Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Oil pumps

  1. #1
    Senior Member Merv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    781

    Oil pumps

    I am doing the oil pump upgrade thing. I have read all the threads I can find. Standard 2.0L in now and no racing envisaged after the engine rebuild. Are the 3.0L pumps suitable or should I really be looking for the 3.2L with the modified pan?
    Merv

    Member # 2633
    Cars:
    Porsche '68 - 911N (Sold)
    Porsche 356B (T-6) S Coupe
    Porsche 2008 C2 997 Cabriolet (Sold)
    Porsche 2010 Gen.2 Boxster S

  2. #2
    Restoration newbie.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,484
    I personally went with the 3.2 because there have been some horror stories of the separate venturi screens coming apart and debris being sucked into the pump.

    I don't have the link handy but a search on the bird should find the threads showing the damage.

    andy
    67S in pieces
    EarlyS: 1358
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  3. #3
    Senior Member Merv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    781
    Thanks Andy. I am not seeing those horror stories, but maybe looking in the wrong places.

    My 1968 2.0L is a rebuild to pretty much stock spec and I have been advised to consider an oil pump upgrade. I can get a decent 3.0L one, and also at a much higher cost, a 3.2L. The latter one seems to require a non-stock sump plate to fit its strainer.

    My question related to the capacity/suitability of the 3.0L (SC - 4-Rib) as compared to the Carrera 3.2L - in early motors such as mine.

    I also think that either one would still need a few parts replaced, such as the screen?

    Name:  Oil Pump Part numbers.jpg
Views: 1024
Size:  66.4 KB
    Last edited by Merv; 04-24-2015 at 01:44 PM. Reason: more info
    Merv

    Member # 2633
    Cars:
    Porsche '68 - 911N (Sold)
    Porsche 356B (T-6) S Coupe
    Porsche 2008 C2 997 Cabriolet (Sold)
    Porsche 2010 Gen.2 Boxster S

  4. #4
    My opinion is on a stock build such as yours, and no track use intended, I use the original aluminum pump if it has a good housing and gears. It's only worked for 45 years, must not be much wrong with the design.
    Early S Registry member #90
    R Gruppe member #138
    Fort Worth Tx.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Merv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    781
    Thanks Ed. Yes - I am in fact starting to lean that way as I am not keen to add a different sump plate to accommodate the larger 3.2 with strainer. Oil pressure was good before the rebuild. If the earlier 3.0 litre pump could be fitted directly, without sump plate, then that would seem the only alternative. My car is an early 68 with an Mag engine case - therefore I 'suspect' the pump body is also magnesium?
    Last edited by Merv; 04-24-2015 at 03:57 PM.
    Merv

    Member # 2633
    Cars:
    Porsche '68 - 911N (Sold)
    Porsche 356B (T-6) S Coupe
    Porsche 2008 C2 997 Cabriolet (Sold)
    Porsche 2010 Gen.2 Boxster S

  6. #6
    Restoration newbie.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,484
    SC & 3.2 pumps have the same gear lengths and ratio. Are you doing oil bypass mod? I believe the ratio between the pressure and scavenge sides was changed with the case casting change.

    Getting a domed sump plate is not difficult.

    andy
    67S in pieces
    EarlyS: 1358
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  7. #7
    Senior Member Merv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    781
    Yes Andy the bypass mod has now been done on the case. I have a line on a couple of pumps here in Australia but as yet no photos to confirm type or condition.
    Merv

    Member # 2633
    Cars:
    Porsche '68 - 911N (Sold)
    Porsche 356B (T-6) S Coupe
    Porsche 2008 C2 997 Cabriolet (Sold)
    Porsche 2010 Gen.2 Boxster S

  8. #8
    another trick is to blueprint the oil pump

  9. #9
    Senior Member Merv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    781
    Ed - whether I do retain the existing pump or not (after check up), it would seem that the pressure relief valve should be replaced with the solid one in the drawing below. The springs would seem not as essential to replace.

    I am not totally sure which part number for the valve for the 2.0L case.

    Would seem to be this one http://www.sierramadrecollection.com...11-p20563.html ?

    Should the safety valve also be replaced? It looks to be the same part number.

    Name:  BypassModSprings-factoryManPage-s.jpg
Views: 705
Size:  65.1 KBName:  BypassMod-Anderson2-63b-red.jpg
Views: 728
Size:  93.3 KB
    Last edited by Merv; 04-24-2015 at 08:19 PM.
    Merv

    Member # 2633
    Cars:
    Porsche '68 - 911N (Sold)
    Porsche 356B (T-6) S Coupe
    Porsche 2008 C2 997 Cabriolet (Sold)
    Porsche 2010 Gen.2 Boxster S

  10. #10
    Restoration newbie.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,484
    Pelican sells a kit with the appropriate piston & correct length springs. I used the original caps rather than the hex caps for aesthetics but I had to make up some shims because the internal depth of the spring seat was different on the modern caps.

    andy
    67S in pieces
    EarlyS: 1358
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

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.