C4S Supercharged

I'm thinking ahead in 2006, an '02 -'03 C4S with supercharger would make one heck of a ride when my lease is up. I'd look for one with some warranty left. Reasons: I like the wide body look, 4wd would better handle the extra torque. (comments?) I am ok with the 996 interior and I like the exterior of the 996 better than the 997, they both have the same RMS. There would be lower depreciation on a used car. I think the main reason for going this route is I like to get into the mods thing which I find difficult on anything 'new' and under warranty.

Get the TT. If you're going to spend the extra cash for the mod anyway, spend the money on a used TT upgrade instead. Engine designed from the get-go to handle the added torque and horses, no RMS problems as far as I know with the TT engine. Plus, the whole car is already designed for the added HP.

Good point Palting, except up here a clean 2002 TT is asking ~130K CDN. which is ~104K US. Also I have been told that a TT's extra weight somewhat dulls the joy in the handling dept. I can't comment from first hand though. I agree on the RMS, but really the RMS thing doesn't bother me so much. Heck even if you have to swap out a motor, it's still not the end of the ($$) world.

It is only assumed that the Turbo engine is a strnger engine than the NA engines designed by Porsche. I am one who does not follow that belief. If you look at the design of both engines, there is little (if any) variance in the quality or materials used in both engines. The is NO evideence in the real world, or on the engineer's not pads that can justify the claim that introducing boost to a NA engine will wear out the engine any faster than it will the Turbo engine. But, so many people here always believe that is Porsche does something, it HAS TO BE THE BEST WAY. These are the people who have little experience in engine design or rebuilding and continue to hold on to old and dispproved theories. There are tremendous advantages of a PROPERLY SC'ed engine over a Turbo. Cooler operation, no cool down, instant power with no lag, easy to increase or decrease boost, more efficeint engine operation and less weight. It can also be reversed in a couple of hours. A moderately boosted N/A Porsche 996 is as fast as a Porsche TT. It can also be setup to beat the GT2 up to 120 MPH. It all boils down to what you want. If you are interested in engine mods and getting the most out of a stock 996, then go for it.

Webtool, i'm not sure what the canadian dollar is at right now, but if its still hovering over 80 cents on the dollar, then you might want to consider bringing in a car from the states (i.e. florida) and play the exchange rate since from what i hear from rennlisters: 996 pcars are dirt cheap over there.

DeAd-EyE I can only assume that the disparity between the two markets indicate there are complications when importing. It is tempting though.

^ on the contrary, porsche's are especially easy to import as they should meet all the current emissions and the only thing needed to make it from mph to kph is to have a dealer/tuner change the digital display which is done with a flick of the switch. appart from that, the paper work is very easy and if you follow procedure, the border/customs people won't jerk you arround. if ur serious about the C4S i can ask an associate of mine if he still has his car for sale, but i believe it was sold.

Thanks, ..just thinking out loud at this stage.

I'm looking forward to driving a flashed TT. And although the "value" would be better should you go that route, a lot of VERY good points were made by 1999. Having just SC'd my car and made that very same debate about six months ago (I found and just about purchased a 2003 TT X50), I have zero regrets on doing it up this way.

Robyn, you car is definitely sweet and yeah, I kinda like the idea of going with mods to make it in 'my' car as opposed to a factory stock ride.

I don't know what the relative reliability of a stock vs. S/C'd 996 engine is, but this is an interesting video: http://www.gofastvideo.com/gallery/i...sx-kaboom.html It's up to you, I guess, to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks in your application...

Please, do tell...what are these said "risks"? Do we know anything about the install of that NSX SC? Do we know what the boost levels were, what the install entailed? Who did it? Was it a chop job? It never ceases to amaze me how some of you guys are such alarmist. Certainly, if we want to play, one has to pay. Geez...don't walk out on the street, cause you just might get hit by a car, too. Come on guys, yes, there are risks. But, throwing up a video of ONE sc'd car (And not even a relevent Porsche for pete's sake.)blowing up on the dyno is just silly to try to sway someone one way or the other. It's up to the consumer to educate themselves. Throwing up emotional responses isn't very helpful.

I haven't heard of a SC blowing up a 996 yet. Anyone?

I have heard of an SC (Not an EVO one) blowing up a Boxster...but it was his own fault...he set his boost at an insane level.

In no way do I claim that that video is representative of S/C'd cars; I just happened to see it last night when I was checking out that great Hans Stuck M3 video. No emotion involved, whatsoever, at least on my part. As I said, it's up to each individual to decide, just like bumping up the boost on your turbo...

Listening to that Dyno run makes me think it is maybe the toughest run your car will ever make. It seems the dyno load could easily be higher than the load it takes to accelerate the car. I only ever seem to be at WOT for a few seconds at at time and it would be even less with an extra whallop of torque available. Any Dyno experts out there?

