Notices
928 Forum 1978-1995
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 928 Specialists

INTERFERENCE?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-28-2015, 04:01 PM
  #16  
mark kibort
Rennlist Member
 
mark kibort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: saratoga, ca
Posts: 29,952
Received 165 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by WALTSTAR
Ok, now that its still not clear...
Who is and where is Roger? (keep in mind that I havent been on here with you guys long and am not as familiar with you all as you all are with each other).
What is a porkensioner?
Why would I rebuild a 60,000 mile engine that has been babied? If I was going to swap engines, I have a 406 dual quad, roller, gear driven, 4 bolt main small block that I would drop in rather than another Porsche engine (forgive me purists, but no vehicle of mine remains stock once I decide to start modifying it)
I was wondering if in the event of a belt failure, would my valves be struck by the pistons.
you wouldnt, unless it was already out, and then you would just swap short blocks... much cheaper that a hybrid conversion .
as far as belt failure, its probalby just find if its a US 78 to 82 (4.5 liter) and 80% sure there is no problem with the 83 and 84 US.


Originally Posted by WALTSTAR
OK, I read up on the porkensioner and I think I have to get one from Roger?
I want it. I need it. I got to have it.
i wouldnt bother with it, the stock stuff works great. but, if you got to have it, its seemingly working in a bunch of cars here. dont know about it being race tested though.

Originally Posted by Kiln_Red
Of course I meant with the belt displaced. I understand with the valvetrain working as it should that pistons and valves don't make contact. In my experience, the '80-'83 Euro is non-interference (meaning when the bottom end continues rotations while the valvetrain does not). The good news that from '78-'95, they are all non-interference when the belt is equipped and the timing is correct.
you kind of hinted that the valves were close if "carbon" got built up on the valves or pistons and they could "touch".. not so as you know. nothing gets even remotely close unless the belt breaks or slips ....or if you spin it up to 10,000rpm, you might get "float" where the valve is still hanging down and the piston can hit it... but in our motors, thats kind of impossible... and if you drop a valve, it will get hit too, but thats true of all motors, interference or not.
Old 05-28-2015, 04:57 PM
  #17  
WALTSTAR
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
WALTSTAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 825
Received 45 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Too late, the porkensioner is in the mail! I spoke to Roger who looked up my vin and told me I had the 22nd of 3000 USA 1984 928s and explained that my car had a good many options not normally requested..
I am in da club!
Old 05-28-2015, 04:59 PM
  #18  
Kiln_Red
Rennlist Member
 
Kiln_Red's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bowling Green, KY
Posts: 1,494
Received 214 Likes on 112 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mark kibort
you kind of hinted that the valves were close if "carbon" got built up on the valves or pistons and they could "touch".. not so as you know. nothing gets even remotely close unless the belt breaks or slips ....or if you spin it up to 10,000rpm, you might get "float" where the valve is still hanging down and the piston can hit it... but in our motors, thats kind of impossible... and if you drop a valve, it will get hit too, but thats true of all motors, interference or not.
Right. I think you misunderstood. What I meant was that I know of occasions with S2 owners who reported bent valves after a belt failure. I also know of S2 owners who reported no bent valves after a belt failure. Clearly, the valves and pistons get very close AT THE LEAST on the S2 if a belt failure occurs. Obviously there are differences between those examples that should explain why one engine bent valves while the other did not. What's the difference besides the obvious fact that the pistons touched over here and not over there? Was there a difference in the dynamics of the engine internals? Valvetrain? Carbon buuldup? Maybe? I don't know. Just a hypothesis.
Old 05-28-2015, 07:38 PM
  #19  
mark kibort
Rennlist Member
 
mark kibort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: saratoga, ca
Posts: 29,952
Received 165 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kiln_Red
Right. I think you misunderstood. What I meant was that I know of occasions with S2 owners who reported bent valves after a belt failure. I also know of S2 owners who reported no bent valves after a belt failure. Clearly, the valves and pistons get very close AT THE LEAST on the S2 if a belt failure occurs. Obviously there are differences between those examples that should explain why one engine bent valves while the other did not. What's the difference besides the obvious fact that the pistons touched over here and not over there? Was there a difference in the dynamics of the engine internals? Valvetrain? Carbon buuldup? Maybe? I don't know. Just a hypothesis.
ah ha.. Yes, i get it . I was misunderstanding your point. I think you are right .
the little changes can make for some problems in engines that normally wouldnt have any upon a belt failure.
I did measure the contact of the valves pushed down in the EURO. with euro S pistons. there was .3" of travel before the valve hit the piston cut out..... if you think about it, if the cut out was .175" , then the valve would hit the piston without it at .125". the lift of the euro cams are about .4", so you can see, that with a 8mm lift US cam, (or near .3") with deeper cuts, it becomes a non interference engine. the euro 80-83 pistons have a .3" pocket., so you can see that any piston with a .3" pocket and up to a .4" cam , will miss contacting the piston, as the distance the valve takes to hit the piston face is about .125.
anyway.... this is all from memory, but i think it gets you in the ball park for the risk involved...... if any. its nice to have a Non-interference engine, because bending valves is a huge pain! (and cost). But i havent heard of too many belts breaking that hadnt required changing if they did fail.
Old 05-28-2015, 08:38 PM
  #20  
Landseer
Rennlist Member
 
Landseer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Johnson City, TN
Posts: 12,143
Received 360 Likes on 209 Posts
Default

You talked to roger so you are good to go.

