Jump to content

Welcome to RennTech.org Community, Guest

There are many great features available to you once you register at RennTech.org
You are free to view posts here, but you must log in to reply to existing posts, or to start your own new topic. Like most online communities, there are costs involved to maintain a site like this - so we encourage our members to donate. All donations go to the costs operating and maintaining this site. We prefer that guests take part in our community and we offer a lot in return to those willing to join our corner of the Porsche world. This site is 99 percent member supported (less than 1 percent comes from advertising) - so please consider an annual donation to keep this site running.

Here are some of the features available - once you register at RennTech.org

  • View Classified Ads
  • DIY Tutorials
  • Porsche TSB Listings (limited)
  • VIN Decoder
  • Special Offers
  • OBD II P-Codes
  • Paint Codes
  • Registry
  • Videos System
  • View Reviews
  • and get rid of this welcome message

It takes just a few minutes to register, and it's FREE

Contributing Members also get these additional benefits:
(you become a Contributing Member by donating money to the operation of this site)

  • No ads - advertisements are removed
  • Access the Contributors Only Forum
  • Contributing Members Only Downloads
  • Send attachments with PMs
  • All image/file storage limits are substantially increased for all Contributing Members
  • Option Codes Lookup
  • VIN Option Lookups (limited)

jaykay

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by jaykay

  1. jaykay
    Can anyone post up a photo montage of boxster rear bumpers from 2000 to 2004 (euro ones included)?
  2. jaykay
    Thanks Loren, thanks for the nudge..." I do have the TSB: it also includes a contradictory statement just below the one you quoted: "A mixed configuration is not permissible as the parts are mismatched with each other. The previous chain tensioner part number 996-105-180-54 is still available and maybe continue to continue to be used on engines that have the previous style chain drive installed." So I see the words may and not permissible all in the same statement. It seems that the statement above means that earlier engines would have to put in new cam drive components to be able to take advantage of the new tensioner type
  3. jaykay
    Just went pick up the most up to date chain tensioner for the IMS to crank chain. It's the one with the external spring. I was told that this spring type is not compatible with my early 2000 986S engine (dual row IMS bearing) as I have a roller chain type IMS drive and not the newer tooth drive chain. These changes ( tooth chain ) were instituted for engine numbers M96.21 67 1 02086 onward. Apparently they could tell from my VIN that mine was an earlier engine (not sure I trust vin based engine component listings where is the engine number again?). I believe this is covered in a bulletin 8/00 1551. So I belive some of you have put the newer style tensioner in irrespective of engine series and earlier chain type . Is it okay? Any issues? Did it help to chain rattle on startup? __________________
  4. jaykay
    Has anyone completed this installation? I have everything all built but cannot seem to hook the pedal box on to the base plate t-slot.....if you have done this work you will know what I am talking about....do I have to start filing...something?
  5. jaykay
    Interesting! It's not in reverse .....and there is no code or cel. I wish it was that easy
  6. jaykay
    I did some testing with fellow forum member and his new 74mm throttle body. His car (same as mine 2000 S) is really quick and accelerates amazingly well! Well I now know what I have been missing with the 74mm. The time in his car really accentuated the throttle response issue that I am having. In 3 or 4th gear at 3K it seems like it can take up to 3-5seconds to get over 4K! At 4.5K things wake up and seems fine but it is all too late! At 3K, I would look over and say I am “flat” (pedal to the floor board) here… and his reaction would usually be dismay… Could my used TB be defective? Is there a vario-cam problem? Is there an intake or exhaust acoustic problem? His car is pretty much stock with the exception of the TB and intake plumbing for it. The plumbing is potentially “smoother”. His engine is better maintained.. Mine is modified much more: short snorkel rougher prototype intake tube for the 74mm TB; 3.25” dia. rather than 3” secondary cat by-pass pipes stock S by-pass muffler (worse flow?) softronic tune leaky spark plug tubes/older plugs older air filter 5w40 oil….heavier I am wondering if the stock tune works better with the characteristics of the 74mm TB. Any thoughts?
  7. jaykay
    Has anyone gone and changed out their chain tensioners for the updated spring loaded type? I would think that the spring load would be a great feature to mitigate chain lash on start up, before oil pressure builds up. It seems Porsche has issued a TB regarding retro fit of the older tensioners; I am confused as to why this might be. Is there a dimensional, or stroke mismatch which is the issue? Gp1800.pdf _150_Carrera_New_Drive_Chain_and_Seal_for_Intermediate_Shaft.pdf
  8. jaykay
    Would anybody have the exact diameter of the 2000 986 S 3.2L MAF (mass air flow) housing? I also require a compatible (plug) and same diameter Bosh or aftermarket MAF with an appropriate mesh screen. I am getting information all over the map on what size it might be; I cannot access my airbox at present to measure it. It needs to be the dimension near the probe. Thanks, J
  9. jaykay
    Would anyone be able to tell me the exact diameter of a mass airflow housing for a 2000 986 S 3.2L? I also need an appropriate bosh or after market maf housing (with flow straightening mesh) of the same internal diameter (must accept the probe from the 986). Certain BMW ones are good candidates... Otheriwise I will have to get a custom tune for a larger 987 MAF housing.....assume its larger
  10. jaykay
    Would your 98 MAF housing diameter be the same for the 2000 S 3.2L. I am suprised to hear that there was such a variance in diameter. Would this not affect the reading and ECU?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.