Engine upgrades for Gen 1 Cayman - Page 2 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

Has anyone done this sort of thing? Ranging from a full transplant (to a 3.8) or turbo/supercharging? What are the thoughts of those who have mechanical knowledge or have had specialists do this, if it has been done at all? I love the shape of the Gen 1 over any of the gen 2 versions (they seem to have morphed into 911s!) and would prefer a serious upgrade from my current 3.4S, should I ever feel the need. I have chatted about this with the mate from whom I bought the car and I suspect he is in the market for doing such a thing. Buy a Gen 1 car for low money and do stuff to make it faster. That's got to be the way forward no? Any thoughts/experience/knowledge would be welcomed. At current resale values and given the condition and mileage of my design edition 1, there is a possibility that this can be done and no money need be lost, depending on your answers of course! Cheers all.

I considered giving my RS 60 to Parr to do a conversion on, but to do the full fat job was expensive but I guess if you like the car that much you won't mind forking out.

BIRMA said: I considered giving my RS 60 to Parr to do a conversion on, but to do the full fat job was expensive but I guess if you like the car that much you won't mind forking out. With a good geo and Super sports the RS60 is a sublime little car, so I wouldn't modify mine.. However out of curiosity what would you have changed at Parr?

The Cayman engine can be enhanced to extract additional performance. The saying is "Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?" Enhancements range from fitting a supercharger to the existing engine, rebuilding the engine to up its displacement and power output, transplanting in a larger engine from a higher performance model (read 911). There have been a few X51 even Turbo/GT3 engines fitted I suspect. Oh, and here in the USA I believe one company even offers a V8 engine transplant kit. So how fast do you want to go? Unless you are the world's best car salesman, almost certainly whatever money you put into the car you will not get out of the car when it comes to sell the car. To give you an idea of how bad this can be: Just yesterday in discussing with someone with an early 996 who was looking to put a Turbo engine in his car I came upon someone who had an early 996 with a Turbo engine installed. He bought the car with the engine already swapped and paid around $30K for the car. He mentioned the seller, who funded the swap, had around $57K in the car.

TheAnimal said: BIRMA said: I considered giving my RS 60 to Parr to do a conversion on, but to do the full fat job was expensive but I guess if you like the car that much you won't mind forking out. With a good geo and Super sports the RS60 is a sublime little car, so I wouldn't modify mine.. However out of curiosity what would you have changed at Parr? Yes I've had the geo done and despite the warranty run Pilot Super Sports. I was going to get Parr to do the Turbo job and modify the PASM altogether about £18K but still can't decide but probably won't. You see I set out to buy a 911 Turbo thought it was great but it was a sunny day and an RS60 was available for a test drive, must have been the sun on my head but I decided against the 911 Turbo. Problem is I still have the 911 Turbo itch which will have to be scratched but can't let go of the Boxster at the moment as I still like it too much.

BIRMA said: TheAnimal said: BIRMA said: I considered giving my RS 60 to Parr to do a conversion on, but to do the full fat job was expensive but I guess if you like the car that much you won't mind forking out. With a good geo and Super sports the RS60 is a sublime little car, so I wouldn't modify mine.. However out of curiosity what would you have changed at Parr? Yes I've had the geo done and despite the warranty run Pilot Super Sports. I was going to get Parr to do the Turbo job and modify the PASM altogether about £18K but still can't decide but probably won't. You see I set out to buy a 911 Turbo thought it was great but it was a sunny day and an RS60 was available for a test drive, must have been the sun on my head but I decided against the 911 Turbo. Problem is I still have the 911 Turbo itch which will have to be scratched but can't let go of the Boxster at the moment as I still like it too much. Thanks... 18k is a lot. If I was desperate I would sell mine for around 20 and add the 18k or so to get into a decent Spyder. Or... Wait for the new Spyder which my OPC confirmed will be announced in Q1 next year. Of course, the 981 will cost more and we do not know the spec as yet.

anonymous said: [redacted] And then you'll have a Cayman R - give or take :-) Still tempted by a lightweight flywheel, but will probably just do the geo before we head to Spa next year - finances and wife permitting!

anonymous said: [redacted] fun though and cheaper than buying a new car which feels like a play station game ;-)

anonymous said: [redacted] OP, have a word with the nice people at SVP : http://www.specialistvehiclepreparations.com/ and build something along the lines of this : http://www.specialistvehiclepreparations.com/porsc... I've driven this car, it's a blast (and nothing like a Cayman R) They've done all the R & D and taken the ball ache out of producing genuinely fast Caymans.

