Use the Boxster 2.7 it's lighter and plenty of HP (245). It makes a regular Boxster a quick car so it will make a car with 900 to 1000lbs less curb weight just plain fast.
I think they will be able to do it. I cannot believe that there is not a company in the entire country that cannot do it.
I save you a space suit.
Joel
@Marty Grzynkowicz posted:Use the Boxster 2.7 it's lighter and plenty of HP (245). It makes a regular Boxster a quick car so it will make a car with 900 to 1000lbs less curb weight just plain fast.
@Marty Grzynkowicz was the Porsche motor one of your option but chose Subie instead?
@calmotion posted:@Marty Grzynkowicz was the Porsche motor one of your option but chose Subie instead?
No, it was not in the discussion much back in end of 2011. I was happy to be the first factory Subie Henry did back then. It was a 2.2L before going back for a 2.5 Turbo in 2015. The Turbo Subie was a complicated build but ran perfect when IM did there magic. The only thing I missed was that Flat Six sound that only Porsche can produce.
Marty the whine of a P 6 is pure wine of desire, yet, a turbo subie well tuned I think is lighter on the pocket book I think. In any case I prefer the NAspirated engines for their Non Switch style of powerband.
Actually, a Subie 6, would be pretty cool too but it is more funds.
FWIW, someone put a 375hp turbo audi and 915 tranny set up and lost it on a wet road unfortunately. I personally feel that somewhere between 240-275 is the sweet spot. Anyway, there are many many choices.
FYI, Henry has now built twenty-four 911 based speedsters, according to my source. I believe he was in the practice of using the 6 cylinder engines before 2011.
I assume the 2.7 will be the fall back if they cannot use the 3.2 S motor. Jake can probably bump it up maybe even to 3.2 and increase the HP as well.
@Bob: IM S6 posted:FYI, Henry has now built twenty-four 911 based speedsters, according to my source. I believe he was in the practice of using the 6 cylinder engines before 2011.
Bob, those are all air-cooled.
I don't understand the need to use a factory ECU. There are aftermarket ECUs with NO immobilizer and WITH variable cam activation capability. There has to be a setup that works with the Boxster 3.2.
It won't be cheap but if you're already spending Raby money on a pumped up motor...
Thanks, I will ask Jake and Carey about it.
I have to admit, that I really want to use the 3.2 so I am going to do everything possible to get it done.
@Marty Grzynkowicz posted:Bob, those are all air-cooled.
You're kidding...damn, now I know why my IM6 uses so little water.
Duh.
@Joel Roth posted:I have to admit, that I really want to use the 3.2 so I am going to do everything possible to get it done.
@Joel Roth 3’.2 nice. Beast mode
Marty:
I think the early model 2.7 only made about 228 HP. It was the later model 2.7 that made 245 HP. If they have to go with a 2.7 it will be the early model because of the ECU. I am hoping they find a solution so I can use the 3.2.
FYI, In the subie world they sometimes use an older ECU with a newer engine to get around the immobilizer.
I already asked. Apparently. they cannot do that here because the older ECU does not allow them to download their tune files onto it.
I understand the advantages of using the stock ECU (and Carey and company are way more experienced with all of this than I am) - but in situations like this, I wonder if a standalone ECU like MegaSquirt or Speeduino wouldn't be worth looking at.
I understand that the variable cams are the secret sauce, and I've got no idea if the rudimentary ECUs could handle it, but the whole "immobilizer" circuitry thing is really putting a brake on running a lot of tasty modern engines in alternate applications.
I use stock ECU for a variety of reasons, but simple drivability is probably the top. MOST clients don't have the desire or ability to write tune files, and I've played with a LOT of various "self tuning" aftermarket standalone, but nothing ever compares to the reliability and ease of a stock ECU, OBD-II diagnostics, etc...
As Joel knows, we are just starting to play with watercooled P car drivetrains, so I am certainly not the expert int hat field (yet) so I'll revert to my Subaru experience. I have yet to see any standalone that even starts to compare to the stock Subaru ECU in terms od the advanced self-tuning ability, cold start, warm up, adaptation to driving style, adaptation to environment/altitude/humidity/ambient temp/etc...
@et al.
And as for the earlier fitment questions, this will be the first in a coupe, and I'm smart enough to know it will come with its own challenges, however almost 3" of the Boxster engine added length is low on the motor and mounts, so the minor chassis changes for fitment will happen at the base of the seat, which is already a dead space, thus I can leave the firewall completely unchanged at the top of the seat where it matters for leg room. Gearbox is shorter, which helps. Plus I can run 930 high angle CVs with high angle CV boots, which allows me to take up some additional offset without CV stress or the fear of wearing out stock CV boots through misalignment.
My subie tech is a rally racer who has a direct relationship with Subaru and sells ultra high performance fully modified new cars under the Subaru wing with their blessing. They use an aftermarket tune but their techs are out there skilled.
Having said that most of us are far from our builder so a stock écu is the answer to get local service without much suffering and why fix or change something that has a million cars using it?
i would differ to the builders choice he knows what after sales service from far away is like.
Great explanation Carey
I totally get why you use factory ECUs. Their startup, warmup, and drivability are VERY hard to match. Their ease-of-use, impossible to match.
Aftermarket is more flexible, but requires way more TIME. You don't have the time in your endless car-building to devote to tuning. I'm going through this right now with my EFI. It's not easy as it is my first, but I'm getting there making little advances. Warm, the engine drives great, I'm probably 80% there. Once it's polished warm I'll start on the cold start/warmup curves. Did I say this takes time?
The immobilizer thing is going to come to a head though, just like the chassis thing you've already tackled: getting away from the VW frame/pan/suspension roots. A non-factory ECU is going to be a necessity for performance.
RE: CV joints:
On my Cayman, the axles are angled forward about 10 degrees or so. I'm sure it is to provide decent legroom in the mid-engine dimensions. Your plan sounds perfect for dealing with the additional length of the Boxster motor. Carry on.