Porsche 996/986 Deep sump oil pan from LN Engineering. Poor design.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ก.พ. 2022
- We review the LN engineering deep sump oil pan on the M96 engine. Conclusion, appears to be sloppy engineering, but it is better than stock.
Stay tuned and we will post another video this summer measuring how it performs on the track with race spec setups. - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
Hey man! Cool videos and keep them coming. Long time fan of porsche and seriously considering picking up at 986 s as my first porsche. Just found one and need to get the financing done. Hopefully I will be able to pick it up soon.
I throughly enjoy my 986. Good luck on your purchase !!
You need to have a dropped center (50 mm) in the oil pan and sloped from the sides to the dropped center. The original baffle design needs to be utilized with a 50 mm vertical dimensional increase along with better oil return from the heads to the pan. These modifications will work to address flaws and the oil starvation problems this engine suffers from. Electric scavenge pump system would be the easiest way to get the oil back from the heads to the oil pan.
All very good points. If Porsche would have included a true dry some lubrication, not messed up the IMS bearing, and not giving it fried egg headlights, I'm convinced these vehicles would be worth to 2X what they are today.
Interesting review. Thanks. We’re planning to install an accusump on our 98 boxster and not sure if a deep sump kit is also needed. Still researching ….
They both have pros and cons. no easy answer on this one...
Have you had any experience with the FVD Brombacher deep sump pan and baffles? I like LN products as well, but the FVD B. pan looks great. (however mods are needed to fit my 2006 977.1 M97 3.8L. and I am not certain what the "mods" are (?))
Hi Chris. I agree with FVD looks great. It does not have the large increased capacity or extra deep well so it does not have G-load prevention as does the LN, but it does appear to seal the sides better. I suspect the mods are minimal.
Are you going to track the car? Do you have race slicks? What you buy somewhat depends on what your objective is.
Sorry to be non-committal!
I have the FVD 2.5qt deep sump on my 996 and my 987 with a 3.4 swap. They've both worked well, but I don't run slicks and it's possible that I'm running out of talent before I'm pulling enough g's to experience a drop in pressure.
If I had to do it over again I would fit the Hartech unit. It looks like the best design to me, of course I'm no engineer so my opinion probably doesn't mean as much as our host's.
I may buy a hartech just to satisfy my curiosity.
TuneRS is your solution.Im not related to the company in any way whatsoever. Im a little OCD and in my testing found out that the factory baffle works best. I have more info on anyone wanting it with proof. So the tuneRS uses the extension and the verticle baffle as well in conjuction with the factory plastic horizontal baffle win win.
Based on what I learned from this LN solution, I would agree the TuneRS solution is best. It uses the 2qt deep sump combined with the stock factory baffle.
All of these are stupid-expensive for what they are. TuneRS is $750 for an aluminum sheet, a cast spacer and upgraded Porsche de-airators. Crazy!
Porsche built the X51 baffled oil pan which, in combination with the X51 revised oil pump, is by all accounts equal to the M96/76 Mezger dry sump motor in terms of g-load oiling performance. Better to spend the money on an OEM X51 pan and pump than a deep sump with all of its associated shortcomings.
Hi Henry, you may be right, but I have not seen any field data to support the improvements of the X51. The improved X51 oil pan is only $340 but it does not lower the oil pickup point and accordingly it may only give an extra 0.5 seconds of additional oil before the pan runs dry from g-load. The additional X51 pump for the head will get more oil back to the the block quickly, but it is unfortunately $3300 per bank not including plumbing for the pump to the block. If you add to both banks you are quickly into a $8-10k project which is not realistic for most 986 Boxster owners holding onto a $10-20k vehicle.
The big difference, at least as far as I'm told, with the x51 package isn't the design of the sump, it's the extra scavenge pumps in the heads. The base engine has 1 scavenge pump per head at opposite ends which allows oil to pool up in high g corners and it doesn't get pumped out until the oil can make it back to the other side of the head. Having 2 pumps per head fixes that problem.
@Brembo Pollypor interesting. Thanks for setting me straight!
@Brembo Pollypor - The X51 baffle has a slightly larger oil capacity than stock. It might be 1/2 - 1 quarts greater (at most) in the baffle area. At high RPM the oil pump runs 50-70 quarts per minute, hence it will deplete the extra capacity in likely less than 1 second at higher RPM (track) driving.
That x51 pan might get you an extra second or two before things blow. Check out the UIDS… might be our best chance at something that’s works
A year later. I wonder if they made a change. Anyway, your choice of the word "significant" isn't all that quantitative. Keep in mind, a partly closed window won't let as much wind blow through as a completely open one. As far as a company, they are very self-promoting. Probably to try to justify their exorbitant prices. Silly as other aftermarket companies arn't so aggressive, still sell parts, and their prices are way too high as well (as it's Porsche).
Well summarized. As a recovering engineer, I wish I could give you harder numbers to make it more quantitative. But given the net gaps in the design, the engine would move a significant amount of warm idle under G-Force changes.
What a piece of crap.
Just wondering, what’s wrong with the stock baffled design?
The stock baffle design is OK, but it is not compatible with the deeper sump. And the deeper sump is important to prevent oil starvation under high G loads.
Ｐ?Ｏ?Ｏ?ｍ
POOm???? Help?