Pelican Parts
Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   Pelican Parts Forums > Porsche Forums > 911 Engine Rebuilding Forum


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average.
Author
Thread Post New Thread    Reply
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 721
Henry,

Why did you choose 95mm bore? Why not 98mm or whatever to make 3 liter short stroke?
Old 11-03-2005, 03:28 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #61 (permalink)
Try not, Do or Do not
 
Henry Schmidt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Fallbrook, Ca. 92028
Posts: 6,028
Garage
Quote:
Originally posted by blue72s
Henry,
Why did you choose 95mm bore? Why not 98mm or whatever to make 3 liter short stroke?
Why not a 100mm and for that matter 102 ?
This is not Mac Donalds, and you don't have to super size me.
When Porsche took a clean sheet of paper and started to build a super car, the 959, they chose the 95 mm piston and a 67 mm stroke. If I could get the 67 mm crank I'd build that engine too.
I also feel the 95 mm cylinder is more stable (thicker walls) than the 98 mm. We have seen ring seating problems with the 98 that we don't see with the 95 mm.
I guess more is not always better.
Who knows? Could a 60x95 (2.5) be close at hand?
9200 rpm ?
The Benetton 3.5 liter F1 V8 was 50 X 95 mm.
__________________
Henry Schmidt
SUPERTEC PERFORMANCE
Ph: 760-728-3062
Email: supertec1@earthlink.net

Last edited by Henry Schmidt; 11-03-2005 at 06:10 PM..
Old 11-03-2005, 06:05 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #62 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 721
Thanks.

BTW:

Quote:
Originally posted by Henry Schmidt
They (Mahle) do make a 10.5 to 1 compression, 3.0 RSR piston that you can order in a cylinder with SC bolt spacing that will work for a 2.8 SS engine. Part # from Andial is AND 10398495
Keep in mind that a 10.5 to 1, 3.0 piston was designed for a 70.4mm crank so when you install it on a 66mm crank you will loose static compression.
I have measured a loss from .5 to .58 reduction in comp. ratio when doing this conversion.
10.5 to 1 will now be as high as 10.0 to 1 and as low as 9.9 to 1.
Isn't 9.9:1 or 10.0:1 enough?
Old 11-04-2005, 08:36 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #63 (permalink)
Try not, Do or Do not
 
Henry Schmidt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Fallbrook, Ca. 92028
Posts: 6,028
Garage
10.0 to 1 for some applications is enough and maybe too much. But for my taste 10.5 is the target figure and if you can make the engine work and survive then you win.
__________________
Henry Schmidt
SUPERTEC PERFORMANCE
Ph: 760-728-3062
Email: supertec1@earthlink.net
Old 11-04-2005, 09:27 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #64 (permalink)
Registered User
 
0396's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 950
Henry,


Great write-up.

Thanks for the educaton !

By the way, long over due, thanks for the help at Steets 15 years ago when I blew my 6 motor ( spun a rod - like you suggested)

Good to see your doing well.
Old 11-04-2005, 09:00 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #65 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: minneapolis MN
Posts: 463
Henry - wouldn't an SC case be the same as the 3.O Carrera or early turbo?? I never realized there was much difference. If they're the same I'd think we could get SC cores cheaper, or maybe I'm way off here. Set me straight!
Nabil
__________________
'71 S track car, 2.7L & Webers forever!
Old 11-07-2005, 09:33 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #66 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Porschekid962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: pasadena/novato
Posts: 1,510
Garage
Send a message via AIM to Porschekid962 Send a message via Yahoo to Porschekid962
It is my understanding that the 930/52 3.0 turbo case is capable of accepting a 6bolt crank whereas the 3.0 sc case can only take 9 bolt cranks. That being said I dont think there is much other difference between the two. Seeing as 9bolt 66mm cranks are rather rare, I think the 956/962 used them it gets expensive fast.

Correct me if I am wrong please.
__________________
74 911s neverending story. two feet and a jetta for now.
Old 11-07-2005, 10:39 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #67 (permalink)
Registered User
 
KobaltBlau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: City of Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,374
that's right. The main journals are bigger on the 9 bolt cranks so you can't put a 6 bolt crank in an SC or later case, and as PK said the 66mm 9 bolt cranks are pricey/scarce, whereas 66mm 6 bolts are not. Of course if you are building a motor with a 70.4mm or longer stroke, there is no advantage to starting with a small journaled case that I am aware of, you might as well use a cheap SC or later case.
__________________
Andy
Old 11-08-2005, 08:50 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #68 (permalink)
Registered User
 
KobaltBlau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: City of Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,374
below is a post from Henry regarding the tradeoffs of journal size.

Quote:
Originally posted by Henry Schmidt
When talking about journal size there seem to be three factors.
Drag, load distribution and weight.
Small journal, less drag ( small surface area) , reduced load distribution, less weight.
Large journal, more drag ( larger surface area), better load distribution, more weight.
There is also an issue of strength but I believe that strength can be manipulated by corner radii of a given journal.
Given some of this is true:
Small journal with large radii should be, low drag, reduced load distribution (increase clearance, and oil pressure to correct) weigh less for easier rotation.
In the case Porsche engines, drag produces friction (heat) and in an oil cooled engine, heat is bad.
__________________
Andy
Old 11-08-2005, 09:14 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #69 (permalink)
Registered User
 
andrew15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Thunder Bay, ON
Posts: 4,550
Henry - Sorry if I missed it but, did you custom order some JE pistons for this engine? I read that the compression is 10.5:1 with the 66mm stroke - did you just order 11:1 pistons for a 70.4mm stroke from JE ?

