[hallonz]

Thebob -

To be honest, you come across as highly argumentative... and not in a good way. You are also guilty of putting words in people's mouths, and turning their words around to fit your own arguments. I am not impressed.

......


So, YOUR opinion might be that that 987.2 aftermarket exhausts make no additional power - since they are at best a noise maker and "does not unrestrict flow in the slightest". Have you flow-benched all the aftermarket exhausts vs. stock exhausts? Have you compared the fluid dynamics between different systems? Until you do, and you provide those results for all to see, dynos, flowcharts, and numbers... YOU are talking out of your ***.

Pot calling the kettle black?

For instance, in the search for performance, we may be comfortable with a vehicle with increased emissions, louder sound, and higher cost. That's why we spend $2000 on a cat-back exhaust, when Porsche might spend $500 making the stock exhaust

I would argue that "we" (as in: Porsche owners) do that due to lack of knowledge, or the other way around - due to buying into marketing fluff. I do not count myself into that crowd; yes I am fortunate to be in a financial situation that allows me to have a Porsche as a weekend toy. It doesn't mean I am an idiot with more money than common sense. Most of the products for the Porsche aftermarket assume just that; just because we can afford a high $ car we can spend high $ on aftermarket parts. I for one think that is very cynical. In the case of exhaust - it's just a couple of pieces of pipe, in that sense it's not rocket science. As you yourself say: it's better to be a sceptic than to be gullible. And we Porsche owners tend to be the latter....


My opinion is to each his own; if someone want to spend their money it's really not my concern. My concern is that when doing so they are effectively aiding to keeping the aftermarket prices overinflated. And to justify that spending you will hold the claims of the marketer as absolute truth, regardless of actual outcome. I think this is what TheBob is going after, although I could be wrong.

Fact is: cat-backs on a 987.2 will add sound more than power. I would put them in the same category as de-snork and air filter. If we want to nitpick they will offer a slight measurable gain if put on a dyno. But the only noticeable gain will be the sound increase. Which most of us will falsely interpret as making (substantially) more power. If that was "truth", then why not just unbolt the exhaust alltogether - it should make the most power since it makes more sound?

When you add a canned tune, you will effectively get a Cayman R base file with e-gas tweaks to get a quicker response when pressing the pedal to the right. To expect 360HP from this is, well, remarkable. TheBob's point about the 991 Carrera is that Porsche had to add some mechanical parts to make that kind of power with the same exact engine. AND a tune. If they could just alter the tune, don't you think they would have walked down that more cost effective path instead? They are doing it with the 981 GTS (340HP). So I don't think that logic is invalid. But I understand your point about comparing a tuned 3.4L 991 Carrera engine vs a 3.4L 987.2 Engine with similar mods. I would like to see this as well.

 

[trebien]

Pot calling the kettle black?

Yes, somewhat tongue in cheek... maybe a little taste of one's own medicine. ;-)

It doesn't mean I am an idiot with more money than common sense.

No, in fact... that's how many of us came to be in a position to own a Porsche in the first place.

In the case of exhaust - it's just a couple of pieces of pipe, in that sense it's not rocket science.

While appearing rather simple in function, both intake and exhaust side science has evolved highly, as engines come from the factory with very high specific outputs. The "max" flow possible thought process of a decade ago, or specific to turbos, goes out the window. There are many considerations, such as torque vs. top HP, resonance, drone, etc... but I get your point.

Fact is: cat-backs on a 987.2 will add sound more than power. I would put them in the same category as de-snork and air filter. If we want to nitpick they will offer a slight measurable gain if put on a dyno. But the only noticeable gain will be the sound increase. Which most of us will falsely interpret as making (substantially) more power. If that was "truth", then why not just unbolt the exhaust alltogether - it should make the most power since it makes more sound?

