wpriller

I've owned a 1975 911S California car for over 28 years. I've gone through the gamut with the 2.7 engine from head studs, tensioners to airbox. The car set in my driveway for 10 years. I was told by my wife to get rid of the car or part it out. I made the decision to put the car back together with the 2.7 engine. I had already updated the casing with a 77 casing that had steel inserts, I had replaced the reactors back in 1980 with bypass headers and with the recent engine rebuilt, updated the heat exchangers with SSI and updated hydraulic tensioners along with SC cams and the UT pressure kit. I've been told by my Technician I will be able to get a lot of years of enjoyment from the car even with it being a 2.7 engine. I know that there were a number of issues with pulled headstuds because of the material in the casing which I think was Nikasil. I know that California Cars were more prone to pulled head studs due to the thermal reactors. I know one of the benefits of the 2.7 was that the pistons and cyclinders were interchangeable with the 2.8 European piston sets without doing any boring to the casing. Overall I guess I'm just expressing my opinion, is the 2.7 engine really that bad if your are able to update and take care of problem areas that existed with the engine.

Slantnose!

Well, I've read all that too...
All I know is my 2.7 was rebuilt with some of that update stuff over 20 years ago and is still running strong & dry underneath.

wpriller

I"m sure glad to hear that, it gives me something to look forward too and I appreciate your comment.

JV911

in a word - no

assuming all issues are addressed you should get many tens of thousands of KM of enjoyment

Steve Weiner-Rennsport Systems

My own 2.7 still runs very strong for the past 28 years.

JMHO, but IF,..................IF these things are correctly built and employ very strict control of oil temperatures, they are just as durable as any other air-cooled 911 engine.

One cannot cut corners otherwise the outcome will be disappointing.

wpriller

Thanks, it's good to hear that other Porschephiles have had some success with the 2.7, and as you stated "assuming all issues are addressed you should get many tens of thousands of KM of enjoyment"

wpriller

Steve, it's good to hear from a Technician that services 911 engines and the success that you have had with your 2.7. It sure gives me something to look forward too. Thank You for your comment

LaughaC

My 2.7 was rebuilt in 2004 and runs great.

Edgy01

Once you do all of that the 2.7 engine is not what it originally was coming out of Zuffenhausen. Sadly, most of these engines started out poor to begin with, lacking all of these corrective actions. If you're an owner out there with a 2.7 litre car in which most of these things have not been done yet, you might want to seriously consider buying an SC (3.0) case which is aluminum vice magnesium, and start with that. The 2.7 engine went as far as a magnesium case could go for the technology at the time. Over time, even Porsche realized that the cases had to be aluminum because that stuff has better thermal qualities over magnesium,--weight, alone, couldn't be the majority of their design focus.

spanky

Hello to all. I have owned a 2.7 /75/ 911 for the past 6 years and have driven ir hard and fast for all of those 6 years. This includes long sustained 90/95 mph trips on I 5 going to San Diego from San Francisco The 2nd year in to ownership I noticed that dreaded popping exhaust and oil leaks. Looked underneath and i could see that at least 2 studs were not where they should have been . . I rebuilt this engine using a diffrent mag 2.7 casing, 930 turbo steel studs only, having the required machine mods completed on this casing. and have never looked back. This is a fun car to drive, high revs, all of the right 911 sounds and I love it. If its done correctly you should not have any problems after a rebuild.