KevinMac

Hi, I was wondering if its possible to upgrade the bi-xenon headlights bulb

and fog lights to something brighter? any recommendations??

thanks

I have seen some third party offer the Bi Xenon headlight replacement bulbs with higher temps.

Let's not go there you have no clue what my backround is! You really are just throwing around what you see on the internet, and have no idea how it ties together!

Just for your education, firmware is written to meet certain criteria the manufacturer is seeking. So go read some more, and get an education on Software and Digital circuitry developement! Then we can have an intelligent conversation! The sensor will hear more but does not mean it's a cure all. There is more to it then just a listening device!

Your previous posts says all that is needed to know you are just arguing for the sake of arguing!

BTW the tie to the crank position sensor is a method to try narrow down to what cylinder is pre igniting, therefore allowing individual cylinder control as apposed to introducing broad control. In no way provides any control, it's just a data flow! The ECU will decifier to the appropriate cylinder, and attempt to adjust. Still does not mean that the ECU can accommodate the knock below a paramter that is setup in the firmware. By introducing 87 may be well below the adjustable parameters. Like I said it is how the manufacturer has written it's firmware.

You quoted all the tech words out of the glossary of some document but can you tie it together! "ME THINK NOT"

Once again am not saying the Porsceh ECU cannot, all I am saying is to many speculative comments are being made without knowing the manufacturers parameters. Nowhere in any of their documentation do they say you can run 87 as other manufactures say you can!

So until someone can provide Porsches acceptance of using 87 then there is no need to continue with this!

Enough said!

This thread needs to be closed!

Actually the current knock sensors are broadband single wire and flat response two wire knock sensors. My response is up to date. If the sensor was responded to for all harmonic frequencies it would never allow the engine to run at it's full potential since engines harmonics are not all due to knock. They still have their specified window! Therefore a base line has to be configured. Once agan a knock snsor is not the cure all!

Think this topic is worn out!

Does anyone happen to know what the highest octane is that you should run in a 2002 boxster S? I can only get 91 in CA but do have race gas available locally. I think it's over 100 octane though. Would there be any noticable advantage to running a higher octane if I could keep within the maximum? I don't go to the track, just on the street.

Thanks,

Ryan

2002 boxster S

Palm Springs, CA area

rslinger - I do not have any info to say if anything above 93 will net better performance. ihave heard that 100 in higher temop condition works well, but no validation if iti s true. I know if you go too much it will go negative. Think you might want to ask the question on some porsche race sites

I had the Conti Conta 2's they don't last and get noisey. Carrera's are known for rear wear out quicker than fronts. Withthat said I have gone to a set of Bridgestone Potenza RE960AS Pole Position, which supposedly have 40 K tread wear out guarantee. I can't say at this time since they are to new, that they will make 40K. I can say they out perform the Conti Con 2's, from a handling, noise and ride perspective.

So when the Contis are gone take a look at them. Tire rack has very high marks for these.

KevinMac, I was considering the RE960AS as you said but they are not approved by Porsche. I was trying to stay with what they approved. However, since I have a wide temperature variation to deal with throughout the year I don't think it is feasible to have two sets of wheels and tires. Did you switch to the Bridgestone all around or just on the rears? Have you noticed any difference in handling?

My opinion the Porsche approved which has the "N" designation just means that tires meet the design criteria of the Porsche design. This by no means that the tires without the "N" designation could not exceed the performance criteria. I don't think you will suffer in anyway not using "N" designated tires.

I can understand if you live in an area that needs an all season recomendation which would dictate an all season high perfomance tire. No I did not go with 4, I still have the Conti's on the front since they still have plenty of tread. After a few months with the Bridgestones on the rear

and Conti's on the front and have expierenced no problems in wet dry or handling.

I had the Conti Conta 2's they don't last and get noisey. Carrera's are known for rear wear out quicker than fronts. Withthat said I have gone to a set of Bridgestone Potenza RE960AS Pole Position, which supposedly have 40 K tread wear out guarantee. I can't say at this time since they are to new, that they will make 40K. I can say they out perform the Conti Con 2's, from a handling, noise and ride perspective.

