Engine Limits vs Power -- Sharing Some Knowledge
I highly doubt that the cylinder pressure in and of itself was the problem(600 ft lbs at 4k on a a Mustang dyno). My car was making in excess of 700rwhp on pump fuel for 8k miles with no ill effects. I believe on the Porsche engines that rpmXtorque is more of a problem than solely increased cylinder pressures at low rpm.
Justin
Justin
The graph above is from one of our recent turbo builds, at what we feel is a "safe" power level for a tiptronic car. I posted it at the request of Milou.
Registered User
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 157
From: NJ/NY
Rep Power: 60
As I'm sure you are aware of, the strength of the internal components of the motor are better defined in terms of torque, making it far more difficult to extrapolate the component's true exposure to torque due to the requirement of knowing the RPM at which the horsepower figures were reached. Many enthusiasts are unaware of this, therefore making statements such as tuner xyz was capable of reaching abc horsepower without knowing the entire story.
I think if you expand on this in another thread much of the misinformation and incorrect assumptions will be alleviated.
I think if you expand on this in another thread much of the misinformation and incorrect assumptions will be alleviated.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,321
From: Fastlane USA
Rep Power: 246
TTdude....as I said much earlier on, we believe that the failure was due to the cylinder pressures created by generating over 700whp. I also never said pump gas specifically was the cause. Pump gas or race gas is irrelevant. BOTH our pump and race tunes operate safely free of knock with full control in place, again as I've mentioned 3 or 4 times. I'm not defining an absolute #, by any means. Yes, our 68mm turbos make a TON of tq down low, and they also make a TON of tq up top and good hp across the entire range. But isn't that what you want, the largest area under the curve possible?? Why tune a car with peak power that comes in for only a couple hundred rpm?? Why have 250 more peak hp then tq?? Our 68mm turbos don't "go wild" by any means. 
The fact is that they work...they make tremendous amounts of power across a VERY large portion of the rpm range. Could this be a contributing factor to why the rods bent at this power level while others don't? I suppose so....but the question once again becomes WHY? Why have such a large deviance between hp and tq? And why make a peak # at peak rpm? It just doesn't make for good driving car.
The fact of the matter is that the car is FAST with these turbos, even safely running 670awhp (which is the max we tune to without internals). In fact, a customer of ours in Turkey recently ran 5.5 60-130 with this exact kit at that power level. Faster then several cars equipped with GT or alpha turbos. Faster then all but a small handful of other cars. So my question is....in the real world...WHY need more power anyway, when roughly 650 to the wheels with VTG's gets you a USABLE power range that's faster then cars allegedly generating 200 peak hp more??? Riddle me that....
The fact is that they work...they make tremendous amounts of power across a VERY large portion of the rpm range. Could this be a contributing factor to why the rods bent at this power level while others don't? I suppose so....but the question once again becomes WHY? Why have such a large deviance between hp and tq? And why make a peak # at peak rpm? It just doesn't make for good driving car.The fact of the matter is that the car is FAST with these turbos, even safely running 670awhp (which is the max we tune to without internals). In fact, a customer of ours in Turkey recently ran 5.5 60-130 with this exact kit at that power level. Faster then several cars equipped with GT or alpha turbos. Faster then all but a small handful of other cars. So my question is....in the real world...WHY need more power anyway, when roughly 650 to the wheels with VTG's gets you a USABLE power range that's faster then cars allegedly generating 200 peak hp more??? Riddle me that....
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset" class=alt2>Originally Posted by Tom@Champion
During it’s daily use and prior dyno testing, the car was running a pump gas program at 725awhp, which is what we’re confident caused the damage.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 79
From: Massachusetts
Rep Power: 20
kercar is stock motor from what I have read with a built tip, and his car is tuned for ~670awhp which is what champion feels is within the safe limits of the motor. I don't think champion has done a built motor car yet, but they are working on the yellow GT2 for slow911tip.
The 725awhp car was owned by champion as a test mule.