Thanks to all for your views and you as well Slippy. I shall check out those sites for sure.

I've no doubt there could be failures as a result of the differing torsional harmonics with the single mass flywheel, but I think I'd be more concerned about the list of other well documented "chocolate" issues than the crank or rods failing catastrophically. My guess is that the majority of dual mass flywheels specified these days are for driveline refinement rather than an attempt to compensate for intrinsically poor crankshaft design. The SVP car is delight to drive, and a large part of that comes from the improved engine response/lack of driveline inertia. Surprised/shocked you abandoned the Boxster fold, sounds like you have regrets ? What is that "grates" with the newer car ?

anonymous said: [redacted] Ah yes, all those f*cking clutch inhibitor switches, no doubt we have our friends across The Pond to thank for them, can't have individuals starting cars whilst they're in gear can we ! The 2.7 Caymans do get good reviews, their power and grip seem to be more evenly matched. I remember driving a Tip 2.7 Boxster for a couple of days whilst my 996 GT2 was being serviced several years ago, two more different cars you couldn't have had, one benign, able, confidence inspiring and willing you to wring its neck, the other belligerent, spikey and requiring you to be on your mettle constantly. The GT2 felt simply ballistic when I collected it, but as I travelled home along a stretch of A road road in N.Wales I knew well, albeit in damp conditions, I noted the Boxster had been able to maintain very similar speeds to the GT2 around the twistier bits without breaking sweat....... Hmmmm, have to agree, the 997/987 platform cars are just too accomplished to be "fun", no doubting their ultimate speed, grip or indeed ability, but that comes at the expense of tactility and a large slice of engagement.

I've got a Boxster with a Parr turbo conversion. The turbo conversion was done by a previous owner, so I can't tell you much about the process of getting it done. The car is 375 bhp and 322 lb ft, so it goes quite well. The best bit is the noise though. Others will say that the purity of the car goes with turbo charging, and they're probably right (I've never driven another Boxster or Cayman so can't tell you), but my car is a daily driver, so the extra power is good for overtaking. If you're ever in the Warwick area, let me know and I'll take you for a spin.

VladD said: I've got a Boxster with a Parr turbo conversion. The turbo conversion was done by a previous owner, so I can't tell you much about the process of getting it done. The car is 375 bhp and 322 lb ft, so it goes quite well. The best bit is the noise though. Others will say that the purity of the car goes with turbo charging, and they're probably right (I've never driven another Boxster or Cayman so can't tell you), but my car is a daily driver, so the extra power is good for overtaking. If you're ever in the Warwick area, let me know and I'll take you for a spin. There are also two very good articles from Evo magazine (I think) which after reading had me seriously thinking about doing it, but I would never see my money back in any way whatsoever and with my fickle approach to car ownership knowing me I'd buy something a year after spending mega bucks and that would upset me more than the sort of money you loose buying new cars.

BIRMA said: VladD said: I've got a Boxster with a Parr turbo conversion. The turbo conversion was done by a previous owner, so I can't tell you much about the process of getting it done. The car is 375 bhp and 322 lb ft, so it goes quite well. The best bit is the noise though. Others will say that the purity of the car goes with turbo charging, and they're probably right (I've never driven another Boxster or Cayman so can't tell you), but my car is a daily driver, so the extra power is good for overtaking. If you're ever in the Warwick area, let me know and I'll take you for a spin. There are also two very good articles from Evo magazine (I think) which after reading had me seriously thinking about doing it, but I would never see my money back in any way whatsoever and with my fickle approach to car ownership knowing me I'd buy something a year after spending mega bucks and that would upset me more than the sort of money you loose buying new cars. Here's the review of my car in "911 and Porsche World".

