JFP in PA

There is a Schrader valve (look like a tire stem valve) on the fuel rail. You can jump the relay, or just turn the ignition switch on (does the same thing). If you have access to a PIWIS/PSTII/ Durametric system, all have the ability to cause the pump to run. I think the test is also covered in the Bentley manual.

You will need to get a new cap and seal for the Schrader valve, they are not reusable, but only cost a few cents……….

The fuel pump has two critical parameters: Fuel delivery volume (measured in mL/min.) and pressure. A pump can deliver considerable volume, but the injectors still will not operate correctly without the correct level of pressure. All M96/97 engines came equipped with a test port on the fuel system for testing both. If the pump cannot deliver the correct pressure range, the volume delivery becomes irrelevant..............

Life would be a whole lot simpler if you connected a fuel pressure test gauge to the test port and checked for the correct pressure..................

And have you checked the battery (e.g.: had it load tested)? Would not be the first brand new dud we have seen..... You could also be having parasitic current draw issues that are pulling the battery down; does the car have any aftermarket electrical/electronics in it?

Let's see; $250 for the tool, then $1300 for the Porsche specific add on; vs. $287 for the Durametric "Enthusiast" or $735 for the "Pro" version. Kind of seems obvious.......

I have, and I would definitely recommend against using a light weight single mass flywheel unless the rotating assembly, and the flywheel, are fully balanced as a unit before the engine is assembled.

A lot of people seem to think that they can simply slap on an X51 sump cover and all is well, when the reality is that the sump cover is probably the least important component in the upgrade.

dumb question here... what exactly is the rotating assembly... is that not on the flywheel... is it a separate component?

as for the X51 baffled pan.. its does provide *some* benefit that's for sure... but I definitely agree that it is only the 1st (and IMO necessary step) in upgrading the oiling system... I'm curious if there are folks who have done both X51 AND deep sump pan (which holds about 1/2 quart extra only) that have seen more stable pressures in corners where oil pressure was previously unstable. I know of an outfitter here in Canada that makes a sump kit that holds a *complete quart* of oil with spacing hardware and that would certainly help to ward off starvation a bit better than just 1/2 a quart; if the oil your engine needs is suspended in one corner of the engine during a high g corner it will never make it back to the sump and hence never pumped to where it is needed... (this is where complete X51 oiling kit comes into play - pumping it back into sump) and the theory of having a full extra quart means that it was never pumped and is ready as "reserve"... many are doing this but I haven't heard any feedback that shows a change in oil pressure; I have an X51 pan only and *think* I see a SMALL difference but I will do more testing this summer that's for sure as I have made less than scientific observations.

a lot of the oil trying to drain back into the sump gets "stuck" in the cylinder bank towards the outside of a given corner, and the oil in the sump stands up on the same wall of the sump. Not a good thing.

yes but I thought with x51 with the walls built in *around* the tube it forces a much smaller perimeter and keeps the oil in place during high g cornering so the pick up tube has something to suck in... it also has the baffles that open and close to trap oil in that little box round the pickup tube... in a non-x51 pan I can see the oil being cornered on the far wall away from the pick up tube but I don't believe this is happening with x51 pan... unless of course that corner is so long and sweeping and you are generating serious g force for a long time so that it picks up all the oil the x51 pan has collected and now its stuck on top of one of the heads waiting for the g-forces to stop so it comes back down... <- that can definitely happen and from what I'm told will blow the motor; so the question is whether putting in an extra litre of oil with a deeper sump pan makes that condition less likely and I think it does..

btw ... I never knew the x51 pan with baffling allows an extra 1/2 litre of oil... interesting...

All M96/97 motors, down to the lowly 2.5L have fully baffled sumps with trap doors to limit oil movement right from the factory. The X51 (first photo) is a bit deeper and more elaborate, but very similar to the base system as seen here (second photo):

"rotating assembly" is the crankshaft, rods, front pulley, and flywheel.

I always have these balanced (weight matched, and lightened) when rebuilding an engine. It will add years and RPM to the engine.

so unless you take apart your engine to balance all the above parts *with* the new LWFW your saying don't do it?

I would not. But everyone must weigh the risks and make their own decision.

ok... thx for clarifying... that's why lots of the engines that have this mod added eventually give out early.. but not all though... its a crapshoot

+1 on Loren's comments. This is what was left of a factory X51 motor running a lightweight flywheel.............

We have several customer's running the Accusump system, some which we installed. Is there something specific you want to know?

I have, and I would definitely recommend against using a light weight single mass flywheel unless the rotating assembly, and the flywheel, are fully balanced as a unit before the engine is assembled.

