is difficult and even with them installed trying to compensate for bend radius etc still makes it a guessing game, particularly if you want it to look neat and work first time.

After much procrastinating, I landed on Earls performance hoses. Earls make a high pressure power steering hose that does not require crimping and can be made up in situ, so you can run the hose, cut to length, you then add the required AN ends, which threads in the Rebel racing fitting one end, and you need an Earls Power steering fitting that screws into the pump.(Its either M14 or M16 x 1.5, cant remember) – I don’t have any pictures of the fittings, if anyone wants parts numbers etc let me know and I will dig get them off the invoice, Earls to their credit were super helpful.

The return line is low pressure again I used Earls, but their Prolite range, it’s a large diameter pipe and uses lower pressure, fittings, which again are screwed in as oppose to crimped.

This should make up for my pi$$ poor explanation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2wXKfOmvF0

https://www.earls.co.uk/earls100/earls_shop/

You also need to decide on where to drill the penetrations in the bulk head to run the hoses through from the pump to the rack, lots of areas are double skinned and there are a lot brake and coolant lines running around which you need to be careful not to disturb, in addition to not wanting to put any nasty bends in the PS hoses or leaving them to long so as they catch on anything.

I wanted a single skin penetration while taking all of the above into account and ended up drilling as per the picture, I considered hydraulic bulk head fittings but access is so limited, rubber grommets were fitted to the holes to add a little more protection to the hoses, although that said it was hard work cutting the hoses with a hacksaw so I would not see them rubbing through without the grommets.

I am not 100% happy with my hose runs from an aesthetic point of view, everything works without issue, I may look to adjust the way they sit in the frunk over time, my primary concern was functionality.

Electrical wiring is straight forward when you know how. – The pump has inbuilt control, but nothing as complex as a full-blown ECU and it does not need to be run through a relay, the red block you see on the Porsche motorsport kit is a fuse, you do need to fuse it as it is a heavy load.

The thick brown cable from the pump needs to go to ground.

The thick red cable from the pump needs to go to directly to your battery, but via a suitable 80-amp fuse, there are many options available, inline etc, however I wanted mine to be accessible so used a Mega fuse and suitable enclosure which I mounted to the bulk head.

Now for the control.

The pump has three control wires of which only two are used.

The black cable requires a switched live – I ran this back to the fuse board in the drivers footwell, there are spare ways available for factory options that were not fitted. – From memory I utilised slot E8.

Blue & White cable. This tells the pump when to run, due to its heavy draw you do not want it running when you switch the ignition on, only when the car is running, finding a suitable signal was a challenge, I end up using the alternator charge indicator signal. – The easiest place to get this from was the dash cluster. - White plug, pin 23, blue 0.5mm cable, I spliced into this.

I made up an IP65 multi-pin plug for the control cables which allows me to disconnect and subsequently isolate the pump if required, I could also pull the fuse.

In turning the ignition on, the pump clicks, when you start the car the pump runs. – As with the hydraulic pump the pump runs constantly, the inbuilt FCV either recirculates the oil within the reservoir or directs to the rack as required.

Steering feel is no different from the hydraulic pump. – In fact its slightly improved, however that probably down to the new rack.

When refitting the rack, you will do well to get the UJ spline position to match up perfectly with the steering column so as everything is dead centre. – Expect to have the car tracked to centre the rack and the steering wheel to be out of centre, I simply removed the steering wheel and refitted.

In my vain of trying to be honest, weight, you may save 1 or 2 kgs over the hydraulic pump and associated pipe work, the electric pump is heavier than the hydraulic item, I have not weighted the junk I removed, but there is not much in it. – However, you are removing the hydraulic pump weight from up high at the rear and relocating the weight to low down at the front, which is a benefit.

You may gain 1-3-wheel bhp due to the removal of the parasitic lose of the hydraulic pump, don’t go expecting miracles! Removing the hydraulic pump also frees up space in the engine bay so airflow will be better, and you lose the heat produced by the PS pump.

And as touched on previously, it the system does fail, you would be able to limp the car home.

