34 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHX-51 package, what is it, exactly?
Leading reported evidence
Replace bit
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
The difference has changed a bit from the 3.4 to 3.6 x51 packages.
Leading evidence: 'Replace bit' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace bit' (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
You seemed to be running against guys that are not driving to the ability that you are.
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
I keep that car running between 5-8K and never felt a "flat" spot.
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
I guess most people don't get too much out of the hp difference in street driving but on the track you should have a nice advantage if you run between 5k and 7k RPM.
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
Some of those also on Hoosiers, running Motons and with a R&P swap.
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
I guess most people don't get too much out of the hp difference in street driving but on the track you should have a nice advantage if you run between 5k and 7k RPM.
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.
34 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 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: 20261026T165820Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Could someone please explain to me (and perhaps other forum members), just what comprises the X-51 option? I have tried searching but must be doing something wrong, since nothing comes up.
What is difference between the regular 3.6 and the X-51 3.6?
What increase in power and torque?
Can the package be ordered as a service kit, or just when purchasing a new Porsche?
...Rickker
all i know that the 345HP Porsche says is Under Rated... i have been told by local porsche tuner that the 996 40th AE that comes with the X51 is as quick as a 996 GT3 in stright line...
Not a chance at all. Amazes me that some of y'all believe everything you hear. Sure, the X51 3.6 is quick but it is NOT going to deliver the straight line power that the GT3 does. Now the 3.8 x51 on the new 997S is a good comparo. That car is every bit as quick in a straight line as the 6GT3.
I reeealllly don't want to start a flame war but I seem to have lots of video of me not exactly loosing very much ground to some very well prepped and driven GT3s down Summit Point's main straight. Some of those also on Hoosiers, running Motons and with a R&P swap.
but back to the subject at hand.
The difference has changed a bit from the 3.4 to 3.6 x51 packages. Yes you can order them to add to an existing engine for the 3.6 in the usa but it costs as much as a whole engine.
Off the top of my head you get,
- new aluminum intake manifold
- new intake pipe supports adapted to the form of the intake manifold;
- new exhaust manifolds;
- new cylinder heads with optimized, CNC-milled inlet ducts;
- new camshafts with larger valve stroke on the inlet side and modified inlet and outlet timing;
- inlet valve springs adapted to the enlarged valve stroke;
- modified partition box in the oil pan;
- modified maps for the DME control module;
- new underside panel in the transmission area;
- third radiator.
We're talking about straight line performance and same driving/shifting skills.
I'm sure Walter Roehrl is faster around almost any track in a base Boxster than me in a 7GT2; but that's not the point.
I am saying the difference may not be as great as some are led to believe.
For instance.. There is a member on here with a track prepped 3.6 996 that dyno's 305 at the rear wheels (Darren). Most GT3s dyno 325ish at the rear wheels.
Not that big a diff down a straight, that all I am saying.
So if the 3.6x51 makes a very conservative 345 HP then with a tune I can def see it hanging with a GT3.
I honestly am amazed to only loose a little ground on a GT3 down the straight. And the guy is definitely trying to get away.
IMHO the diff lies in the 3.4/3.6 being in the meat of their torque band at x speed vs a GT3 which is a little flat off the corner and then screams at the top end.
It cracks me up that you call the 345hp x51 "very" conservative yet the GT3 has been consistently called VERY conservative and is easily 400+hp not the 380 that is published.
Then are you talking about a standing start? Confused on this as I have NEVER been outside the power band on the track. I keep that car running between 5-8K and never felt a "flat" spot. You seemed to be running against guys that are not driving to the ability that you are.
But......you ARE losing ground and that ground you loose will ADD up lap after lap until it isn't even a gap worth pursuing. Come on, it's not like we are trying to say that the GT3 is going to scream down the straight like a 1000hp Bugatti. These subjective observations crack me up.
Dell,
Nothing to gain or lose. I have zero examples or experience on the street. My example is both cars on track leaving a corner at the same speed and then basically staying put behind them down the main straight when I fully expected to have them just walk away.
