AGW911

So, my 72T came with a 2.2 out of a 1970. I originally thought it was a T engine from 70, but the Red Book is telling me it is an E engine.

Case number 901.101.101.3 R and L
Case has 911/07 on it, which I though meant 70T US engine
Serial number is 6108529 which fits into the E range
Heads are 901.105.111.OR
Cylinders are 911.104.306.OR

My original plan thinking it was a T was to put E cams and S pistons in it. Still not sure on what fuel delivery is best. Open to options on that one.

If it is an E, what are my options now? I would like to stay with easily available parts out of original Porsche engines as they will probably be easier to source at relatively affordable prices.

The engine is already completely disassembled, so I don't have to worry about that.

whalebird

I think you could have something to work with. Since the motor is apart and your sourcing new pistons and cylinders, A 2.4 (S p&c) with carbs and a SSI exhaust is a fine engine. The small things to make it worth while can add up(as if what I just said is "affordable") like getting the right size valves and machine work - including the piston skirt squirters(oil). After this you could have latitude with the cam, I like something with a little "lump". Don't forget a good oil cooler.
Stay safe over there man.

mck911

A 2.4 with PMO's, cams and SSI gets my vote too.

whalebird

Yea, sweet little motor. Thats 10K in parts.

User 4221

Why not a 3.2 transplant?

Depends on what you want to do. If you want period correctness, then build the 2.2 or 2.4. If you want something a little spicier, then a 3.2 with DME may be the way to go.

I've always wanted to take a solid longhood car and drop in a 3.2. It's on my bucket list so if you do it, I will be living vicariously through you.

whalebird

Yup. A transplant would be my next suggestion. But a 3.2 is not spicier than a 2.4. But you could easily build a 2.7 RS with carbs - why stop at 2.4. No 3.0 or 3.2 (stock) has the responce as a properly carb'ed motor. There's a big differance. A 3.0SC is an easy transplant in a 915trans early car, I like to add the aluminum suspension from the same donar. A little electrical work is needed, not as much as a 3.2. Choices, choices. I love spending others money...I too live vicariously in these threads.

Ed Hughes

A good 3.2 plus the needed conversion parts can approach 10k. And he still has a used motor. I think the build would be the way to go, and a lot more fun.

whalebird

^^^thats exactly what I'm thinking. Do we know what trans is in play here?

User 4221

Now that we have established his budget at $10k, what other options are out there? It's great spending other people's money

How about a 993 3.6?

User 4221

I need to add that I don't know much about the older power plants. Although a ITB'd 2.7 sounds interesting...

Ed Hughes

Same difference, not cheap and still a used motor. Did I tell of the story of a guy I know that went that route, only to find the motor wasn't right? He spent a lot of money rebuilding on top of the large sum he spent on the conversion. These are the exceptions rather than the rule, but a distinct risk. That's why I opted to blow more money on mine for less power than what a conversion woulda cost.

AGW911

Thanks for all the replies. When you say S pistons and cylinders you are talking about 2.4S pistons and cylinders? I will definitely add that to my shopping list. I agree that building this one will be more fun than just transplanting a used engine.

For carbs, if I can find a set of used Webers and rebuild them that could keep the cost down.

SSIs were on the original list, as well as a good oil cooler. Probably front mounted, but open to suggestions on what is best on that one.

Will I need head work done for the valves, or will E valves be fine?

I will have to read up on the oil squirter mod.

Oh ya, it is a 915 tranny as well.

pu911rsr

Very little difference between a T and an E motor, slightly higher CR and hotter cams in the E. The S power is coming from the S heads, bigger ports. If you want a slightly hot rodded motor you are good to go with what you have, if you want something more radical you are better off going with a 7R case or one of the aluminum sand cast cases. In my opinion there is nothing like a well set up 66mm stroke motor but to make a lot of power with one ain't cheap.
Phil

ked

sounds like you've got a great lump to start w/...
have you confirmed it still has stock P&Cs / have you measured everything?
any flow work done / previous valve work / etc?
I'd try to drag some pro old 911 motor rebuilder over (or take your box 'o parts to him) to examine the whole schmere... talk you through what's critical to replace & what's keeper.
I like the idea of building up a "cost effective" (hahahaha) version of the motor you have as a 2.4.
you can always sell it as a solid (hopefully!) running motor (highest value) & get something else eventually (but you're selling it, so why go to all the swap-motors / sunken cost effort when you can best learn how to build up most any aircooled)?

aside:
I'm fortunate to be attending the Barber "Legends" event this weekend... it's raining enough to keep the Loti from bursting into flames... Rahal led a parade of racers & nice vintage cars into "downtown" Mtn Brook last night - very Euro feel w/ streets closed down & people walking around w/ drinks (in 'bama!). supposed to be a big Porsche Corral at the track this wkd...

AGW911

When I say inexpensive, I mean not going loony tunes with the spending. I learned a long time ago there is a huge difference between inexpensive and cheap.

I realize some of these "upgrades" will require slight modifications (ie. oil squirters) but that is ok.

As for selling the car, I have been torn on that one. If I build an engine that gives me some enjoyment, it may end up staying around for a while. If that's the case, a new engine build will be the winter project.