Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
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.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Oil Temp gauge / sender
Montreal914
post Jun 18 2017, 10:22 PM
Post #1


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 342
Joined: 8-August 10
From: Claremont, CA
Member No.: 12,023
Region Association: Southern California



I've been seeing a temperature mismatch of about 20 degrees between my temp gauge and an actual thermocouple reading through the dipstick tube. Seems like the 911 temp gauge/sender mismatch is pretty common from what I've been reading. I've been using the standard 914 sender.

My gauge is a combination of various elements and therefore the actual whole gauge number cannot be used as a reference. Am I to understand that the temperature module was built in November 1980 as per the picture below? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

Attached Image

Attached Image

I found this chart either here or Pelican.

Attached Image

If my temp gauge was build in late 80, then I need to get a 911 606 112 sender.

Attached Image

Will this fit in the standard taco plate or is it too long?

I've been seing a lot of comments about late temp gauges being numberless which makes me wonder if I actually do have a 1980-81 gauge...



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
defianty
post Jun 19 2017, 02:33 AM
Post #2


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 9-August 06
From: Essex, UK
Member No.: 6,621
Region Association: None




Yes November 1980 is correct.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
arne
post Jun 19 2017, 08:27 AM
Post #3


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 263
Joined: 31-January 17
From: Eugene, Oregon
Member No.: 20,799
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



But the numbered range shown on that gauge does not seem to be correct for the '81 gauge, or any of the non-numbered gauges. I recall that the only one that topped at 340 or so did not start as low as 80. Thought it started at 140. Since this one has numbers on it, it must have been refaced, and I wonder if the face is the correct scale for the gauge itself.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Montreal914
post Jun 19 2017, 09:01 AM
Post #4


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 342
Joined: 8-August 10
From: Claremont, CA
Member No.: 12,023
Region Association: Southern California



QUOTE(arne @ Jun 19 2017, 07:27 AM) *

But the numbered range shown on that gauge does not seem to be correct for the '81 gauge, or any of the non-numbered gauges. I recall that the only one that topped at 340 or so did not start as low as 80. Thought it started at 140. Since this one has numbers on it, it must have been refaced, and I wonder if the face is the correct scale for the gauge itself.


Humm... That could be another issue to look into. I will remove it tonight to see if there are 2 layers on the face.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
arne
post Jun 19 2017, 09:33 AM
Post #5


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 263
Joined: 31-January 17
From: Eugene, Oregon
Member No.: 20,799
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



Another thought - the build date of that gauge was 11/80, but that does not mean that it wasn't a replacement for an earlier car.

This could be tough to figure out. You may end up having to buy a new matching pair, or at least a used gauge that is clearly identified.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
porschetub
post Jun 19 2017, 02:51 PM
Post #6


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,672
Joined: 25-July 15
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 18,995
Region Association: None



Is that date stamp to indicate when it was made or model year ? the number on the very outside of the gauge face will confirm,I was sold a tach and it wasn't as advertised turned out to be a 86 from a 3.2.
The 3.2 tach uses a different signal than the earlier ones but my tachadapt will cover that.
I have the same combo gauge and it is matched with a 150 degrees celsuis sender,I matched a new 50mm VDO to it and got close reading between the two,there is a VDO sender that you can cut to length but think it is only 1/8''npt ,I just used a reducer bush,not sure if you could use it on a T4 motor.
Is it possible the one you showed in the pic will be too long (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) .
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
arne
post Jun 19 2017, 03:07 PM
Post #7


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 263
Joined: 31-January 17
From: Eugene, Oregon
Member No.: 20,799
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



I believe the date stamp is the build date. You need the part number to determine what it was originally supposed to fit.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Montreal914
post Jun 19 2017, 08:36 PM
Post #8


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 342
Joined: 8-August 10
From: Claremont, CA
Member No.: 12,023
Region Association: Southern California



As mentioned, I'm pretty sure the gauge housing and module are not matched. I believe the housing is from a 68 or 69.

I removed the module and there is only one face, no stick on layers. That being said, it doesn't prove anything.

There is actually a number on the actuation mechanism; 211216182. I did a Google search but couldn't find anything. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Attached Image

As for the 911 sender's length, I hope it can fit in the taco plate.

I guess I will have to validate all this with the boiling water method. It's a pain to do though, either you bring a battery in your kitchen or the camping burner near the car... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I'm trying to avoid buying a bunch of senders in hopes of finally matching them. The gauge /sender is documented but up to a point unfortunately. I wish that module number was correlating to a sender.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th June 2017 - 11:31 PM