Project 3.6 RS Thread, Next steps tin and wiring harness Options

[Steve]

After 23 years of service out of my 3.2, I decided to buy a used 1995 3.6 from LA Dismantler with 110k miles on it. I paid $25k for the motor, Plus an additional $5k from PMS for conversion parts. Got this motor home and two of the cylinders had bad leak down from the exhaust valves. Lots of goofy issues with 3.6 motors. They have an electric smog pump which clogs the SAI passages in the exhaust valves. Sometimes you can turn the engine over with compressed air through the spark plug openings and use a rubber mallet on the exhaust valves to clear it out. This did not work for me, so I sent my motor out to get a top end overhaul, bigger valves and RS Cams.
This will not be an RS spec motor. RS Spec is 3.8 liters, bigger valves, different injection, etc. My motor is just a 1995 993 motor with one size bigger valves, RS cams and steve wong chip. I asked PMS about the 3.8 slip ins and they said their is very little noticeable difference between the two and not worth it unless your changing the P&C's anyway.

LA Dismantler lessons learned:
-Get a warranty in writing
-Do a leak down at their location before buying the motor.
I did neither and they came up with a ton of excuses not to help me.
This is also true for any wrecking yard. My Euro 3.2 also came from a wrecking yard with no warranty, but that motor was flawless.

This will probably be a very slow progress thread. I still work full time and have a family. I bought this motor two years ago and finally pulled the 3.2 a couple of weeks ago. I sold the 3.2 to the guy that did the top end overhaul on my 3.6. On the 3.2, two of the cylinders had poor leak down, due to weak rings. The motor ran great before I pulled it and all the spark plugs looked the same. So I was very surprised about the leak down results. Besides spending $4500 to PMS three years ago to reseal this engine, it has never been apart. The PMS reseal was due to the normal oil leaks around the cam chain housings and other areas. Who knows how many miles were on it. The guy who bought it said the rings are weak and to spray WD40 in the cylinders. Sure enough it brought the leak down, from 30% down to 3% on one cylinder and from 10% down to 5% on the other. He plans on doing a top end overhaul on it and flipping it or putting it in one of his 914's.

I will add pictures and more info as time goes on.
Old Euro 3.2 motor

Used 3.6 motor

[Root_Werks]

Steve,

If you were looking for an option to run hydraulic tappets, my 2.7 uses 993 cam caps and 964 cams with hydro tappets. Would think something similar could be done on a 3.2?

-Dan

[Steve]

Steve,

If you were looking for an option to run hydraulic tappets, my 2.7 uses 993 cam caps and 964 cams with hydro tappets. Would think something similar could be done on a 3.2?

-Dan

No reason why it wouldn't work on a 3.2. It's just a cost issue. A 3.6 has a mass air flow meter (firewire) (versus barn door AFM on a 3.2), twin plug and bigger displacement. All can be done to a 3.2 for a price. I'm also a big fan on stock versus mods. I went from 2.7 to 3.2 and now to 3.6.

Mark @mepstein
Why RS cams unless you want to keep the hydraulic tappets? So much better cam options with solid tappets. RS was the biggest I could go and keep the hydraulic lifters. I'm getting older and don't want to adjust valves if I don't have to. Even though I probably adjust valves every 5-10 years since I only use my car for Cars & Coffee and events. I thought about 3.8, but I am not a fan of slip ins and I did not want to split the case (bigger bucks). 4.0 is a ridiculous amount of money. I was told it requires GT3 crank and ITB's.

[mepstein]

Steve,

If you were looking for an option to run hydraulic tappets, my 2.7 uses 993 cam caps and 964 cams with hydro tappets. Would think something similar could be done on a 3.2?

-Dan

No reason why it wouldn't work on a 3.2. It's just a cost issue. A 3.6 has a mass air flow meter (firewire) (versus barn door AFM on a 3.2), twin plug and bigger displacement. All can be done to a 3.2 for a price. I'm also a big fan on stock versus mods. I went from 2.7 to 3.2 and now to 3.6.

Mark @mepstein
Why RS cams unless you want to keep the hydraulic tappets? So much better cam options with solid tappets. RS was the biggest I could go and keep the hydraulic lifters. I'm getting older and don't want to adjust valves if I don't have to. Even though I probably adjust valves every 5-10 years since I only use my car for Cars & Coffee and events. I thought about 3.8, but I am not a fan of slip ins and I did not want to split the case (bigger bucks). 4.0 is a ridiculous amount of money. I was told it requires GT3 crank and ITB's.

I misspoke. It’s not an rs cam. It’s very similar to a GT2 evo cam.

[ClayPerrine]

Steve,

If you were looking for an option to run hydraulic tappets, my 2.7 uses 993 cam caps and 964 cams with hydro tappets. Would think something similar could be done on a 3.2?

