72 2.4, flat six |
|
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.
This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way. Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. |
|
72 2.4, flat six |
CG-914 |
Sep 1 2013, 03:03 PM
Post
#1
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 326 Joined: 27-December 10 From: LA/OC CA Member No.: 12,526 Region Association: Southern California |
Me and my dad are rebuilding a 72 2.4 engine.
They are some wired things going on with the parts in the engine so here are some facts and questions about them. We are rebuilding the engine but also want to modify it. Maybe different cams and make it a 2.5…. Engine Case 901.101.101.5R Heads [Date?: 4x 72 + 2x 71] 911.104.306.OR [K 1819g] Valve Intake 45 mm Valve Exhaust 30 mm Intake 37.5 mm Exhaust 36 mm The Intake ports are bored out. With that size are they even useable? also in regard of the plans? Are the valve sizes stock? Cylinders [Mahle] 90 ZN 2 W6 [5x] 90 ZN 2 W5 [1x] Diameter 84 mm Total Hight 120 mm Pistons [3 Piston Rings] Hallmark 1: 83.95 [84 mm] Hallmark 2: Sp 0,05 Are these the stock cylinders? Cam Housing 901.105.111.OR Stock? Cam left 901.105.183.OR [965?] right 901.105.110.1R Here it gets wired. With Wayne Dempsey's great book, I think this is a S and a L cam out of two different engines. Was that something a lot of people did? Also the wear marks on them are pretty bad: See pics Then the question about the 2.5 liter engine set up. I understand, that they are two versions: 1: 2.7 liter as a high stroker 2: 2.4 liter with bigger bore. With rebuilding a 2.4 what are our options to build a 2.5 exactly? With what consequences? What needs to be changed/machined accordingly? With that in in mind what cams are best? As I read and heard the S cams are the best with now further consequences like taller intake manifolds?! Is there a great article about 911 Cams, they characters and consequences? Thank you guys! |
Mike Bellis |
Sep 1 2013, 04:24 PM
Post
#2
|
Resident Electrician Group: Members Posts: 8,345 Joined: 22-June 09 From: Midlothian TX Member No.: 10,496 Region Association: None |
I don't know enough about flat sixes but those cams look NFG... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/barf.gif)
I'm sure there are better aftermarket cams than S, T or L. |
ConeDodger |
Sep 1 2013, 04:40 PM
Post
#3
|
Apex killer! Group: Members Posts: 23,612 Joined: 31-December 04 From: Tahoe Area Member No.: 3,380 Region Association: Northern California |
This is a question for Jeff "The Hammer" or sixnotfour to you... He will know what you have and which way you should go.
|
Cap'n Krusty |
Sep 1 2013, 05:40 PM
Post
#4
|
Cap'n Krusty Group: Members Posts: 10,794 Joined: 24-June 04 From: Santa Maria, CA Member No.: 2,246 Region Association: Central California |
I think Jonathan at GPR is building a 2.5. Seems to me, FAR in the past, we used a 2/2.2 crank and rods with a 2.7 bore and special pistons. Betcha if you Google it you'll get all kinds of answers. BTW, a 2.7 is a 2.4 with a larger bore. You might want to go for that ............. The lobes on those cams can be welded and reground.
The Cap'n |
sixnotfour |
Sep 1 2013, 05:43 PM
Post
#5
|
914 Wizard Group: Members Posts: 10,434 Joined: 12-September 04 From: Life Elevated..planet UT. Member No.: 2,744 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
those heads should have 46 intake and 40 exhaust valves sizes.
the port size you have is modified. the 90zn cylinders should be 90mm unless they have been sleeved. more pictures |
sixnotfour |
Sep 1 2013, 05:45 PM
Post
#6
|
914 Wizard Group: Members Posts: 10,434 Joined: 12-September 04 From: Life Elevated..planet UT. Member No.: 2,744 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
2.7 with a 2.2 crank is a cheater 2.5 at 2519
|
GeorgeRud |
Sep 1 2013, 06:54 PM
Post
#7
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 3,725 Joined: 27-July 05 From: Chicagoland Member No.: 4,482 Region Association: Upper MidWest |
If it started life as a 2.4, you already have a longer stroke crank (the short stroke 2.5 used the original 66mm throw crank). Using the 2.7 piston/ cylinder should give you a nice combination, just be sure to use case savers throughout so you are less likely to pull head studs. Are you going to be racing in an under 2.5 liter class?