The 725awhp car was owned by champion as a test mule.
Why is 700rwhp on a stock motor "living on the edge"? I've had my car 4.5 years and after a year of owning it the car was making 650-700rwhp on high boost on the old turbo kit. The car has made upwards of 900rwhp on this kit (weather dependent... Remember we made 868rwhp on 26psi in the 60s; I ran 29-30psi in freezing temps...). The motor was running fine when the motor started to be built. When I built the motor I figured it was just time to do it all because the power I was making was WAY to boring! I also rev'ed the car to 7800rpm for over a year. Still no issues...
Tom, the questions from Justin were just to help explain things. He wasn't trying to take any thing away from the post. So hard to correct the mis-information posted from many people on this thread. But regardless of you all's credit and his records a reputation too people will still question. Even when they themselves have no real experience other than reading forums and what people have told them. Oh well I guess that's just a part of the forums.
Tom, the questions from Justin were just to help explain things. He wasn't trying to take any thing away from the post. So hard to correct the mis-information posted from many people on this thread. But regardless of you all's credit and his records a reputation too people will still question. Even when they themselves have no real experience other than reading forums and what people have told them. Oh well I guess that's just a part of the forums.
For the sake of comparison, I should mention that the run I posted just above here with our 68's was done on 93 octane pump gas. Also, I want to make it VERY CLEAR that the dyno I posted above DOES NOT represent the limit of our 68mm turbos, it's simply the power level we deem safe. It is also NOT the car from which the damage rods were removed.
Nonetheless, milou's results are certainly very impressive, especially for 63mm VTG's!
Tom, Below is exactly what you said. How else are we supposed to interpret this? You say fuel choice is irrelevant but I don't think you really mean that. So from your statement below, the car is making over 700 whp on your "pump" program on vtgs? Is this really true? Kercar's 5.5 time is very impressive, especially with two people on board but we're all waiting for his time with one on board. Does he have a built motor as I don't recall him stating so? I know he has an upgraded tranny since that's what everyone had been focusing on but what about the motor? Certainly with those numbers he is over 700+ whp. You sell your 68 mm kits to customers without building the motor when you think 700 is living on the edge? So many questions when you drill down and still a mystery...
KerCar's car is our straight, off-the-shelf 68mm VTG turbo kit, stock engine, upgraded tranny, with our 675awhp GIAC tune (both ECU and TCU). No more then that at all. In fact....when he did his 5.5 run, he wasn't even using race gas. He's also using someone else's headers, someone else's exhaust....so it's not even our complete kit. If you don't believe this, you can ask him yourself.
I'm not sure what you're agenda is TTdude...but honestly....you seem to constantly suggest I'm lying or pick apart every detail of every sentence I write, trying to find some error in my wording. If you think we've masterminded some grand scheme of international trickery to make KerCar's car (which is 1000's of miles away from us) go exceptionally fast while hiding his power output, then I'm really not sure what I can say to convince you otherwise. The only thing I'm guilty of is being brutally honest about what we do here at Champion. Maybe you should just come out from behind your screen name and speak what's REALLY on your mind.
Last edited by Tom@Champion; Apr 26, 2011 at 10:45 AM.
Registered User
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,768
From: Cyprus
Rep Power: 111
Thank you for posting them for me Tom, if you could post the datalogs also 
By the way dynojet can be set to apply limitations of STD,EEC,SAE, and DIN. On din I did 680whp but the equal to American dyno settings is SAE almost identical
By the way dynojet can be set to apply limitations of STD,EEC,SAE, and DIN. On din I did 680whp but the equal to American dyno settings is SAE almost identical
no problem milou. I'm working on the datalogs now. I have to convert the format...it may take a bit. I'm sending you back an email...
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,671
From: Athens
Rep Power: 135
Since you mention it, let's talk about the metzger engine. The term "metzger" refers to the design and layout of the engine, not the specific engine in any of these cars. The most developed variation of the metzger engine from Porsche is arguably the GT1-98 which was used in 3 different cars: the Joest open ****pit (<---haha, darn censors) prototype from 1998, the GT1-98, and the Champion Lola. In 1998 when Porsche pulled the plug on the GT1 project, Champion bought ALL of the remaining GT1-98 engines, and ALL of the remaining inventory of parts. The point here is that there are very few people in the world that have as much experience with the GT1-98 engine as the ones engineering and testing our aftermarket parts in this building.
For starters, there are very few pieces from the actual GT1-98 engine that are the same as the 'metzger' production car engine. For example, the GT198 engine has Pankl titanium connecting rods, which the production version obviously does not. Those rods were lifed-out at 6000km, precisely the distance traveled during one race at LeMans. Pistons, cylinder studs, valvetrain, camshafts, the list goes on....none of these parts are the same as what's in the 996TT or the 997TT that you drive. Even something as simply as the engine block, which looked identical, was cast from a completely different material and included 100's of machining details which, again, are not present in the production engine. We could talk about the internal oiling system, but that would then require an entirely new thread.
The point? Many people think that we (Champion) are new to the game, simply because we didn't make consumer performance parts for the 997TT until only about 2 years ago. The reality is that we have been at the forefront of development on the GT-198 motor right up to the point that Porsche stopped developing it themselves.
So as you read on in this thread, or refer back to earlier posts, you can either continue to doubt the knowledge base that we have, or you can give some credit where credit's due. Choice is yours...but again, for the ump-teenth time....this post was only put up to SHARE info. If there's more info you want....ask and I'll do my best to gather it.
What's happening is exactly what I expected, to be honest. Hopefully the "insecurity" you're referring to is not from us? If there's some info you want that's not been posted...just ask. There's nothing to hide here.
Thanks Neil. I appreciate your comments, and I think it's equally valuable to hear experiences from other tuners that agree with our findings, as well as those that don't. The performance of your kit is extremely impressive...hats off for that. Unfortunately, it seems that we only tend to read about other's successes on the forums, and rarely their failures, which is what prompted this thread in the first place. The spirit of this thread was simply to share some knowledge that we consider to be true, which is something we like to do, not in any way to discredit anyone else's success. Some will agree, some won't. Some will point the finger at tuning. That's all fine. When I decided to put up a post like this, I knew very well that their would be opinions flying in from all directions.
That being said, I wanted to talk a little more about the issue of knock that keeps coming up. I also wanted to make a distinction between how knock control functions on an ECU-controlled boost setup (VTG turbos) versus non ECU-controlled boost (GT turbos) on the 997 Turbo. With GIAC's software, knock control remains fully intact, as I mentioned before. So let's say you get a batch of bad gas and the sensors begin to detect knock. Several things start to happen immediately. First, boost is reduced, which obviously cuts power output. Next, the software will pull timing and add fuel. Lastly, the ECU will actually close the throttle plate. All of these measures are left at factory levels for the specific reason of protecting the engine. Once you replace the VTG turbocharger with a non-VTG (GT, Alpha, etc), the ECU no longer controls boost. So in the same scenario (you get a bad batch of gas), you'll pull timing, add fuel....but the ECU will not have the ability to reduce boost because it's being externally controlled. In this scenario, if the driver doesn't notice something is wrong and pull back off the throttle, cylinder pressure will soar because of the constant boost pressure, and the consequences could be dangerous.
Some have asked to see pictures of the pistons that came out of this car. Here's a few. Pardon the size, I wanted to post them as large as possible so you could see the detail. As you can see, no signs of detonation.
Believe me when I say that between the experience of GIAC and our engineers here, every tune we run is carefully written and as safe as humanly possible. After all, we offer a full warranty on any car equipped with one of our power kits, so they are built to be safe, and to last. So back to the original topic of how these rods bent. We still hold firm that the engine should not be pushed beyond that level on stock internals. Obviously, based on the post by Neil above, it CAN be done. But we still firmly believe that it shouldn't.