So when the Contis are gone take a look at them. Tire rack has very high marks for these.

I bow to the self proclaimed experts who know nothing about the mapping software and insist that the scanner watching the sensors tell the combustion profiles! No longer worth the discussion! Do what you like it's your vehicle!

Such a stubborn, condescending view begs for other opinions. Here's my 2 cents. It doesn't take a "self proclaimed expert" to know that there is fuel in the tank without using a dipstick. The expert can monitor the fuel level gauge and if there is no reason to disbelieve the gauge, he can tell the level from it.

Much in the same way, a "self proclaimed expert" can monitor the "combustion profiles" (boy there's a twenty dollar phrase) by monitoring knock sensors and ignition timing "profiles". The knock sensor feedback is quite simply a monitor of "There is detonation" or "There is no detonation". Period. It's quite simple and does not lend itself to any exotic study of thermodynamics, wave theory, or "combustion profiles".

I'm sure that your answer will be that I myself am also a self proclaimed expert but in fact I have gleaned this knowledge from schooling and 30 years experience engineering race engine parts and systems.

Sorry for the pointed response but your attitude begged for it.

Pointed response or not my response was based on the attitude of another!

That's interesting, you ever write any mapping firmware! Have you ever developed digital interface of OBDII diagnostics into a technician terminal. Have you ever wriiten or even seen tuning software and remote engine monitoring software?

Well I probably know the answer to that, and if you can just say that since you have a knock sensor that is the cure all, you are way off.

The limitations of the maps can only go to the a low threshold! So depending on the threshold written into the firmware will be the determing factor.

Even if the knock sensor continues to hear it does not mean that detonation will cease! A knock sensor is tuned to listen

in the 5khz range. Combustion chamber cylinder bore and temperature are charateristics that vary knock frequencies. Engines typically have muliple vibrations modes. So in reality depending on the condition the design or location of the sensor may not pick up all the knock. It is not unusual for one cylinder to knock and not be detected due to the transfer function of the cylinders and engine characteristics. In addition, the base reference of the sensor has to be set low for knock detectiion above idle speed. There may be times a knock sensor to shut off above 4000rpm make more dependency on the ECU maps to prevent knock in this range. The sensor can actually not pick up 100% of the knock based on variables mentioned. So now add in 87 octane which may or may not cusae issues! Thus my point in my posts. Another point od f which I agree that a knock sensor goes from base to no knock condition, but that means nothing based on the design and other factors mentioned and if the maps cannot correct then it makes no difference if it hears it or not. The Maps are wrtten for fuel economy, emission standards and performance. With all factors considerd. The outcome is a limitation of the stock firmware.

As an engineer one would think you know this!

Nice try though!

Since this all came from someone making a mistake on using the correct octane, the article I referenced in my above posts backs that 87 octane will have it's problems in a Porsche 996.

Have a great day!

So let me get this straight you are comparing a Mazda CX 7 a passenger crossover vehicle vs a performance car, wow! We are talking Porsche a performace vehicle!. Once again would you really put 87 octane in Carrera turbo "street engine"?

If the tank is empty, and only regular is available, yes, absolutely YES..!!

Well if you don't know what a performane tune is, which there are many avialable for Porsche, how can you comment on the acceptable fuels to use?

NO comment.

Oh btw if I remember correctly most European countries have a minimum or "regular"@ 95 RON which is = to 91 in the US. Kinda matches the octane recommendatin in the owners manual 91 to 93!

Funny how that works out!

Yes, LOL, it is funny, truly FUNNY..

"to provide optimum performance and fuel economy Porsche recommends unleaded premium fuel with an octane rating of 98 RON (93 CLC or AKI)."

"be assured that your vehicle will operate properly with octane numbers of at least 95 RON (90 CLC or AKI)....

So, by your "standards" when we in the US fuel with premium we're really using "regular" as defined by Porsche..??

Would that mean their premium is ~100 octane....??

With that said, all I am saying is I would not make any speculation on using 87 unless Porsche says it's okay, or someone has looked at the maps! To just randomly say you can use it is nothing but speculation.

