Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy Squirrel
....edit.....
Maybe so, but Dilavar has won Lemans outright on 15+ occasions. I think I'm going with Dr Metzger on this one.
.....edit......
|
Wow, more hero worship.
I guess by this answer, you believe that Porsche engineers never make mistakes?
You think the 2.8/3.0 RSR engine was the same as the engine offered to the public.?
You think the RSR used magnesium cases?
You think the heads were the same as a 2.7 or 3.0?
You think the cranks were the same?
Do you believe that the later 74.4 cranks offered to the consumer was a "great" crank and rod design? No room for improvement? Do you believe that ARP bolts are a major improvement over Porsche rod bolts in these engines?
Do you believe that the cranks in Porsche race cars ever use the 55mm rod journal found in production cars?
How do you feel about the rod length to stroke ratio offered in production 911 engines. In most Porsche engines, it sucks.
Most people who understand these basic concepts understand that engines are built with compromises....even Porsches.
As these flaws start to materialize, innovative engine builders seek to push the envelope with design improvements.
Tensioner arms, rockers, rod to stroke ratios, head studs, rod bolts, compression ratios, cam profiles all deviate from the long held production precepts to produce a longer lived and much improved platform for the Porsche driving experience.