Pictures, in no order below, unfortunately I am not as committed as the likes of Dammit, Mistercorn or Marky in taking pictures or documenting!

Edited to add the parts and providers I used which may be of use to some. - There are many different ways to mount the pump and run the hoses to the rack, do what works for you!


Earls 991955 ; AN-6 to 16mm x 1.5mm Power Steering Fitting – Fits into Pump

Earls 150006 ; AN-6 Power Steering Hose

Earls 130106 ; AN-6 Straight Hose End Steel – High Pressure Hose Fitting

Earls 139106 ; AN-6 90 Degree Hose End Steel – High Pressure Hose Fitting

Earls 800106 ; AN-6 Straight Swivel Hose End – Return / Low Pressure Hose Fitting Rack Side

Earls 350006 ; AN-6 Pro-Lite 350 Hose – Low Pressure / Return Hose

Earls 900107 ; AN-7 Jubilee Clip - Return / Low Pressure Hose Fitting Pump Side

Porsche 999.230.542.40 – Sealing Ring
Porsche 999.230.543.40 – Repair Seal
Porsche 996.347.769.02 – Tension Shackle

Rebel Racing Rack Fittings

https://www.rsrproducts.com/product-page/rebel-s-racing-rsr-steering-rack-fittings-for-elec-pump

TRW Rack & Pump from Western Power Steering

http://www.westernpowersteering.co.uk/

Power Steering Fluid – I upgraded to ‘Motul Multi HF’ , its fully synthetic and has a higher maximum operating temperature than Pentosin.

Last edited by crash7 on Thu Dec 05, 2019 9:59 am; edited 5 times in total
 



Rack1.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  706.11 KB
 Viewed:  500 Time(s)

Rack1.jpg



rack old3.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  544.92 KB
 Viewed:  500 Time(s)

rack old3.jpg



rack old2.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  667.09 KB
 Viewed:  500 Time(s)

rack old2.jpg



rack old1.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  805.49 KB
 Viewed:  500 Time(s)

rack old1.jpg


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
crash7
Hockenheim


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 678



PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pump in situ

Tarrett PS delete pulley.

Rack Fittings, the Heath Robinson and the Rebel Racing items I used.

Last edited by crash7 on Thu Dec 05, 2019 10:34 am; edited 1 time in total
 



Rack End Connections.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  220.54 KB
 Viewed:  153 Time(s)

Rack End Connections.jpg



rack pump frunk.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  633.61 KB
 Viewed:  489 Time(s)

rack pump frunk.jpg



rack pump.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  276.37 KB
 Viewed:  489 Time(s)

rack pump.jpg



rack tarrett 3.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  471.43 KB
 Viewed:  489 Time(s)

rack tarrett 3.jpg



rack tarrett 1.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  747.89 KB
 Viewed:  489 Time(s)

rack tarrett 1.jpg



rack fittings diy.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  1001.97 KB
 Viewed:  489 Time(s)

rack fittings diy.jpg



rack rsr fittings.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  625.65 KB
 Viewed:  489 Time(s)

rack rsr fittings.jpg


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
crash7
Hockenheim


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 678



PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hydraulic pump & pipework.

Various example installs.

997 Cup install

PCGB 996 Racecar install

RSR install

You can see they all differ in method, but all work.
 



rack hyd pump.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  763.31 KB
 Viewed:  445 Time(s)

rack hyd pump.jpg



rack 997 Cup power steering.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  46.05 KB
 Viewed:  445 Time(s)

rack 997 Cup power steering.jpg



rack pcgb car.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  509.17 KB
 Viewed:  445 Time(s)

rack pcgb car.jpg



rack rsr install.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  140.62 KB
 Viewed:  445 Time(s)

rack rsr install.jpg


  
View user's profile Send private message
   
maldren
Suzuka


Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Posts: 1198



PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have no intention of following this but it's an excellent post, great reading.
many thanks.
Mike
_________________
Mike
2003 996.2 C2 Coupe Arctic Silver
 
  
View user's profile Send private message
   
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   All times are GMT - 12 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum