my low budget dream car build

[chrisbalich]

I'm in the throes of deep-diving and could use some anecdotal info.

1. I'm looking to pick up a spare set of spark plugs for my Rennsport trip. I have NGK BPR5EIX in the car now. The 3.1L engine makes ~10.1:1CR and I worry I'm pushing my luck. With the EFI, I can make adjustments on the fly, but I'm thinking of stepping down to 6 heat range plugs for the trip...if not permanently. Thoughts?

2. I live at sea level and fill my single-spark high-ish compression engine with 93 octane fuel. That is not available west of Kansas City. So I'm exploring octane boosters. I'm not keen to make more power. I just want to stave off detonation and engine damage on my road trip without completely redoing my timing map. Please share any experiences.

3. Oil. I typically run VR1 20w50. I'm thinking of trying the Motul Classic Performance for this trip. I'll be going 5k miles on this oil change. I like the VR1, so I'm probably not going to make a change. But it's worth discussing, so please do so.

[shoooo32]

Two thoughts - I forgot you're 10:1 CR so my 9.5:1 91 octane experience may not be applicable. Definitely bring octane boost.

Regarding oil, road trip miles are easy on aircooled engines. You're going 700-1000 miles per day with only one or two cold starts so the oil stays relatively clean. 5k miles is no big deal.

[Focker]

I can't comment on the spark plugs, but I used the VP Octanium additive with very good luck on my racing motorcycle. That was a 12.5:1 pistons with milled heads. IIRC we were just over 13:1 compression.

https://vpracingfuels.com/product/octane-booster-vp-octanium/?c=367&

Didn't have detonation and that was on a carbureted bike.

[ryanjboutin]

Originally Posted by chrisbalich

I'm in the throes of deep-diving and could use some anecdotal info.

1. I'm looking to pick up a spare set of spark plugs for my Rennsport trip. I have NGK BPR5EIX in the car now. The 3.1L engine makes ~10.1:1CR and I worry I'm pushing my luck. With the EFI, I can make adjustments on the fly, but I'm thinking of stepping down to 6 heat range plugs for the trip...if not permanently. Thoughts?

2. I live at sea level and fill my single-spark high-ish compression engine with 93 octane fuel. That is not available west of Kansas City. So I'm exploring octane boosters. I'm not keen to make more power. I just want to stave off detonation and engine damage on my road trip without completely redoing my timing map. Please share any experiences.

3. Oil. I typically run VR1 20w50. I'm thinking of trying the Motul Classic Performance for this trip. I'll be going 5k miles on this oil change. I like the VR1, so I'm probably not going to make a change. But it's worth discussing, so please do so.

I'm at 9.5:1, the same spark plugs, and the same oil.
I'm currently running a full tank of VP110 (available on tap locally) and it's good, reliable power, no knocks or anything.

Maybe adjust timing or use a colder spark plug for the trip?
That way you're not fumbling with bottles or worrying about your octane levels when traversing the Rockies and there are no octane boosters available.

Just thinking aloud.

[shoooo32]

The rockies aren't a concern - at 3k ft elevation, the car is making 9.2:1 compression. At 6k ft, it's making 8.4:1 compression. At 11k, you're just glad it's still running.

California (specifically the central valley where its a zillion degrees and 300 ft elevation) is where I'd toss a bottle of octane boost in.

[fanaudical]

My personal opinion is to stay with the VR1 on the trip and try Motul when you're closer to home. A long trip usually isn't hard on the oil (comes up to temp and stays there). I think you'd rather be near home if one of your seals finds it doesn't like the Motul...

[chrisbalich]

Originally Posted by shoooo32

Two thoughts - I forgot you're 10:1 CR so my 9.5:1 91 octane experience may not be applicable. Definitely bring octane boost.

Regarding oil, road trip miles are easy on aircooled engines. You're going 700-1000 miles per day with only one or two cold starts so the oil stays relatively clean. 5k miles is no big deal.

Definitely taking octane booster.
VR1 is en route. As clean as it looks at 3k of beating on it, I'm sure it'll be ok with 5k of mostly freeway.

Originally Posted by Focker

I can't comment on the spark plugs, but I used the VP Octanium additive with very good luck on my racing motorcycle. That was a 12.5:1 pistons with milled heads. IIRC we were just over 13:1 compression.

https://vpracingfuels.com/product/octane-booster-vp-octanium/?c=367&

Didn't have detonation and that was on a carbureted bike.

Thank you. Good info. I ordered 104 branded octane boost. We'll see how it does.

Originally Posted by ryanjboutin

I'm at 9.5:1, the same spark plugs, and the same oil.
I'm currently running a full tank of VP110 (available on tap locally) and it's good, reliable power, no knocks or anything.

