Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: seanery Aug 14 2004, 06:50 AM

Woohoo!
Going to meet 914forme and buy his 2.2T motor!

Plans are to make a modified 2.2S/E and stick it in whitey!

Posted by: itsa914 Aug 14 2004, 06:52 AM

Done in time for the FFC. We are not going to wait for you this year.

Cool.....

Posted by: seanery Aug 14 2004, 07:12 AM

Nope,
it'll be a 4 cylinder car this year.

Posted by: jim912928 Aug 14 2004, 08:38 AM

lucky you!...one of these days I'd love to drop a six in mine!

Posted by: ArtechnikA Aug 14 2004, 08:53 AM

we'll hafta compare notes at the FFC -- i'm doing exactly the same to the 911's engine this winter ...

Posted by: Brad Roberts Aug 14 2004, 09:07 AM

I consider you a brother... please re-think your purchase...

Anything below is a 3.0 is a waste of time/money/resources.

Your 2.0 4cyl car will out run/ out handle the same car with a 2.2 or 2.4 in it for that fact.



B

Posted by: J P Stein Aug 14 2004, 09:46 AM

Dear Brad:
You're as full of shit as a Christmas goose.

Your buddy,

JP

Other than that, I agree. The 2.2T is not a good place to start from the time/money/effort standpoint.

Posted by: ArtechnikA Aug 14 2004, 10:27 AM

i'm hotrodding my 2,2E because it's what came in the car. it has the Biral cylinders broad torque-range cams, and MFI.

you need a very specific reason to build an engine earlier than a 3,0 -- targeting FP in SOLO-II with a 2,8 for instance. i'm making the best of the engines i have, and when i make a decision to go bigger, it'll be based on what's available and my goals at the time.

that said - a 2,2+ S should be a fun engine, and it does at least have piston squirters from the factory...

Posted by: J P Stein Aug 14 2004, 10:42 AM

The E motor is a better base. It has the Birals and usable cams...these save a pee pot fulla money..and it doesn't have Zeniths. The case is.....decent as long as one stays with 84 mm bore.

Nuthin' wrong with using whatcha' got, me thinks.

Posted by: Robert21 Aug 14 2004, 11:44 AM

brad;s right wait and get 3.0

Posted by: seanery Aug 14 2004, 03:09 PM

done deal. It's in mah truck.

I'm taking the E cams out of the 2.7 as well as the Weber 40s.
I'll need to think about what cams and PMOs to put in bluecar.

I'm gonna need some pistons and cylinders for the 2.2. I don't plan on using the cast iron cylinders anymore. I wish I could afford a set of Nikkies, but that and PMOs in the same year are a tough one to swallow.


I know what everyone says about big sixes, but a 170-180hp lil six will be just fine....OH, and it has THAT SOUND! You guys know what I'm talkin' 'bout

Posted by: J P Stein Aug 14 2004, 04:29 PM

Which leads me to ask, what is the deal with the blue car & its 2.7L....did I miss sumthin'?

Posted by: seanery Aug 14 2004, 05:49 PM

race car in progress way too long.
Being 2000 + miles away hinders my ushering it into competion.
I started it when I lived on a boat and had more $ than time and space, so it's a hired out job.

It actually is just about done, just need to find time to go pick it up.

Posted by: seanery Aug 14 2004, 05:51 PM

I'm no fan of CIS. Aint puttin' that crap in mah car.
I can't afford no stinkin' 3.2 at this point, so a hot lil 2.2 will suit me just fine.

Posted by: trekkor Aug 14 2004, 10:11 PM

I be with you in a SIX , too. I'll have questions .

KT

Posted by: seanery Aug 14 2004, 10:38 PM

Me too!

Posted by: Gint Aug 14 2004, 10:47 PM

Don't listen to the "big motor or don't bother" club. That's all a crock. I suppose if your racing the thing only, then go big or stay home. But the small sixes make sweet 914' motors.

Posted by: seanery Aug 14 2004, 10:50 PM

Isn't Jeff Fort's a 2.2? If not, I don't think it's bigger than a 2.4.
That thing sounds awesome, and I've gotta tell ya, that's a big deal to me. I friggin' love that sound!

Jim Chambers will know, maybe he'll respond if he reads this thread.

Posted by: trekkor Aug 14 2004, 10:51 PM

Mike,
Thank you for saying that out loud!!

Trekkor

Posted by: ArtechnikA Aug 15 2004, 07:25 AM

i agree with your sentiment 100%.

however, there's another side of the coin. if one is starting from scratch, you have all types to select from. it's about the same price of entry for a 3,0 as an early engine, and it costs about the same to rebuild (maybe less, if you're fixated on genuine Mahle 2,2S P&C's...). the SC engines are just about bulletproof.

