After market turbo for $15k

I saw an ad in one of the pca mailings for an outfit that can convert a non turbo 996 to a turbo. I asked since the turbo engines are built to withstand more than the regular engines would my regular engine die faster? I was told my regular engine would be ok with the extra load. Since the turbo is almost $70k more than the base, why doesn't everyone just buy a base and pay $15 (in lieu of $70) to end up with a turbo I remember the guy who sold me the car advised me vehemently to change nothing, not even the wheels. My friend who got me into Porsche's in the first place agrees. IF i were to do this, I'd do it now (at $23k miles) rather than after I put another 100k miles on the car) The question is, what would you do and why? '04 non-S, non-turbo, 23k miles

I wouldn't do it. The M96 engine in the non turbo 996 and the turbo motor are completely different beasts. The turbo motor is far more robust and was built for forced induction. You are just asking for trouble by boosting a NA 996. You make this sound like a simple solution to getting a turbo powered Porsche when there is no such thing as a simple solution with these cars.

I wouldn't do it either. If Porsche though the engine could handle a lot more then they would have given it a lot more HP.

Good way to blow up the engine. If the engine was strong enough, Porsche would have used it in the Turbo.

Use the $15k to buy a modded 944 turbo. It will be just as fun for a lot less dough, and if you wreck it it's actually worth more in parts. AND you can still keep your 996 intact.

There's WAY more to a 996TT than just sticking a turbocharger in the engine compartment. You can trade your 996, add $15k to your budget, and own a REAL turbo outright.

Back in the air cooled days I had such a car. A 911SC (3.0) converted to turbo specs, with a modest 6 lbs of boost. It took a 172 hp engine up to a conservative 270 hp, capable of an easy 162 mph (when you ran out of gears). I wouldn't even think to do that with a wasser boxer. The air cooled engines were robust, and much more durable for such enhancement. A friend of mine had his 997C4 supercharged at great expense and wound up paying more money, again, to have the darn thing removed. Unless you are just committed to a particular 996, simply consider buying a used 996 turbo. Prices are down so much now that it's a far smarter way to spend your money. The issues (and there are many) in getting an engine to run correctly after turbocharging are vast and complex.

Mister Quickie, where do I start?.........oh never mind.

Quotes source post: 8776987

+1, it's a no-brainer.

Based on the responses, I'm going to pass on turbo charging my engine, thanks folks

Any opinion on this: http://www.vf-engineering.com/vf_old/996-34.htm 300hp -> 420 hp ... but again, is the 996 NA engine capable of handling the extra power or will it wear out more quickly? silly question but what's the difference between a turbo charger and a supercharger?

I have turbo charged a few high compression motors, really its all in the tuning and your power goals with an unopened motor. Dont be put off by people that have never done it, talk to a tuner that has and get the real story, of course there is a point it might make it as quick as a Turbo model, but other changes mean its not, like brakes etc.

Quotes source post: 8853340

Turbo take exhaust gases to spin a compression wheel in a turbo to produce air pressure, the Supercharger uses a belt driven off the motor to spin a compressor wheel. Basically Turbo is more complicated to install with the exhaust work, but is way more efficient, the SC is easier to install, but the drag on the motor robs a lot of power. (in a nutshell)

I think there are quite a few supercharged and turbocharged 3.4 and 3.6 cars out there. VF does them, there is at least one other company that does (or did) superchargers, and now one or more that are doing turbochargers. Check with Vivid Racing. There are quite a few naysayers here, and I have not done one myself, but if they were blowing up engines on a regular basis you would certainly be hearing about it on this site and the other 996/997 sites. IMHO

Superchargers are AWESOME ... IF you plan on driving your car north of 200 mph! All that horsepower and virtually NO additional low end torque. In other words ... this prolly aint gonna do what you want it to do.

OK... here is the real question: Are you sure that your 996 is actually too slow? Have you done any track events? Do you actually know the limits of the car yet? I suspect not. Most people find that the 996 has plenty of power, that it is the stock suspension holding them back from lowering lap times. Rarely does someone new to Porsche actually need more power. The flat 6 is not about brute force, but about balance. If it's just big hp numbers you want, you probably should go buy a Corvette or Mustang. Either can give you a V8 with over 500 hp for little money compared to what it will take to achieve similar results in a Porsche.