This is just the opinion of our engineers here at Champion. For those who don't trust or believe the information we provide, there are other options out there. That's what makes the Porsche aftermarket so exciting....choices.
) prototype from 1998, the GT1-98, and the Champion Lola. In 1998 when Porsche pulled the plug on the GT1 project, Champion bought ALL of the remaining GT1-98 engines, and ALL of the remaining inventory of parts. The point here is that there are very few people in the world that have as much experience with the GT1-98 engine as the ones engineering and testing our aftermarket parts in this building.For starters, there are very few pieces from the actual GT1-98 engine that are the same as the 'metzger' production car engine. For example, the GT198 engine has Pankl titanium connecting rods, which the production version obviously does not. Those rods were lifed-out at 6000km, precisely the distance traveled during one race at LeMans. Pistons, cylinder studs, valvetrain, camshafts, the list goes on....none of these parts are the same as what's in the 996TT or the 997TT that you drive. Even something as simply as the engine block, which looked identical, was cast from a completely different material and included 100's of machining details which, again, are not present in the production engine. We could talk about the internal oiling system, but that would then require an entirely new thread.
The point? Many people think that we (Champion) are new to the game, simply because we didn't make consumer performance parts for the 997TT until only about 2 years ago. The reality is that we have been at the forefront of development on the GT-198 motor right up to the point that Porsche stopped developing it themselves.
So as you read on in this thread, or refer back to earlier posts, you can either continue to doubt the knowledge base that we have, or you can give some credit where credit's due. Choice is yours...but again, for the ump-teenth time....this post was only put up to SHARE info. If there's more info you want....ask and I'll do my best to gather it.
What's happening is exactly what I expected, to be honest. Hopefully the "insecurity" you're referring to is not from us? If there's some info you want that's not been posted...just ask. There's nothing to hide here.
Thanks Neil. I appreciate your comments, and I think it's equally valuable to hear experiences from other tuners that agree with our findings, as well as those that don't. The performance of your kit is extremely impressive...hats off for that. Unfortunately, it seems that we only tend to read about other's successes on the forums, and rarely their failures, which is what prompted this thread in the first place. The spirit of this thread was simply to share some knowledge that we consider to be true, which is something we like to do, not in any way to discredit anyone else's success. Some will agree, some won't. Some will point the finger at tuning. That's all fine. When I decided to put up a post like this, I knew very well that their would be opinions flying in from all directions.
That being said, I wanted to talk a little more about the issue of knock that keeps coming up. I also wanted to make a distinction between how knock control functions on an ECU-controlled boost setup (VTG turbos) versus non ECU-controlled boost (GT turbos) on the 997 Turbo. With GIAC's software, knock control remains fully intact, as I mentioned before. So let's say you get a batch of bad gas and the sensors begin to detect knock. Several things start to happen immediately. First, boost is reduced, which obviously cuts power output. Next, the software will pull timing and add fuel. Lastly, the ECU will actually close the throttle plate. All of these measures are left at factory levels for the specific reason of protecting the engine. Once you replace the VTG turbocharger with a non-VTG (GT, Alpha, etc), the ECU no longer controls boost. So in the same scenario (you get a bad batch of gas), you'll pull timing, add fuel....but the ECU will not have the ability to reduce boost because it's being externally controlled. In this scenario, if the driver doesn't notice something is wrong and pull back off the throttle, cylinder pressure will soar because of the constant boost pressure, and the consequences could be dangerous.
Some have asked to see pictures of the pistons that came out of this car. Here's a few. Pardon the size, I wanted to post them as large as possible so you could see the detail. As you can see, no signs of detonation.
Believe me when I say that between the experience of GIAC and our engineers here, every tune we run is carefully written and as safe as humanly possible. After all, we offer a full warranty on any car equipped with one of our power kits, so they are built to be safe, and to last. So back to the original topic of how these rods bent. We still hold firm that the engine should not be pushed beyond that level on stock internals. Obviously, based on the post by Neil above, it CAN be done. But we still firmly believe that it shouldn't.
