I've seen people stall out their cars a couple of times going up a driveway (from stop slowly) or incline because they had to modulate the clutch with LWFW. We knew the cars had LWFW, but other bystanders just laughed because they thought the guys can't drive. Seriously.

 

smshirk,

Just had my LWFW installed yesterday and just as you explain.., That thing makes itself noticable just as the gains in performance. The car really pulls hard and the Dyno showed no loss in torque at all.
I have been thinking on that 200cc upgrade and and would really appreciate your feedback on your experience. Dyno, type of investment, we want to know it all!!!

Thanks,

Jose

 

Jose, Once I have the breakin period behind me I will get some good data to share. At this point I know for sure it is over 300 to the rear wheels but I don't have the final dyno sheets. Before the upgrade it was tested in multiple configurations to determine what intake, exhaust, and chip to use and to establish a base line for improvement. It showed 226 RWHP before the engine work, which is really high compared to most 986s out there.

 

Anybody make a Lightweight Flywheel for a 09 987.2 ?

T.C.

 

[quote=carr914;3119141]Anybody make a Lightweight Flywheel for a 09 987.2 ?

aascomotorsports.com

 

I have gotten used to the LWFW as far as driving goes, but my wife doen't fare so well, and in fact won't drive it. I'm really upset about that......not so much. The flywheel does make an irritating noise in neutral. Jake isn't sure why but all three he has installed make the same racket and so far there are no issues, other than learning to deal with starting out on a hill etc.

Having all the upgrades done at once leaves me wondering how much additional throttle response is due to the flywheel and whether or not it is worth the aggravation, but I am not apt to put the stock unit back in to find out. Overall, driving this car is akin to driving a supercar. I am getting 300 HP and somewhere close to that number in torque at the rear wheels, which is really what makes this car so special. I have done my own unofficial 0-60 time under 5 seconds over and over, which is even more remarkable since it so hard to get off the line. I've done 0-100 under 10 seconds but my brakes aren't good enough to repeat the 0-100-0 but once or twice in the space I have to operate in. I have all the break in miles completed now and it took a lot longer than expected due to bad weather this year. I've just about worn out my rear Dunlop Direzza's in 5k miles. The sound is absolutely intoxicating, and most of it is the intake. Even with the hardtop on as it usually is, wide open throttle reminds me of my muscle car days, but with an engine that virtually sings. The only sound better is a Ferrari. I can't keep myself from winding the gears at every opportunity and in the process I am getting very poor mileage. However, I can get close to 30 MPG on the highway, using cruise at 70 MPH, but I've only done that on one trip with my wife in the car. By myself I usually run at 75 in fourth and keep the car around 4k RPM.

My stated goals were:

(1) Engine to create power with a huge concentration of TORQUE in the midrange and top end. The engines main power band will be concentrated between 4,000 and 6,500 RPM with peak HP at or below 7,000 RPM.
(2) Engine to provide a level of 7,000 revolutions per minute(valve control) and to be mechanically sound for a gear shift of 7,000 RPM. The performance of this engine in the high rev ranges is to be understood as the most important part of the proposed engines power band.
(3) The engine will capitalize on torque more than overall peak HP.


The upgrades include:
Reconditioned crankshaft
o Upgraded connecting rod bolts
o New main and rod bearing inserts
o Blueprinted OE oil pump
o Modified 3.2 cylinder heads using all new and upgraded valves and components.
o Standard reground camshafts

Standard Features – Assembly/Tuning/Labor

o Level II prep and engine assembly
o Intermediate level dynamic balance (with index)
o Standard Tuning
o Standard Dynamometer Optimization

Ultra high performance LN Engineering “Nickies” Big Bore cylinders in 99mm.
o Custom JE Forged pistons with lightweight pins and low tension rings.
o Ultra-Duty Billet Chromoly Intermediate shaft bearing
with modified intermediate shaft
o Smooth-Flow spin on oil filter adaptor

o LN Engineering Billet Chromoly Connecting Rods
o Low temperature actuated thermostat update
o Race level Dynamic Balancing (with index)
o Cryogenic enhancement of valve train components
o Cold Air intake system (installed free of charge)
o Lightweight aluminum racing flywheel
o Custom Header system
o Performance engine and transaxle mounts

I left off the after market muffler, as there was little or no gain in HP and the drone at highway speed was not worth the sound at WOT, even though it did sound a lot better. Jake experimented with several different units. I would still like a different set up but not one that drones and most apparently do. Pedro's home made could be an option. Has anyone here tried it?

Lastly cost....Expensive and not much left out of a 20k dollar bill. Why would anyone spend that much on a car not worth that now and depreciating like a rock? When I got my first Boxster, MY 97 2.5 litre I loved the car, the sound, the handling but it just didn't have enough oompf. After Porsche came out with an underpowered Cayman is was obvious they were never going to make the mid engine design as powefull as a 911. I found an unusual color Boxster S for a fairly reasonable price in 2008 and planned to find a 3.6 996 motor to put in it. After reading the Excellence article late that year, and being less than 60 miles from Jake's shop I felt like it was a no brainer. Sure I spent more than I would have for a used motor, but what I have is far better and built by an expert using some of the best internals on the market. I plan to keep the car for as long as I am able to drive it, and if I do get tired of it, Jake says he can reduce the 12.75 to 1 compression and put on a single Turbo. First I have to upgrade the brakes and likely the suspension as well. I don't regret a single penny I've spent so far.

I should have fresh dyno results soon to go with my seat of the pants impressions after my next maintenance visit.

 

sounds like you have one hell of a car..what type of power would it put out with a turbo on it?? that would be insane..did you ever upload your dyno results?

 

I am guessing that the GT3RS gets off the line a few 10ths quicker than a standard GT3 because the car weighs less and the flywheel differences are a wash. Pure speculation on my part though
http://www.fastestlaps.com/compariso..._facelift.html

 

Aasco

 

There have been documented incidents of broken cranksshafts that have one thing in common....LWFW. The explanations I've read is that removing the dual mass FW causes the the transfer of harmonics throughout the drivetrain to the crank, resulting in the M96's less than stellar crankshaft material to break.

Optimally you might want to reconsider using a LWFW unless you plan to have your entire engine and drivetrain professionally balanced in the process of changing to a LWFW. There's a long thread on the 986 forum discussing multiple facets of the issue. The 986 forum reads from back to front, i.e the first post is at the end, the last post is the first one you see. http://986forum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20622

 

The reason for the Dual mass Fly is to keep the torsinal harmonics from the crank shaft from transferring through the driveline, not vice versa, i.e. noisy gear box. Remember the Carrera 3.2's with the G50 gearbox? Porsche realized noise was going to be an issue, especially as the displacement increased, so did the torsional moment in the crank shafts. As far as a higher incidence of breakage due to changing flywheels, I do not know of enough crank breakage due to flywheels, but more due to stress risers in the crank from machining.

 

Read the posts by Jake Raby in the thread I linked above. He's pretty astute with regards to Porsche engines, arguably one of the best in the country.

 

By the way. I have a LWFW in my 3.6 Boxster and just live with the noise, so I'm more than a little familiar with it. What Jake's learned, through taking them apart is that the M96 cranks are highly susceptible to breakage, particularly under stress, and in every case there was a LWFW involved that was put in as an after thought, not as part of an engine build. In my limited understanding that's what I gathered from the discussion, which is worth sharing I think. I don't think this holds true for anything other than M96 Porsche engines. The aircooled cranks were not made of the same material and therefore literally never did break unless there was a defect.