first, how is cooling with these cars? Do these engines drop valve seats like the t4 does?
second, which engine is considered a good buy ( not too much, widely available, and reliable)
i'm just gathering information for what will eventually be a transplant...
Here we go again....
QUOTE (bd1308 @ Sep 3 2005, 09:08 PM) |
first, how is cooling with these cars? Do these engines drop valve seats like the t4 does? second, which engine is considered a good buy ( not too much, widely available, and reliable) i'm just gathering information for what will eventually be a transplant... |
3.2 stroker with MFI.
M
I don't think I ever heard about a 911 engine dropping valve seats
In a nutshell...
2.4 and smaller... watch for general wear, these engines are getting old
2.7 - known for pulled head studs
3.0 SC - pretty much bullet proof (bottom end of the 911 turbo), although lately, I've heard of a few with pulled headstuds as well
3.2 - same bottom end as the 3.0, but watch for valveguide wear comes with EFI and hydraulic chain tensioners
3.6 - early versions (up to 91 IIRC) are known to have oil leakage trouble at the cilinderbase (requires a full teardown to fix)
Keep in mind that rebuilding a 2.0 costs about as much as rebuilding a 3.6
QUOTE (bd1308 @ Sep 4 2005, 12:08 AM) |
first, how is cooling with these cars? Do these engines drop valve seats like the t4 does? second, which engine is considered a good buy ( not too much, widely available, and reliable) |
best overall 911 engine?
they would be the few that I built
britt, i think you need a CA 75/76 2.7 motor with thermal reactors
aaron:
if i've learned one thing on this board, i've learned that thermal reactors placed on 911 engines was one of the worst ideas ever...led to mucho uber heat in the engine compartment that subsequently led to engines with reduced life-spans.
Didn't they also combine the thermal reactors with a 7 blade engine fan that moved less air around the engine? Those motors were designed to have a short life due to excessive heat.
Well, who got Rudy's motor? (Otto's 3.HOLYSHIT RSR)
That is the motor you want, and I have connections.
M
QUOTE (zymurgist @ Sep 5 2005, 09:08 AM) |
Didn't they also combine the thermal reactors with a 7 blade engine fan that moved less air around the engine? Those motors were designed to have a short life due to excessive heat. |
from what I learned, the 5 blade fan moves just as much air as the 11 blade fan
the reason they went back to 11 blade is that the 5 blade is more noisy
i'd need to see your source on that one, especially since they went back to the 11-blade fan for the cat cars (in the face of increasingly stringent noise regulations). they did play around with pulley ratios a lot.
3 liter with the dilavar lower head studs replaced with steel.
Bulletproof and in most cases good for several hundred thousand miles.
QUOTE (ArtechnikA @ Sep 5 2005, 02:41 PM) |
i'd need to see your source on that one |
Best 911 engine? I'd have to go with the GT-1 derived engine in the current GT3.
-Ben M.
2.2S most power per lter from the factory
QUOTE (jd74914 @ Sep 5 2005, 05:48 PM) |
2.2S most power per lter from the factory |
Hey, don't bash thermal reactors ('75-'77 2.7's) the reactor replacement (shorty headers) made me beaucoup rich in the late '70s
The best 911 engine , and coolest running is this one --my CHT's dropped 75 f --top fan VS front fan.
Marty
Attached thumbnail(s)
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)