Check this out from PCA - looks like what I have been saying.

http://www.pca.org/tech/tech_qa_question.a...9-50218293CFDC}

wwest - think you just like to argue for the sake of an arguement.

Your the one that posted low octane in Europe. As I posted their low octane is = to 91 in the US = within spec of the porsche spec! So what's your point!

Point me to where does Porsche says regular, all my documents including the maintenance manual says Ron 98 = 93 Ron+Mon.

That's what's funny you are all over the place with your comments!

Low octane 87 in a twin turbo, that answers it all. Thanks for such a competant answer! Now I know where your knowledge really lies! Your true colors are really showing now! Nice job!

I hope the mods are not the reason you can stay with a GTO, hopefully the GTO you are talking about is the 400HP version, since the published specs are pretty close with the 996 edging the goat out in 0-60. ( based on published #'s after test drives)

Anyway be careful with the cold air intakes, some suck in hot air and may cause a lower output. I agree the published numbers adverised by OEM mods is over exagerated.

It cost me about $120 before shipping. Use the collision catalog search boxes. Bought it here: http://www.trademotion.com/partlocator/ind...CFReQGgodj2UgCA

It's not a tuff thing to do, everything snaps off just becareful when removing the storage box switch and wire. If the current storage box has the old hinge set, you will also have to buy the hinge kit, not expensive.

Use the instuctions to change the shifter out to a short shift kit. It has all you need to remove the console. My only suggestion is when you remove the side cover that encloses the handbrake lever. Wrap the lower section with tape. This will keep it from getting scratched when removing and replacing the console.

O3 996tt- dash and center counsil has some nicks from rubbing key's and other assorted things. I am wondering if there is a touch up kit that exists for this type of thing?

Good luck, I searched high and low and could not find a match (graphite grey), wound up buying a new center console, which really was not that much of a wallet hit.

So let me get this straight you are comparing a Mazda CX 7 a passenger crossover vehicle vs a performance car, wow! We are talking Porsche a performace vehicle!. Once again would you really put 87 octane in Carrera turbo "street engine"?

Well if you don't know what a performane tune is, which there are many avialable for Porsche, how can you comment on the acceptable fuels to use?

Oh btw if I remember correctly most European countries have a minimum or "regular"@ 95 RON which is = to 91 in the US. Kinda matches the octane recommendatin in the owners manual 91 to 93! Funny how that works out!

With that said, all I am saying is I would not make any speculation on using 87 unless Porsche says it's okay, or someone has looked at the maps! To just randomly say you can use it is nothing but speculation.

Check this out from PCA - looks like what I have been saying.

http://www.pca.org/tech/tech_qa_question.a...9-50218293CFDC}

Hey all, got a 2000 996 C2 Tip with 98k miles on it. Runs very well no issues. Recently I have started to notice a ticking sound on start up. I think it stays there although somewhat lower sound after warming up. I assume this to be a lifter not pumping up correctly. That doesn't concern me terribly. What does is the occasional romp I have at higher RPMs I get a very pronounced harmonic vibration when I stay at certain RPM levels. Mostly goes away when accelerating\decelerating but comes back when RPMs are fairly constant at >2500. Normally, my drive is in full auto on the way home so the car rarely gets up to 3000. I know it is not a good idea to not "wring it out" every now and then. But when I run the RPMs way up this vibration really booms in the cabin. My assumption is that something is not right with a bearing. Anyone know a way to check this out?

PS, no oil loss whatsoever. What I put in, stays in for full 15k miles until next oil change.

Thanks

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I bow to the self proclaimed experts who know nothing about the mapping software and insist that the scanner watching the sensors tell the combustion profiles! No longer worth the discussion! Do what you like it's your vehicle!

Okay, question for you, then.

With the A/F mixture and ignition timing "mapping software" so easily malable/modified and regular fuel less expensive and such a common thing why wouldn't the parametric mapping ALWAYS allow for the use of regular fuel. What's the harm...??

Wouldn't it take a somewhat idiotic engineering team, engineering management, to overlook such capability..??