Maybe adjust timing or use a colder spark plug for the trip?
That way you're not fumbling with bottles or worrying about your octane levels when traversing the Rockies and there are no octane boosters available.

Just thinking aloud.

I don't want to make an entire timing map for this trip if I can avoid it.

Originally Posted by shoooo32

The rockies aren't a concern - at 3k ft elevation, the car is making 9.2:1 compression. At 6k ft, it's making 8.4:1 compression. At 11k, you're just glad it's still running.

California (specifically the central valley where its a zillion degrees and 300 ft elevation) is where I'd toss a bottle of octane boost in.

I'm still going to have an ear out just in case.

Originally Posted by fanaudical

My personal opinion is to stay with the VR1 on the trip and try Motul when you're closer to home. A long trip usually isn't hard on the oil (comes up to temp and stays there). I think you'd rather be near home if one of your seals finds it doesn't like the Motul...

The seals are something I hadn't considered. That's an excellent point.
Going with VR1 for this trip.

[chrisbalich]

mid-weekend update

Yesterday, I collected the second 914. It's now tucked safely away in the corner of the drive with the 72. (the new one is a 75)


The majority of the destruction, mayhem, and terror are confined to the two hoods and the driver's floor. All of which are easily replaced with parts from the 72 or maybe even a reproduction floor panel.

Last night, I wrapped them up until I get back from Rennsport so I don't lose focus on final preparations for that trip.


Undoubtedly, some of you will have noticed the LBDC's new addition in the above photo. Here are some better shots for your perusal.








Getting the duck fitted (for the first time, actually) was a bit of a chore. Despite all the hours of work I have to make it less $hitty, it's still a POS. So the gaps are messy and the trailing edge isn't forking flat. But what I'm after here is a general YES or NO on the duck at all. I can bodywork it further. The Krylon that's on it looks like ass and cannot stay even tho I like the color.

PLEASE CHIME IN

Some of the work that went into getting it mounted in a way that would enable very quick changes between the duck and the smooth lids include, but are not limited to, these trick bushings I modified to use as lower bumps since I only have the bumps that are in the hood and smooth decklid and I wasn't going to swipe either of those.


Forgive the unevenness of the bushings. I modified them on the belt sander as they did not play nicely with the lathe. *The pic is a before/after, not a left/right.

My favorite part of the duck so far is this detail...which goes away with a decklid grille.


I'm not sold on the duck at all despite this being my favorite iteration thereof. So if you have an opinion, please do share it.

[Gonbad]

Walks like a duck, talks like duck, looks like duck - then it’s a duck.

I like ducks ��.

[ADDvanced]

So, from far away, I think it looks pretty cool. But up close, I hate almost every single one not only due to poor fitment, but becuase the design itself doesn't look good. The fact is the, duck was a quick engineering fix, and the form is the result of compromises- the biggest one being it's method of construction. The factory ducks, and almost all the repops, sit proud of the factory decklid, and produce a bumped out surface under the duck.



I had a whole thread on it here:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/1130110-ducktail-critique-industrial-design-perspective.html

From a design perspective they all look wrong/****ed up to me. YMMV, everyone has an opinion, but the way the surfaces are formed all wonky would drive me crazy every time I looked at it.

[Evan Fullerton]

Porsche 911 in their entirety are a hodge podge of engineering solutions to improve function. That’s what makes them what they are.

Ducktails are functional, whale tales even more so as aero evolved. They weren’t designed by a designer, they were made to work.

If you want a designer’s car where function came second, buy a Lamborghini. Countach have an iconic wing engineered to provide no downforce or function.

[MFX]

I like the duck, but I am biased. Easy thing would be just to paint the rest of the car to match the colour of the duck, and the flat lid (did I mention I like colour ) and you can swap them out as you please :P

[chrisbalich]

Originally Posted by Gonbad

Walks like a duck, talks like duck, looks like duck - then it’s a duck.

I like ducks ��.

Thanks! I've been getting this a lot.

Originally Posted by ADDvanced

So, from far away, I think it looks pretty cool. But up close, I hate almost every single one not only due to poor fitment, but becuase the design itself doesn't look good. The fact is the, duck was a quick engineering fix, and the form is the result of compromises- the biggest one being it's method of construction. The factory ducks, and almost all the repops, sit proud of the factory decklid, and produce a bumped out surface under the duck.



I had a whole thread on it here:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/1130110-ducktail-critique-industrial-design-perspective.html

From a design perspective they all look wrong/****ed up to me. YMMV, everyone has an opinion, but the way the surfaces are formed all wonky would drive me crazy every time I looked at it.

I read that thread for a while when it was current. It's best left dead.
My query was more of a overall aesthetic, not final fit and finish.