84 USA #2874 suffered a tb break a few years ago. Stan Shaw had it re-belted. No damage was done. I bought it soon afterward and it runs great. Drove it today.

85 USA #1116. 32 V. Suffered a cam chain derailment last spring. Valves on right bank crashed. Symptoms were a rattling knocking sound up top for 6 months. My dumb *** self drove it anyway without making the effort to diagnose.
Old 05-29-2015, 03:11 AM
  #21  
Vilhuer
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Vilhuer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
Received 60 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kiln_Red
I know of occasions with S2 owners who reported bent valves after a belt failure. I also know of S2 owners who reported no bent valves after a belt failure.
On '84 MY S2 it can be explained by early engines using same pistons as '80-83 S. Those should be non interference like all earlier engines.
Old 05-29-2015, 12:28 PM
  #22  
Adk46
Rennlist Member
 
Adk46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Adirondack Mountains, New York
Posts: 2,412
Received 314 Likes on 164 Posts
Default

As I understand it, there are many factors that determine clearance: manufacturing tolerance stack up*, head gasket thickness, carbon build-up, etc..

*e.g., a combination of parts that individually meet dimensional requirements, but combine to produce an undesirable total length not governed by any drawing or specifications, and/or not determined. Long rods, long crank throws, short block, "thin" head, thin gaskets, shallow piston pockets, long valve stems, etc. You can imagine a manufacturer calculating the odds and deciding there's no justification for the trouble of matching parts.
Old 05-29-2015, 02:49 PM
  #23  
Andre The Giant
Rennlist Member
 
Andre The Giant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Gatineau, QC
Posts: 913
Received 14 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by giddyupp
IMHO - Porkensioner is the only way to go. Self contained, no bleeding needed and no re tension after 1500 miles (or what ever the recommended interval is)
+1
I have the porkensioner and love it, peace of mind, for me.
Old 05-29-2015, 04:09 PM
  #24  
mark kibort
Rennlist Member
 
mark kibort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: saratoga, ca
Posts: 29,952
Received 165 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Vilhuer
On '84 MY S2 it can be explained by early engines using same pistons as '80-83 S. Those should be non interference like all earlier engines.
dont think the US 80 to 82 motors came with a 4.7, they were all 4.5 Liter.... the US 83s started using the 4.7 pistons and were all Ljet. the 80 to 83S engines that had a 4.7 , were euro.....and the pistons were different than the 84-85 LHjetronic euro 310hp version engines which had very shallow valve relief pockets. the 300 hp version of the 80-83 euro, had deep pockets, thus giving the compression ration differences of 10:0 vs the 10.5:1 of the later 84-85 euro version.
Old 05-29-2015, 05:43 PM
  #25  
Kiln_Red
Rennlist Member
 
Kiln_Red's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bowling Green, KY
Posts: 1,494
Received 214 Likes on 112 Posts
Default

Some MY84 S2 had the early Euro S pistons. I had forgotten about that but that's what Vilhuer was referring to.
Old 05-29-2015, 09:14 PM
  #26  
mark kibort
Rennlist Member
 
mark kibort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: saratoga, ca
Posts: 29,952
Received 165 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kiln_Red
Some MY84 S2 had the early Euro S pistons. I had forgotten about that but that's what Vilhuer was referring to.
I heard that one time as well. curious, as that wouldnt have given the 10.5:1 compression.. maybe the story was , porsche did it and thought no one would notice? if so, you get lucky, that you have a non interference engine, but unlucky in that it would be a little weak. no way around it, as the heads were all the same size for the euro with the big valves. 42 /45mm (exhaust /intake)
they all had about 46cc of volume... just add the gasket and piston cuts and see what you get. (normal 84 piston were 2ccs vs the 80-83 pistons coming in at 7cc)
Old 05-30-2015, 06:28 PM
  #27  
WALTSTAR
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
WALTSTAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 825
Received 45 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Got the new unit from Roger. The porkensioner is a quality assembly. check it out, you wont be disappointed. I will let you guys know how it installs for me.



Quick Reply: INTERFERENCE?



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 12:07 AM.