Peter Zimmermann

I know about many instances from the Porsche world when product carryover occurred from one production year to the next, but I've rarely seen a carryover go into the third month of production. (The '73 911 had a design change done to the M/S seal in the trans, and the '83 SC had a mid-year change to the crankcase that eliminated the sump plate, and we know about the airbox change in 1980, but those are significant changes). A rubber centered clutch in an '82 is something that I've not seen, or been made aware of by associates. I think we'll know more when you can measure those intake ports.

Update, the CoA for my car shows a build completion date of 10/15/1981, but the door post VIN sticker shows a "9/81" production; so it appears that the stickers are a bit ahead of actual car completion.

Update #2, another P-car mystery! I'm positive that, back in the day, my shop repaired a couple of very late production '81 SC engines; both were fitted with coated Dilavars. So, I got curious and crawled under my car (it's on my lift for an oil change) with a good flashlight and dentist mirror. Wonder of wonders; my engine has uncoated Dilavars (you can see about 10-12mm of stud at the base of each cylinder), and no record of dis-assembly!

Now we must wonder if Porsche used some '81 engines as test mules for coated studs, but chose to exhaust their inventory of un-coated studs on early 1982 models. How about that? How's that old saying go? "There's the right way, the wrong way, and the Porsche way."

Regarding after market studs, my shop had always opted to use factory 993 studs (full "threaded" version), so I can't comment on the others.

MUSSBERGER

Pete I am constantly amazed by your selflessness.

Steam Driver

That's interesting about the uncoated Dilivars. A lot of manufacturers to that. 'Way back we had one of the original Honda Civics, non-CVCC. I think it was a '74. Anyway when it came time for brake pads I bought some appropriate to the year. Wrong; our car had calipers from a previous version and they wouldn't fit.

Getting back to the CIS, I have located a complete "plug 'n play" (according to the seller) CIS from an '81 SC. Would that be appropriate for my car? No price given as yet but I replied that I was interested.

I'm going to spring for the CoA and see what comes out of that.

Peter Zimmermann

Another thing occurred to me; have you looked under the passenger seat to verify if the Lambda ECU and oxygen sensor relay are still there? Also, the wire harness?

Steam Driver

As far as I know all of the K-Jetronic stuff is still there under the seat. If I was at my home computer I could send you an image of what's there as I documented it when I had the Recaro seats out ("Classic C's") to make some height-increasing seat mounts for them. (They sat too low for me.) I will post that image tonight.

Getting back to the problem at hand - engine (I thought I had posted this earlier in the thread but if I did I can't find it) I checked the cam timing Friday evening and they are timed at .039 - .040; right in the center of the recommended setting for a 930/04. Not the 930/16 as I have.

And, when I pulled the distributor cap to double-check being on TDC #1 I found a rev-limiting rotor, like the "old days." (Something I personally much refer to the fuel pump variety.) I assume that's there because of the disabling of the K-jetronic electronic functions. Or maybe not. I would like to keep that intact when this is all over with!

I have also found an '82 CIS wiring harness that's located in CT. I contacted the guy this morning to see if he still has it and how to consumate the deal. So far no reply from the guy offering the '81 Plug 'n Play.

All for now; will post an image from under the RH seat tonight.

Peter Zimmermann

Rev limit rotor, eh? Hmmmmmm... (1) failure to understand the car/system? or (2) a back up...?

Cam timing - interesting. Must have been done but I don't understand, if the mechanic was in far enough to time the cams, why didn't he install Carrera oil-fed chain tensioners? Makes me wonder if the engine has mechanical, aka; Junk!, tensioners...

Steam Driver

I guess we'll find out about the chain tensioners eventually, all things considered. I thought it curious about the chain tensioners as well. But today another thought hit me; I wonder about the heads. Perhaps they are the big port heads. That's because they have short exhaust studs, i.e. for the thin-flange HE's. I don't think most people would go to the trouble (and potential breakage issues) to swap out all those studs, do you?

I have an f.i. wiring harness for the '82 on the way, but the "plug 'n play" CIS system from the '81 won't be happening. The seller and I agreed to disagree; he wouldn't quote a price, instead wanting to play the old "show me the colored rock and I know when I see the right one" game. I'm not going to get into that with him, I'm sure his isn't the only one out there. And I was only doing it for convenience.