Allow an engine, "street" engine, to be damaged as the result of an owners simple oversight/mistake...??

NOT..!!

No because they already specified the fuel that should be used! Porsche and other performance cars are fighting the battle between performance and emissions! To just say you can use this fuel and to design with such wide paramaters is a false understanding!

It's a myopic view to think it's as easy as your comment!

Those who buy these cars are expeced to want the performance, therefore the price of fuel is not a factor. If that is your concen then go buy a honda!

With your logic on street engine, then 87 must be okay in a non natually aspirated street engine too? Hey the guy made a mistake and put in the wrong fuel!

Go try and get a warranty claim done if it's found out the so called street engine did not use the recommended fuels!

BTW when you go get a tune, guess what, they tune to the fuel being used. So turn the question around, if you get a performance tune what makes you think you can step down from the design? It is a bad assumption on your part!

So to respond on your comment NOT! Nice try though!

I bow to the self proclaimed experts who know nothing about the mapping software and insist that the scanner watching the sensors tell the combustion profiles! No longer worth the discussion! Do what you like it's your vehicle!

This is all speculation, anyone without seeing the maps to say the computer will detune to 87 is just making assumptions. I believe it will to 91 but since the recommended is 93, I would not make that assumption!

I know for a fact that maps that I was involved with Ford and GM, the threshold was not that robust to allow such a wide margin of error. Yes it will attempt to retard the spark, and adjust the fuel flow, but some maps are not that robust to get you that far below the recommendation.

You really don't need to take the time to tell us just how far behind the technology "curve" Ford and GM are, we're all, hopefully, very well aware of that. Even my '92 LS400, with the old style resonant knock/ping sensors, has enough range to adjust for regular fuel.

Based on the lower limit of not allowing it to detune that far it can only offset some detonation.

BTW on some cars high speed detonation may not even be audible!

So unless someone can show the actual fuel map. I would not speculate on anything!

And just how many of us out here in the peanut gallery do you think would even understand the actual fuel map....??

So why take a chance!

And wouldn't it be somewhat idiotic for Porsche to design a car that didn't have enough parametric mapping range, A/F mixture and/or timing adjustment, for use in a country/region/continent where premium fuel is often not available...??

Your right and premium is not available in all areas, that's why Porsche says you can run 91.

Droping 3 points is ususally not an issue, but 6 can be!

Sensors are not going to tell you anything other than they are working and depending on the one you have you will see what the outputs are. Will not tell you the combustion profile!

You have no clue by looking at a scanner and seeing if the map is at it's lowest limit unless of course it has the map download capabilities.

As I said it's all speculation!

You have to look at he actual maps! Until someone can provide the actuall map parameters, I would not stand by that 87 can be run without any damage.

But then again it's your cars do what you want!

With over 11:1 even with low ambient temps the combustion temps are higher. So lets not go that route.

Yes i have a scanner.

This is all speculation, anyone without seeing the maps to say the computer will detune to 87 is just making assumptions. I believe it will to 91 but since the recommended is 93, I would not make that assumption!

I know for a fact that maps that I was involved with Ford and GM, the threshold was not that robust to allow such a wide margin of error. Yes it will attempt to retard the spark, and adjust the fuel flow, but some maps are not that robust to get you that far below the recommendation.

Based on the lower limit of not allowing it to detune that far it can only offset some detonation.

BTW on some cars high speed detonation may not even be audible!

So unless someone can show the actual fuel map. I would not speculate on anything!

So why take a chance!

Hate to tell ya, Porsche does not recommend anything past 18's on a 2000 C2. The suspension is calibrated.

Read this:

http://www.europeancarweb.com/tech/0505ec_...ires/index.html

I accidently filled up with regular unleaded (87 octane) rather than the recommeded super unleaded (91 octane). I know the computer will adjust the timing so that the engine will run on lower octane (albeit with less HP), but will the prolonged period of running a full tank of 87 hurt the engine in any way?

The 996 owner's manual says that the car will operate normally on at least 95 RON (I think 87 octane is about 91 RON?), so that doesn't sound good. Should I siphon out the gas?

No. It will not hurt the car.

