3.2 question, is gasketless design a problem? Options

[brp914]

hi,

I'm getting my 3.2 freshened. the 3.2's have no head gaskets. my machinist recomended machining the cylinders so that C2 type gaskets could be used. At first I thought ok, but later reconsidered because I dont recall head leaks to be a problem with 3.2's. I just took apart 2 3.2's - both had top ends done at some point in their lives and neither had this mod done. Anyone have knowledge of this? tia

Bryan

[TimT]

Leave it be unless your going to pressurize the engine ( ie turbocharge)

[Brad Roberts]

What he said. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/thumb3d.gif) The turbo guy's are all over this mod, but no need for it on a street engine.


B

[Cap'n Krusty]

The head gasket was a running change on the C2 (964), and IME, the earlier engines all need the mod the first time they come apart. Leaks are absolutely epidemic on that engine. I had a long discussion a year or so ago with Bruce Anderson about the head gaskets and the studs. Most of the in-the-know people are putting the old style steel head studs in their street rebuilds along with the head gasket mod. Tha Cap'n

[Brad Roberts]

Seriously?

I knew about changing the head studs, but cutting the heads for the later gasket?

Hum.

Ollies hasnt said anything to us.

I guess German Precision must be doing them.

Very interesting.


B

[Series9]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with a stock 3.2. Leave it alone.

[Brad Roberts]

I think the point here is: He has the engine apart.

Joe,

I respect your opinion's on this stuff, but Bruce Anderson and his Jerry Woods connection have more engine experience than most of us on the forum put together. They build on average 10 engines a month for vintage racing and racers worldwide. Bruce doesnt pull this stuff out of thin air. He has been dealing with it for 40+ years. I'm going to tend to beleive what he has to say about ANY engine related topic. Most of the 3.2's I run across need top end rebuilds (or they where done recently.


B

[Series9]

Brad,

I completely agree. I definetly don't have all the answers. Bruce and Jerry have WAY more experience than myself.

I was simply saying that I've never had any 'head gasket' problems on 3.2s. As far as I'm concerned, the only engines that might need this treatment are the early 3.6s.

[brp914]

quote]Seriously?

I knew about changing the head studs, but cutting the heads for the later gasket?

Hum.

Ollies hasnt said anything to us.

I guess German Precision must be doing them.

Very interesting.


B
[/quote]

It was Ollies that was going to do it.

Posted Jul 17 2006, 06:54 PM
The head gasket was a running change on the C2 (964), and IME, the earlier engines all need the mod the first time they come apart. Leaks are absolutely epidemic on that engine. I had a long discussion a year or so ago with Bruce Anderson about the head gaskets and the studs. Most of the in-the-know people are putting the old style steel head studs in their street rebuilds along with the head gasket mod. Tha Cap'n

His Crustiness - are you saying the leaks are caused by broken dilivars (which did occur with my engine), or the gasketless design itself?

thanks all for your replies.

[sixnotfour]

3.3 turbo's have no gaskets cylinder tops are flat,
3.2 have the mini taper
pic of stock 3.2 and 3.2 with the mod.

[GeorgeRud]

Is the new setup to replace the head studs with Dilivar, Racequip, or plain steel studs? It seems to me that using the steel studs would not expand the same as the cylinders. Isn't that the old 2.7 pulled head stud story? Thanks for the explaination.

[Jeroen]

3.2 are pretty much bulletproof
only trouble they have are the valveguides, which usually wear out because the originals are too soft

replacing the headstuds "while you're in there" might be a good idea
I haven't heard of many breaking on the 3.2 (yet), but the SC's are breaking them on a regular basis now, so it's prolly just a matter of time...