As well, could I keep using my 40mm Webers if I went with a slightly milder cam? (mostly street car)

Thanks,
Andrew M
__________________
1970 911E - track / weekend car
1970 911S - under restoration
1986 930 Slant Nose - fun car

Current used parts for sale
Old 11-12-2005, 03:41 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #70 (permalink)
Try not, Do or Do not
 
Henry Schmidt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Fallbrook, Ca. 92028
Posts: 6,028
Garage
Yes, they are custom built by JE.

40s on a mild 2.8 would work if you don't plan to rev it. But why build a 2.8SS if you're not going to rev it?
__________________
Henry Schmidt
SUPERTEC PERFORMANCE
Ph: 760-728-3062
Email: supertec1@earthlink.net
Old 11-13-2005, 01:29 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #71 (permalink)
Registered User
 
andrew15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Thunder Bay, ON
Posts: 4,550
so, some 46 PMO would be in order then...
__________________
1970 911E - track / weekend car
1970 911S - under restoration
1986 930 Slant Nose - fun car

Current used parts for sale
Old 11-13-2005, 01:39 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #72 (permalink)
 
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 126
Very nice Henry! Thats my style of Porsche 911 engine, gather up a bunch of factory parts (or factory style parts) and build something cool out of them. I have always liked those magnesium stacks much better than the plastic ones. I never use the oil fed tensioners in my own engines.
__________________
Paul Weir
Old 11-15-2005, 04:40 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #73 (permalink)
Registered User
 
ChrisBennet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nashua, NH USA
Posts: 8,089
I'm a big fan of "beauty is as beauty does" but that motor is also easy on the eyes. Nice work Henry!
-Chris
__________________
'80 911 Nogaro blue Phoenix!
'07 BMW 328i Coupe
http://members.rennlist.org/messinwith911s/
Old 11-16-2005, 09:18 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #74 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lancaster, uk
Posts: 191
A good 30 years to age that glass shroud would be nicer.
Is that a new one?
Old 11-30-2005, 01:00 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #75 (permalink)
3 restos WIP = psycho
 
kenikh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: North of Exit 17
Posts: 7,729
A bump for those who haven't read this. I just reread it and still love it.
__________________

- 1965 911
- 1969 911S
- 1980 911SC Targa
- 1979 930
Old 04-23-2006, 09:44 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #76 (permalink)
Conservative Libertarian
 
Turbo_pro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Seasonal locations
Posts: 6,706
I just found this old post and thought others might enjoy it.

I love that old school Porsche kit more and more.
Old 10-20-2006, 06:58 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #77 (permalink)
3 restos WIP = psycho
 
kenikh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: North of Exit 17
Posts: 7,729
Quote:
Originally posted by solowerks
I just found this old post and thought others might enjoy it.

I love that old school Porsche kit more and more.
With good reason.
__________________

- 1965 911
- 1969 911S
- 1980 911SC Targa
- 1979 930
Old 10-20-2006, 08:30 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #78 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 494
Quote:
Originally posted by solowerks
I just found this old post and thought others might enjoy it.
Indeed; great thread; thank you!

I'd be curious to hear anyone's opinion on how this remarkable and beautiful motor might compare to a 2.8S and 2.8 RSR. I've read everything I can find on the forums by Grady, Steve and others about the 2.8S, and it seems like a fantastic option to build on a 2.7 case, with more reliability than the RSR. The RSR seems a little more high strung compared to the 2.8S--more of a pure race engine--but all three sound brilliant, and this is the first I've ever heard of a short stroke 2.8.

In the long term, one of these directions is the one I will probably take, currently driving a 2.7RS that I love.

Beautiful work!
__________________
1974 911 Carrera 2.7RS+
1968 912 -- sold
2007 S2000
2004 R32 -- for sale; inquire within!
1990 Ford Ranger prerunner
Old 10-24-2006, 01:53 PM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #79 (permalink)
Try not, Do or Do not
 
Henry Schmidt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Fallbrook, Ca. 92028
Posts: 6,028
Garage
The 2.8SS can not be built on a 2.7 core. (easily)
It is built using a 3.0 turbo or 3.0 Carrera case.
The benefit of this case is that uses the 3.0 head configuration.
These heads flow better than the 2.7 head because of improved valve angles and bigger valves.
The reason I prefer the 2.8SS over all other 2.8 configurations is that the 66 mm crank is stronger than 2.7 based cranks and the rods have a better rod length to stroke ratio. This ratio reduces rod angularity and increases piston dwell.
Net result: more power, higher functional RPMs (8500) and less destructive forces produced by the pistons.
Big bore/small stroke engines for a given displacement (all other things being equal) produce more horse power. The is why F1 rules specify displacement and max. bore not stroke. Current F1 rules state 2400 cc and a 98 mm max. bore. If you do the math that's a 39 mm stroke (rough guess)

The reason you haven't heard of the 2.8SS before is because it's " The best engine Porsche never built"

They came close with the 959 (95 x 67) and some 956/962.
These were special because they used 9 bolt racing cranks (rare but available) instead of the 6 bolt crank.
__________________
Henry Schmidt
SUPERTEC PERFORMANCE
Ph: 760-728-3062
Email: supertec1@earthlink.net
Old 10-28-2006, 10:19 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #80 (permalink)
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

 


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:32 AM.


 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page
 

DTO Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.