I think you are right if it is only a question of maximum power, but i have last year made a total very nice rebuild of my 3.0 engine. I like that engine, but i would like to get rid of the CIS. and get another programable system, combined with an good origianl Porsche Intake for road use. Therefore i am interested in these 3.6 intakes. Another disadvantage with ITB's for a road going car is that you ned to have more complicated linkage to adjust on to keep it in balance. I like the single throtlebody setup, and the clean original Porsche look of the engine. :-)

Hi, were did you got those adapters from?? I'll like to get a hold on a set!

Is your V-ram intake complete with injector-body's and fuel-rail and so on ?

He is selling them.

The billet adapters for the cylinder heads are in stock.

Rothsport Racing 503 885 9626 Jeff Gamroth

911-32 questions response
 

The dyno graph represents a stock 3.2 engine with the original 3.2 low impedance injectors and uses the stock AFM.

Our 3.6 plastic intake uses a new style Bosch EV6 injector with DTA or Motec engine management. There are multiple ECU options depending on your budget. We use engine temp. sensor..air temp. sensor..map sensor for baro. compensation.. throttle position switch..reference sensor.. sync. sensor for those who want sequential setup. There are multiple configurations for the ignition system, from our new billet upper valve covers that incorporate the 996 style coil on plug, or a wasted spark system with no distributor, or you can use a distributor with a single coil. We have no need for the stock AFM, so your options are either a stock single throttle body, 3.6 style, or individual throttle bodies. The individual throttle bodies use our own custom linkage as seen in the photos below. You use the stock throttle rod that comes up from the gearbox bellcrank. The single stock throttle body uses the OEM stock 3.2 bellcrank setup on top of the engine with a custom length rod to attach to the throttle body.

The adapters for the 3.2 heads as seen in my previous post do cover the injector cutout in the head, but this is a small detail that can only be tested on a flow bench to see what if any difference it makes. You could always weld this small divot if you like. The adapters are made as thin as possible to keep the injectors low.

We do not have any adapters for the 993 aplication you mentioned.



http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1227740520.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1227740537.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1227740552.jpg

3.6 with high butterfly race setup
 

High butterfly race setup pictures.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1227741523.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1227741536.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1227741549.jpg

I like the tall manifolds! Nice.

Cheers

Again, very useful - thank you :)

I have one adapter from SRP and, being in the UK, I will have a machinist copy that but adding the taper so 993 stack mates to 3.2 head. I have talked to SRP and they say the 3.4 they put a 964 intake on was left with the injector cut-outs in the heads covered but not filled, so maybe that's not critical.

Appreciate the steer on the throttle linkage as I have not started thinking that thru yet. Still in part acquisition mode.

RB

Good stuff in this thread - thanks for starting it Chris!

RSSCOTTY,

Can you enlighten us to what one may see power/torque curve wise with high butterly vs low and high injector placement vs low?

Cheers

HB info.
 

Jeff,

I wish we had the time and parts available to do more testing as far as your questions go. There is nothing I would enjoy more than to be full time in the dyno room to squeeze more power out of our engines.

We based our high butterfly setup on a lot of homework and consulting with various people with similar experience. This HB setup worked well, produced good top end HP numbers, and another important factor was a simple mounting system for air filtration. Our throttle linkage setup also worked well at this height. See picture below.

Also picture of Lola engine with high butterfly.

Next time we get a RSR engine with slide valves and high stacks with high or low injector placement available I will test both.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1227843661.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1227843732.jpg

I used this intake set-up on my hot-rod 3.4 street engine. Mainly because the intake is cast from basically; plastic and the runner length and volume is almost exact from cylinder to cylinder. The resonance pipe enhances top-end performance starting at @4500 rpm.
It is very difficult to get the stock cast 3.2 intake runners equal volume with extrude honing and if you want the most out of your 3.4 than this set-up or ITB's are the way to go

BMW also went to plastic intakes at about the same time for the same reasons as Porsche did: cheaper manufacturing costs, improved performance and lighter weight.

I went a different route with engine management. I used the stock motronic, am having the board updated to the later - '87-up and had a custom chip burned. I'll be using a MAF conversion from Lindsey racing with pots for fine tuning the mix. I am also using a simple MSD RPM controller for operating the resonance tube/flap

You'll have to cut the webs the hold the upper crossover and throttle body to the lower resonance tube. This is so you can rotate the upper tube downward so that the throttle body doe not hit the top of the engine compartment. (ask me how I know)

Because you have to use the 3-to-2 bolt adaptors, the extra height from these are where the clearance problems come from.

If you retain the a/c you'll have to use the 964 compressor because the earlier compressor will be too long and hit the intake. Plus you'll have to use the 964 a/c hoses and adapt them to your existing high and low pressure hard lines in the car

I used a throttle cable conversion from Pat Williams racing to elimate my relay-rod set-up.

I used the injectors that came with the 964 intake because my engine was larger in displacement, fairly hot cams and headers with cylinder head work. It's easier to drive slightly larger injectors lean than to try to take the stock injectors and drive/pulse them open longer for more fuel

I don't know if this is right, however, 9M advised that the high impedence 3.2 injectors will flow more fuel than the low impedence 964 injectors. Colin said to stick with the 3.2 injectors and if necessary use a 964 fuel pressure regulator to get more fuel pressure.

Very useful info on the engine bay clearance and useful knowing of the throttle cable conversion kit if necessary.

RB

I cannot verify if any resistance values are different between the the two sets of injectors.................first that I've heard. Maybe someone here could could elaborate........

3.2 #0280150158- 21.8 lbs/hr 229.1 cc/min @ 36.25 lbs
964 #0280150731- 18.45 lbs/hr 193.9 cc/min @ 43.5 lbs

thanks !!

High impedance injectors have a typical resistance in the 11-13 Ohm range. Low-Z will be 2-4 Ohms.

Be careful with injector selection. Some ECUs can not drive the low-Z injectors due to the increased current draw. It might burn out your injector drivers. There is no reason to run larger injectors unless you are running at max duty-cycle (>85%). Otherwise, oversized injectors just induce low-speed tuning problems since the open-close time is longer than the required fuel delivery-pulse.

Based on Steve W's recommendations I have been looking at installing such a plenum on a set of ITBs. I would love to do a VarioRam on ITBs but the buy-in price may be too much for me. :)

From Randy's motor, I can say it works well. There were numerous teething problems, but if you want one, the R&D is already done...just call Chris' German in Bellevue, WA. They built it. That said, this is still a megabucks install on anything but the motor it was designed for. Whateve number you think it will cost to build...double it.

It's actually the other way around: The 3.2 stock injectors are low-impedance around 2.5 Ohm. And all six are wired in parallel resulting in an ultra-low total impedance seen by the single output stage of the 3.2 DME. The final impedance according to 1/Rtot=1/r1+1/r2...+1/r6 is only 0.43 Ohm. The 3.2 DME uses a peak&hold driver with pulsed output for current regulation and active flyback supression to handle rather complex load. It is realized with discrete darlington transistors.

The 3.6 injectors are high-impedance with around 16 Ohm and each is driven individually by its own low-side MOSFET switch. Integrated power MOSFET circuits made this possible.

Ingo

Ok so here's the question $10K then.......................................... I have the 3.6 injectors with the intake on my hot-rod 3.4....................... I'm planning to use the stock motronic with revised board and chip.............................will this work? I was told many had used this combo a few years ago here with great success ?

Let me know / thanks all