2,2T, Is this a good choice Options

[DavidSweden]

I have the chance to buy a 2,2T motor.

Is this a good motor for a 914 6 conversion? Its not cheap so I want to be sure that its not wasted money. There is also a 2,4 available and its a bit cheaper. Advice required

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads_offsite/i1300.photobucket.com-17452-1472590389.1.jpg)

[flyer86d]

I've been mentally beating this to death for the past 35 years. This is my experience. The short stroke engines like to rev and don't make a boatload of torque but can make good power if you twist the motor. The 2.4 is a great engine depending on the tune. When I rebuilt our 73 911T, I rebuilt it to 911E+ spec. I used 2.4 S pistons and cylinders, 911E cams and fuel injection. The heads and port size is the same as a 911T. On paper it makes about 30 more horsepower than a 2.4 MFI 911T but it feels more like 50hp. Back in the mid 1980s, all of my rich friends bought 1973 911RSs to use as track cars. They would pull about 2 car lengths on me up the back straight at Watkins Glen. I would then dive inside them down the loop and shute into the left handler. I could piss all over 911SCs and most 3.2 Carreras. There was this one 3.2 Carrera that I could only stay even with but not catch. I thought that there was something wrong with the car or my driving. I found out from talking to the owner that it was a Ruf 3.4 with Ruf cams and exhaust. Felt better.

Generally, the short stroke engines run cooler and you may get away without an oil cooler if you drive it on the street. The long stroke engines run hotter and our 2.4 MFI 911T needed an external cooler and in 911E tune even more so, I installed one.

The 3.0 SC engines and 3.2 engines are the best that Porsche built. Good power and great reliability, however, they need a cooler. I had a stock SC and a SC 3.2 (98X70.4) 320 HP track car. The track car was stupid fast and reliable too. It was twin plugged, big port, GE80 cams, 46 Webers, headers and phase 9s. In the 8years that I ran it, I changed the oil every event. That's it!!

For the 914-6,my plan is to build a 2.3, (86X66) with 2.7S heads, 911E (911L) cams, 40 IDS carbs, S crank and rods in a 914-6 crankcase. Should not need a cooler as it will not be tracked. I expect about 175 HP which should motivate the 914-6 well for me.

The problem with the 2.2 911T engine is that it has the non counterweighted crank like the 2.0 T and 914-6 does. All 2.4 liter engines have the same counterweighted crank. The only difference is the P&Cs, cams and port size and detail changes in the MFI. They are very easy to hot rod.

Charlie

[0396]

I've been mentally beating this to death for the past 35 years. This is my experience. The short stroke engines like to rev and don't make a boatload of torque but can make good power if you twist the motor. The 2.4 is a great engine depending on the tune. When I rebuilt our 73 911T, I rebuilt it to 911E+ spec. I used 2.4 S pistons and cylinders, 911E cams and fuel injection. The heads and port size is the same as a 911T. On paper it makes about 30 more horsepower than a 2.4 MFI 911T but it feels more like 50hp. Back in the mid 1980s, all of my rich friends bought 1973 911RSs to use as track cars. They would pull about 2 car lengths on me up the back straight at Watkins Glen. I would then dive inside them down the loop and shute into the left handler. I could piss all over 911SCs and most 3.2 Carreras. There was this one 3.2 Carrera that I could only stay even with but not catch. I thought that there was something wrong with the car or my driving. I found out from talking to the owner that it was a Ruf 3.4 with Ruf cams and exhaust. Felt better.

Generally, the short stroke engines run cooler and you may get away without an oil cooler if you drive it on the street. The long stroke engines run hotter and our 2.4 MFI 911T needed an external cooler and in 911E tune even more so, I installed one.

The 3.0 SC engines and 3.2 engines are the best that Porsche built. Good power and great reliability, however, they need a cooler. I had a stock SC and a SC 3.2 (98X70.4) 320 HP track car. The track car was stupid fast and reliable too. It was twin plugged, big port, GE80 cams, 46 Webers, headers and phase 9s. In the 8years that I ran it, I changed the oil every event. That's it!!

For the 914-6,my plan is to build a 2.3, (86X66) with 2.7S heads, 911E (911L) cams, 40 IDS carbs, S crank and rods in a 914-6 crankcase. Should not need a cooler as it will not be tracked. I expect about 175 HP which should motivate the 914-6 well for me.

The problem with the 2.2 911T engine is that it has the non counterweighted crank like the 2.0 T and 914-6 does. All 2.4 liter engines have the same counterweighted crank. The only difference is the P&Cs, cams and port size and detail changes in the MFI. They are very easy to hot rod.

Charlie

Charlie,
Thanks for responding with such an in depth analysis / recommendation for a - 6 motor on this site that I've seen here in a long long time. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/pray.gif)