This is just the opinion of our engineers here at Champion. For those who don't trust or believe the information we provide, there are other options out there. That's what makes the Porsche aftermarket so exciting....choices.
1) my post was not adressed to you...it was a reply to another member here...
2)since your team likes to be called porsche engineers from the early years and have bought all metzger engines left,I wonder how you managed to bent these rods...with all the knowledge and experience you have...
3)i never said 996/997 engines use same internal parts as le man engines...i said same internal design and structure...(short rods for minimum rotational speed,dry sump lubrication,etc)...
4)its good to have you share your knowledge with us,but its good for you to hear knowledge from others too...you never know what engineering degrees and experience others have...
5)if you like to start an engineering conversation,i would like to ask you about thermal efficiency...i.e. intercoolers...
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,321
From: Fastlane USA
Rep Power: 246
KerCar's car is our straight, off-the-shelf 68mm VTG turbo kit, stock engine, upgraded tranny, with our 675awhp GIAC tune (both ECU and TCU). No more then that at all. In fact....when he did his 5.5 run, he wasn't even using race gas. He's also using someone else's headers, someone else's exhaust....so it's not even our complete kit. If you don't believe this, you can ask him yourself.
That being said, we recently shipped our complete 68mm Billet VTG turbo package to a customer in Turkey for his '07 997 Turbo tiptronic (username KerCar). He already had a few of our parts on his car, but wanted to up the ante to the full kit. Last week, KerCar finally installed the parts on his car and did a few runs. Best run was 5.50 seconds 60-130 with a mixture of 97RON fuel and toluene, in GIAC race mode.
I'm not sure what you're agenda is TTdude...but honestly....you seem to constantly suggest I'm lying or pick apart every detail of every sentence I write, trying to find some error in my wording. If you think we've masterminded some grand scheme of international trickery to make KerCar's car (which is 1000's of miles away from us) go exceptionally fast while hiding his power output, then I'm really not sure what I can say to convince you otherwise. The only thing I'm guilty of is being brutally honest about what we do here at Champion. Maybe you should just come out from behind your screen name and speak what's REALLY on your mind.
Believe it or not, I have no agenda, nothing to hide, nothing personal against you or CMS, but I have trouble dealing with inaccuracies which seem to occur not infrequently in your posts. In the past, you've even apoligized for them and stated that you're learning on the job (to paraphrase) which I respect.
If you guys are such experts on these motors (which I'm not challenging) then why is it so difficult to get a straight answer as to what caused the problem here as there are a number of 700+ cars with unbent rods running around?
Last edited by TTdude; Apr 26, 2011 at 12:10 PM.
Don't need to ask him. You already said it yourself in a different thread. 97RON + Toluene = race quality fuel. If you read-on he even states he will try to get "pump" numbers.
I can't otherwise I will get a spanking by the moderators...
Believe it or not, I have no agenda, nothing to hide, nothing personal against you or CMS, but I have trouble dealing with inaccuracies which seem to occur not infrequently in your posts. In the past, you've even apoligized for them and stated that you're learning on the job (to paraphrase) which I respect.
If you guys are such experts on these motors (which I'm not challenging) then why is it so difficult to get a straight answer as to what caused the problem here as there are a number of 700+ cars with unbent rods running around?
Believe it or not, I have no agenda, nothing to hide, nothing personal against you or CMS, but I have trouble dealing with inaccuracies which seem to occur not infrequently in your posts. In the past, you've even apoligized for them and stated that you're learning on the job (to paraphrase) which I respect.
If you guys are such experts on these motors (which I'm not challenging) then why is it so difficult to get a straight answer as to what caused the problem here as there are a number of 700+ cars with unbent rods running around?
And the fact of the matter is this. You asked for a straight answer on what caused the bent rods and I've given it at least 10 times in this thread. Simply put, it's because we feel (<--opinion based on what we know) that over 700 WHEEL hp (and similar tq) is beyond the mechanical limitations of the stock parts. We warranty our cars, so they HAVE TO BE SAFE. Now, you (and many others) have pointed out that you disagree, and have even cited quite a few examples of cars with that amount of power that are running just fine. Absolutely fine, that's why there are other options out there besides Champion. But, I've answered the question. You may not like the answer...but that doesn't change the fact that it's been answered.
The fact of the matter is that other tuners HAVE had engine failures at that power level. Most just won't admit it, but I know for a fact that it has happened, even to some record holding 997TT's. But my point in this thread was NOT to call out any other tuners or make this us vs. them thread. 6Speed has enough of those already. I think the spirit of my original post hasn't changed....it's about sharing. You can respect our knowledge and experience, or you can dismiss it. Again, you have the choice, as does every other user here. But suggesting that I'm lying or providing inaccurate information just isn't fair.
And by the way, I think I should get some kind of 6Speed merit badge for having the patience of a saint!! LOL
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 650
From: Philadelphia, PA
Rep Power: 107
This is a really interesting thread... thumbs up, guys.
Everyone seems so focused on "what peak WHP level needs a built motor to be safe?" Is this even the right question?
Wouldn't it be more relevant to state "if you're planning on running more than xxx ft/lbs of WTQ below 4k rpm, you should consider a built motor for a greater margin of safety..." ???
Also, guys - isn't the reference to "Mezger" due to Hans Mezger, the Porsche engineer? Why do so many (including many Porsche owners) butcher the spelling of his last name? Do you also say "Poursh" instead of "Pourshuh"?
The engineers meant well. In the early 1970s, the new Porsche
911 also needed a new engine. For reasons of space, it was to re-
main a boxer engine with six cylinders—strong and expandable.
Hans Mezger, an engineer and the father of many successful
Porsche racing engines, joined the 911 team. He contributed his
experience from the Formula One, which had influenced his en-
tire working career.
-Christophorus 332, p.40
Everyone seems so focused on "what peak WHP level needs a built motor to be safe?" Is this even the right question?
Wouldn't it be more relevant to state "if you're planning on running more than xxx ft/lbs of WTQ below 4k rpm, you should consider a built motor for a greater margin of safety..." ???
Also, guys - isn't the reference to "Mezger" due to Hans Mezger, the Porsche engineer? Why do so many (including many Porsche owners) butcher the spelling of his last name? Do you also say "Poursh" instead of "Pourshuh"?
The engineers meant well. In the early 1970s, the new Porsche
911 also needed a new engine. For reasons of space, it was to re-
main a boxer engine with six cylinders—strong and expandable.
Hans Mezger, an engineer and the father of many successful
Porsche racing engines, joined the 911 team. He contributed his
experience from the Formula One, which had influenced his en-
tire working career.
-Christophorus 332, p.40
TTDude from what I have gathered based on your post you suffer from an old syndrome that I thought died a long time ago on this forum. If Todd K. at Protomotive didn't do it or say it, then it isn't true... Todd K. is and has been an incredible resource in this community but he is by far from the end all when it comes to anything tuning or Porsche related... I thought most of those users had broken away from that mentality...
You argue with EVERY other tuner sometimes about topics where you are wrong but you pick apart until they give up and say you win...
You argue with EVERY other tuner sometimes about topics where you are wrong but you pick apart until they give up and say you win...
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,321
From: Fastlane USA
Rep Power: 246
TTDude from what I have gathered based on your post you suffer from an old syndrome that I thought died a long time ago on this forum. If Todd K. at Protomotive didn't do it or say it, then it isn't true... Todd K. is and has been an incredible resource in this community but he is by far from the end all when it comes to anything tuning or Porsche related... I thought most of those users had broken away from that mentality...
You argue with EVERY other tuner sometimes about topics where you are wrong but you pick apart until they give up and say you win...
You argue with EVERY other tuner sometimes about topics where you are wrong but you pick apart until they give up and say you win...