Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: SWB Engine update

  1. #1

    SWB Engine update

    Is it much of a deal to put a 2.7 or 3.2 engine into a '67 911?
    I am not looking for power but better drive-ability, the 2.0 with Webers always seemed a little finicky and it seems more work to upgrade engine to 2.2 and install newer heads, than to just put a newer FI engine in.
    1967 911
    SN 307012
    EN 911-008

  2. #2
    Senior Member super9064's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,184
    Its been done many times. There is a minor problem fitting the later transmission. There is plenty of info at Pelican, lots of threads.
    Rob Abbott

  3. #3
    How about fitting to the older transmission?
    1967 911
    SN 307012
    EN 911-008

  4. #4
    Senior Member super9064's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,184
    I believe the 901 transmissions , strength, and gearing are the main reason to include the matching trans with the swap.
    Rob Abbott

  5. #5
    Clearance for the 915 is an issue
    Half-shaft compatibility then becomes a problem
    901 will require expensive upgrades to work
    Wiring harness for FI motor is different and Motronic box will have to be stashed
    External oil cooling is required above 160-170 HP

    See here for my own thought process. . . your 2,0 can easily be modified to be a LOT more fun without destroying the originality of the car. . .


    http://forums.pelicanparts.com/911-e...-901-05-a.html
    1966 911 #304065 Irischgruen

  6. #6
    Senior Member super9064's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,184
    I think John is right, you should keep the motor original, I you don't want more power, and the carbs are the issue why not new PMOs.

    This may be of some help to you, I am going to start the build of my 68 Alu 2.0 cased L motor soon. I went through many combination's, and have collected parts as they have come up. I have it narrowed down to two options.
    a 2.0 67S spec motor, or a 2.2S spec w/ webbers. I have 2.0S Ps@Cs, 2.2S rods, 66.mm counterweight crank, Carrera oil pump, and a set of 71T heads. dilemma is I would like to use the improved later heads, but they will not fit the 2.0. Supertec makes a 81mm cylinder that mates up to 2.2 heads. I could keep looking for 2.2S Ps@Cs, they have gotten stupid expensive new.
    Rob Abbott

  7. #7
    Rob,

    It depends on your priorities-- if you don't mind mild changes on the originality side, it's a simple matter to use the later heads, all the way to 2,7 heads. In fact, you could have LN Engineering make you up a set of Nickies in 87.5mm with custom JE pistons to match, and have a nice 2381cc motor, which with S cams and the accompanying hardware would probably be good for 190Hp.

    The only reason TO use 2,0 heads is originality-- the casting number is (barely) visible from below the engine, and the 2,4 Biral cylinders have a different-shaped relief cut along the bottom fins. VERY hard to tell unless you know exactly what to look for.

    If I were you I would find a set of 2,2 heads and 84mm cylinders, have the cylinders bored oversize to 85mm and fit a set of 9,5:1 JE pistons. That combo is probably good for 170 HP depending on the port size and is probably the outer limit of the engine oil cooler capacity. (167 HP 2,7S used engine cooler only, not that we hold up that motor as the pinnacle of thermal longevity. . . )
    1966 911 #304065 Irischgruen

  8. #8
    Senior Member Bill Simmeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Virginia's Blue Ridge
    Posts
    1,679

    Thumbs up Interesting thread linked above

    John,

    Thanks for posting the link to that thread on the Bird. Interesting and timely for me. Plus, you stirred in a good bunch of seasoned contributors who came at it from different angles.

  9. #9
    Senior Member super9064's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,184
    John
    What I should have said, is that I'd like to build a 901/30 period correct rally kit motor. I've abandoned the idea of a 911R replica for my 68L, and am now building a "68L lightweight". I basically have all the parts, the heads stay the same(2.0), I have the S pistons/ cylinders, carbs, just need S cams. This set up equals 150 bhp, larger mainjets(145), and raising the compression ratio to 9.8:1 adds another 20bhp to 170bhp. This is all straight out of the "sports purposes" manual.

    The deciding factor will be the condition of the 2.0 heads, if the valves require replacement, then its just so much cheaper to rebuild the 2.2 heads. At that point I would just bite the bullet and purchase a set of 2.2 Ps&Cs.
    Rob Abbott

  10. #10
    Restating my goal, it is for increased drive-ability mainly around town. My '67 911 is never going to be a hot rod, it will be fun only, we don't have an autobahn around here. if I go to 2.2, I prefer lowering the compression ratio to keep horsepower the same as the 2.0 to make it more reliable and less finicky.
    The reality is driving around here will be mostly on the Weber's idle circuit, carbon build up under those conditions is an issue. Newer heads would be more efficient, but I don't know if it is really worth it to change.

    I am a fan of newer fuel injection systems, if I could adapt one to my 2.0, I would be happy. I prefer to keep the original engine as close to type as possible for future sale, and in the meantime pop in a newer engine for drive-ability and reliability.

    For reference I have owned the car since Oct 1968, but have not used it since 1977, and am currently restoring it to better than its previous glory, including upgrading the brakes to vented rotors and adding an external oil cooler, and other misc suspension enhancements.

    PMO's besides being expensive are more suited for the track than the street and being mechanical devices would probably be as finicky as the Webers, e.g. what works when air temperature is cold won't work when the air is hot.
    1967 911
    SN 307012
    EN 911-008

Similar Threads

  1. Engine fire w/pictures-update!
    By Zithlord in forum General Info
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-07-2009, 11:58 AM
  2. Engine fire update w/ pictures
    By Zithlord in forum General Info
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-24-2008, 01:43 PM
  3. Engine fire update
    By Zithlord in forum General Info
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-09-2008, 11:16 AM
  4. Pan update
    By berettafan in forum Technical Info
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-13-2007, 04:51 PM
  5. 67S Update
    By BBausser in forum General Info
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-09-2006, 10:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Message Board Disclaimer and Terms of Use
This is a public forum. Messages posted here can be viewed by the public. The Early 911S Registry is not responsible for messages posted in its online forums, and any message will express the views of the author and not the Early 911S Registry. Use of online forums shall constitute the agreement of the user not to post anything of religious or political content, false and defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise to violate the law and the further agreement of the user to be solely responsible for and hold the Early 911S Registry harmless in the event of any claim based on their message. Any viewer who finds a message objectionable should contact us immediately by email. The Early 911S Registry has the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary.