What do you think? (cylinder scoring)
04-16-2006, 04:03 PM
#16
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
In addition to what Tom mentioned, if you want the 3L to live, DO NOT use the 2.5L chip.. Timing is different.
04-16-2006, 05:24 PM
#17
Pro
Thread Starter
1. What about the pistions on the LR site?
2. Oil pan is already tapped.
3. Noted.
4. I'm using a SplitSec PSC1-003 in combination with a Zeitronix wideband for tuning.
5. I have the 951 rods from my current 951 engine.
6. Noted.
7. Can I use the clutch from my 951? It has only 5000 miles on it.
fast951: ok, no 2.5 chips for the 3.0 engine.
2. Oil pan is already tapped.
3. Noted.
4. I'm using a SplitSec PSC1-003 in combination with a Zeitronix wideband for tuning.
5. I have the 951 rods from my current 951 engine.
6. Noted.
7. Can I use the clutch from my 951? It has only 5000 miles on it.
fast951: ok, no 2.5 chips for the 3.0 engine.
04-23-2006, 07:03 AM
#19
Pro
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Tom M'Guinn
5. You'll need forged rods (from the 951 motor or Pauter, Carrillo, etc.)
If I use the 951 rods (78.9mm) my compression will be lower! Or are the pistons offered by LR for a 3.0 8V conversion for the 951 rods?
04-23-2006, 02:38 PM
#20
Rennlist Member
All stock 944/968 rods are the same length, so the compression should be the same regardless of which rod you use. The Mahle 104 8v turbo pistons are set up to make 8:1 compression using the stock length rods. Have you confirmed that LR still has a set of those pistons (they'd have been smart to buy Andial's remaining supply). The 951 rods are made stronger (forged) than most 944/968 pistons, according to all reports. I have no first hand experience using non-forged rods in a turbo motor, but have been told from multiple sources that they are subject to failure in higher HP applications. I've also heard, however, that some folks have gotten lucky and found forged pistons in non-turbo cars.
The 78.9mm you mention is the crank throw of the 2.5L crank (rather than the 951 rod length). The 3L crank has an 88mm throw. Just fyi.
The 78.9mm you mention is the crank throw of the 2.5L crank (rather than the 951 rod length). The 3L crank has an 88mm throw. Just fyi.
04-26-2006, 05:18 PM
#25
Pro
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Rip It
so there are no scratches/scoring in cylinders 1 & 4 ?
Today I found a good shortblock so there is no need for a 3.0 liter Turbo conversion.
04-26-2006, 07:00 PM
#26
Advanced
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: GR MI
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the picture there are no scratches above the top ring, only in the ring travel. The ring ends will touch with overheating or lack of clearance. It's not a moly filled ring is it?
04-27-2006, 09:03 AM
#27
Pro
Thread Starter
It is a (cheap) aftermarket ring.
Overheating may be the problem. After installing GuruChips the car was running lean. I think it may have taken me too long to correct the lean problem.
Overheating may be the problem. After installing GuruChips the car was running lean. I think it may have taken me too long to correct the lean problem.
05-03-2006, 06:49 PM
#28
Pro
Thread Starter
Today I went to pick up new parts for the rebuild. I received Goetze piston rings for the 944 NA. When I told the supplier that I needed 944 Turbo rings he told me that the rings I received are the same as the ones they had put in the last rebuild!
Might this have contributed to the scoring!?
Might this have contributed to the scoring!?
05-04-2006, 11:24 AM
#30
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: ottawa
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>You need the 951 rings. They are different. Don't know exactly what is different, but ... <
Here is the pet-file part#944 103 902 82 do a cross-reference to what you have, see what you come up with.
Here is the pet-file part#944 103 902 82 do a cross-reference to what you have, see what you come up with.
