My new 982 718 Cayman S PDK
- Thread starter Brian_Innes
- Start date
penguinman
New member
Interesting discussion re. geometry adjustment. For additional information only, I had the front camber 'maxxed out' on my 981S (PASM), and final figure was 1.24/1.24 front.
Figure for rear was 1.46/1.48, with some small adjustment remaining, if I wanted it.
Figure for rear was 1.46/1.48, with some small adjustment remaining, if I wanted it.
AndrewCS
Active member
Twinfan said:It's the 981 Cayman S Brian's comparing to we need to know about []
`It` is my car ... the geo. information is in another thread in the Cayman section. Whilst the car has PASM I am unsure `which` spec. it has. The Hunter equipment had several settings, I opted for the +/- 0mm. How can I determine the exact PASM spec. please ?
For any comments on the choice of my settings etc. please revert to the thread ... https://www.porscheclubgb../forum/tm.aspx?m=984555
Hi Andrew,
There was only one PASM spec for 981 cars: -10mm compared to standard. The "X73" suspension was the lowest option available at -20mm but it's an old-skool passive system, not PASM. The 718 has both -10mm and -20mm PASM options - no passive option.
Was that the maximum camber they could put on the front and rear of your car?
There was only one PASM spec for 981 cars: -10mm compared to standard. The "X73" suspension was the lowest option available at -20mm but it's an old-skool passive system, not PASM. The 718 has both -10mm and -20mm PASM options - no passive option.
Was that the maximum camber they could put on the front and rear of your car?
Brian_Innes
Member
Very interesting views and comments guys.
Andrew's 981 CS, the car referred to in my post, has a small amount of adjustment remaining. During the adjustments on the Hunter rig, I recall that the front axle could be adjusted to -1.10" negative but Andrew opted for a -1.0" compromise. The limiting factor on the 981 rear negative camber on Andrew's car was the eccentric adjustment available for the required toe setting which limited the negative camber to -1.36". I have yet to see what my car's adjustment range is by comparison to this "sample" 981.
When the weather finally warms up, BTW it has only been 3c in the Highlands here today, I shall book in my 718 CS for the geo set and adjust. You will all know by now my car has the -20 lower Sports PASM X73 adaptive suspension with 20" 8.5" and 10.5" alloys fitted with new Michelin PS4S N0 tyres.
For interest, I shall take photos of the front and rear suspension components. I know Ralph and others may be interested to see any differences from the stock 981CS of the "sample" car kindly facilitated by Andrew. I accept your point David, that this is only one sample, but at least it will give an impression of the physical differences in suspension components and mountings between a 981CS PDK and a 718CS PDK.
Brian
Andrew's 981 CS, the car referred to in my post, has a small amount of adjustment remaining. During the adjustments on the Hunter rig, I recall that the front axle could be adjusted to -1.10" negative but Andrew opted for a -1.0" compromise. The limiting factor on the 981 rear negative camber on Andrew's car was the eccentric adjustment available for the required toe setting which limited the negative camber to -1.36". I have yet to see what my car's adjustment range is by comparison to this "sample" 981.
When the weather finally warms up, BTW it has only been 3c in the Highlands here today, I shall book in my 718 CS for the geo set and adjust. You will all know by now my car has the -20 lower Sports PASM X73 adaptive suspension with 20" 8.5" and 10.5" alloys fitted with new Michelin PS4S N0 tyres.
For interest, I shall take photos of the front and rear suspension components. I know Ralph and others may be interested to see any differences from the stock 981CS of the "sample" car kindly facilitated by Andrew. I accept your point David, that this is only one sample, but at least it will give an impression of the physical differences in suspension components and mountings between a 981CS PDK and a 718CS PDK.
Brian
Hi all
i purchased a cayman 981 2,7 2 months ago and mostly love the car .
i am finding the headlights very poor ,I only have got the basic lights .
is it possible to upgrade the lights with a bulb swap or is it more complex
would love to hear from anyone who has upgraded the bulbs without
too many problems ,if it can be done without invalidateing the warranty
many thanks
Paul
i purchased a cayman 981 2,7 2 months ago and mostly love the car .
i am finding the headlights very poor ,I only have got the basic lights .
is it possible to upgrade the lights with a bulb swap or is it more complex
would love to hear from anyone who has upgraded the bulbs without
too many problems ,if it can be done without invalidateing the warranty
many thanks
Paul
Paul,paulhunt said:
What bulbs is the 2.7 using? Over the years I have upgraded the bulbs in many cars. Phillips do some which turn out 130% more light or there abouts. I have run illegal lighting but the bulbs are temperamental with a short life span and you have to run them through a new wiring loom and relay for protection. I am sure there will be something out in the market place to suit your needs I have always used the white light rather than the fashionable bling blue.
Ray
Brian_Innes
Member
Ralph,
Thank you for the link. All the stats I'll ever need. Interesting to study the differences in gear ratios/differential between manual and PDK cars. I've found the closer stacked intermediate gears with the PDK gearbox a huge benefit to driving enjoyment. Not only does it keep the momentum going, but it eliminates any turbo lag that may occasionally be experienced in manual 718's.