I disagree, if the computer does not have enough threshold to detune to 87, yes it could hurt the car by detonating. Just the mere fact you are over 11:1 compression ratio, I don't think the maps will accomadate 87. So throw in octane booster and when down to 1/2 tank fill it with 93 and octane and booster again.

Do not drive it hard until you can at least get 93 and octane booster in together.

If you can get a code reader and post the codes, that will help a great amount. I had a similar problem and it was the coil pack. They are very picky and even if they are new, they need to be installed vey carefully. I would guess it can be as simple as removing the coil pack on 5 and then reinserting the coil. Cylinder 5 is acutally a tough one as far as the muffler bracket being in the way, so it is probably just the way that they put it back on. Easily can be an intermittent problem.

It could be just a bad connector to the coil that is causing you grief!

Good chance the OPC got it right, a faulty valve lifter. It is not necessary to change all the lifters, only the faulty one is needed. The engine can stay in place to do the job, just removing the exhaust and let sink the engine on the rear a little.

If that were the case you would have a noisey valve train, and this was not in the post. If the noise is not present, it sounds to me they are just throwing parts at it. Based on the post, I would be very skeptical about the diagnosis.

Hi

I have just bought my first Porsche 911 and I have a bit of a problem. After 30km from the dealership the enginelight started, that is not good so I took the car to Porsche Center and they plugged the car in and got missfiring in cyl 5 and therefore they changed the sparkplug and the coil (i think coil is the word?) and the car started up and runned fine. Now a week later and 600km more after a big rainfall the englinelight went on again :( so another turn to PC and again missfiring in cyl 5. Accordingly to them they now need to take down the engine and change all the valves for a totalcost of 5500 euro.

Right now the independant Dealership from where I bought the car is refusing to handling the problem because that I have bought a used car with no factory warranty

Is this normal? This car is in extremly good condition externally and internally, fully served att porsche and has now gone 65000km on the speedomeeter.

/Magnus who mayby should have kept my SLK55 :huh:

If the rainfall was really part of the problem, it surely would not be the valves. Maybe the rain and the problem are coincedental, Was a compression check done and if so what were the numbers?. Where there any codes beside #5 missfire.

I would get a second opinion!

Thanks - appreciate the insights.

I checked the receipt and the dealer had put in 15x50 Mobil 1 at last oil change. Was planning to change it after the Summer, but alas, I didn't need to do that. Just needed to mop up a few gallons from the garage floor and then the street once the flatbed wrecker showed up and we pushed it to the street. I will definitely not run that viscosity in the future, as it's not THAT hot here.

Sent a PM regarding price (roughly, in the $41k range). Thanks for the good wishes - I'll keep my fingers crossed for a new engine, and will post back once I hear from the dealer.

Wow a Porsche dealer put in an oil that was not on the recommended Porsche oil list?

Perry: Interesting perspective, but I have to admit that as I was reading it, I found myself chasing my tail a bit...but then again, my specialty isn't in petroleum products.

It did seem logical that if oil is geting to the right place, it might be consumed at a higher rate than that which doesn't reach the innermost recesses.....but then again, my 930 turbo had been using the Castrol GTX 20-50 and has been running just fine for over 20 years.....I think the compression ratios are about the same for the 996TT (0W-40) and the 930....so I was focused on a lubricant that would be most beneficial for the turbos which spin at an ungodly rate....hence the need to keep the oil clean and changed regularly within the established scheduled cycles.

The dimension I never considered was the actual compositional makeup of the oils and the additives...which truthfully, I still don't understand very well....but this thread has been most revealing and informative for the neophye that I am.

Perry - I agree with you when you compare base number as the temp rises Mobil 1 0w- 40 compared to 5w- 50 has a higher viscosity index number at 100 deg C. The discussion was around Mobil 1.

0w - 40

cSt @ 100º C 14

5w- 50

cSt @ 100º C 17.4

Yes the center console is plastic, and if you want yours painted as Loren said it needs to be preped. The actual paint the factory uses is not really a paint as we know it. It actually is a coating more like a dye type coating.

http://www.bumperplugs.com/BPindex.html