Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Yet another 2.2T owner seeking sanity check on adding displacement

  1. #1
    Senior Member teenchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Bucks Co., PA, USA
    Posts
    738

    Yet another 2.2T owner seeking sanity check on adding displacement

    Back in OCG911T'S thread https://www.early911sregistry.org/fo...rease-Question two and a half years ago, I wrote:

    I've been lurking on this thread and others similar here and on Pelican for the same reason: I have a 2.2T and have been considering going the 2.5SS route in the next year or two. I had mentally settled on 90mm P&Cs with custom pistons to raise compression to 9.3-9.5:1, with E cams and on my stock T crank. I'd also considered swapping the Zeniths for Webers which would entail finding Sporto-specific Weber manifolds, since swapping gearboxes is not an option (and outside the scope of this thread - no hijack!).

    On the head end of things, it's been suggested to me that I not bother with head work but swap in later 2.7S heads which aren't hard to find and are reasonably priced. As my T is of the 1970 variety, it's possible I'd need squirters and other case work. This setup might need additional cooling in the front fender as well.

    A twist to my situation is that my car had a top end done about three years before I bought it, in early 2006. There was a minor amount of head work done as the compression is slightly higher than that of a stock 2.2T (exact number I'm not sure, didn't commit the PPI report to memory but can dig it up). I wonder from time to time if I'd be better served by putting the engine on a pallet and sourcing a well-built 2.7 or 3.0.
    To recap briefly, a description of the car and how and where I intend to use it:

    Suspension/braking status: Bilsteins front/rear; fronts are inserts in Boge housings. Factory 15mm sways front/rear. 21/27mm torsions front/rear (hollow Sander, Elephant plugged/plated). Front calipers are Alfa GTV Brembos (fits those Boge housings), rears standard. Porterfield R4S pads. 195/65 P6000s on 7X15 Fuchs is how the rubber meets the road. I'm pretty satisfied with this setup.

    (edit: Here's a recent photo for reference. Actually, not that recent as you can still see the M calipers up front. Yes, this Sporto-equipped car did not come with S front calipers.)

    Name:  70T_profile_warrington.jpg
Views: 1027
Size:  88.8 KB

    Some self-imposed constraints: Retain Sporto; retain carbs; single plug. Retain narrow body.

    How/where would I use it: Almost exclusively on the street and almost exclusively east of the Mississippi. Highest altitude might rarely be 4,000-6,000 ft but most of the time from sea level - 2,000 ft. Would love to drive on on of those Mountain Mille type events if health permits.

    What would seem like a simple route: slip fit 87.5mm Nickies w/9.5:1 CR JE pistons; 911E, mod-Solex or DC30/35/40 cams (would need recurved distributor); SSI exchangers; Dansk sport, Porsche Classic or SCART exhaust, 2 in/1 out. Retain 2.2T heads and crank. Could either rejet Zeniths or spring for PMO 40.

    What had also been suggested to me: slip fit 86mm AA biral cylinders with JE pistons to reach that 9.5:1 CR, then split my case and swap out my 66mm crank for a 70.4mm crank. Same heads, cams, carbs, exhaust scenario. Initially this sounded like an option but have heard less-than-good things about the AA products and figure that once my case is split, Pandora's box of machine work is opened. So I'm not as keen on this option as when first presented.

    OCG911T ended up going the 87.5/9.5:1 route and I'd like to think I could do that without opening my case. I've spoken to several shops in my area and no one wants to build anything on my case. They all tell me to put my matching-numbers engine on the pallet. (Who out there wants a matching-numbers driver-quality 2.2T Sporto? I didn't think anyone did; that's how I was able to get mine.)

    Another option: Some folks have told me just to pick up a used 3.0SC motor and plug and play. I'd have to find a Sporto manifold for that (Sporto SCs do exist but they're rarer than Sporto longhoods), then also deal with new wiring, a different ignition system, the SC tach and some kind of tach-adapter for the SC tach. Swapping CIS to carbs might help a little but not much. I've had a couple of 3.0s offered to me but I didn't move fast enough on them. Also a couple of motors (2.7, 3.0) that look promising but have no known history. This seems easy enough but I'm just not sure a 3.0 or even a 3.2 is keeping with the spirit of the car.

    The most involved solution, but after the simple route maybe the most trustworthy, may be to start parts hunting: find a 7R case (2.4 or 2.7, not picky) and go that 90/9.5:1 X 66 route, same cams, carbs, exhaust. Just build or have built the whole shooting match.

    In all scenarios except the slip-fit routes I would expect to have to add a front fender-mounted cooler. I'd also expect to use a 3.0SC or newer oil pump.

    So yeah, I've been dragging my feet for a couple of years on this one, but I'd still appreciate some input and feedback as to the feasibility of each route. Thanks.
    Last edited by teenchy; 04-12-2021 at 05:00 PM.
    (a) 1970 911T Sportomatic coupe
    (b) 2016 E350 4MATIC wagon; parts hauler for (a)
    ESR #1474

  2. #2
    I have a 70 2.2T. Just finished most of the restoration. Engine went up a little with pistons/cylinders (86 nicks, 9.0 compression), had to machine some on heads. Added the newer stuff..squirters, oil feed tensioners. Reground the cam to e specs. Kept the Zeniths (rejeted) Kept the Marelli (no recurve) Everything else stock stuff. Runs fast/fine but going to rejet more, seems to be a little rich.....I live at 6400 ft in Idaho. I was more interested in keeping it kinda stock...
    1970 T

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    143
    wow your chassis setup is very similar to mine, almost identical. 71T.

    Now my car hasn't had its original engine since it was swapped in 1992. It has a 77 7r with webers and SSI on it now. That engine is a basic CIS motor, not hotted at all. It runs really, really nice. Lots of grunt, runs out of breath around 5500. Feels so much more powerful than a stock T.

    I'm finishing an over the top build now 2.8L Motec EFI/ Rasant ITB 8k+ rev monster... it will be way too much for the chassis :-)

    I also have a 70 914/6. Had the original 2L punched out to a 2.5L short stroke with weber carbs also on the original case, all the proper mods etc done. It's LIVELY. Really good. Like really nice balance and feel for the chassis. Going off memory but the build is essentially: all the proper case mods, custom rods, custom crank, custom pistons/cyls about 9.5:1 for 2.5L displacement, single plug heads ported and a tick bigger valve size, DC40 cams, SC oil pump, all the usual tricks... partsklassik CDI, coil, pertronix, Bosch distributor. Just finished break in and doing some carb setup and will finish the tuning on the dyno. But, even with it being not fully tuned its a screamer! So good... I think this would be really great in a T. The upside too is I've run it pretty hard on the tail end of break in and the engine cooler seems to be doing just fine with it w/o secondary cooling. MY T already has a full later oil cooler setup and I hope its enough.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern Ca.
    Posts
    1,168
    Bottom line : why would you do any engine upgrade and keep the sporto ? Why not get a manual trans and not worry about the engine ? The car will be 100% more fun to drive with a manual trans . The car needs a 5 speed , simple as that .

  5. #5
    I agree,,,keep the sporto, do the big bore (L&N) and E type cam, 9.5 C/R get some venturis made for the Zeniths, new stock valve springs, some multi angle valve seat work, it will run better than current, but won't be a rocket ship,,,which is what you're looking for, and in your climate probably won't need a front cooler.
    Early S Registry member #90
    R Gruppe member #138
    Fort Worth Tx.

  6. #6
    Senior Member teenchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Bucks Co., PA, USA
    Posts
    738
    Quote Originally Posted by edmayo View Post
    I agree,,,keep the sporto, do the big bore (L&N) and E type cam, 9.5 C/R get some venturis made for the Zeniths, new stock valve springs, some multi angle valve seat work, it will run better than current, but won't be a rocket ship,,,which is what you're looking for, and in your climate probably won't need a front cooler.

    Six months later, Ed, and this is going to happen. There may be a bit more head work done and I may end up between 9.5 - 9.8 but still single plug. Have T cams reground to E in hand; may still consider DC30/mod-Solex. Have engaged a very reputable engine builder in the region.
    (a) 1970 911T Sportomatic coupe
    (b) 2016 E350 4MATIC wagon; parts hauler for (a)
    ESR #1474

  7. #7
    Senior Member teenchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Bucks Co., PA, USA
    Posts
    738
    Quote Originally Posted by bru15 View Post
    I have a 70 2.2T. Just finished most of the restoration. Engine went up a little with pistons/cylinders (86 nicks, 9.0 compression), had to machine some on heads. Added the newer stuff..squirters, oil feed tensioners. Reground the cam to e specs. Kept the Zeniths (rejeted) Kept the Marelli (no recurve) Everything else stock stuff. Runs fast/fine but going to rejet more, seems to be a little rich.....I live at 6400 ft in Idaho. I was more interested in keeping it kinda stock...
    Do you recall the jets you ended up using?
    (a) 1970 911T Sportomatic coupe
    (b) 2016 E350 4MATIC wagon; parts hauler for (a)
    ESR #1474

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Orange County, CA & Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    419
    I like your build - particularly appreciate the 'sleeper' narrow body hot rod approach. I have been extremely happy with my 87.5 Nickies/JE's at 9.5:1 and DC30 Mod Solex cam setup. I also kept single plug. Although my setup was based on my stock 2.4 case/crank and MFI. Looking forward to the outcome!!
    Bill

    Early 911S Registry Member #4087
    Instagram: @myflat6

    '72T hotrod 210 0228
    '82SC Targa
    '97C4S (sold - and regretting it)

  9. #9
    Senior Member teenchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Bucks Co., PA, USA
    Posts
    738
    Quote Originally Posted by myflat6 View Post
    I like your build - particularly appreciate the 'sleeper' narrow body hot rod approach. I have been extremely happy with my 87.5 Nickies/JE's at 9.5:1 and DC30 Mod Solex cam setup. I also kept single plug. Although my setup was based on my stock 2.4 case/crank and MFI. Looking forward to the outcome!!

    Thanks! Moving right along but need to make a decision around carburetion. Separate thread forthcoming.
    (a) 1970 911T Sportomatic coupe
    (b) 2016 E350 4MATIC wagon; parts hauler for (a)
    ESR #1474

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Santa Monica CA
    Posts
    2,042
    did anybody warn you about the 87.5 nickie's being too thin on the cylinder walls?
    1. Chris-Early S Registry#205
    2. '70 911S Tangerine
    3. '68 911L Euro Ossi Blue

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.