3,0's with Webers and 964 or early 911S cams is a v-e-r-y nice package.

i like my little engines because they rev freely, they're light, and they keep the thermal loads manageable (although i will be adding the cost, weight, and complexity of a front cooler with the 2,2+S due to its intended track use...).

you need a good reason to start with something earlier than a 3,0. if you've got a reason, go for it !

Posted by: Porsche Rescue Aug 15 2004, 09:08 AM

Sean, only know what I was told about Jeff's car: Early aluminum 2.0 case, 2.0 crank, E cams,2.7 P&C which makes a 2.5. Bruce Anderson talks about this combination in his 911 performance book. It also has msx gears. One thing I know for sure, it is strong, loud and fun.

Posted by: itsa914 Aug 15 2004, 09:36 AM

It sure is. I was behind him on the way back from the..... oh heck I can't remember the name of the store with all teh model cars and such at the MWC. Anyway I was able to keep up with my 2.0L 4, but that sound... ahhhh

Posted by: trekkor Aug 15 2004, 10:19 AM

How about I complete runner for $1500?

That's my reason.

KT

Posted by: ArtechnikA Aug 15 2004, 10:28 AM

that's a good start, especially if it's reasonably fresh.

if it had low compression and indications of bad valve guides, $1500 is a bit steep for a core engine (depending on the induction) and after a full rebuild, you have a fresh $8000 little engine. for $8000 you can have a reasonably fresh 3,2 - so it's all about tradeoffs.

one of my reasons for staying "little" (<3,0) in the 911 is that i am trying to stay 'period correct' with my RS-homage car. i don't know what i'm doing with the 914.6 yet ...

Posted by: Brad Roberts Aug 15 2004, 12:21 PM

One word for daily driven 6 conversions... TORQUE. The little motors dont have it/wont have it.

I wouldnt run a CIS engine in a 914 either... but plenty of people have done it.

I'm looking at the list of people responding to this post.. and I can only count 1 or 2 that have ever ridden in a 3.0 9146.

B

Posted by: Britain Smith Aug 15 2004, 12:24 PM

I agree with the torque thing...I have driven a stock 2.0L 914-6 and I was in desperate need of some more torque. The motor spins nicely and drives good, but is a little slow off the line.

-Britain

Posted by: seanery Aug 15 2004, 12:32 PM

I've driven a 3.0 ridden in a 3.2 a couple times, 2.7s, a 2.5 several 2.0s. I kinda have an idea what I'm doin' here.

I'd love a 3.2 but it's not in the cards right now. Period!

Posted by: Brad Roberts Aug 15 2004, 12:37 PM

Nobody here mentioned a 3.2.. I just said dont spend money on anything less than a 3.0 UNLESS you plan to run a certain race/autoX class.

I have watched many people go down the small motor path... and sell them.



B

Posted by: seanery Aug 15 2004, 12:51 PM

I'm not gonna spend 3500 bucks for a tired 3.0. It's gonna need a full rebuild, webers, cams, etc...It's WAY more money!

Posted by: Gint Aug 15 2004, 07:33 PM

Ahhh... for Fuch's sake...

It's all relative. And it depends on what you want to do with the car. To make a blanket statement like that just doesn't make sense. I know you probably intended it specifically for Sean, knowing that it's primarily a track car, but *LOTS* of people read these threads and take comments like that to be gospel.

My motor has plenty of torque for a street car. And to my knowledge, it's still a 2.0. Modified yes, but still a 2.0.

Trekkor is a fine example. Found a decent 2.0/2.2(2.4?) for $1500. Great motor to start a conversion with. Once the conversion is done, if he wants more power, he can get it, sell the small motor and upgrade as budget/circumstances allow.

Posted by: seanery Aug 15 2004, 07:41 PM

whitey is a street car. bluecar is the track car 2.7RS-ish stuff in it.

Posted by: Gint Aug 15 2004, 07:44 PM

Then WTF! Go for it! Sorry, I lost track, you have so many. Brad is right, a 2.0/4 will spank a 2.0/6.

But it doesn't sound or feel the same. But you already know that.

Posted by: ArtechnikA Aug 15 2004, 07:59 PM

that's me - nobody ...

Posted by: thomasotten Aug 15 2004, 08:43 PM

Ok, I am weighing building a 2056/4 or going with a "little" six. Since we have to have a "good reason" for going with a , which I believe the larger engines require oil coolers.

And I want to know where you guys are finding these complete runners for $1500?

Posted by: Gint Aug 15 2004, 08:55 PM

From all of the "Go big or don't bother" clubbers. Seriously, if you shop around long enough, a local deal will usually come along for a decent running small 6 that you can even hear run and possibly drive before you buy.