Nice article there Vlad. That has to be an amazing drive! I think that would be a cracking thing to do with the Cayman. Thanks for the post.

Every time I read that article I am so tempted, I love mid engined cars as my car history confirms and I like the fact this conversion is very much in line with why I bought one of the first M5's that landed in Britain in the early 80's it's a stealth car which has a real turn of speed. Still have my RS60 which for me is a record for keeping a car so you never know I might have to do it, don't really care about never getting my money back as I'm sure the big grin I get when I drive the Boxster may get wider.

Horses for courses obviously, but the big bore conversions seem to make the Cayman the car everyone thought/wanted it to be : http://www.autofarm.co.uk/projects/past/cars http://porschecarshistory.com/wp-content/old/lib/m...

BIRMA said: Every time I read that article I am so tempted, I love mid engined cars as my car history confirms and I like the fact this conversion is very much in line with why I bought one of the first M5's that landed in Britain in the early 80's it's a stealth car which has a real turn of speed. Still have my RS60 which for me is a record for keeping a car so you never know I might have to do it, don't really care about never getting my money back as I'm sure the big grin I get when I drive the Boxster may get wider. If I had sufficient funds and was so inclined - thankfully while I have the funds I'm not inclined -- I'd go with the bigger engine. There is no replacement for displacement. I'd leave the rest of the car as it came from the factory. You can remove weight but all that does is make the car look like it is a poorly repaired theft recovery. If you think 100lbs is all that is keeping you from a podium finish at the local track day you are in for a disappointment. I would *not* fit a lightweight flywheel. The dual mass flywheel also serves as a harmonic dampener. One highly regarded engine builder here in the States is on board against the lightweight flywheel and on this matter I agree with him 100%. I would *not* install an under drive pulley. This turns the water pump slower and the last thing you want to do to a big (or small) engine working hard it give it less coolant. You can see the effects of slower coolant flow by doing this "experiment". On stove burner place a flat bottomed pan with some water in it. Turn on the heat on high and watch the water. After a while you'll see small bubbles form on the bottom of the pan. Gently pick up the pan and move it in a circle to swish the water around. Note how hard you have to do this to remove the bubbles. Continue to let the pan and water get hotter. The bubbles get bigger. And it takes more force to loosen them. In your car's engine when it is working hard and the water pump is turning at its proper speed any bubbles that form are removed. With a slower turning water pump, maybe not. And if not these bubbles can form steam pockets which can result in localized overheating. Your big bore engine turns into a big pile of junk. And for naught. You ain't going to gain squat on the track with the smallest under drive pulley in the world, even if the engine would survive. The big bore engine looks factory, should be factory, nearly. This counts for something during the time you own the car -- I hate getting into a car with all kinds of loose edges and such due to a lousy modification for the sake of power/performance -- and counts for something when you go to trade in or sell the car. The big bore engine will be the most tractable engine and drivability as good as and probably better than stock. All things being equal two identical cars with a small engine and one with a large engine the car with the larger engine is easier to drive. We buy HP but we drive torque and a big engine has torque in spades. The engine will be under stressed and should last two lifetimes, if you service it right. Edited by Rockster on Friday 14th November 23:04

Personally I find the non-Mezger lumps lack the response, torque and hard edge that the Mezger engine has in spades (put bluntly, they're "wooly") Some may call the older engine agricultural, but it's a worthwhile tprice to pay for the far harder edge it possesses. But a 3.7 Cayman/Boxster lump with a single mass flywheel, some decent manifolds, cats and silencers along with a remap, larger throttle body etc would go a long way towards addressing that lack of a hard edge and in the process would allow you to really work one of the finest chassis AG has produced to date. One thing's for sure though, no matter what you do, it will never possess the depth of character of the engine in this :