I agree that the cat-back on a 987.2 is less useful than a 987.1 vehicle, no doubt. However, as a vehicle is tuned more and more above stock, every little piece matters. Thebob effectively said it does NO good whatsoever, and that's inaccurate, or at best, a guess and personal opinion. In fact, in another thread on the Cayman R, he actually touted the increased exhaust piping size of the R?!? Can't have your cake and eat it, too.

When you add a canned tune, you will effectively get a Cayman R base file with e-gas tweaks to get a quicker response when pressing the pedal to the right. To expect 360HP from this is, well, remarkable.

I disagree. Maybe similar in function and parameters altered, but it's not a Cayman R file. If it were that simple, how would Softronic offered a tune file for years before the Cayman R even came out? And it strongly seems, by independent dyno, that the new Softronic 93 octane file mentioned gets ~345-350 on a tune alone. Maybe a few more HP with a cat-back. It might just be, that at that state of tune, it was found that the cat-back section could add a little more flow and power. But Thebob immediately disagreed, with no data to back it up... while simultaneously asking Softronic for data, who had just posted and referred to dynos done at a 3rd party shop, for a customer that I don't think Softronic even knew was dynoing the car.

TheBob's point about the 991 Carrera is that Porsche had to add some mechanical parts to make that kind of power with the same exact engine. AND a tune. If they could just alter the tune, don't you think they would have walked down that more cost effective path instead?

Yes, but no - that's not why they did it. Quite the opposite. The 991 uses the same airbox, filter assembly for all models and engine sizes. In order for that intake structure to mate up to all engines, they needed the same size (larger) throttle body as the other engines. In doing so, they didn't need the resonance flap anymore. So yes, it was for cost savings, and simplified assembly on the line. Porsche receives the airbox, filter, intake assembly as one piece... ready to just pop in the car on the line... no matter the engine size. This keeps it simple, and also parts count lower. But... the actual downpipes from the plenum to the intakes, is the same size as the 987.2 engine. In related news, the 991 now uses all the same header section across all engine models - reduced parts count and easier assembly again. The reason they don't use the 987.2 headers on the 991, is because the exhaust would point the wrong direction in the 991.

Let's not forget... there's a reason that Porsche is the most profitable car company out there. ;-)

They are doing it with the 981 GTS (340HP). So I don't think that logic is invalid.

Because all the parts are pretty much the same from CS to CGTS, so then this goes back to the question of if Porsche can get this power out of a GTS with just a remap, why can't a 987.2?

It's always important to remember that Porsche makes cars NOT the best they can be, but for perfect product placement for maximum profit. And in the Cayman, that meant holding it back from the 911. We all know this.

:cheers:

 

[trebien]

And as a side note... this may all be a bit moot. I was going to get a remap anyway, but am considering the Softronic Power Package.

If I did, out of curiosity and a desire for data... I would likely dyno the base, tune, and exhaust for comparison... and would be glad to post for the benefit of the community. Maybe it's the aerospace engineer in me, but I like the data and analysis... and just curious to see what I am getting.

If I can add value and data for the community in the process, all the better.

I know that in my search over the years, I always wished there was more data, more dynos... especially with back-to-back base runs, same day, same dyno. I'm sure many feel the same way...

 

[hallonz]

I disagree. Maybe similar in function and parameters altered, but it's not a Cayman R file. If it were that simple, how would Softronic offered a tune file for years before the Cayman R even came out? And it strongly seems, by independent dyno, that the new Softronic 93 octane file mentioned gets ~345-350 on a tune alone. Maybe a few more HP with a cat-back. It might just be, that at that state of tune, it was found that the cat-back section could add a little more flow and power. But Thebob immediately disagreed, with no data to back it up... while simultaneously asking Softronic for data, who had just posted and referred to dynos done at a 3rd party shop, for a customer that I don't think Softronic even knew was dynoing the car.

