Hi. Am new to 914club and would like some feedback. I want to build a 2.7 six and have my eye on a long block on ebay.
Magnesium or aluminum cases: one over the other?
Thanks,
Rick

Unless you are searching for the absolute max amount of power possible (doubt it, or you would be looking @ bigger motors), either type of caser will be fine. Talk to your engine builder and get his personal oppinion though.

On the street, you will never be able to see the difference.

BJH

aluminum is stronger than magnesium, but i guess mag with case savers is good too. cant easily weld magnesium.

I didn't think the 2.7's came with aluminum cases, I thought the aluminum started with the 3.0L.
I have a megnesium case in my 911S. Go to a reputable shop and have them Timesert the head stud threads and you are good to go. Use good head studs, I used 993 studs. The 2.7's when built correctly are strong reliable engines.

Ed

Rick If you need a 2.7 to build I have a complete ready to assemble motor. PM me for more details and pics.
Craig C. Laughlin

JP is one of our resident experts when it comes to building a nice 2.7, he's the one you need to talk to. just watch your fingers

Seems to be a pretty good motor so far. Mines at 240hp and I think that is about as high as she will go.

I think the important thing is to get it shuffle pined and time certed. After that it's suposed to run forever.

aluminum cases are sought after the early racer guys... bring lots of money...

apparently, you need the sandcast AL cases for the screamer motors (8-9000 rpm short strokers) or you will walk the crank right out of the mag case.....

Rick, so what is the attraction to the 2.7? They, of course, have the headstud pulling issue with the mag cases. Why not start with a 3.0, 3.2, or a 3.6?

Magnesium cases are lighter than the aluminium ones, that's about the only plus.

Personally, if it was my project, I wouldnt use the 2.7 because its a horrible motor. I would go with either a 3.0 or 3.2 for the conversion just because its easier to add upgrades. One of the best 911 motors was the bullet-proof 3.0, as long as it had the tensioner upgrade. They should also be easier to find in terms of searching for the right motor.

Ooooh, where's that popcorn emoticon thingie?

The 2.7 can be an incredible motor if put together right.
The 2.7 RS MFI was a screamer, I'd love to have one or those. Torque, hp, it was the whole package.

The only justification to say the stock 2.7 is a horrible motor is that it had a tendency to pull head studs. Once it has timeserts installed and the thermal reactors removed, it should be just as bullet-proof as a 3 liter.

BTW, I'm not biased. i have a 3 liter that's putting out close to 300 hp.

Hay, I got my 2.7L cheep. I would have rather had a 3.0L as the case is mo better.

The "trick" with a 2.7L is finding a good case. They warp when they get hot and many of them have....specially CA. motors. Some are OK, some can be drag honed and some need to be line bored.....the latter gets expensive. They all need case savers & 24 Divilar studs (this last bit is my opinion)

That said, the 2.7s are less expensive to hot rod.
Nikasil cylinders are more affordable.....these are need to hot rod all the 2.7-3.2 engines. E Solex, or S cams (used) are widely available for the 3 journal cam towers.
Keep em' cool and they work fine. Mine has been reliable as a brick and I've been beatin' on it for 5-6 years.

The 2.7-3.2 all have their failure areas....and all have solutions. The trick is to build around these.

i have never built a motor ...but having said that, with reading, why not buy a 3.0 to start with, as it is said to be a much better base....

I don't think the 2.7 is a horrible motor either.
It can be an awesome motor if you fix the common weak points.
(the 3.2 has its weakpoints too)

a 2.5 or a 2.8 would be an awesome motor...

I sometimes wish my 2.0 was built on the mag 7R case so as to loose another 20lbs.

brant

Prorsche has never built a "horrible" air cooled motor...cept maybe the T-4

!!!

Hi Pete,
Why is the 3.0 better?
And cheaper? Isn't it a newer and more expensive engine?
Thanks,
Rick

Hi J.P.,
Thanks for the info. I need to do some homework before I get in too deep. Maybe it wouldn't be bad to start with a 4 cylinder.
Rick

I think I am biased because I only have talked to one racer and not about a street engine with longevity. Thanks for the info though.
Rick

A 3.0s only cheaper if you don't have to rebuild it.

The 3.0 didn't pull studs like the 2.7 and it didn't have thermal reactors that cooked the motors.....3.0s DID have a nasty habit of snapping the bottom Dilivar (SP) studs.....but otherwise were a great engine.

Up until I bought this 914...the scariest fastest 914 I ever drove was a built 2.7 with carbs....

How could you tell? You only drove it from the front of your house to the garage.

I am looking at building a 914-6 for SCCA autocrossing.

Looking at F Prepared class, I read it as the 2.7/2.8 are the largest motors for that class.

That would be my reason for building a 2.7.

Am I correct in the SCCA rules reading?

Ray

Ayup.
2.700 L X .75 =2025 Lbs
Bring monies.

Ayup.
2.700 L X .75 =2025 Lbs
Bring monies.
[/quote]