2.0 911S motor build for my '68, advice?

[Fritter]

I have an opportunity to buy a '68 longblock for $500. Engine number is 3380373 so I think it's a mag case. I was thinking about buying it and selling the heads and PC set and then starting on an "S" engine with the cams, heads, and PC set.

I have a 2.2T motor currently in my car that I would salvage the Weber 40 carbs, heat exchangers, shroud, and other various and sundry parts from.

My car was originally a sporto, but it has a 901/2 in it now, so probably a good match for the 2.0 S motor?

I would do as much of the work as I could myself.

Any advice or comments on this project would be appreciated.

[kenikh]

Sounds like mag. Read more:

http://www.early911sregistry.org/for...erson+aluminum

[Fritter]

Cool, thanks Kenik! I guess it is mag, but will confirm when I look at it again.

Would be nice if it was AL, but Mag will work for this project also.

[Grady Clay]

Mike,

Go look at the engine type number. I suspect you will find it 901/17.

My info shows 3380373 as a ’68 normal 911 USA Sportomatic. Yes, that probably would have a mag case.

In ’68, the 911S engine numbers are the form: 408xxxx type 901/02 or 418xxxx type 901/08. My recollection is most (if not all) 901/02 911S engines were aluminum cases. I don’t recall 901/08.

Best,
Grady

[Fritter]

Grady, thanks. I still have to find out if it's 901/17, but I am sure it will turn out to be the case (no pun intended).

In your opinion, is that case a good one to build a 2.0S motor off of, if I get the oil squirters and time certs installed? $500 seems like a good price for the longblock to me. I know the mag is not as robust as the AL.

Thanks for any advice.

[66S]

Unless you have too much money ,.the mag case doesnt need case savers or squirters.It worked fine until the 2.7. The 2.2 had squirters but not the 2.0.

[kenikh]

Grady, thanks. I still have to find out if it's 901/17, but I am sure it will turn out to be the case (no pun intended).

In your opinion, is that case a good one to build a 2.0S motor off of, if I get the oil squirters and time certs installed? $500 seems like a good price for the longblock to me. I know the mag is not as robust as the AL.

Thanks for any advice.

No need for squirters, but they are nice to have and keep the motor cooler. I would not get cheap on case savers though, as heat causes pulled head studs and not having squirters could get you there on a hot day.

[gruen911]

Mike,
Assuming you are planning to put the motor in your 68 911, it is a good idea. However, if you don't care about a correct year case, you may be better off going with a 22 or 2.4 case. For the money you are going to spend on the rebuild, why not go for a larger displacement engine? More torque and hp for about the same cost.
$500 for a 68 mag case seems a little pricey (unless of course you are trying match you 68 car with a correct year case). You can buy a much better 7R mag case for the same money.

[kenikh]

I recommend what Gruen says; I did the same thing. I found a nice 2.2 case that was within spec on the mains. The squirters were already there, so I spent my money doing case savers, oil bypass, LIGHT boat tail on the mains and shuffle pins.

My original case will sit happily in a corner of my garage until called upon at a later date.

[Fritter]

Guys,

Thanks for all the comments, this is exactly what I need!!

It's $500 for the entire 2.0 longblock, not just the case. Is that a high price still? I can get a 7R longblock for that money?

Squirters and case savers are good insurance in a mag case methinks. Not that much more money is it, for the added insurance?

I hear you on the increased displacement, but I was trying to keep this a semi-pure 67/68 2.0 S motor type of thing. Don't want an external cooler either.

I would do the assembly myself, so the costs would be the parts purchases and the outside machining.

Keep the comments coming, this is great!