Early 2.8 SS 66 X 95 15 years on the drawing board

[Henry Schmidt]

15 years ago I thought about how cool a 2.8 built on an early 2.0 aluminum case would be for a hot rod short wheel base 911 . Old school look, revs like a 906 and pulls like freight train.
A customer with the right vision finally stepped up and here's what we built.

1967 2.0 Aluminum case with oil flow modification and piston squirters for cooling.
2.2 "S" counter weighted crank, cross drilled and ground to fit 996.2 GT3 connecting rods.
911 SC oil pump with Supertec flow modification. We were able to source a new intermediate gear through Passion Rose.
90 mm cylinders modified with Moly2000 ductile sleeves to fit 95mm pistons
The pistons were custom engineered JE (9.5:1) . The challenge was a 95mm piston dome and a 90 chamber.
2.7 cylinder heads ported to 39/37mm with 47/41mm stainless valves installed with Aasco springs and Titanium retainers
Securing the heads in to the case were Supertec head studs (what else?)
47 mm 4 journal cam housings to fit DC43 cams modified for 6 bolt early valve covers.
Of course, Supertec rockers were installed. We fabricated a custom set of chain box covers for Carrera tensioners and Supertec idler arms were also installed.
Replica 906 fan and fan ring, Series 900, 906 Amber shroud with modified ducting to cool the CSF cooler.
We're running Lonnie's (Permatune) new programmable distributor with an Ashlock Tech CD and PartsKlassicks coil.
We topped it of with 46mm PMO carburetors with tall 906 manifolds and ITG filters.
The headers are Supertec short runner 321 stainless with the Dansk sport muffler still to be determined.

[Cloggie]

Fantastic Henry, another of your classics methinks.

Any idea (or testing) planned for determine what kind of numbers you will get out of it?

....looking forward to the next instalment...

D.

[MST0118]

This is the first I heard of the Moly 2000 ductile sleeves. Seems like a good solution to help strengthen cylinders. Would be interested to learn more about the general process if it’s something you’re able to talk about.

[Classic 911]

Nice build


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by Cloggie

Fantastic Henry, another of your classics methinks.

Any idea (or testing) planned for determine what kind of numbers you will get out of it?

....looking forward to the next instalment...

D.

230 ft/lb @ 6100/ 285+ at around 7500 with a safe rev limit around 8200rpm. The cams won't be making horse power up there but it will be an adventure taking it there on the rare occasion when the right foot gets happy. .

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by MST0118

This is the first I heard of the Moly 2000 ductile sleeves. Seems like a good solution to help strengthen cylinders. Would be interested to learn more about the general process if it’s something you’re able to talk about.

It's a material LA Sleeve has been promoting for a few years and we've been pretty successful making our own odd -ball one off sets.
The key to playing with iron liners is the ability to put large pistons in small-ish spigots.
The one thing we do that isn't really common is that we install the sleeve do a rough bore and send the cylinders to Millennium for a Nickasil coating and final size and honing to 8-10 RA. At a huge cost per cylinder but the accuracy and friction reduction seems well worth the extra cost.
We've made a few of these cylinder sets for builders who really want to turn up the boost.
We could never have squeezed a 95 mm piston in a 2.0/2.7 stud spacing if we tried to use Nickies. We made a few sets of 101.5 mm for a 3.0/3.2 case by simply sleeving 3.0 cylinders. Obviously the challenge is cooling the cylinders. The cast iron does not transfer heat from the heads as well a aluminum so head tempts for racing application would be a challenge. That said, most of us just aren't trying to win the race from our driveway to Cars and Coffee.

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by Classic 911

Nice build


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you.
I'm just grateful for customers who want to play with some old school ideas.

[Helix8]

Nicely done and that should make the SWB chassis very happy.

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by Helix8

Nicely done and that should make the SWB chassis very happy.

The idea was to have something that looked as stock as possible with a little "wow" of course.
I love the short stoke 2.8, it's clean sheet design, technical dimessions amd free spinning characterists so in a SWB narrow bodied car, how much more trust do you need?
If I see one more 912 with a 3.6 Vario Ram stuffed in the back, I think I'm going to scream.....
Of course, if that' your ride....you do you and enjoy but please think about some brakes.

[Helix8]

I’m much more in your camp actually. I prefer elegant solutions and your 2.8L built on 2.0L case falls into that category in my opinion. Again, nicely done.

[Cloggie]

Originally Posted by Henry Schmidt

230 ft/lb @ 6100/ 285+ at around 7500 with a safe rev limit around 8200rpm. The cams won't be making horse power up there but it will be an adventure taking it there on the rare occasion when the right foot gets happy. .

VERY nice, it will be lovely in a lighter car....great fun.

You may have done this in other threads, if so, please direct me to them, but curious why this combination is "better" than - say - just an SC case with short stroke crankshaft etc etc....

D.

[PeteKz]

Nice work, Henry. I'm afraid to ask what it cost! For us mere mortals, I'll stick with a 3.0SC case and crank.

[Henry Schmidt]

Some of the additional parts we used to make this unique little engine.