Rockster said: BIRMA said: Every time I read that article I am so tempted, I love mid engined cars as my car history confirms and I like the fact this conversion is very much in line with why I bought one of the first M5's that landed in Britain in the early 80's it's a stealth car which has a real turn of speed. Still have my RS60 which for me is a record for keeping a car so you never know I might have to do it, don't really care about never getting my money back as I'm sure the big grin I get when I drive the Boxster may get wider. If I had sufficient funds and was so inclined - thankfully while I have the funds I'm not inclined -- I'd go with the bigger engine. There is no replacement for displacement. I'd leave the rest of the car as it came from the factory. You can remove weight but all that does is make the car look like it is a poorly repaired theft recovery. If you think 100lbs is all that is keeping you from a podium finish at the local track day you are in for a disappointment. I would *not* fit a lightweight flywheel. The dual mass flywheel also serves as a harmonic dampener. One highly regarded engine builder here in the States is on board against the lightweight flywheel and on this matter I agree with him 100%. I would *not* install an under drive pulley. This turns the water pump slower and the last thing you want to do to a big (or small) engine working hard it give it less coolant. You can see the effects of slower coolant flow by doing this "experiment". On stove burner place a flat bottomed pan with some water in it. Turn on the heat on high and watch the water. After a while you'll see small bubbles form on the bottom of the pan. Gently pick up the pan and move it in a circle to swish the water around. Note how hard you have to do this to remove the bubbles. Continue to let the pan and water get hotter. The bubbles get bigger. And it takes more force to loosen them. In your car's engine when it is working hard and the water pump is turning at its proper speed any bubbles that form are removed. With a slower turning water pump, maybe not. And if not these bubbles can form steam pockets which can result in localized overheating. Your big bore engine turns into a big pile of junk. And for naught. You ain't going to gain squat on the track with the smallest under drive pulley in the world, even if the engine would survive. The big bore engine looks factory, should be factory, nearly. This counts for something during the time you own the car -- I hate getting into a car with all kinds of loose edges and such due to a lousy modification for the sake of power/performance -- and counts for something when you go to trade in or sell the car. The big bore engine will be the most tractable engine and drivability as good as and probably better than stock. All things being equal two identical cars with a small engine and one with a large engine the car with the larger engine is easier to drive. We buy HP but we drive torque and a big engine has torque in spades. The engine will be under stressed and should last two lifetimes, if you service it right. Edited by Rockster on Friday 14th November 23:04 As far as I can remember the work I was quoted for was the turbo conversion, alterations to the PASM, extra radiator and a limited slip diff. I would not change anything else on the car as it came with PCCB's also in my equation is that I paid £26K for it with 20,000 miles on it so px values would be an insult in the future so I may balance up the cost of a 4-5 year 911 Turbo with a px deal and just press the button for the conversion to my existing car. Not interested in being a track day winner just want to have fun and as 99% of my driving is on the road and the fact I have a habit over-revving the car in the lower gears.

I would love a bigger displacement engine in my Boxster, the one from Autofarm is 15kish just for the engine, so I have been looking for some while for a 3.8S engine out of a 997.1 but they all go for serious money as well, let alone all the additional work they will need to get them in a Boxster. The man maths just don't add up so the only current option for me is too sell and buy a 997 hopefully with X51. Before I purchased the Boxster I test drove a Cayman with a 3.8S X51 engine and some exhaust work as well, all in about 400hp, it was great and I very nearly bought it but they were a few non engine related issues with the car and the vendor was a right bell-end so I walked and have pretty much regretted it ever since