I think we have to agree to disagree then. Please note that I am not out to get Softronic, or any tuner for that matter, I just call it as I see it. A canned tune is by its very own definition something that will produce a quick, easy and safe power boost that can be reproduced time and again. What could be easier than to use a file that is already optimized by Porsche as a base - then tweak it a bit? Sure now that the 987.2 DME is cracked some legit tuners actually tune the car. But pure business logic is to follow the path of least resistance to maximize profit. As I have mentioned in the 981 forum - everyone is just waiting for the GTS to hit the market so they can copy that DME file and re-sell as a 981 "tune".

But to answer your question - I think Softronic first offered an altered Cayman S file, then used the Cayman R file as a base when it came around. It also has to do with the Siemens ECU used in the 987.2 was easy, relatively speaking, to crack. To be honest I don't know since I wasn't around the Porsche scene back then. There could be a ton of other answers as well if I had the background info needed to make more than a qualified guess. But fact is - with the 987.2 which I do own and have tinkered with myself quite a bit - it really is that easy...believe it or not.

Also note that I haven't expressed my opinion about tuners selling rebranded base tunes with minor tweaks, just calling it as I see it. If one were to ask me of my opinion in the matter my statement would be that if I were a 981 BoxsterS och CaymanS owner I really wouldn't care. Because the results would be undisputable and reproducible. I know that I would at the very least get 340HP with one of those "tunes". And on a 315HP Boxster S that is quite a decent jump with just a tune and it would be the first thing I do in terms of modifications. As a 987.2 owner I would be more reserved with my expectations, not to get disappointed. If I had a Cayman R I would leave it alone, or get a custom tune. If I had a Cayman/Boxster S I know I would get 330HP - anything over that is bonus.

My problem comes with the marketing rhetoric that will claim a lot of R&D to inflate prices. That kind of mis-information I am NOT OK with. People need to know what they buy, fair and square, then decide if it's worth it. Some tuners, and again I am not pointing fingers to any specific party, tend to overexaggerate the effect of their products, their efforts getting a product to market and respond in rather shady ways with the excuse that they don't want to risk their "intellectual property"...

In this sense I feel that Scott/Softronic is actually being one of the more honest tuners; because even if he doesn't outright say it, it is there between the lines. And I am OK with that. I just want more power.

But... the actual downpipes from the plenum to the intakes, is the same size as the 987.2 engine.

I might misunderstand what you mean by "downpipe", that's normally something I would expect to talk about on the exhaust side not intake. But if you mean the intake pipe between the plenum and TB then you are completely wrong. The pipe wouldn't mate up with a 74mm TB if it was infact a 991 82mm tube. I have an aftermarket plenum myself, I could post a picture comparing to the stock tube if you want.

And as a side note... this may all be a bit moot. I was going to get a remap anyway, but am considering the Softronic Power Package.

If I did, out of curiosity and a desire for data... I would likely dyno the base, tune, and exhaust for comparison... and would be glad to post for the benefit of the community. Maybe it's the aerospace engineer in me, but I like the data and analysis... and just curious to see what I am getting.

If I can add value and data for the community in the process, all the better.

I have the same intention, with the exception that I already have all the parts ready and installed. My own experiment would be to dyno the car before/after a canned tune to see if/what it actually adds. My own firm belief is that the most power will come from two things: intake (i.e plenum/tb) and exhaust (race cats). The other stuff like tune is icing on the cake, unless you can get a custom tune. And to give credit to TheBob; he as already shown what a HUGE difference there is between a canned and custom tune with dyno sheets etc.

Anyways good luck with your own experiments! :cheers:

 

[trebien]

A canned tune is by its very own definition something that will produce a quick, easy and safe power boost that can be reproduced time and again.

I completely agree... because from car to car, there may be different intakes, air filters, headers, exhausts, gasoline quality, etc. So a canned tune has to be applicable to a wide range of parameters.

I might misunderstand what you mean by "downpipe", that's normally something I would expect to talk about on the exhaust side not intake. But if you mean the intake pipe between the plenum and TB then you are completely wrong. The pipe wouldn't mate up with a 74mm TB if it was infact a 991 82mm tube.

