kusee pee

Hi guys, looking for some opinions here. I've recently sold the 930 after hankering for nother NA 911. I love my 911SC track car so an obvious choice is to get an SC for the road. However, I also have an urge for a Carrera 3.0. Apart from the rarity factor can anyone tell me if the drive and ownership experience of the 3.0 will be much different from the SC? Will it be an even revvier version of th SC experience or will I get something much the same but just spend more money? TIA.

Bill Verburg

A C3 is lighter and revier and a bit faster than an SC, they are great cars which were pretty nicely equipped originally. Finding a stock one for sale these days is going to be tough, but if you can find a good one they are keepers.

I've owned mine for 35yrs

race911

Yeah, the engine is basically an aluminum 2.7L engine with a 95mm bore. 10+ lb. lighter crank. (Which is also the case/crank that the 3.0 930 used.) I did a 98mm P/C 3.2L with some wild cams and 46IDAs back in the '80s on one that ended up in Phoenix during the gray market craze. We wouldn't call it fast in today's world, but it was a really fun car in its day.

Bill Verburg

The difference between the 930/02 used in C3 and the 2.7 engines of the day is in the cc material and port sizes They used the same crankshaft, con rods, flywheel, fi and oil pumps but the top end and cams were different
2.7 mg case 911/82 used in '76/77 RoW 911, 90x70.4, 2687cc
valves 46/40, ports 35/35 165hp@5800, 176lb-ft@4000

2.7 mg case 911/83 used in'76/77 911RS, 90x70.4, 2687cc
valves 46/40, ports 36/35 210hp@6300, 188.4lb-ft@5100

3.0 al case 930/02 used in '76/77 Carrera 3.0, 95x70.4, 2994cc
valves 49/41.5, ports 39/35 200hp@6000, 188lb-ft@4200

Since the op asked about a comparison to SC, the SC used a beefier heavier crank and so doesn't rev quite as freely, SC are also burdened by more stringent smog reg tuning, late SC did get the power back though
'78 SC RoW 930/03 used the beefier crankrods but other components as in C3 w/ an added airpump
95x70.4, 2994cc
valves 49/41.5, ports 39/35 180hp@5000, 165lb-ft@4200

by '81 they got it right, at least RoW in the 930/10 which bumped cr from 8.5 to 9.8, 95x70.4, 2994cc
valves 49/41.5, ports 34/35 204hp@5900, 189lb-ft@4200

kusee pee

Cheers guys. I'm definitely tempted by a 3.0 and will keep my eyes peeled...

Jay Gratton

My Uncle has had his 3.0 Careera for over 30 years and loves it! I have driven it many times and it is as fast if not faster then my '85 3.2. I think it weights in at 2400 pounds give or take a few. They are fantastic cars! I would get one over an SC anyday (if you can find a good one).

Tom F

Find an 81-83 ROW SC. Best of the 3.0s.

Tom F

Find an 81-83 ROW SC. Best of the 3.0s.

racer

OP is listed as living in the UK, so an ROW car should be easy to find

ZAMIRZ

I own an SC with a short-stroke 3.3. But, if I were in your position, I'd get a C3. 6-bolt crank FTW.

kboustani

i have ownes an 83 sc,87 carrera 3.2,95 993,94 964 and still own a 76 c3.my c3 is by far the most fun and the one i kept fot 7 years and replaced the others.
get a c3 if you can.

HkPlinker

I have a 1976 911S with a 1967 S sand cast block that was punched to accept the 2.7 heads, SC cams and is bullet proof. It was ran on a Mustang dyno and produced 224hp and 212 pounds of torque. Stephen Kaspar built the car and it is still an absolute pleasure to drive. When you stay on the throttle and the the cams start to wind up and you shift at 6600rpm's and it's still pulling! The headers and SSI exhaust produce a fantastic exhaust note. This is a factory "black out" trim car, I added the Carerra script and duck bill, but have the factory trunk lid. I like this look much better.

Jay Gratton

So what did you go with?

bart1

Not sure where this is located:

http://renn-spot.blogspot.com/2010/0...era-coupe.html