Posted by: seanery Aug 15 2004, 09:00 PM

Remember, used carbs usually go for a grand a set, so the $1500 complete motor isn't an everyday thing.

Posted by: trekkor Aug 15 2004, 09:19 PM

I hope to run my motor soon. I goin' crazy here.

I have an eletric fuel pump and pres reg. I'll set to 4 PSI.
I'll use a 12v battery with power to the starter and power to a switch that lights up the coil and fuel pump.

I'll run ground to the trans bolt.

Do I run a wire to the neg side of the coil?
Is it a ground also?

After you tell me how to wire it, I'll flip my switch and crank the starter...

KT

Posted by: J P Stein Aug 15 2004, 09:23 PM

Oh, wait.........is this thing in a car?

Posted by: trekkor Aug 15 2004, 09:35 PM

Oh, sorry, JP...It's on the bench. Testing only.
After tuning, dyno. Then I'll decide if if it goes in the car.
I don't have a "magic" number BTW

KT

Posted by: trekkor Aug 15 2004, 09:40 PM

I am just a caveman...points, it goes to the points. Doy.

KT

Posted by: J P Stein Aug 15 2004, 09:51 PM

Ah.....oil...is it plumbed for an oil tank?
You said nuthin about that.

Posted by: trekkor Aug 15 2004, 10:06 PM

Yes. Oil tank is ready...Fuel, too.

I can't wait.

KT

Posted by: jd74914 Aug 16 2004, 11:33 AM

I agree, but I also agree with the rest of the guy's, small six's have a sound and feel that can't be denied.

(note: I am biased, I have a 71E Targa, euro spec at that )

Posted by: Cap'n Krusty Aug 16 2004, 02:11 PM

Having built sixer conversions of varying sizes, and driven many others, I'd like to insert a few opinions. I LIKE my 2 litre SWB 911. Might want a bit more power sometime, but I like it. I service a virtually identical car with a 2.7/915 drivetrain. Mine's not only easier to drive under nearly all conditions (especially in traffic), it has that SOUND. Having been around the cars since the very first ones showed at the Parade in Santa Barbara, the sound has some meaning for me. I like the 7K redline, the narrow power band, and the all around way the car feels. A stock 914/6 does leave something to be desired, but a big motor isn't always the way to get what you want., unless you want brute force and ignorance. Big motors require suspension work, brake work, and strengthening the tub, little motors don't . You'll need additional oil cooling, little motors don't. You lose the sound, you get tractor motor torque. You get raw power (though not like a V8 gives you), but you lose the finess, the subtlety, and the style of a little motor. You make your choices, you live with them until you decide they're not what you want. Personally, I like the elegance of pushing a small engine hard. That's my choice, but it obviously isn't Brad's. That's OK. He doesn't have to drive my car, though he might like it. I don't have to drive his either, though I 'd probably enjoy it. They're CARS, not investments. Don't plan on making money on a conversion, just enjoy it .......... The Cap'n

Posted by: Porsche Rescue Aug 16 2004, 02:22 PM

He may be Krusty but he sure makes sense. I have a fairly new to me '66 911 which I really love to drive for all the reason's the Cap'n said. I just never knew why I liked it so much until now.

Posted by: Aaron Cox Aug 16 2004, 02:33 PM

so...any small sixes for sale by any of the macho engine club members?

oh... i got a ride in a 73 2.4 911s with MFI. man...i would love an mfi six in my teener.

Posted by: mack914 Aug 16 2004, 02:37 PM

Amen Crusty

Posted by: theol00 Aug 16 2004, 02:41 PM

aye to the Capt'n

Posted by: shoguneagle Aug 16 2004, 07:40 PM

Elegance is the word I have been looking for to describe the 2.x family of engines. The Cap't has it right. These are the engines that made the name "Porsche". A sports car to me to hear and live with the rev's of a small engine as it goes through a tight road course.

Now I know why I have always liked the 2.2, 2.4, and 2.7 engines; good horse power ranges with adequate torque; otherwords, rev'ing engines. Reminds me of the racing in the late 50's, 1960's, and early 70's. Alfa, Porsche, Austin Healey, MG, Lancia, (no Fiats), Jaguar, Ferrari, etc.

Elegant! Elegant! Elegant!

Steve Hurt

Posted by: elwood-914 Aug 16 2004, 07:42 PM

Hail to the Capt'n!!

Posted by: trekkor Aug 16 2004, 10:23 PM

Yes!!!

Let's see here...I'll drive 20 mins a month at a/x and get spanked silly by the 1.7's ( already do anyway ) but I'll be happy as McMark with a burger ( )the rest of the month. Hmmm.



KT