No, that's not what I meant - let me clarify. Not to be overly scientific, but to give parts exact meanings, since we are bridging language barriers:

A typical engine has these parts on the intake side, in this overly simplified order:

Air intake/filter > Throttle Body > Plenum (I think Porsche calls this Distributor Pipe) > Downpipes (per my language - Porsche calls Intake Distributors, right and left) > engine heads

So, I used "downpipes"... yes, which usually refers to exhaust side; sorry for the confusion. I meant the pipes that run from each side of the Plenum, down to the intake ports on the engine heads.

My point being, that these on the 991 are the same as the 987.2 Intake Distributors... further evidencing Porsche's desire to cut cost, and that the intake parts that were changed on the 991 3.4L engine are for reduced parts count for the 991 assembly line and to standardize the TB size, not performance. If the engine needed more flow, likely these Intake Distributors would also be different, as they are the last element before the heads.

Basically, the 991 intake side of the 3.4L is a bastardized combo of the Cayman "distributors" and then 991 parts that are standard across the engine sizes.

 

[Softronic]

But to answer your question - I think Softronic first offered an altered Cayman S file, then used the Cayman R file as a base when it came around. It also has to do with the Siemens ECU used in the 987.2 was easy, relatively speaking, to crack. To be honest I don't know since I wasn't around the Porsche scene back then. There could be a ton of other answers as well if I had the background info needed to make more than a qualified guess. But fact is - with the 987.2 which I do own and have tinkered with myself quite a bit - it really is that easy...believe it or not.

This is completely false and I'm surprised you would make such statements and speculation. I have been making files well before the CaymanR came out and these files have generated more HP then the R does and still continue to. Another thing is that you cant use the R file in the earlier cars as they are not compatible. Softronic was also one of the first reading and flashing the DFI cars via the port well before others.

I have attached another DynoPack Dyno of a car done with a canned file since the other car would have been considered the custom tune that I originally did it on by your standards. You seem to have only two classifications "Canned Tune" and "Dyno or live tune" . Should you make a file that would generate X in HP and with X in parts added the outcome would be relatively the same every time the combination is used. Basically a Dyno or live tune wouldn't offer anything further . Personally I Datalog and tune cars world wide and have records at the Texas Mile, Moscow 500, Daytona and about at every track in the US and to many to list . The best data isn't from a dyno necessarily yet actual data logging of a car under real world characteristics, accelerations, full throttle . constant speed etc.

This is on a CaymanS with flash and exhaust at 380. This file also is not based on the CaymanR yet the CaymanS. I think it generates a little more power than an R does even with a set of headers ......

I also attached a pic of a Race car I flashed in which set Pole like many of them do. Take a look at the other Porsche cars it set it against.

Best,
Scott

 

[Mike R.]

Looks like Scott provided some convincing evidence to debunk the implied allegations of just tweeking/using a higher "spec tune" to bring the "lower spec" cars up in power.

TheBob and hallonz, the ball is in your court to withdraw your implied allegations. I would like to point out that we do not appreciate unsubstantiated allegations and implications against any member of this board, be it a sponsor or not.

Thanks!

 

[hallonz]

No, that's not what I meant - let me clarify. Not to be overly scientific, but to give parts exact meanings, since we are bridging language barriers:

A typical engine has these parts on the intake side, in this overly simplified order:

Air intake/filter > Throttle Body > Plenum (I think Porsche calls this Distributor Pipe) > Downpipes (per my language - Porsche calls Intake Distributors, right and left) > engine heads

So, I used "downpipes"... yes, which usually refers to exhaust side; sorry for the confusion. I meant the pipes that run from each side of the Plenum, down to the intake ports on the engine heads.

My point being, that these on the 991 are the same as the 987.2 Intake Distributors... further evidencing Porsche's desire to cut cost, and that the intake parts that were changed on the 991 3.4L engine are for reduced parts count for the 991 assembly line and to standardize the TB size, not performance. If the engine needed more flow, likely these Intake Distributors would also be different, as they are the last element before the heads.