A lot of people seem to think that they can simply slap on an X51 sump cover and all is well, when the reality is that the sump cover is probably the least important component in the upgrade.

dumb question here... what exactly is the rotating assembly... is that not on the flywheel... is it a separate component?

as for the X51 baffled pan.. its does provide *some* benefit that's for sure... but I definitely agree that it is only the 1st (and IMO necessary step) in upgrading the oiling system... I'm curious if there are folks who have done both X51 AND deep sump pan (which holds about 1/2 quart extra only) that have seen more stable pressures in corners where oil pressure was previously unstable. I know of an outfitter here in Canada that makes a sump kit that holds a *complete quart* of oil with spacing hardware and that would certainly help to ward off starvation a bit better than just 1/2 a quart; if the oil your engine needs is suspended in one corner of the engine during a high g corner it will never make it back to the sump and hence never pumped to where it is needed... (this is where complete X51 oiling kit comes into play - pumping it back into sump) and the theory of having a full extra quart means that it was never pumped and is ready as "reserve"... many are doing this but I haven't heard any feedback that shows a change in oil pressure; I have an X51 pan only and *think* I see a SMALL difference but I will do more testing this summer that's for sure as I have made less than scientific observations.

The “rotating assembly” is the pistons, rods, rings, bearings, wrist pins & associated hardware; plus the flywheel.

The X51 sump cover and baffles assembly does add about ½ quart of capacity, or about 5% of the total. While the extra oil is a good thing, if you stop and think about the fact that it is such a small portion of the total available oil. A properly done competition oil system works with three factors: The quality of the oil (the rating or grade of it), the condition of the oil (its temperature, shear condition, viscosity), and the location of the oil (where it is inside the engine). Because these cars are capable of tremendous cornering forces, if the oil is hot, thin, and most of it is trapped up in the engine assembly; what is left can easily get stood up (literally) on the sidewall of the engine cases, and your pump momentarily runs dry. Not a good thing. Because of the “boxer” design of the engine (flat opposed six), a lot of the oil trying to drain back into the sump gets “stuck” in the cylinder bank towards the outside of a given corner, and the oil in the sump stands up on the same wall of the sump. Not a good thing.

The full X51 system helps collect that oil and get it back into the sump, lessening the change of the pickup becoming uncovered, and bearings being without oil; which is obviously a very good thing.

I have, and I would definitely recommend against using a light weight single mass flywheel unless the rotating assembly, and the flywheel, are fully balanced as a unit before the engine is assembled.

A lot of people seem to think that they can simply slap on an X51 sump cover and all is well, when the reality is that the sump cover is probably the least important component in the upgrade.

I hope I am doing this correctly - first timer. I'm in the process of having my 03 996 C2 motor rebuilt and am hoping to do it in a way that will reduce the possibility of having to do it again soon. I use it primarily as a track car at HMS, PBIR, Sebring & Daytona. Tires are Sport Cups, StopTech ST40 brakes PF-1 pads (front), Fabspeed headers, sport cats & cold air intake. No software tweaks. My engine apparently spun a bearing at a Chin event at HMS. I got it shut down and to the shop without catastrophic damage. The 4-5-6 bank scavenger pump was torn up and the valves, piston and related hardware on cylinder 5 were damaged. I had an X51 oil pan (pan & baffle only) put on the car a couple months before. I've spent many hours reading on the LN Engineering, Flat 6, Accusump websites and many forums and haven't been able to reach a consensus about how best to address the high lateral g-load oil starvation and general M96 reliability issues. I've committed to the following:

LN IMS retrofit kit

LN deeper sump spacer kit, magnetic, plug, etc.

AASCO LWF w/Sachs Spring loaded clutch disk

160 degree t'stat

Items I'd like input on:

Is the LN sump spacer kit compatible with the X51 pan? LN has a low opinion of the X51 pan w/out the full X51 engine mods?

Has anyone used an Accusump system and / or the Motorsport two chamber AOS to deal with oil pressure fluctuations while cornering?

If so, what were the results?

Any other ideas?

Thank you.

There is no reason the LN pan spacer would not fit, only question is does the pickup spacer lower the pickup enough to get it near the sump floor. As for the X51 package, just adding the sump will do little other than increase the sump’s holding capacity slightly. The full X51 added an additional scavenger pump in the heads and a “northwest passage” oil line to get the oil from the extra pump back to the sump quicker, which is a major plus. Someone is making a similar kit to retrofit non X51 engines, but it requires removing and machining the cam cover for the bypass line, which can be tricky as the cam covers are matched to the heads and not easily replaceable should the process get screwed up or need to be removed. The kit is also very expensive.