I wouldn't do it. But I have a question.......here you say your car has 23K miles. On your 'oil indicator...' thread you post a pic of your (I think it yours) odometer that reads 100K + miles. Which is it? Not trying to start anything but......

Quotes source post: 8853531

Sounds like the quick way to melt a motor unless you're only going to run a few lbs of boost. Every turbo engine I've ever played with run 8-9.5 c.r. allowing you to run much higher boost levels.

Quotes source post: 8853581

Completely untrue, the biggest advantage of a supercharger is the boost is instant, no spooling up of the turbo required. Another advantage is the ability to swap pulleys to increase or decrease the boost levels.

Quotes source post: 8854980

My 1UZFE 10.5:1 compression build ran 25psi fine on 98 RON gas, like I said, its in the tune.

Quotes source post: 8854997

I dont really see how changing pulleys is an advantage for the SC when changing boost levels over turbo cars where it can be done with the push of the button in the cabin.

Quotes source posts: 8854867, 8854907

It is not too slow. This was more a question of curiosity to see what others have experienced rather than something I'm considering seriously. I drove the Corvette and Cobra and while the straight shot speed is greater, the car was bulky and didn't handle well. In other words, it wasn't a "match" in terms of hp and driveability and I didn't feel in control of the car as much as the 911. I'm sure Mustang/Corvette owners will attribute it to me not knowing how to drive those cars properly but that's how I felt and is what drove my decision. That pic is not from my car, I grabbed it off Google images since I tried to take one of my actual car but the parking garage was too dark

Quotes source post: 8854997

<heavy sigh> Superchargers provide additional linear boost (linear with engine RPM) so there is no lag in that regard. Please don't confuse lag with throttle response however. I rather assume the original poster is referring to a centrifugal (automotive) supercharger. I'm not exactly sure how a roots type SC could even be properly installed on a mid/rear engine vehicle (although it does bring some comical images to mind.) Also keep in mind that a roots type SC (what back in the day we used to call a "blower") is usually engaged and disengaged as needed. This is most assuredly NOT what the original poster is interested in. A centrifugal supercharger typically does not even begin to generate significant boost until the engine is over 3000 RPM (for obvious reasons.) This is why I specifically referred to "low end torque" being virtually non-existent. In short, superchargers are appropriate for some specific applications. IMHO superchargers are good for airplanes (high altitude internal combustion recyprocating engines) and alcohol fueled dragsters (very high RPM take offs.) If you are looking to just make your car a little more zippy around town then superchargers are wildly inappropriate.

I don't normally get involved in online arguments but LV some of your "facts" are incorrect, a blower cannot be engaged at will, they are driven off the crank usually by a belt drive, the only way to disconnect would be to remove the belt, low end torque is not non-existent in centrifugal superchargers, it is just slower to build than in a roots style, more like a Turbo, they are used a lot in aftermarket kits because they are compact and fit into the tight confines of a modern car more easily. As to superchargers only being appropriate for aircraft and drag racing, they haven't been used in aircraft since the gas turbine engine came into being, as to their viability in modern vehicles, I believe that Audi, Mercrdes, Ford (GT is midengine), Range Rover, GM, Lotus, & Jaguar would all argue against your theory, as they all have current supercharged models, and are hardly innapropriate or out dated. For the OP, most of the mods we put in our cars for street use are not really put to the test in that environment, bigger brakes, coil overs, wings, spoilers,& exaust, are mostly for bragging rights, the stock versions are usually more than adequate for the street, but we all like to play with our toys, altering them is just part of the fun, the turbo and supercharger kits available won't likely ruin your engine, the ones I have seen advertised for the Porsche look to be well engineered and thoroughly tested, in a purely street application you won't likely use it hard enough to break things, on the other hand if you are going to take it to the drag strip, race track, or Texas mile, then you might want to save up for that rebuild, like someone else mentioned here if these kits were regularly blowing their customers cars up, they wouldn't be in business long, if you want it get it. Just my 2 cents worth.