'70 2.2T engine: How to improve power and torque

[Carreracv]

Hi guys.

I have read some threads about this and have drawn a first conclusion I want to share with you. My objective is to improve torque in low and mid revs, and power at high revs (target 160 hp aprox)

I want to rebuild my original 911/03 2.2T engine, with the following:
* 89 mm JE pistons 9,8 CR
* Solex Cams
* Rejected Zeniths
* Original heads and crankshaft
* Lightweight flywheel and clutch

What do you think about?
Should I change the distributor?

Thanks in advance. Cheers.

[Churchill]

That's pretty much what I did with my 2.2T rebuild, except I used the stock clutch/flywheel (IMHO on a street car you really don't need a light flywheel with a carbureted 2.2). I used Mahle 9.8:1 p/c's and DC-30 ("mod Solex") cams. Couldn't be happier with the setup. Makes great power from mid-range all the way to redline. You should get your distributor recurved, and unless you stick to the stock p/c's, you must have piston squirters installed in the crankcase.

[brookedale091462]

That should do it. although I know of a 70 2.2 that dyno'd at 238hp at 6800 rpms so there is as much room on the upside as you are willing to pay for.
Good Luck!

Hi guys.

I have read some threads about this and have drawn a first conclusion I want to share with you. My objective is to improve torque in low and mid revs, and power at high revs (target 160 hp aprox)

I want to rebuild my original 911/03 2.2T engine, with the following:
* 89 mm JE pistons 9,8 CR
* Solex Cams
* Rejected Zeniths
* Original heads and crankshaft
* Lightweight flywheel and clutch

What do you think about?
Should I change the distributor?

Thanks in advance. Cheers.

[M_deJong]

Bigger ports?

[Frank Beck]

I absolutely agree with rejected Zenith's.

Big investment but PMO's provide so much better drivability and tuning capability.

And since you're going 2.5 you definitely need to open those ports up and recurve distributor.

Not sure if your target hp is rear wheel or flywheel but this motor if done properly should make 220 at the flywheel all day long.

[Carreracv]

What is the difference between Solex cams and DC-30´s?
I know it would be better to fit PMOs or Webers, but I want the engine to look absolutely original, with its Zeniths.
I think the engine will rev up much better with a lightweight flywheel and clutch. Do you agree?
I have read the engine will have better torque with the original ports, and it is not necessary to open them because it will not rev further 6800rpm. Maybe I am wrong.
Thanks!

[Churchill]

I have read the engine will have better torque with the original ports, and it is not necessary to open them because it will not rev further 6800rpm. Maybe I am wrong.

You're not wrong. If you're staying at stock displacement and redline, you will lose power opening the ports. The 2.2 T and E used the same heads (save for the MFI bung on the E)

[Frank Beck]

You're not wrong. If you're staying at stock displacement and redline, you will lose power opening the ports. The 2.2 T and E used the same heads (save for the MFI bung on the E)

But he indicated that he's not sticking with stock displacement.

[Carreracv]

But he indicated that he's not sticking with stock displacement.

I was thinking in using 89mm pistons with the stock 66mm crankshaft. And I prefer not to open the ports (better torque and less money)
I don´t want to burn money. I have to rebuild my engine and I am just trying to improve it as much as possible at a reasonable cost.
Maybe is it better to use 87 or 87,5mm 9.8:1 CR?

[Jim Breazeale]

I was thinking in using 89mm pistons with the stock 66mm crankshaft. And I prefer not to open the ports (better torque and less money)
I don´t want to burn money. I have to rebuild my engine and I am just trying to improve it as much as possible at a reasonable cost.
Maybe is it better to use 87 or 87,5mm 9.8:1 CR?

Put your motor on a shelf and buy a used 3.0 engine with 250,000 miles. Best bang for your buck.

Regards

Jim