N51

Sounds like a "best-case-scenario" for the shop.

jdistefa

LOL, love the cardiac surgery reference.... very true!

FGL28

Steve's perspective is very eyeopening. It all comes down to your comfort level with the shop. Our top end rebuild plus 60K service was about $9,500 give or take. Was it money well spent? yes. I did spend some money to replace the injector nozzles, recommended and I am happy with the results. I checked in while the rebuild was going on, I brought food for the shop, cookies, etc. I asked questions and did my research. I think that as an owner of the car you show the shop that you care about the work and you should get a good job. Is spending a few more bucks worth getting a great job? Yes. This is a classic car and I think worth the price.

38D

$25k is not even close for a stock rebuild. A good quality rebuild with new P/Cs, valve guides, valve springs, ARP bolts, etc should run in the 12-13k range.

droy3

I was just quoted a performance rebuild for $17k from a board contributor (3.8 l with many enhancements) installed. IMHO me thinks 25k is high. For what it's worth.

Bull

+1

scat

In my oppinion $25k is way too much for an engine rebuild.A used, low miles 993 turbo engine sells for around that much....

N51

What enhancements? A basic 3.8l should run ~$15k. Where's the $2k extra going to?

race911

While throwing all these blind quotes around, did anyone (except Steve) consider the initial diagnosis? Metal shavings. So contrast a rebuild of your "hey it's running but it's just dog gone worn out now" rebuild v. crank/cams/oil pump/younameit is in need of replacement rebuild. And the tank. And the cooler/lines. You guys work for free? And stand by your work?

I existed at the lower end of the 911 world (in today's terms, anyway) from 1981-95, and even *I* had the decency not to quote fantasy best case scenarios for catastrophic damage repairs when I was barely out of my teens. Did I get bit in the *** big time more than once? Damn straight. 2.7's were a bitch.

Now onto those crate motors. This is the third time recently I've posed this observation, the other times regarding the 996 crates. I took apart a factory crate 2.4 way back when for a chain tensioner failure or something, and the crank and rods were .10/.20 under (can't remember which was which undersize). No way, no how did I ever put something like that in one of my engines. Just doing engines and transmissions out of my garage, merely gathering up all the cores I could to mix/match/machine in order to sell decent, serviceable engines to pay for law school.

droy3

Remapping + port and polish. Sounded reasonable to me but I may be off.

N51

With all respect, you are off. Port and polish went out in the early '90's. Remapping should be part of the build. $15k firm. $25k should get anyone north of 350hp.

droy3

Come to think of it he may have said LWF. Either way, it was Rennsport so I'm sure I'm wrong and not them. Sorry I can't remember more details. I must be getting old...and with all due respect many still port and polish heads.

Mark in Baltimore

Are you saying that porting and polishing are no longer de riguer for a high-performance motor? Why, and why would one not want better flow?

N51

Mark,
We all want better flow. But the old standard of "port/polish" thankfully died in the arms of chevy/ford/harley. Even they have turned from it. Smaller and rougher ports to increase velocity and create turbulence.
At no time in working with my builder has this term(port/polish) ever come up. :-)

droy3

Now the smaller makes sense to me since if properly designed it can increase cylinder filling due to volumetric efficiencies, but you'll have to explain how rougher and creating turbulance increases flow and/or cylinder filling. As an engineer who routinely designs spillways and penstocks for hydro plants this is a first for me and is somewhat contradictory.