My 987 CR manual had an annoying emissions lag between 2000rpm and 4000rpm, which in normal road driving, particularly in towns and cities, was a frequent occurrence. My 718CS PDK displays no such foibles. I drive it in Sport mode and shift the gears manually, instant response. It's only in towns cities I revert to auto mode, still no turbo lag.
Economy over 10,000miles is only averaging 28.2mpg. That's a price I am more than willing to pay for the driving enjoyment using Sport/manual gear shifting as is my preferred way.
Brian
Thank you for the link. All the stats I'll ever need. Interesting to study the differences in gear ratios/differential between manual and PDK cars. I've found the closer stacked intermediate gears with the PDK gearbox a huge benefit to driving enjoyment. Not only does it keep the momentum going, but it eliminates any turbo lag that may occasionally be experienced in manual 718's.
My 987 CR manual had an annoying emissions lag between 2000rpm and 4000rpm, which in normal road driving, particularly in towns and cities, was a frequent occurrence. My 718CS PDK displays no such foibles. I drive it in Sport mode and shift the gears manually, instant response. It's only in towns cities I revert to auto mode, still no turbo lag.
Economy over 10,000miles is only averaging 28.2mpg. That's a price I am more than willing to pay for the driving enjoyment using Sport/manual gear shifting as is my preferred way.
Brian
BJ Innes said:
Ha, I have averaged 20mpg with a best of 35mpg on long trips; on track it's around 8mpg
Brian; a request,
When you're taking the close-up photos of the underside of your car I'd be interested to see the details of the four-point powertrain mounting system used on the 718. I believe that the two engine mounts are active (vacuum operated at idle?) and yours will also have the Sport Chrono Package's (electrically-operated?) dynamic transmission mounts.
Jeff
When you're taking the close-up photos of the underside of your car I'd be interested to see the details of the four-point powertrain mounting system used on the 718. I believe that the two engine mounts are active (vacuum operated at idle?) and yours will also have the Sport Chrono Package's (electrically-operated?) dynamic transmission mounts.
Jeff
Brian_Innes
Member
Ralph,
Will do. I've taken note.
I will also be interested to see the engine/transmission mounting points on my 718, provided the under-shield tray doesn't get in the way. The dynamic mounts really work on the track. I can feel the car really buttoning down during hard cornering, only to be compromised by the rapidly tiring P-Zero N1's....... This year, with my new PS4S N0's up to track temperature, this dynamic feature should further increase my driving enjoyment.
Brian
Will do. I've taken note.
I will also be interested to see the engine/transmission mounting points on my 718, provided the under-shield tray doesn't get in the way. The dynamic mounts really work on the track. I can feel the car really buttoning down during hard cornering, only to be compromised by the rapidly tiring P-Zero N1's....... This year, with my new PS4S N0's up to track temperature, this dynamic feature should further increase my driving enjoyment.
Brian
Brian,
Just to say that I've found a 718 PET online and note that all four powertrain hydro-mounts are vacuum operated - they're located on bracket extensions bolted to the front of the camcases and to the transmission casing. It'll be interesting to see if all four mounts are part of the dynamic mount system or if it's just the engine mounts.
Jeff
Just to say that I've found a 718 PET online and note that all four powertrain hydro-mounts are vacuum operated - they're located on bracket extensions bolted to the front of the camcases and to the transmission casing. It'll be interesting to see if all four mounts are part of the dynamic mount system or if it's just the engine mounts.
Jeff
Jeff,
I believe the 981 dynamic mounts are magnetorheological fluid operated whereas the PASM/Damptronic dampers are shim stack & valve operated. One defaults at full soft at zero current, while the other defaults at full stiff at zero current. I can control both the suspension dampers and transmission mounts with my DSC controller which I use instead of the PASM ECU. The single 981 engine mount is not electronic.
The mounts circled in the image below are electronically controlled.
I believe the 981 dynamic mounts are magnetorheological fluid operated whereas the PASM/Damptronic dampers are shim stack & valve operated. One defaults at full soft at zero current, while the other defaults at full stiff at zero current. I can control both the suspension dampers and transmission mounts with my DSC controller which I use instead of the PASM ECU. The single 981 engine mount is not electronic.
The mounts circled in the image below are electronically controlled.
That’s right Ralph. In standard form the 981 has two hydro-mounts on the transmission (or magnetorheological mounts with the dynamic transmission mount package) and a single centre-mounted elastomeric engine mount.
The 718 however has a four mount system, each mount having a vacuum connection which I think operates at idle to increase compliance. I presume that either two or all four mounts are replaced by magnetorheological items (still with the vacuum connection?) with the dynamic transmission mount package.
Jeff
The 718 however has a four mount system, each mount having a vacuum connection which I think operates at idle to increase compliance. I presume that either two or all four mounts are replaced by magnetorheological items (still with the vacuum connection?) with the dynamic transmission mount package.
Jeff
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