Basically, the 991 intake side of the 3.4L is a bastardized combo of the Cayman "distributors" and then 991 parts that are standard across the engine sizes.

Ok, that's what I would call intake runners in non-porsche lingo . But now I get you. I might not agree with you but that's another issue. Think of it this way - TPC''s turbo kit uses the existing/OEM runners...they seem to flow enough?

Adding the larger TB/plenum does give quantifiable gains on a 987.2...so it must be doing something .

 

[hallonz]

This is completely false and I'm surprised you would make such statements and speculation. I have been making files well before the CaymanR came out and these files have generated more HP then the R does and still continue to. Another thing is that you cant use the R file in the earlier cars as they are not compatible. Softronic was also one of the first reading and flashing the DFI cars via the port well before others.

I have attached another DynoPack Dyno of a car done with a canned file since the other car would have been considered the custom tune that I originally did it on by your standards. You seem to have only two classifications "Canned Tune" and "Dyno or live tune" . Should you make a file that would generate X in HP and with X in parts added the outcome would be relatively the same every time the combination is used. Basically a Dyno or live tune wouldn't offer anything further . Personally I Datalog and tune cars world wide and have records at the Texas Mile, Moscow 500, Daytona and about at every track in the US and to many to list . The best data isn't from a dyno necessarily yet actual data logging of a car under real world characteristics, accelerations, full throttle . constant speed etc.

This is on a CaymanS with flash and exhaust at 380. This file also is not based on the CaymanR yet the CaymanS. I think it generates a little more power than an R does even with a set of headers ......

I also attached a pic of a Race car I flashed in which set Pole like many of them do. Take a look at the other Porsche cars it set it against.

Best,
Scott
View attachment 47451 View attachment 47453

I don't know if I dare say I do not agree with your statement in bold, lest I be banned....

Anyways, if my thoughts/speculations were interpreted as factual accusations against you personally or your company then I apologize and will stop posting in this matter. I can admit when I am wrong and if you say so then it must be so.

I do not like to have my quotes taken out of context. Nor do I wish to upset anyone. I do not question your expertise as a tuner, I have no reason to either. I think I made it pretty clear I was just guessing but apparently not. Never did I point out you or your company as being one of the cynical ones. In fact I think I did the opposite. If you took it the other way then I am sorry.

TheBob and hallonz, the ball is in your court to withdraw your implied allegations. I would like to point out that we do not appreciate unsubstantiated allegations and implications against any member of this board, be it a sponsor or not.

Noted and any unintentional "implied allegations" should be considered to be retracted from my side.
:cheers:

 

[N0tt0N]

Man, kill this thread Ken. I've never seen such aggressive and uninformed 'guessing' here before.

"Never did I point out you or your company as being one of the cynical ones." um.... "But to answer your question - I think Softronic first offered an altered Cayman S file, then used the Cayman R file as a base when it came around."

Dude, you're just making sh*t up. Hiding behind your own admission that you don't know what your talking about hardly makes it a reasonable thing to do. Nobody here is interested in sharing your obviously rich fantasy life.

D*mnit! Fell for it again and fed the troll....

P.S. Actually, don't kill it. The information from Scott is excellent.

 

[hallonz]

"Never did I point out you or your company as being one of the cynical ones." um.... "But to answer your question - I think Softronic first offered an altered Cayman S file, then used the Cayman R file as a base when it came around."

Dude, you're just making sh*t up. Hiding behind your own admission that you don't know what your talking about hardly makes it a reasonable thing to do. Nobody here is interested in sharing your obviously rich fantasy life.

Ok, this is obviously a language barrier then. Isn't taking a base file and modifying it what ALL tuners esentially do? That's the whole basis of tuning this way. Take a stock file and alter it. When a "better" base tune (CR) comes out, wouldn't it be logical to use that as a base to tune on? Maybe Softronic doesn't do it in this way at all but don't you think Scott could answer that? Which he also did and corrected me?