Originally Posted by Evan Fullerton

Porsche 911 in their entirety are a hodge podge of engineering solutions to improve function. That’s what makes them what they are.

Ducktails are functional, whale tales even more so as aero evolved. They weren’t designed by a designer, they were made to work.

If you want a designer’s car where function came second, buy a Lamborghini. Countach have an iconic wing engineered to provide no downforce or function.

So, do you like it? Or no?

Originally Posted by MFX

I like the duck, but I am biased. Easy thing would be just to paint the rest of the car to match the colour of the duck, and the flat lid (did I mention I like colour ) and you can swap them out as you please :P

I know you like bold colors, Jeff. I just don't think a bold color would work on this car as well as a subtle one. A bold color hogs all the attention and the smaller details I've labored over get overlooked. Now a bold accent here or there that complement the subdued body color draw the eye without overwhelming.

[David Borden]

I like the duck, and it works on your car. I think the color may be throwing things off for the worse in trying to determine how well it fits the car's esthetics.

BTW, I've really enjoyed this thread...

David

[David Borden]

While drinking my morning coffee, I took a few of your images and changed the color of the duck for you. Hopefully it will make it easier to visualize what it would like like in body color.

[Focker]

I'm biased, but I like it.

I know my painter did a ton of work to get it to fit the way he wanted it too and mine was one of the better quality units available.

IMO, the duck is the next best thing to a slick decklid given the ethos of your car. I just don't think a big wing works on the narrow bodied SC (just my opinion though)

[MFX]

Originally Posted by chrisbalich

I know you like bold colors, Jeff. I just don't think a bold color would work on this car as well as a subtle one. A bold color hogs all the attention and the smaller details I've labored over get overlooked. Now a bold accent here or there that complement the subdued body color draw the eye without overwhelming.

Haha. I am a wierdo who likes crazy colours, but for me personally everything on the road today is a sea of monotonous monochrome. I just prefer cars that have some sort of colour, even subtle colours

...but I am a big advocate for building your car the way you want it and screw everyone else

[fanaudical]

The contrasting color was throwing me in the pics above. I like the duck tail in the same body color as your car as shown in the later pics.

[Showdown]

I've told Chris my feelings via text but here's a longer take:

For Chris' car my initial reaction was yes to the red tail but as I've spent more time thinking about it and looking at the car I have deepened my thinking, gad zooks!

So herein I'll make a few arguments, for, against and maybe one that makes no sense at all.


PRO
Ducks are cool and they harken back to a home brew garage effort Porsche made to fix a problem and add performance. They were mostly engineer-driven and fit oddly, were crudely made but served a purpose; plant that ass. And plant it they did; the numbers didn't lie and that matters.

So, on any car the addition of a duck yields performance improvements and Chris has been chasing improvements everywhere he can find them.

But it's about more than just performance as I don't think Chris is chasing records on the track or hitting 150mph that I know of so the performance improvements, while not lost aren't really what this is about. This is about style.

And in its red punk rock loud AF appearance it totally fits with the build and offers a bit of color on an otherwise completely gray car. A color that could be pulled into the interior to start to create a really interesting palate.

It's an IDGAF on a car that doesn't work for free and is barely giving a f#@k away.


CON
Ducks are overused and formulaic, just like slapping an "outlaw" badge on one's car; it lacks creativity and follows a well worn path of safety and convention. Don't get me wrong, sometimes that's totally ok; if the car is an RS clone, or a period recreation of a privateer racer, etc... but not if the entire ethos of the car is breaking with convention and being a custom, idiosyncratic expression of the owner. Dropped, chopped, drilled and tucked; all of these are part of Chris' car and the duck feels too easy, too normal, too mail order-Porsche.

Don't be that guy. as 50 Cent so eloquently put it;

You say you a gangsta, but you never pop nothin'
We say you a wanksta and you need to stop frontin'

CONCLUSION
So, my final thoughts are both yes and no to the duck. That said, I'd offer that if the duck is to stay it should be, nay, must be modified, drilled out, tucked or otherwise bent to the will of the car in Chris' style. Nary has a stock part made it on to the car without being worked over. That's just how Chris rolls and so to merely bolt on a stock duck is too conventional for this car and feels like phoning it in and that's not Chris' style at all.

[ADDvanced]

Originally Posted by Showdown

That said, I'd offer that if the duck is to stay it should be, nay, must be modified, drilled out, tucked or otherwise bent to the will of the car in Chris' style. Nary ha stock part made it on to the car without being worked over. That's just how Chris rolls and so to merely bolt on a stock duck is too conventional for this car and feels like phoning it in and that's not Chris' style at all.

1000%. Cut more parts of it out and keep the aero surfaces functional but maybe add more big holes under the back so you can see that engine to distract from all the surfacing issues.