718 GT4/Spyder headers - Page 2 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

Anyone fitted headers to the 718 4L? Contemplating fitting these as sound / gains should be good.

Which option are you looking at fitting? Given that only a few people have fitted a rear silencer, I don't think anyone round here has fitted different headers or GPF sections. Only JCR have on their car which is a track hack and they're doing it for development purposes. UK owners generally avoid mods in the warranty period.

Again I see no reason not to use Cargraphic for the 200 cel unit. if you wanted a complete full legal system Kine look the best at the minute. https://www.cargraphic.de/en/your-vehicle/for-pors...

Porsche911R said: Again I see no reason not to use Cargraphic for the 200 cel unit. if you wanted a complete full legal system Kine look the best at the minute. https://www.cargraphic.de/en/your-vehicle/for-pors... Thanks R. Yea, was considering cargraphic. Do Kline sell in the UK?

MannyLon said: Thanks R. Yea, was considering cargraphic. Do Kline sell in the UK? yes 9m sell Kine as do many but it's very expensive.

Porsche911R said: MannyLon said: Thanks R. Yea, was considering cargraphic. Do Kline sell in the UK? yes 9m sell Kine as do many but it's very expensive. Yep, both Ninemeister (9m) and Nine Excellence (9e) resell Kline systems. There may also be others. I would say though that as you have started down the Cargraphic route with the controller.. why not continue with them?

TDT said: Yep, both Ninemeister (9m) and Nine Excellence (9e) resell Kline systems. There may also be others. I would say though that as you have started down the Cargraphic route with the controller.. why not continue with them? Indeed. Time to think / cost..

TDT said: For 100 % UK street legal, Cargraphic sport headers are properly the best that actually exist today. Dundon just announced their street headers overnight. They remove the GPFs and relocate the cats to that space, so technically no road legal for the EU GPF cars, but would pass general emissions testing. This design is actually what I have on my 981 GT4 at present, custom built by 9m, combining the best scavenging and power release from a race style header, but should still be emissions compliant. Problem is Dundon mainly serves their US customer base, which means that they don't do any monitoring of the GPFs (unlike Cargraphic), which means that unless you do a tune European cars will throw a CEL.

Porsche911R said: Again I see no reason not to use Cargraphic for the 200 cel unit. if you wanted a complete full legal system Kine look the best at the minute. https://www.cargraphic.de/en/your-vehicle/for-pors... For 100 % UK street legal, Cargraphic sport headers are probably the best that actually exist today. Dundon just announced their street headers overnight. They remove the GPFs and relocate the cats to that space, so technically no road legal for the EU GPF cars, but would pass general emissions testing. This design is actually what I have on my 981 GT4 at present, custom built by 9m, combining the best scavenging and power release from a race style header, but should still be emissions compliant. Edited by TDT on Tuesday 17th November 14:10

acey81 said: TDT said: For 100 % UK street legal, Cargraphic sport headers are probably the best that actually exist today. Dundon just announced their street headers overnight. They remove the GPFs and relocate the cats to that space, so technically no road legal for the EU GPF cars, but would pass general emissions testing. This design is actually what I have on my 981 GT4 at present, custom built by 9m, combining the best scavenging and power release from a race style header, but should still be emissions compliant. Problem is Dundon mainly serves their US customer base, which means that they don't do any monitoring of the GPFs (unlike Cargraphic), which means that unless you do a tune European cars will throw a CEL. Correct. They are working to get a Cobb tune created to optimise power and probably also handle CEL. Then any Cobb partner including in the UK can help out... I know 9e are working with them on installed full D4 kit on at least 981 GT4 in the UK. For 718 GT4/Spyder - Cargraphic Sports headers are probably the best road legal option, that actually exists, TODAY, for EU cars. Cargraphic also have a solution based on race headers and relocated cat - which would be for non-EU cars also.... BGB in the US are currently developing their package based upon this. Not sure if M&M have built anything yet for road cars... Edited to say Cargraphic do actually have a high-flow OPF/GPF option - that replaces OEM, is monitored and does not require tuning! - So they have all bases covered. Edited by TDT on Tuesday 17th November 15:28

first of all as stated above the best of the shelf 200 cell headers within europe are going to be the Kline headers we are dealers for them.Also we can supply Cargraphic designs are very similar will be very little difference in performance between them they both are using the same high quality HJS catalysts world renowend in motorsport applications. With regards to CEL lights removing the OPF Currently the only way to access changes within the ECU's protocols just like the 992 Carrera and 992 Turbo ECU is to remove the ECU and bench unlock which is pretty simple to do for us which then gives us access to tune through the OBD port.This leaves anything like a COBB accessport or similar OBD flash a non starter.In the future it may or may not be possible....

