25 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHSupercharger Market Poll
Leading reported evidence
Install which is preferable
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
Well, for 23k I can get a 3.8 installed which is preferable to a supercharged engine.
Leading evidence: 'Install which is preferable' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Install which is preferable' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
This data can then be used by sponsors to determine if the investment is financially feasible.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Personally, I would like to see this setup and would like to see what power you can extract from the 3.4 by using a SC.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
25 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Planet-9: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T000231Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
To provide a CaymanClub viewpoint of the available market for a
Cayman S
supercharger, the following Poll is provided. I would keep the responses "realistic" so that we get a not completely inaccurate picture. This data can then be used by sponsors to determine if the investment is financially feasible.
A properly developed and tested supercharger kit is an expensive R&D effort plus ongoing support commitment.
Well, for 23k I can get a 3.8 installed which is preferable to a supercharged engine. I voted for 10k-15k because once you get over that range, I'm 50-66% of the way to a 3.8
I kind of have the same thought process, the only other consideration that I would have is that the car now becomes a specialty item for re-sale where a supercharger kit can be removed with car now back to stock.
My Active Autowerke stage 1 supercharger for my M3 cost me $7800 but I got it on sale when stage 2 was released. I think regular retail was around $8500.
In theory, with intake/
exhaust
/chip(tuned) and 0.5 bar pulley, it is possible that
Cayman S
could break 500hp reliably at the crank (just barely). Probably need larger injectors...
Anything is possible.
Recall a supercharger must be belt driven. I would much prefer a turbo. Its free horsepower, harnesses the
exhaust
, not using the engine to lug up the fans and get the extra boost.
Either way, w/my 2.7, if Porsche 'did X' I'd drop my 2.7 for that, but ultimately pay for the 3.8 as I had planned to do anyway if I wanted more PWR.
SC vs. Turbo
Each has an appropriate application with drawbacks on both sides. Either way, once you get past 9lbs of boost on stock high compression NA engines, the internals have to be reworked to support it. A major "boost" in expense.
500hp NA on 91 Octane with no increase in weight. That would be a nice package. Not possible I think, but would be neat.
Great participation so far!
I am somewhat surprised that we have almost 50% of the voters would purchase a supercharger. More than I expected actually...
Interesting thread,
I think that RUF kit is awesome, but that's alot of pennies($70k+ for the car & $35k+ for the kit.
You could buy a turbo.) I think if VF made one under $10k. That's a do-able & reasonable price.
(If we are doing a Group Buy, you gotta let me know 6 months in advance, so I can slowly convince my wife:argue:
)
cya
So far only the RUF has the R&D and installation quality that would make the upgrade consistent in quality and engineering with the rest of the car. But if we're basically talking about a $100K total investment I'd get a GT3 and be done with it. The 295 ponies the car has is more than adequate for what I need the car to do. My previous
BMW
experience with "modding" taught me that suspension upgrades are the most satisfactory, with
exhaust
next, colder air a distant third, and chipping just not worth it.
your
BMW
experience is similar as my
S2000
though I would have this order:
intake
suspension
exhaust
header
chipping (full tune on dyno rather just a canned flash, not sold on this one)
It seems that the main reason for the high cost of a SC is because of development costs and the fact that the Cayman would be such a small market. Well what about adding our drop top brothers into the mix, the Boxster guys. I'm not that familiar with the Boxsters but arent they for all intents and purposes the same as the Cayman, drive train wise ? And if so wouldn't that dramatically increase the size of the market for a SC, hence bring down the cost?
$35K for a SC from RUF is crazy, how can you justify that cost unless its a one off? You can get into a X51 motor with suspension, body, and other drivetrain mods for the same or less at Farnbacher/Loles, their GTR Cayman.
I'm new to Porsche and Porsche motors but what is the possibility of boring and stroking the 3.4 CS motor to get you into the 3.8L neighborhood? And 400HP? And wouldn't that be a lot less expensive?
I am new to Porsche motors as well and am curious about the boring and stroking option. It is a fairly common occurence in other motors with decent results. It is not inexpensive though but wouldn't cost more than a SC I would think.
With respect to Boxster compatibility, it does make sense and I would expect that the potential vendor would have to explore that possibility.
I think you mean Air and fuel combustion when especially dealing with force induction, which you need to be careful by using a management chip or properly tune the ECU else you can go rich on fuel mixture or lean which you don't want since it will definitely make your baby go...Kaaboom!
Personally, I would like to see this setup and would like to see what power you can extract from the 3.4 by using a SC. However, I know it's a Porche, but the price is rather stiff for a belt, pulley, intercooler and a spooler isn't? My 2cent.....
May want to contact some of this guys and present the challenge:
Vivid Racing
Modacar
Hopup Racing
APS
When determing power on forced induction or engines in general, it is about how much airflow can be pulled through the system. It is a convenient way of looking at it, to make the math rather trivial when estimating power on boost. Fuel can always be pumped in at any rate necessary to match the incoming air to optimize lean/rich mixture, airflow is the upfront limiting factor. Once you have that corrected, then it is time to make the rest of the engine "catch-up" with processing the extra flow. That is why so much effort is done to increase airflow through intakes, boost, intercoolers, porting, headers, exhaust, etc., Ultimately, the engine's strength is the limiting factor for being capable of processing the airflow.
Management chip/ECU becomes a major concern when boost gets above 8 lbs/boost typically. 6-7 lbs has always been a relatively safe mark among SC vendors even with stock injectors.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.