Supertec 906 cylinder cooling tin



Passion Rose intermediate gear.



906 225 cooling fan, combined with a Supertec Power Pulley and fan center.
The challenge with ducted cooling fans is that the closer the fan tips get the super-sonic the less effective it becomes do to harmonic inversion/cavitation . The 225 fan diameter reduces tip travel, the Power Pulley reduces the speed so that the fan actually move move air at higher engine speeds. It also reduces horse power losses.







Supertec idler arm updates (more important than pressure fed for reliability)



Updated chain box cover for pressure fed tensioners




Supertec rocker arms

We remove the old bushing and adjuster (if present)
Clean adjuster threads with 8x1.0 forming tap.
Ream the bushing hole
Black Oxide the rocker
Press in the new DP4 bushing and burnish
Surface the contact pad
Coat the contact pad with Moly dry film (TLML 2)
Treat the rocker to a Cryogenic conversion process



And of course a shout out to Aaron Burham's oil sump covers

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by Cloggie

VERY nice, it will be lovely in a lighter car....great fun.

You may have done this in other threads, if so, please direct me to them, but curious why this combination is "better" than - say - just an SC case with short stroke crankshaft etc etc....

D.

I have never built this engine before. "Better" is all about what floats your boat.
This is just what might have been built in 1967 if someone was so inclined.

The SC build would actually be better in many aspects if cosmetics don't matter.
The SC with a 66mm crank require less innovation. You don't even need to design a custom piston and the SC heads are far superior to the 2.7 liter heads even with a bunch of work. Valve size, stud spacing and valve angle are all better.

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by PeteKz

Nice work, Henry. I'm afraid to ask what it cost! For us mere mortals, I'll stick with a 3.0SC case and crank.

Every thing is too expensive. Blame Biden and his team of woke clowns....lol
I'm coming to the end of my run so at this point I'm feeling like getting paid for my time.......strangely enough, that time seems to get more and more valuable.

[Turbo_pro]

Damn Hank, where's mine? You've built me engines of every variety over the years and never once did we have this conversation.
It is very similar to the 2.6SS in a 914/6GT but there is something intriguing about Pankl Titanium rods and a 2.8 in a 2.0 case.
That thing is beautiful as usual.

[PeteKz]

Henry, you probably have answered or proposed this before, but I doin't know what the right search terms would be find it:

I have a spare SC core engine collecting dust under my workbench. I have it "just in case" my current engine meets an untimely demise. If you were to start with that and build the no-holds-barred "ideal SC engine" what would you do?

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by PeteKz

Henry, you probably have answered or proposed this before, but I doin't know what the right search terms would be find it:

I have a spare SC core engine collecting dust under my workbench. I have it "just in case" my current engine meets an untimely demise. If you were to start with that and build the no-holds-barred "ideal SC engine" what would you do?

"ideal SC engine" is a concept with no context. What I mean by that is there has to be a purpose in order for there to be an "ideal" set of specifications.
A perfect example of that is this little early engine. I would never suggest this engine for a home grown Singer replica. It seems a great compliment to a SWB 911 or maybe a 914/6 GT but 6 bolt valve covers and the early case are wasted on a project that isn't looking for the 60's aesthetics.
An SC core is a great place to start for so many different directives so I would want to know body style, driving style, road/track requirements and budget.
I would need to know if the customer is a Porsche fanatic or just an on-line Gysmo.
As I've mentioned over and over, the short stroke 2.8 is fun to drive but not more so than the 3.7 liter torque monster both of which can be built with the SC core. It's all a matter of driving expectations.
I love MFI but it is ridiculously impractical on many levels. Carbs are cheap, simple and effective but project a certain luddite image. EFI is all the rage but finding a tuner is a crap-shoot at best.
"Ideal for an SC build" is a conversation much like what are you looking for in the "ideal" woman. Looks cool when you take her out, performs well without being high strung, easy maintenance and decent throttle response in tight situations.

[dannobee]

Nice build Henry! Very cool!

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by Turbo_pro

Damn Hank, where's mine? You've built me engines of every variety over the years and never once did we have this conversation.
It is very similar to the 2.6SS in a 914/6GT but there is something intriguing about Pankl Titanium rods and a 2.8 in a 2.0 case.
That thing is beautiful as usual.

The 2.6 SS you exploded going into turn 6 at Riverside was the 1980's version of this engine. We used a 2.2 S crank and 92mm (2.8 RSR pistons and cylinders) in a 2.0 aluminum case. The small chamber head made those 10.4:1 pistons come to life. The 2.4S heads were ported to 41mm and we got that crazy huge set a throttles a from Sergio Nardi. Silly thing wouldn't even run under 5 grand. The cams were some version of an Elgin IMSA 906 and at 4500 rpm when you looked down the intake you could see fire on top of the intake valve.
After you smoked that motor, we wandered out to Palm Springs to look at a collection of GTU parts that Chad Seva got with the Meister IMSA car Dennie Aase drove.
It broke my heart to stick a 3.6 in that chassis. 1989. The first 964 transplant I did bastardized a truly historic race car.



I'll call you later this week. Cheers