An image of the area under the passenger seat is attached. It appears to me everything is there but since this is the only one I've ever seen that may not be true!

And I still like the rev-limiting rotors. I don't know how the one on the Porsche works but the one on the 2011 GTI is a pain. If you get into the limiter it puts you in a "penalty box" of no power for what seems like forever!

Peter Zimmermann

Whew! The electrics look good; I feared water damage was the reason that the freq valve, etc., was removed.

The rev limit rotor is cool. It works by centrifugal force that overcomes the spring pressure, and as soon as the revs drop back into the safe zone the car runs normal.

Can't blame you for not playing games regarding asking price. I'm a firm believer in the seller quoting a price, and the buyer saying, (1) OK, (2) No, or (3) Will you take $X?

Steam Driver

No, no water damage. I think all of this was done in the name of getting an autocross "edge," if you know what I mean. It would be interesting to drive the car in it's existing form but I doubt that will ever happen.

I have ordered the CoA for the car and will continue to research what was done to it. I think we've about beat the present situation to death. The next thing up (after I get the shop cleaned up/out) will be to start tearing the engine down and see what surprises might lurk there. I'm also going to try and find out (I have a call in to him now) if he split the case during his massaging. If he did that would be good because it wouldn't need to be done again. You wouldn't believe how clean this engine is inside (looking through the sump plate opening). All shiny new aluminum-looking; no stains or anything.

For additional photos of the car in question in general:

http://s809.photobucket.com/user/Pbu...?sort=6&page=1

Peter Zimmermann

The internal cleanliness is from the use of (1) Kendall, or (2) Valvoline, or (3) some other quality oil with good detergent qualities. Your engine has likely never seen Castrol or Pennzoil!

My shop did a number of top end jobs where we pulled the con-rods with the lower end assembled. Replacing the rod bearings, bolts & nuts goes pretty quick doing it that way. Of course, I think with the passing of time, leakage at the #8 main bearing o-ring could be a deciding factor as to doing the lower end or not. My car has about 204K miles, and #8 seeps a little, even with sealant applied around the OD of that bearing, and a new seal in the bearing.

Steam Driver

One last question - at least for the moment. IF the heads are big-port AND IF I find a complete small-runner CIS system, what are the ramifications of that? I know a step constricting the flow would be an issue; how about a step the other direction, i.e. going from 34mm runners to 39 (?) mm ports? I know that wouldn't be optimal, but would it be a problem? And along that line (runner size, etc.) are the airboxes the same regardless or are they sized as well?

I have ordered the CoA for the car to see about the engine number thing, so I won't do anything about the engine until I see that. Lots of other stuff I can finish up on the chassis first anyway and it all needs to be done.

Peter Zimmermann

Enjoy the process and post the CoA's info!

Steam Driver

One final question for the moment; what is missing here where the two lines plugged with bolts are? I haven't been able to figure that out from the CIS diagrams.

I can hardly wait for the CoA; it will be interesting. Hopefully it will make a decision as to what to do about Frankenstein here easier!

Peter Zimmermann

Man, now your testing me! It's been a really long time, 20+ years, since I've thought about those connections! I'm pretty sure that you have a '78/79 throttle body, and the two large connections were for a decel valve that was mounted forward (driving direction) of the throttle body. I don't remember a large lower hose on Lambda cars, and the top hose went to a goofy line that went down toward cyl #3, did a U-turn, and went back to a lower connection on the side of the airbox. After the U-turn there was a branch line that was the vacuum source for the brake booster. The small, plugged, hose bib, I think, was a vacuum source for the cruise control unit.

Just thought of something else. Does your ignition distributor not have a vacuum device on it? I looked at your pictures, and can't see one; you should have a vacuum box with two hose bibs (1978/79 SCs had only one hose bib). Uh, oh, I have a hunch you will have to figure something else out! Check one of your intake ports, that'll allow you to plan your "attack!"

Steam Driver

OMG this just gets funner and funner. I'm really beginning to think I need to just find another, legal, engine and let the matching numbers thing go away! It appears I'll have enough parts left over returning this one to stock to about have another engine anyway!

3.6 anyone?