Robin - you have a pm.

Oh man welcome to 2 years ago... that video is of an NSX with Nitrous and it's a what happens when you spray too much... And the relationship to that and a 996 SC is?

Just to throw some gas on this: 1) porsche decided not to use the M96 block for the Turbo or the GT3. The 964 block they are using for these two cars is much much more expensive for them to build than our M96 blocks (based on lots of rebuild and cost to manuf data I'm hearing). So, if they could easily make an extra 10k profit on a Turbo by using the M96, why didn't they? They only reason I can think of is that it couldn't handle the extra stress. You're right, nobody has proof. However, just because none of the <100 people who have SC'd a 96 have blown an engine doesn't mean SC'ing is "safe" on these engines. Can I take it out to the track and beat the hell out of it with a SC and be confident it's going to hold together? 2) "advantages of SC over Turbo": a) cooler operation: not true. it depends on the Sc design, some generate much more heat than a Turbo, and some are very comparable. A good read is corky bell's book maximum boost. b) no cool down: I suppose, although water/oil cooling of modern Turbos has made the cool down step pretty unnecessary. c) instant power with no lag: Agreed. This is the one significant advantage, IMO d) easy to increase or decrease boost: easier than changing a chip setting? I don't think so. e) more efficeint engine operation and less weight: please provide some proof for this. more efficient? How so, Turbos are incredibly efficient as the primary "drag" is exhaust backpressure. SC's drag is parasitic, and IIRC is roughly equivalent to slightly more than the drag from Turbos. f) It can also be reversed in a couple of hours. So you can try to get some warranty work done if the engine grenades? g) A moderately boosted N/A Porsche 996 is as fast as a Porsche TT. It can also be setup to beat the GT2 up to 120 MPH: Run it for a couple hours at a track against a Turbo or a GT2. if it survives, then I'll be a believer. I'm not interested in winning stoplight drag races w/my 996... By the way, let me bracket all of this by saying "to each their own". Hell, I threw a big turbo on my old Miata and it was more fun than my 996 (and faster). But, a new engine is <2k in that car... As Robyn said, if you're ready to pay the piper if you lose an engine, then why not?

I believe that's exactly what I said--I don't know the relative reliability of stock vs. S/C... Certainly that equation would depend on the exact installation. On the other hand, if you think that there is absolutely no increased risk of catastrophic engine failure after supercharging, I would say you need to go back to mechanical engineering school. Just the increased power alone would increase the engine failure rate, nevermind the increased risk of detonation from forced induction. Sure, those risks can be mitigated, but not totally eliminated. I don't mean to try to crash the Supercharging party crowd here, in fact once my car's out of warranty I might consider it if I still own the thing--just to tempt the fates

Hey caf: Next time I am down visiting my son at IU, I'll stop by and give you a ride in a properly setup SC 996. I bet you will break before the engine does.

Sounds like a deal! By the way, if you've never done it, you absolutely MUST take your car south of Bloomington into the hinterlands--there are some absolutely wonderful driving roads down that way. Some years back, in the Car & Driver 10 Best issue, they had a category for "Best Drives" or something similar to that, and the area south of Bloomington was a top pick. I make it down there at least once a year with some fellow enthusiasts.

Thanks for the info caf.

As far as I know the 996 has no history of throwing rods, or breaking cranks. These are the areas I think SC hits hardest. The pistons shouldn't melt down if there is enough fuel available, which I gather has been carefully mapped out. The standard valves should be ok, you probably don't need to rev. so high with the blower running. I just think the whole idea sounds like loads of fun for the $$

You are exactly right. The internals of the 996 engine are little different that those of the turbos and 993. They both use titanium rods and same material for pistons and forged cranks. You are also correct that the cylinders do not run any hotter than a NA engine because of the aftercooler and a/f ratio. Lowering the rpm also eliminates a great amount of stress to the engine and any rpm above 7000 is useless anyway. Computer programing controls timing which eliminates any possibilty of detonantion. I have absoluely no worries about big boost in my 996 as far as engine stress go. I do, however, wonder how long the SC can last spinning at 50,000 rpms though. So far closing in on 20,000 miles worth with no problems. I even run the original MAF that came with the car. Lots of fun!

That just figures....for whatever reason I can't see the ill conceived NSX exploding. Link just opens and immediately closes.

I say Charge it if you want....or buy a TT if you want, as long as its a Porsche It doesnt matter. I have alot of Supercharger time under my seat, (not 996) And yea its true if the car is not set up correctly sure you could break it, and the same goes for a Turbo car.Chargers and blowers will both break befor our motors will. My onlt suggestion is make sure you are always keeping an eye on the blower meaning the bearings, i can forsee this as being the only problem.