And even then, how does that make it an accusation? And of what? The part I said about companies being cynical didn't refer to softronic. It didn't necessarily refer to software tunes at all but mods in general (we were talking about exhausts as well). If that was for some reason unclear now it isn't. This is the problem of taking things out of context.

If you are not interested in my input, stop reading it then. I have no intent to "troll". Speaking of that - thanks for your brilliant contribution to this thread.

I don't care what happens to this thread, but if your reply is the level we're at then might as well kill it.

 

[b16a2vtiguy]

Wow, pretty serious thread! But some good information in here too.

I've just purchased a 987.1, I've also just purchased a ipd plenum, gt3 throttle body and bmc air filter.
I'm after a remap and wonder if Scott from softronic would care for me to dyno my car after each modification part is fitted and post up the results?

 

[Softronic]

Wow, pretty serious thread! But some good information in here too.

I've just purchased a 987.1, I've also just purchased a ipd plenum, gt3 throttle body and bmc air filter.
I'm after a remap and wonder if Scott from softronic would care for me to dyno my car after each modification part is fitted and post up the results?

Just to be clear as I mentioned it prior is all the info that I was discussing was on the 987.2 DFI not the 987.1. There are many dyno sheets on the 987.1 going back to 2007 or so on this site and they are all over the place in gains from low to high.

Best,
Scott

 

[K-Man S]

Folks, please realize that if you post speculation or wild speculation in the forums you can expect to be called on it and called out to provide concrete support for your speculation. I've seen plenty of scans of dyno results posted on this site, heck we even have a forum set up for them to try and keep many of them in the same place where they can be easily found. I would advise everyone to take a breath and think before they post, and if you are speculating on something then SAY you are speculating or provide what your top 3 guesses are, etc. just don't try to pass it off as fact or claim that company X is doing Y without some factual backup. I shouldn't have to step in here and remind people of this, it is in our posting rules and has been for almost 9 years now! Let's keep the discussion civil and the information factual, keep calm and keep on tuning!

 

[small car lover]

For those that have been following this thread, I just installed this new Softronic 987.2 flash in my CS. Sorry, I did not dyno it. But I am impressed. My butt has no reason to doubt Scott's claims and the dyno runs he has posted. Unlike the stock 987.2 map, this tune pulls harder and harder all the way to the limiter. In my view it's the most hp bang for the buck you can get. I started a new thread with my impressions here.

 

[mungee]

I have dynoed my car today and the results can be found in the dyno article section..makes for some interesting reading and for some heated commentary I am sure...I am sure others will have graphs disputing what my results show.

 

[hallonz]

I have dynoed my car today and the results can be found in the dyno article section..makes for some interesting reading and for some heated commentary I am sure...I am sure others will have graphs disputing what my results show.

Interesting findings. Maybe the tuners will chime in and explain why you got the results you did. That being said, I can't help but feel somewhat vindicated now. Thank you for investing time and money to share your findings with the Porsche community.

 

[small car lover]

I think we need to be clear which tune versions (revision) have been dynoed. This is relevant as much of the discussion in this thread has centered on the recently revised (last few weeks) Softronic tune.

 

[trebien]

Ok, that's what I would call intake runners in non-porsche lingo. But now I get you..

Yes, it was a poor choice of words (downpipes) on my part... easily confusing.

I was primarily addressing Thebob's implication that Porsche needed to change the intake side of the 3.4L in the 991 to get to 350HP - therefore the 987.2 can't get there without intake changes.

Much evidence proves that the 3.4L in the 987.2 can get well past 350HP without touching the intake side of the engine. My point, was that the intake side of the 991 engine was likely changed due to parts standardization (plenum, TB, airbox intake) of the assembly line for the different 991 engine sizes, as much as anything.

 

[Kendapau]

I like my tune....987.1
No dyno but lotta wheel spinning


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk