Which engine ?

[71gold]

Restoring a 2.2S and only have orig case.
This will be a show car so.....build a stock 2.2 or go 2.4
Of course it will look like a 2.2 with MFI etc....
Will value be hurt if 2.4
Like some thoughts

[Jim Breazeale]

Restoring a 2.2S and only have orig case.
This will be a show car so.....build a stock 2.2 or go 2.4
Of course it will look like a 2.2 with MFI etc....
Will value be hurt if 2.4
Like some thoughts

Having owned both a 71S and a 72S. IMHO, the 71S is way more fun to drive.

Ciao

Jim

[71gold]

Jim thanks for note.....what I am most interested is opinions on whether to build as a 2.2S short stroke or
2.4S long stroke . Also to go with the original MFI type as original or other .
The key factor is to main highest value as an original matching numbers car.
Please provide some feedback
Thanks

[Longballa]

If it's a show car keep it to original spec. To me a show car sounds as if you're not going to be driving it anyway.

[trdking]

I personally would go for the more horse power internals. The case matches someone can always put it back if they want bone stock. IMO

[Frank Beck]

Frank,
Since we're talking fairly similar HP numbers arguably your decision becomes one of utility. (I agree with Jim; all things being equal the 2.2 is a little more fun. But all things are never equal unless you're on a college campus.)

The 9.8:1 2.2S compression takes race gas. The anemic 8.5:1 2.4S comp does not. I suspect this car will sit so much that you'll have race gas in all the time anyway so probably a moot point.

Since all you're talking about here in "additional" parts is a 70.4 crank/rod set ($2k) the decision for me would not be 2.2 vs 2.4 but stock 2.4 vs. 2.4 using the 2.2S P's&C's. Using those definitely takes race gas but 210ish HP will make the car much more enjoyable. And since you already have the 2.2S aux cooler system the extra compression is "free" so to speak.

Oh, and BTW: New Mahle 2.2S P's&C's are cheaper than 2.4S.

[LongRanger]

. . . Restoring a 2.2S and only have orig case.
This will be a show car so . . .

. . . some thoughts . . .

Hmm . . . well . . .



. . . . if you're building something to 'show' then I would recommend keeping the car as stock as possible

Nothing 'll suck-up the finances quite like perfect paint, spotless upholstery, gleaming chrome, etc, etc, etc

On the other hand --- something that's purpose-built to just look good sitting still doesn't exactly need a gonzo-dyno sheet



Spend your money on the specific result that you're trying to achieve



And consider this . . .

. . . when it comes time to sell . . .


. . . and that time will always come . . .


. . . ask Yourself:



Which car will be easier to sell?



The one with 'the 'hot-rodded' (motor, suspension, whatever)' . . .


. . . or the one that's stock/matching/spotless/perfect?




................

[NeunElf]

Jim thanks for note.....what I am most interested is opinions on whether to build as a 2.2S short stroke or
2.4S long stroke . Also to go with the original MFI type as original or other .
The key factor is to main highest value as an original matching numbers car.
Please provide some feedback
Thanks

I confess I've driven neither but lots of people prefer the 2.2 liter 911S because of its free-revving (and peaky) character. Hence, the folks likely to pay big bucks for a 2.2 probably will not want one with a 2.4. Also, Bruce Anderson said the 2.4 S MFI was hard to keep in tune but the 2.2 S was a "happy" car.

As to Mechanical Fuel Injection: again, the folks willing to pay big bucks for a 2.2 will want the legendary throttle response of the MFI.

[71gold]

So ...some really good comments . I would clarify that this wil not be restored as hot rod....the question on 2.4 vs 2.2 was really all about the internals since you don't see the crank or rods. Definitely keep MFI and all other aspects of 2.2
So outward it would looks exactly like 2.2 .
Of course the supporting paperwork would reference the crank and rods.
The car will be driven/ show....but not a garage/trailer queen.
Would like to get more response at lower rpm like the E.....not a fan of 7000rpm

[Jim Breazeale]

So ...some really good comments . I would clarify that this wil not be restored as hot rod....the question on 2.4 vs 2.2 was really all about the internals since you don't see the crank or rods. Definitely keep MFI and all other aspects of 2.2
So outward it would looks exactly like 2.2 .
Of course the supporting paperwork would reference the crank and rods.
The car will be driven/ show....but not a garage/trailer queen.
Would like to get more response at lower rpm like the E.....not a fan of 7000rpm

Frank

Then you definitely don't want to do a proper 71S engine. That motor at 7,000 RPM is glorious. At 2500 RPM it is a turd.

Regards

Jim