I see JCR are claiming that neither the headers or the OPF delete pipes of theirs require any ECU trickery, and don't seem to trigger a check engine light. No idea how they're doing that, maybe a modification to the sensors? They've certainly seen some crazy performance gains from it. One has to wonder what the impact on the rest of the drivetrain the additional 57 WHP and 47 ft-lbs of torque at the wheels At the best part of 10k and a void warranty, it's a bit rich for me. Does scream though.

I think they may move the sensors to other parts of the system to trick the ECU that the reading is within tolerance? I can't see any other way around the issue unless you re-map the car. I'm not sure I'd be comfortable pushing the limits on the manual gearbox, although in the US they've done lots of engine upgrades to the 981 and I've not heard about any gearbox problems.

Or perhaps swap the sensors out for something with a different tolerance/a combination of the both? They're a bit sketchy on the details, partly because I think they'd like to keep the info away from Porsche so that customers can swap the system back out in the event of a warranty claim and pretend it's all stock.

Twinfan said: I'm not sure I'd be comfortable pushing the limits on the manual gearbox, although in the US they've done lots of engine upgrades to the 981 and I've not heard about any gearbox problems. As you say, in the 5 year existence of the GT4 - i've have not seen any reports of manual gearbox issues due to power upgrades.

TDT said: As you say, in the 5 year existence of the GT4 - i've have not seen any reports of manual gearbox issues due to power upgrades. I'm not sure if any have been running >465bhp though?

Twinfan said: I'm not sure if any have been running >465bhp though? Or the extra 55 torques , no idea what the gearbox is rated to, though.

Twinfan said: I'm not sure if any have been running >465bhp though? 981 4.0, 4.2 and 4.5 conversions run 465+, and not all of them have had gearbox upgrades or changes - although it would be advisable anyway. But still zero reports.... and there quite a few of those running around in the US, Australia, Asia and mainland europe. Edited by TDT on Wednesday 18th November 11:44

Gotcha, thanks T. Things are going to get expensive then if the JCR gearbox goes bang, although it's held up so far

Was gonna go for cargraphic headers but Parr are asking for excessive labour rates for 3hrs work.

Twinfan said: Gotcha, thanks T. Things are going to get expensive then if the JCR gearbox goes bang, although it's held up so far I think he has products in motion regarding the gearbox. A lot of things break as they are miss driven, ie people being in the wrong gear and WOT at low revs etc. Porsche stated on the 997.1 the only people who had issue were miss driven cars, and the cars designed to rev . I know people who tracked 997.1 and had zero issue driven up the rev range. I also see in one of the car forums I am in people having new Clutch's at 15k miles in Golf where I rag mine to death on 42k miles and it's clutch is fine. It's just having a bit of knowledge to not ruin your own cars. I only sold my GT4 due the the spot welding gearbox issues , it was planned to be a keeper and modded but I had long sold it before the recall. Watch Jonny on track and he it right up the revs so much less torques at 7k. Edited by Porsche911R on Wednesday 18th November 12:32

Fair point re. track use. All round road use though, which will be some buyers, may be in for a surprise...

Rojibo said: Or perhaps swap the sensors out for something with a different tolerance/a combination of the both? They're a bit sketchy on the details, partly because I think they'd like to keep the info away from Porsche so that customers can swap the system back out in the event of a warranty claim and pretend it's all stock. Running a decatted header on any modern Porsche variant and not put a check engine light on would require a stepped lambda sensor boss to fool the sensors readings reporting back to the ECU which doesnt give a true reading if it was in the correct position is all thats been done.To not a have a check light on for removing the OPF can only be done by changing a parameter in the ECU's detection protocol to keep the ECU happy(map it out).

Pete_9m said: Running a decatted header on any modern Porsche variant and not put a check engine light on would require a stepped lambda sensor boss to fool the sensors readings reporting back to the ECU which doesnt give a true reading if it was in the correct position is all thats been done.To not a have a check light on for removing the OPF can only be done by changing a parameter in the ECU's detection protocol to keep the ECU happy(map it out). Thanks Pete, the claim was also that the OPF delete also didn't require any ECU tinkering. Dummy sensor perhaps?

Rojibo said: Thanks Pete, the claim was also that the OPF delete also didn't require any ECU tinkering. Dummy sensor perhaps? You can't dummy a pressure sensor as far as we are aware it has to be switched of with the software model.

Just awakening this thread to ask if anyone has fitted the Cargraphic OPF bits or even fitted the complete Cargraphic Motorsport System (with monitored OPF's) and what their feedback is. TIA.