3.4l 996 intake manifold on 3.2S motor

[Robert986]

One more thought on this topic..

I understand that the engine will need to be lowered quite a bit to fit the 996-intake, but if one where to manufacture a tailored engine cover with more clearance? Would that work? Or are there also fitting issues at the outside edge of the engine cover? One would have to sacrifice the subwoofer, but thats rarely used on a track inspired car anyhow.

[BYprodriver]

Originally Posted by Quadcammer

While I do believe it added a bit of top end power, I'm not sure its worth the trouble as the lower ground clearance and work involved. If you want the absolute last hp, do it, otherwise I'm not convinced.

I would be surprised if it didn't lose some low RPM torque.

[Quadcammer]

Originally Posted by Robert986

One more thought on this topic..

I understand that the engine will need to be lowered quite a bit to fit the 996-intake, but if one where to manufacture a tailored engine cover with more clearance? Would that work? Or are there also fitting issues at the outside edge of the engine cover? One would have to sacrifice the subwoofer, but thats rarely used on a track inspired car anyhow.

My clearance issue was with the front lip of the engine bay, not the cover itself. That said, you can (and I do) run the engine cover from a cayman or 987 boxster. Its higher up though, so unless you hollow out your carpeted cover, it will not fit well.

[Quadcammer]

Originally Posted by BYprodriver

I would be surprised if it didn't lose some low RPM torque.

possibly. I don't spend much time below 5k though, so it wasn't a huge concern for me.

[BYprodriver]

Originally Posted by Quadcammer

possibly. I don't spend much time below 5k though, so it wasn't a huge concern for me.

I have all the parts from a 2002 996 intake for sale if anyone wants to make the conversion.

[Robert986]

One more on this topic..

Did you use the oem exhaust manifold?
I would like to try the 996 intake but cannot lower my engine since my equal length headers will touch the subframe support arm (98633108003)

[Quadcammer]

No i run fabspeed 97 to 99 headers, which may be different than later models

[jaykay]

If one does lower the engine how is it actually accomplished? Are there any issues other than clearance?

I would like to temporarily lower just to remove my airbox but unsure on how to properly do this without wrecking something.

[Robert986]

Originally Posted by jaykay

If one does lower the engine how is it actually accomplished? Are there any issues other than clearance?

I would like to temporarily lower just to remove my airbox but unsure on how to properly do this without wrecking something.

Good question.. I will try to temporarly lower my engine soon for some fixes, I´ll take the headers off first, but then I´m a bit worried about the oil filler tube. Will it not crack?

[Robert986]

Originally Posted by Quadcammer

No i run fabspeed 97 to 99 headers, which may be different than later models

Ok thanks for answer.. Then I guess that Fabspeeds headers are a bit narrower than the ebay headers i use, they do not clear if I lower.

[Quadcammer]

Originally Posted by jaykay

If one does lower the engine how is it actually accomplished? Are there any issues other than clearance?

I would like to temporarily lower just to remove my airbox but unsure on how to properly do this without wrecking something.

If its just for temp repairs, its easy.

Support oil pan with 2x4 on a jack.

Remove the 4 nuts on the motor mount

Lower jack slowly.

You may run into the motor mount hitting the studs due to angle. If so, use i believe a 7mm socket to unscrew the motor mount studs.


As to the question of how I lowered the motor. I bought a m10 spacer and some longer studs and just added the spacer between the motor mount and the chassis with some hardened washers.


There is flex in the oil filler tube, but if you're concerned, just disconnect it at the motor end.

[jaykay]

Thanks very much! Sounds like this could be accomplished on jack stands and sounds way too easy! Although it would good to have some sort stand for the engine. Okay so this pertains to the front mount I assume. I will dig up the one I pulled out years ago to see if makes sense to me.

How much of a temporary drop can one hope to get with this method?


Can the rear trans mounts take the rotation and not be permanently damaged?


How can the trans mounts take this as a permanent condition they would be in a twist.

[jaykay]

Originally Posted by Quadcammer

If its just for temp repairs, its easy.

Support oil pan with 2x4 on a jack.

Remove the 4 nuts on the motor mount

Lower jack slowly.

You may run into the motor mount hitting the studs due to angle. If so, use i believe a 7mm socket to unscrew the motor mount studs.


As to the question of how I lowered the motor. I bought a m10 spacer and some longer studs and just added the spacer between the motor mount and the chassis with some hardened washers.


There is flex in the oil filler tube, but if you're concerned, just disconnect it at the motor end.

Okay if it’s only the filler tube to worry about no sweat. I have fixed that thing a few times. I would have thought there were at least half a dozen things that could get hung up

[Robert986]

Any answer for jaykay:s question? "Can the rear trans mounts take the rotation and not be permanently damaged?


How can the trans mounts take this as a permanent condition they would be in a twist."

[ike84]

Robert, you can easily drop the front of the motor by an inch and the tranny mounts will barely have any deflection. It's the geometry of the mounts that allows this. Go slow and you won't have any problems.

Maybe I'm missing something but I've got to ask. Recently when I swapped out my stock TB and intake plenum (only the TB housing, not the runners) I measured the entry diameter of the runners to be 3.5". This is on a 2000 base box with 2.7. Because of this I didn't even think of doing any further modifications because at that point the TB was the point of obstruction and I'm obviously not going any bigger than 82mm there. Quadcammer mentioned 73mm though? Where is that measured? I saw the pic above comparing the two side by side and the 996 do indeed look a bit larger but again in terms of fluid dynamics my question would be if this is truly meaningful or if the real money shot is enlarging the narrowest point (in our case, the TB) to ease the point of greatest resistance. My understanding of fluid dynamics as it applies to intakes (and trust me when I say to not trust me!) is that in general the intake cross sectional diameter will taper closer to the heads and thus create an increase in flow velocity which aids in filling of the cylinder volume without creating a single point of significant resistance. The key is to start small and gradually shrink, whereas with our stock setup it seems to be exactly opposite of this (tiny ass intake, restrictive TB, and then relatively big but really a bit undersized runners)

Anyway, just random thoughts while taking a deuce at 11pm on a Saturday.

Sent from my POCOPHONE F1 using Tapatalk

[Sveach756]

Any performance data? I ask as I contemplate my engine choices. 3.4 might be coming out I have a 3.2 donor ready but am kind of on the fence. Maybe I’ll just call the 3.2 a temporary fix and refresh the 3.4. I’ll for sure be putting the 996 intake on if the 3.2 goes in and will try to get some dyno time. Maybe it’ll give a good comparison of the 3.2 vs 3.4 with the same intake. No promises but I am curious to know what a fully tuned 3.2 w this intake will do. The 3.2 will retain all the same stuff and tune I have now/ softronic tune/bmw maf (pretty sure that’s what it is) and 987 air box/underdrive pulley/ intake plenum/ NHP headers to fabspeed exhaust
Shawn