333pg333

Search his 'Recent posts' and you can read up somethings about this build.

George D

Garrity at Motorsport is developing a longer stroke to get to 3.4. I'll give an update when he is willing to share.

George

tone3721

Sweet. I plan on doing a 968, with as much displacement as possible, eventually. Maybe this year, sometime after I recuperate from the 951. The 951 will stay 3.0. After paint/wheels, Ill be done sinking large chunks of cash, into it. Youll definitely have to let us know George.

Olli Snellman

Still under building process (lack of hobby funds)


Bore: 104.5 (Alusil)
Stroke: 88
Pistons: Mahle/Andial 104.5 turbo pistons
Rods: PO-Metal
Block: S2
Head: Factory new 2.7L with Chevy big block valves
Turbo: Holset
Engine Management: VR
Other: Dbilas cam

RajDatta

Chris, correction on that. Only the S2 has this harmonic damper. 968's get DMF, which provides the damper features. Also, 968 turbo S from the factory had this vibration damper so it was used on 8 valve heads as well.
Regards.
Raj

RajDatta

You are 100% correct. 968's have just a standard light weight pulley unlike the S2, which has this harmonic damper. 968's get DMF.
Raj

thingo

Mine is a work in progress, well more like a wait in progress at the moment.

thingo, 3.1 Darton MID,custom wossner,16v,FP HTA gt3582,variable cams,motec

mikeyoman

Almost finished ! Hoping to fire her up in 2 weeks. report to follow.

LR 3.1
Bore: 105 NiCom
Stroke: 88.6
Pistons: JE ceramic coated
Rods: Carrillo
Block: '93 968
Head: 8v LR stg3, solid lifters
Turbo: LR S75
Engine Management: LR chips
Other: LR stg4 MAF & more

(happy now Rob !)

RolexNJ

Hey Mike glad to see you make a post about your car. And that engine department looks very familar to me? Anyway, we're looking forward to hearing more about your 3.1L build at some point!

tone3721

Ugh, im so ancy I cant wait for my car to be done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was told yesterday another week minimum. The builder is takin his sweet time to tune, thats ok tho, quality takes time. They want to do the break in themselves too, thats mostly the hold up at this point. I feel like a kid counting the days to xmas. Did I mention Im ancy, and cant wait? LOL

I figured if anyone understood my angst, its you guys. LOL

Tom M'Guinn

I've been trying to keep the list up to date, but if you see any errors, let me know.

In the meantime, I have a question: I have seem the S2/968 crank stroke referred to as 87.8mm, as 88mm and as 88.6. All the Porsche reference materials I've seen, such as the 968 factory manual, list it as an 88mm stroke. So, where are people getting these other specs? Even clarks-garage lists it as 87.8. Anyone know why?

333pg333

Yeah I've been wondering about that too Tom. Someone mentioned to me in passing that there was a different crank and I think it was from one of the 968s but I will have to try and dig this up.

This would obviously have a direct effect on the nominated capacity of the car. I know we round it out, but some guys are saying 3L and some 3.1L. Both with 105s? Perhaps different rods?

Tom M'Guinn

Well, 1mm difference in stoke make about 34cc difference in overall displacement on a 104mm bore, so these reported stroke differences would make even less impact on total cc's. I've been poking around and cannot find anything but 88 in Porsche's literature, but assume there is more to the story since clarks-garage shows 87.8 (and clark is usually a good fact checker) and a number of people have said 88.6 in this thread. If anything, I was just curious if I calculated my compression ratio correctly, since I used 88mm stroke without actually checking.

333pg333

Perhaps it's just been that people have started rounding up the 87.8 to 88? Not sure on the 88.6 though. Perhaps that's the one I was informed about. Interesting that this hasn't surfaced before though?

mikeyoman

have to admit I didn't really check to well with my stroke numbers. Could have swore I found a site with the specs only last week, quoting 88.6, can't find it now. as you say all the books state 88.