The Accusump is a major benefit when cornering causes oil starvation, but it is not a guarantee, engines with them still can and do fail but usually for other reasons. It also requires running a smaller filter that needs to be changed more frequently.

You normally would need to obtain commerical battery acid, which is a soultion of around 30% H2SO4 in distilled water.

More than likely, it was not stolen, but simply came loose and fell off without anyone noticing it was gone................

For future reference, you may want to look at 3M automotive "Scotch Loks".

They are gel filled, self stripping crimp connectors that are water proof and made for automotive applications. Come in a variety of sizes, we use them on (and under) cars all the time, never had one come back with a bad connection.

E-scan is an interesting device, but unfortunately cost more than the Durametric Pro system, and has less diagnostics functions than the Durametric when connected to a Porsche (at least the last time I looked at it).

A leak down test will often catch very small leaks caused by minute head or block cracks as well as head gasket failures that get missed or classified as cylinder to cylinder variations in a compression test routine. Yes it costs more, but it gives more definitive information.

Kind of thought that would be the situation; in any case, it still is not that bad a project.

Looks like it. Be sure to flush with lots of clear water before refilling.

The only way to know what you are dealing with is to check the engine out (run a leak down test, pressure test the cooling system, pull the oil filter and cut it open, drop the sump cover, etc.). These engines do not like being hot, tend to start cracking heads, and the early blocks had other issues as well.

Pulling the pump and putting it back is often false economy; considering the effort and parts costs involved, and the fact these pump go south without much warning, it simply does not make sense. That is also why we never reuse coolant, even when it looks good. Do it right and you generally only do it once……….

Any debris in the coolant is reason for some concern; contamination can lead to a premature death of the coolant. Normally, there should be no sealant or other crud in the system as none is used in the original assembly, or should be used if the thermostat or pump is changed out.

One potential source for black flakes in the system is from the pump itself, which uses a black plastic impeller that is well known for breaking up in use. Impeller failure has led to other issues as the debris can block water passages and cause hot spots to form, which can lead to issues like cracked cylinder heads. If you want to flush it, Prestone makes a flush that works well in getting out crud like intermix residues.

As for the pressure on the Airlift unit, use 90 PSIG per the manufacturer's instructions. As there are no seals in the Uview unit, pressure will not harm it; and the unit will get to full vacuum quicker.

As for draining the system; if you have removed the drain plug and pulled the hoses, and then allowed the system to drain, you should not get anything more by evacuating the system as pulling a vacuum does not move the liquid, only the air.

As for measuring the electrical properties of the coolant mix, we have never done that, preferring to test it for visual clarity, pH and freeze levels, which have always been dependable indicators of its condition.

OEM Litronics installations have two features that cannot be retrofitted, even using the OEM “kit”. The factory units have sensors on the chassis that adjust the lights angle to prevent glare to oncoming drivers (such as when cresting a hill), and the factory units are capable of being fault scanned by a PST II or PIWIS.

I recently had a tire fail and shred itself to pieces, and in the process, tire debris really tore up the wiring that runs up from the hub carrier into the rear trunk area that carries the wheel speed sensor and brake wear signals. Is this section of wiring replaceable as a unit? I have to figure it's offered for collision repair, when wheels get ripped off these things....

You do come up with interesting problems…………… As I believe your car is a 2003, I think the news is bad: The ABS wiring circuit diagram does not show any disconnects other than the ones near the actual wheel speed sensors. Some of the earlier years had a disconnect just inside the trunk area, but that seems to have disappeared in the later models like yours. You may want to do some exploring, as I have found the connection locations in these diagrams to not always be completely accurate. In any case, the wiring is nothing special, so you can do some splicing to get back on the road.

Not sure the later airbag is compatible with the earlier system.

I have to agree with Loren on this; and because it gets into a questionable definition of "better". In general, just about any new plug is going to be "better" than one with a lot of miles on it, simply because it is new (after all, these are consumable items) . I believe if you dyno tested several brands of new plugs of the same heat range; any differences would be more experimental error rather than actual gains. The more appropriate question is which plug is doing "better" after a ton of miles, and this is where the incredible toughness of Iridium comes in. After 30-40 thousand miles, the Iridium plugs still look like new with no real change in the electrode gaps or condition, while the OEM plugs tend to show more electrode wear. On a Boxster or Cayman, plug changes are relatively straight forward affairs as nothing is in the way; on a 996/997/Turbo they tend to be a bit more difficult due to exhaust system packaging and the like. Longer lived, or longer performing plugs have an obvious advantage is these installations. To me, that is where the "better" term actually resides………..