I tend to gain any difference back in braking (so yes that is all driver as the GT3 clearly has better brakes).
No one is saying the GT3 doesn't outclass a C2 by a long shot as that would be foolish and if driver A were given both machines they would certainly always do better with the better equipment.
I'll be on the track tomorrow with my buddy in the GT3 and hope to be able to follow him around as he helps me considerably by having a faster car to follow and to bring up my pace.
If you know summit point a 1:22 lap is nothing to sneeze at.
oh god unsubscribe...
Rickker if your looking to the answer to your orginal question, clearly this is not the place... everyone here is got a point to prove... sorry bud
OUCH!!!
Touche!
Probably won't be back. My wife is here with me in Dallas now. We are still trying to sell the house in NC. Having two mortgage payments SUCKS!!!!
My daughter is still in Charlotte. She wants to finish school at UNC-Charlotte. She is a Junior now. Can you believe that??
Yes, I am VERY proud of her. Except two weeks ago, when her engine blew (not quite but was heavily damaged) when she was 4 quarts low on oil!!!
She now drives a Toyota Corolla that SHE is paying for. She insisted that she make the payments since she trashed the Rodeo. I didn't argue with her logic. I am also very proud of her for the last part. She is maturing well.
Thanks Paul 996 for the X-51 details. I didn't expect such a simple question to bring out so much good hearted rivalry and sparring between 996/997 and GT3 camps.
Now, I wonder if there is any chance that someone has the values for torque @ rpm for the regular 3.6 and the X-51 version?
...Rickker
Rick....you need somebody with the 40th Anny car to post a pic of the hp/tq curve from their owners manual.
And by the way, is there really such thing as a simple question here on RL?
Rickker,
Your welcome! I was reluctant to post because I knew it would spark controversy and didn't want to come off as a 996 fan boy.
I have this info somewhere but may not find it tonight and tomorrow when I get home from the track I will do bedtime with kids and then crash myself.
That's very interesting, thanks for posting Paul!
So the real hp kick comes only in at the top 1500 RPM and the torque difference on the low end of the X51 engine comes probably from the headers. I guess most people don't get too much out of the hp difference in street driving but on the track you should have a nice advantage if you run between 5k and 7k RPM.
Now it'd be nice to see the GT3 curves as comparison.
Good info - thanks Dell! So summarized I see below comparison for the main powerband on the track and have to say that Paul has a point as there doesn't seem to be such a huge difference between 5-7k RPM (sure the GT3 revs up and above 8k).
...................................
RPM
............................
kW/Nm....4,000.......5,000.......6,000.......7,000
......
X51..150/355...190/370...210/370...254/350
......
GT3..140/335...200/385...220/367...275/372
Actually there is a big difference. When the X51 has to upshift at the conclusion of it's powerband at roughly 6600rpm (and torque dropping off at 5700rpm) the drop in power in significant compared to the GT3 when they will still be in gear moving in the heart of the horsepower with that higher rpm surge from 5500 to 8200rpm. Take a look at the curves again. If the powerband in the X51 extended and allowed the driver to carry that power (without dropping off) another 1k+ in rpm, the gains would be on par with the GT3 and then be able to hang with it.
This is why the GT3 performs so well on track with respect to power. If you don't watch your gearing properly in the GT3 and you shift TOO EARLY then you are in for a rude awakening trying to get that sucker to peddle faster as the gearing is SOOOOOOOO tall. It's all about the driver.
Thanks for posting the power curves, Paul. But this is not what I had hoped for. I had hoped for increased torque and power throughout the usual driving rpm range. For street driving, this would be from 2000 to say, 4500 rpm. Seems to me that the "extra" power of the X-51 option would barely be noticable in most street driving situations. I mean, where we would like extra torque is when coming out of a corner in 2nd gear at 1500 rpm, and putting your foot down. It's not worthwhile to shift down to 1st, so you just have to wait for the revs to come up. I think you all know what I mean.
Of course, for racing or track days, it is a different story. But for most of us this (track days) happens once or twice a year, if at all. Anyway, it's good to know this information before spending big bucks for a "high performance" option.
....Rickker