-Dan

No reason why it wouldn't work on a 3.2. It's just a cost issue. A 3.6 has a mass air flow meter (firewire) (versus barn door AFM on a 3.2), twin plug and bigger displacement. All can be done to a 3.2 for a price. I'm also a big fan on stock versus mods. I went from 2.7 to 3.2 and now to 3.6.

Mark @mepstein
Why RS cams unless you want to keep the hydraulic tappets? So much better cam options with solid tappets. RS was the biggest I could go and keep the hydraulic lifters. I'm getting older and don't want to adjust valves if I don't have to. Even though I probably adjust valves every 5-10 years since I only use my car for Cars & Coffee and events. I thought about 3.8, but I am not a fan of slip ins and I did not want to split the case (bigger bucks). 4.0 is a ridiculous amount of money. I was told it requires GT3 crank and ITB's.

I misspoke. It’s not an rs cam. It’s very similar to a GT2 evo cam.

When I did mine, I had the cams reground to 993SS spec. The 993SS cams used solid rockers. I also did the big valves to improve air flow.

When I bought the motor, it was 8 grand for what was definitely a core motor. I had to buy all of the intake and electronics separately off ebay.


And a 4.0L engine does not require a GT3 crank and ITBs. With the proper piston and cylinder set from LN Engineering, you can get 4L out of a 964 motor with the stock crank. You can use the stock intake, but you will leave some horsepower on the table vs ITBs.

[Steve]

Steve,

If you were looking for an option to run hydraulic tappets, my 2.7 uses 993 cam caps and 964 cams with hydro tappets. Would think something similar could be done on a 3.2?

-Dan

No reason why it wouldn't work on a 3.2. It's just a cost issue. A 3.6 has a mass air flow meter (firewire) (versus barn door AFM on a 3.2), twin plug and bigger displacement. All can be done to a 3.2 for a price. I'm also a big fan on stock versus mods. I went from 2.7 to 3.2 and now to 3.6.

Mark @mepstein
Why RS cams unless you want to keep the hydraulic tappets? So much better cam options with solid tappets. RS was the biggest I could go and keep the hydraulic lifters. I'm getting older and don't want to adjust valves if I don't have to. Even though I probably adjust valves every 5-10 years since I only use my car for Cars & Coffee and events. I thought about 3.8, but I am not a fan of slip ins and I did not want to split the case (bigger bucks). 4.0 is a ridiculous amount of money. I was told it requires GT3 crank and ITB's.

I misspoke. It’s not an rs cam. It’s very similar to a GT2 evo cam.

When I did mine, I had the cams reground to 993SS spec. The 993SS cams used solid rockers. I also did the big valves to improve air flow.

When I bought the motor, it was 8 grand for what was definitely a core motor. I had to buy all of the intake and electronics separately off ebay.


And a 4.0L engine does not require a GT3 crank and ITBs. With the proper piston and cylinder set from LN Engineering, you can get 4L out of a 964 motor with the stock crank. You can use the stock intake, but you will leave some horsepower on the table vs ITBs.

Interesting read on 4.0 options and reliability issues on Rennlist. https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/68523...d-engine-3.html
Clay what piston and cylinders did you end up using?

[ClayPerrine]

Steve,

If you were looking for an option to run hydraulic tappets, my 2.7 uses 993 cam caps and 964 cams with hydro tappets. Would think something similar could be done on a 3.2?

-Dan

No reason why it wouldn't work on a 3.2. It's just a cost issue. A 3.6 has a mass air flow meter (firewire) (versus barn door AFM on a 3.2), twin plug and bigger displacement. All can be done to a 3.2 for a price. I'm also a big fan on stock versus mods. I went from 2.7 to 3.2 and now to 3.6.

Mark @mepstein
Why RS cams unless you want to keep the hydraulic tappets? So much better cam options with solid tappets. RS was the biggest I could go and keep the hydraulic lifters. I'm getting older and don't want to adjust valves if I don't have to. Even though I probably adjust valves every 5-10 years since I only use my car for Cars & Coffee and events. I thought about 3.8, but I am not a fan of slip ins and I did not want to split the case (bigger bucks). 4.0 is a ridiculous amount of money. I was told it requires GT3 crank and ITB's.

I misspoke. It’s not an rs cam. It’s very similar to a GT2 evo cam.

When I did mine, I had the cams reground to 993SS spec. The 993SS cams used solid rockers. I also did the big valves to improve air flow.

When I bought the motor, it was 8 grand for what was definitely a core motor. I had to buy all of the intake and electronics separately off ebay.


And a 4.0L engine does not require a GT3 crank and ITBs. With the proper piston and cylinder set from LN Engineering, you can get 4L out of a 964 motor with the stock crank. You can use the stock intake, but you will leave some horsepower on the table vs ITBs.

Interesting read on 4.0 options and reliability issues on Rennlist. https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/68523...d-engine-3.html
Clay what piston and cylinders did you end up using?

LN Engineering Cylinders, JE Coated Pistons, and Pauter rods.

The case had to be split, and the spigots bored to take the cylinders.

Clay