You might want to check with Henry Schmidt at Supertec as he seems to know the combinations that work. He just rebuilt my 2.7 using the RS jugs and S cams. |
sixnotfour |
Sep 1 2013, 07:27 PM
Post
#8
|
914 Wizard Group: Members Posts: 10,434 Joined: 12-September 04 From: Life Elevated..planet UT. Member No.: 2,744 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
INHO the best autocross motor is a 2.4 S with solex cams cheapest and simple...SS motors you will need perfect gearing. You have not provided enough info about what you and you're dad intend to do upon completion..
|
CG-914 |
Sep 1 2013, 07:36 PM
Post
#9
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 326 Joined: 27-December 10 From: LA/OC CA Member No.: 12,526 Region Association: Southern California |
I dont know what crank and rods are in the case yet…
To the cap'n: they could be rewelded, the problem though is, that they out of two different engines… an S and E/L… so they dont fit or shouldnt?! So the Jugs are stamped 90ZN which I guess now should be 90mm bore but they messure 84mmm I guess they are sleved, so 2.7 jugs to 84mm reduced, (= with a 66mm stroke that should be 2.3 or less…) What confuses me is the Mahle diagram out of the Bruce Anderson book: 2.4 87.5mm bore 66.0mm stroke 2.7 90.0mm bore 70.4mm stroke 2.5 86.7mm bore 70.4mm stroke = long stroke 2.5 89.0mm bore 66.0mm stroke = short stroke BUT: The Wayne book says the 2.4 engines had a 84 mm bore and pistons…. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) When the engine is done, the car is going to be a daily driver, but my dad and mom are canyon carvers and take no prisoners in the mountains every weekend or dont mind a 'sharper' engine everyday… |
sixnotfour |
Sep 1 2013, 07:56 PM
Post
#10
|
914 Wizard Group: Members Posts: 10,434 Joined: 12-September 04 From: Life Elevated..planet UT. Member No.: 2,744 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
looks like you may have a class specific built motor.. where did you get it ??
what is the case serial number ?? casting number on the bottom side of piston ?? |
CG-914 |
Sep 1 2013, 07:57 PM
Post
#11
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 326 Joined: 27-December 10 From: LA/OC CA Member No.: 12,526 Region Association: Southern California |
looks like you may have a class specific built motor.. where did you get it ?? Its a german car imported to LA in 2004. It has factory fiberglass bumpers and fenders from the factory. Factory recaro race seat on the driver side The bad part is, that it has a welded shut oil cap on the right rear fender… Any idea what motor? |
CG-914 |
Sep 1 2013, 08:03 PM
Post
#12
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 326 Joined: 27-December 10 From: LA/OC CA Member No.: 12,526 Region Association: Southern California |
|
sixnotfour |
Sep 2 2013, 06:37 AM
Post
#13
|
914 Wizard Group: Members Posts: 10,434 Joined: 12-September 04 From: Life Elevated..planet UT. Member No.: 2,744 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
84P8 are 2.2S pistons
Mahle for about 8yrs ? uses the 90mm casting and does the 84mm bore and they are Nikasyl coated inside, The old ones were aluminum fins with cast iron liner.Biral. Your piston and cylinder set is 4k so if you have a 70.4 crank = 2.4 the BA 2.4/2.5 specs are for 2.5 race motors and are expensive and rare today. factory 2.4 is 84 x 70.4 ID *6522038* is a 72 2.4 ,,like you said. |
sixnotfour |
Sep 2 2013, 07:00 AM
Post
#14
|
914 Wizard Group: Members Posts: 10,434 Joined: 12-September 04 From: Life Elevated..planet UT. Member No.: 2,744 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
http://www.elgincams.com/
http://www.webcamshafts.com/mobile/automob...1_sohc_12v.html for a regrind or weld up. look at the big end of the cams, grinders usually stamp the grind number on that end. no matter what the casting numbers are. |
totle |
Jan 17 2014, 06:44 AM
Post
#15
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 43 Joined: 18-October 10 From: Norway Member No.: 12,280 Region Association: Europe |
I have kind of same setup.
Trying to figure out my engine spec. I have same cylinders as you 90ZN2, but they are as well 84mm 2,2S pistons. Do you have more info of the cylinders? |
JmuRiz |
Jan 17 2014, 07:53 AM
Post
#16
|
914 Guru Group: Members Posts: 5,434 Joined: 30-December 02 From: NoVA Member No.: 50 Region Association: MidAtlantic Region |
2.2s in a 2.4 was an old hot-rod setup, because there weren't many options.
My brother is spec'ing out a 2.4 rebuild too. He talked with Henry at Supertec, he suggested his 2.45 engine build, I can dig up the specs later today if you like (or search for it on the pelican engine builder forum). Edit: found the correspondence - It is basically a 70.4 stroke x 86mm bore. Slightly under 9.5:1 compression and use a DC "mod S" cam. These engines make great torque while still producing 180 hp at the wheels @ only 6500 RPM. The only other modification is a 36 mm intake port. Btw, I think he strips and re-coats the pistons with nickasil |
sixnotfour |
Jan 17 2014, 08:09 AM
Post
#17
|
914 Wizard Group: Members Posts: 10,434 Joined: 12-September 04 From: Life Elevated..planet UT. Member No.: 2,744 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
I have kind of same setup. Trying to figure out my engine spec. I have same cylinders as you 90ZN2, but they are as well 84mm 2,2S pistons. Do you have more info of the cylinders? one more time; Mahle for about 8yrs ? uses the 90mm casting and does the 84mm bore and they are Nikasyl coated inside |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 8th June 2024 - 03:47 PM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |