What's this I hear about a 996 not being good on the track?

Hi there, I've been researching 996's, and I came across a thread that stated that a 996 cannot go on the track if it is stock? Can this be true? Is that why Porsche is still racing with the less current 993 engine? Input appreciated. regards,

If you found a thread on it, what conclusion did it reach? It should have been that lots of people drive their 996s on the track w/o problems. If you're going to be running slicks though you'd probably want to contact PMNA and get the oiling kit that helps prevent the oil from being trapped in the cylinder heads under sustained high-G loads. This may or not be applicable to the 3.6L M96 engine which is supposed to have better oiling than the original 3.4L but it doesn't have the extra oil pump added with the PMNA kit. Porsche isn't racing a 993 engine. They're racing a water cooled engine usually referred to as derived from the GT1 engine which itself goes back to the original 911 design. The current race engine design is also the basis of the GT3 and 996 Turbo engines. The problem with that motor, as I'm projecting it from Porsche's standpoint, is that it's too expensive and too labor intensive to build for the "standard" production Porsche. Lest you think that's a new attitude from Porsche, Ferry Porsche himself was once quoted to the effect that if he'd known the original 911 motor design could have been stretched from 2.0 to 3.8L he would have insisted on a less over engineered design. To summarize, the 996 can be used on the track but keep in mind the engine design is no longer based on the design of what Porsche races. If it was the GT3 would be the base 996 and that's probably over engineered for most people's needs. Kinda goes back to when Porsche sold the 911 in 3 levels of tune. You just pay for the level you want.

track your 996 all you want, no prob. oil starvation is a non issue until you run full race slicks (not DOT R compounds). and when you are that good, you are probably tracking every weekend in a GT3 anyway.

Stock wheel set-up is prone to a lot of understeer. Going to 245's in the front really help the turn-in. Eugene

The 996 is a CHAMP on the track. eclou, PMNA does NOT recommend you going to a 245. The brakes will not get the right cooling. Of course, if you make provisions to fix the air flow to the brakes, then no problem. This was told to me by a Porsche Motorsport North America tech. They have had rotors warping and boiled brake fluid caused by just adding wider front tires. My suggestion: Get a one inch wider front wheel and keep the stock 225 front tire size. This will reduce understeer. It worked for me! Good Luck.

No problems taking the 996 to the track. Plenty of folks track their 996's with no problems. As stated earler, the engines used in the GT3, GT2, and turbo is based on the engine from the GT1 which in turn was based on the engine from the 964.

Any body uses 245 in the front and have brake heating problems? I'm using 245's in the front and so far so good.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by Steve in FL: <strong>. The current race engine design is also the basis of the GT3 and 996 Turbo engines. The problem with that motor, as I'm projecting it from Porsche's standpoint, is that it's too expensive and too labor intensive to build for the "standard" production Porsche. Lest you think that's a new attitude from Porsche, Ferry Porsche himself was once quoted to the effect that if he'd known the original 911 motor design could have been stretched from 2.0 to 3.8L he would have insisted on a less over engineered design. .</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">You can quote Ferry Porsche all you like, but When Porsche dragged Toyota in to show them how to make money producing cars they took the overengineering out of much of the car, the engine being the biggest cop out. The proof is that Porsche became the most profitable car manufacturer 'cos the cars were built to a mass produced "just in time" formula to which the new engine design and manufacture had to subscribe. Porsche have been very clever, but there must be quite a few 911 fanatics like me who consider the 986 platformed motors to be an anachronism which took the p!ss out of its customers in the light of the GT3 type platform which should have been standard fitment on a base 996 <img border="0" alt="[icon107]" title="" src="graemlins/icon107.gif" />

Zblue - The wider front's is usually only an issue at pretty high temps. I've only run across it in southern states, and only in 996's - 986's don't generally generate the heat (say that 3 times real fast). Enjoy your wonderful car! J

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by Sloth: <strong>As stated earler, the engines used in the GT3, GT2, and turbo is based on the engine from the GT1 which in turn was based on the engine from the 964.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I know that the GT2/GT3 motor uses the 964 crankcase. What else does it share?

TB993tt: That's pretty much the reason I never bought a "base" 996 and now have a GT3 on order

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by Hamann7: I know that the GT2/GT3 motor uses the 964 crankcase. What else does it share? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">The crankcase is pretty much it but that's the best part

I ran 245's on my Boxster and now my 996 with alot of track time on both. No cooling problems (warped rotors). I am hard on the brakes and they show it on the track but no that I would consider a problem. Be careful with the 3.4's if you heavily mod the car's suspension and run R's or slicks. I also recommend the 3rd radiator on all of them. I watched every 996 overheat at summit last July. I'll give you it was 104 in the shade, but its only a few hundred for the extra margin of safety.

A question for Edward Newman. Were your 245's 17" or 18' and what were you runing on the rears? Robert