Been reading this thread with much interest and with 12k miles and nearly 18 months on my 981 Box S (PDK, PASM, PSE and PTV) I am thinking a touch more push wouldn’t go amiss. Would love to upgrade to a 3.7 but seems way too expensive at the moment and will have to wait till I need some remedial work on the engine-another 65k miles at least I hope. A turbo ticks all the hp, driveability and reliability boxes and seems great- apart from being a turbo, much prefer NA- and seems to offer the biggest bang for your buck. (About £8-10k?). Possibly something to consider but I would want to try before I buy. That leaves the incremental approach, exhaust, remap, plenum, throttle body, geo etc etc. The problems I have here is that; 1. I shelled out for PSE and am loathe to ditch it and shell out again, and… 2. Not keen on ditching half the interior to loose weight- I like my creature comforts and want a Box with a bit more push for Continental hooning, not a track beast. So, I am left with remap, plenum, throttle body and geo for about…….£2500?? Which is probably the way I will go for the moment but would like a bit of advice/info from the experts on here. I didn’t spec Sports plus because I didn’t like the Chrono clock and couldn’t see me using Launch control more than once. Should I consider getting it retro fitted now? If I get a remap will the remap give me more value if Sports + is fitted prior to or will the remap just be the same whether Sports+ is fitted or not? With remap, plenum, and throttle body am I being too optimistic if I expect 35-40 hp more. Is it worth considering headers, keeping the PSE boxes? Best geo guy in the North West? Thanks guys- the bottomless pit of knowledge on here re. all things Porsche is truly amazing.

The modification to my car is fairly mild. Parr did a much more powerful Cayman. Evo The Parr conversion is adapted from a TPC Racing kit. If you're handy with the spanners, you could always buy directly from them and save some money. TPC Racing Edited by VladD on Tuesday 18th November 09:45

anonymous said: [redacted] But that would mean buying a fat arsed and ugly 2+2 coupe, where as the ideal solution is a proper sports car.

anonymous said: [redacted] I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying the 911 is a compromised design because the addition of rear seats means pushing the engine out to the back instead of being ideally located in the middle. This also has the nasty side effect of giving it a massive ugly arse. Look at the overhang on the red one above. Just hideous.

40bhp? Probably a bit optimistic without touching anything in the exhaust system. Not the same car granted but on my old 3.2 S I managed an additional ~25bhp at peak with gains starting around 3.5k rpm with 996 plenum and throttle body, larger MAF to TB intake, headers, exhaust, remap. My approach was more bargain bucket style / DIY rather than premium off the shelf stuff but cost a fraction of £2.5k. Call it £900 for parts.

anonymous said: [redacted] If I met a beautiful woman who was funny, intelligent, kind and great in bed I'd be happy. If I found out she used to be called Dave, it wouldn't materially affect anything, but I still wouldn't. Same theory applies. Just can't get my head round the 911.

VladD said: anonymous said: [redacted] If I met a beautiful woman who was funny, intelligent, kind and great in bed I'd be happy. If I found out she used to be called Dave, it wouldn't materially affect anything, but I still wouldn't. Same theory applies. Just can't get my head round the 911. Got to agree Vlad. I looked (and am still looking) at 911's when I bought the Box but couldn't (and can't) bring myself to buy one. I haven't seen one yet that I would call good looking, especially in the cabs which is a must for me. Capable, road presence, fast, compromised handling and fat arsed...not for me. (I know, I know....you have to be a proper driver, more involved, deeply rewarding etc etc but with my limited skills I just want to go fast with as little drama as possible ) Cmoose is right in that the sensible option is to buy a more powerful car but I love the 981 and it ticks every box except the power one. The 981 is a keeper so eventually it will have a bigger engine. Expensive, yes but I suppose that if Porsche had produced a 375bhp Boxster at £75k I would be the first in line. As Rockster quoted earlier, Speed is expensive, how fast do you want to go? Is that your Box for sale at Parrs by the way? Have you fallen out with it?

jredram said: Is that your Box for sale at Parrs by the way? Have you fallen out with it? Mine's not for sale. It's still on there but listed as sold. Interesting that they have a Cayman Turbo for sale now though. Edited by VladD on Wednesday 19th November 11:20

I just wonder if you think it's better why you don't own one ? I don't think it's better so choose to own what I like better. you seem to like the 911 better but then buy a Cayman and boxster ?

anonymous said: [redacted] it don't, that's just chinese whispers and you don't own a 911 either even though you say you like a better drive :-) Edited by mrdemon on Wednesday 19th November 11:37

anonymous said: [redacted] if you wanted one you would have one imo.

anonymous said: [redacted] There's enough pent up sexual energy between you two to power a small city.

anonymous said: [redacted] I had one, lets not do this again...