Mark, give me a call. also, FWIW you can put in the 6 and mounts, while leaving the stock 912 engine mounts in place. makes one plug access slightly awkward but not bad.

My youngest son now drives a '68 912 with my old '72 911 T motor in it. We built the car together as his high school senior year project. It's been a wonderful combination, and is certainly faster than his older brother's mildly hot-rodded '79 SC. The car barely cracks 2,000 pounds with gas in it, and combined with that short geared 901 box meant for the 912, the car failry hauls ass. I'm sure it would give most any 3.2 Carrera a run for its money, at least up to 80-90 mph.

This particular motor dyno'd at 135 RWHP and 145 ft lbs or torque. It's dead stock, and has well over 100,000 miles on it. All we did was reseal it a bit before it went in the car. The 2.4 T motor is one of the most trouble-free of the mag case motors, with the cast iron barrels serving to all but eliminate any pulled stud problems (CTE's match more closely than with the biral cylinders). It actually makes more power than the vaunted 2.0 S motor, and gobs more torque. It really is a neat little motor.

The 912 itself is subtantially lighter than a 911 of the same year, even after swapping a 911 motor into one. They simply had less stuff on them, fewer "luxuries" or "creature comforts" and options. I was really astounded just how light his car is and, as a result, just how quick it really is. I would highly recommend this combination, from our personal experience with it.

Well, maybe fewer options, like a Webasto Heater, but other than that, the shells are about the same. From the little white book p. 88:

SWB 912 empty weight 970Kg, max gross 1275
SWB 911T 1080Kg, max gross 1400
SWB 911L same as 911T
SWB 911S 1030Kg, max gross 1400

Well, the 912 motor weighs less, around 130Kg dry vs 184Kg of the 911.

So. . . 970Kg - 130Kg = 840Kg or 1851 pounds without the motor
911S, 1030Kg - 184Kg = 846Kg or 1865 pounds without the motor
911T, 1080Kg - 184Kg - 896Kg or 1975 pounds.

Those are dry weights, the oil tank in a 911 probably weighs 10 pounds, and the five additional liters of oil have a density of, say, 0.8Kg per liter, or 4Kg, that is another 9 pounds, call it 15 by the time you add the additional oil lines. So when you switch to the 911 motor you are adding about 25 pounds, that is in addition to the extra 120 pounds of motor weight, 145 pounds all in.

PCA rule book quotes slightly different weights (including 150 pound driver)- 2333-150 = 2153 pounds = 990kg, not sure where they got that from.

But you get the idea-- the whole 912 mythos is really about the extra 145 pounds situated about six inches further aft in the car. And the missing two gauges, wooden dashboard, webasto heater, front fog lamps, engine electrical panel and the steering wheel!

That's all well and good, but weighed side by side on the same day, on the same scale, my somewhat lightened '72 911 comes in at about 2250 with a tank of gas. My son's '68 912/911, which we have made no attempt to lighten, came in at about 2005 with a tank of gas.

Everything you wanted to know about bang for your buck with a 616.

http://www.lnengineering.com/hotrod356.pdf

t

I have a 912 with a 2.4 conversion and love it.... 68 901 transmission. everything works nice!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v468/patpan/BWRear.jpg

I've had 2 '69 912's a targa and then a coupe. Neither had any swaybars and I don't know if the 911T had them or one in front. It was probably an option anyway.

It's already been said and it's true. The 912 and 911T have the same body, suspension and brakes and the 2 instuments to the left of the speedometer were different because there is no oil tank in a 912 and no oil pressure gauge, just a light.
I think the first 901 transaxle was designated a 902. The 912 and 911 transaxle is the same with shorter gear ratios for the 912 and the 911 clutch is also bigger and heavier.

They didn't change much with the 912 because they already had the parts for a 911 and it would cost more to design, build, and stock more special parts for the 912 which had a the same motor that was in the 356 super 90 or something like that. The only difference may be the split shafts in the Solex 40mm 2 barrel downdraft carburators..

Solex 40 P11 comes to mind as the number on them.. but it was 21 years ago when I had my last 912 and I get confused in memory because I had a '72 BMW 2002 Ti with Solex 40 PHH sidedraft carbs.
The Mercedes 190SL also used the same Solex 40 PHH dual sidedraft carbs.
Dual Weber 45DCOE with 38mm venturis, a 300degree BMW motorsport cam and 10:1 compression pistons, intake port matching, and stahl headers were much faster and stayed in tune better!

I drive a 72t with a 3.0 sc conversion and it is adequately quick by modern standards. A new camry V6 is faster as I'm sure is my Tundra p/u. Does anyone know the difference in weight between a 68 and a 69? I'm guessing 200 pounds. No doubt the 911 is more fun to drive. The 3.0 works well in the 72 and no doubt would be a little quicker in a swb if it fits.

Lots of engine choices, I would look for any engine that has documented low mileage, or
rebuilt by someone reputable. The cost to rebuild any 911 engine will put you very deep under water with this project.

I have seen so many nice cars sold recently for 1/2 or 1/3 of build cost, you would probably be better off just selling your car to someone who appreciates the charm of a 912. Not only will you save $1000s of dollars, but you will not waste 100s of hours of your spare time in the garage. Buy someones well done project and be enjoying it the next day.

I of course, did not listen to this advise given to me, and decided to build several cars at the same time.... because its fun... and I have other cars that are done that I can enjoy;)

Think about your needs, look whats for sale, before you get in to deep.

I'm at a loss as to why, exactly, you don't just find yourself a SWB 911....cutting up a 912, that could be worth 15 to 25K or more, if done 'right'...& building this 912 into a "911", that will never be "real" & thus never worth the money you poured into it doesn't pass the sniff test.

I got my 912 when I was a post doc in New Mexico. Rust free, $5.5k, YMMV but usually cheaper than a 911. You have to have a pristine, near show car for 25k and that's a lot of $$$$.

Like haycati mentions above, the only 'non transparent' change is the rear motor mounts which have holes and the 912 do not (assuming one does not cut the sheet metal for a standard oil tank) but mounts an aftermarket. External coolers are considered a wise upgrade just like a 911, so it's a feature not a bug for extra oil cooler plumbing.

Driven one? There slow. Yes they are 'momentum machines' but merging onto a freeway, mine can be scary. The 912 is unloved and under valued and will be since it has 90 hp in a stock fresh motor let alone one that has some miles. In the past three years there has been a lot done with the 912. 160 hp plus is very do able now where 130 was 'hot' then. Porsche should have used the 2000GS twin cam, maybe the 912 wouldn't be as unloved now..... but then it would have pounded the 911S.... :D

The 912 did outsell the 911 in the early days. We all just were used to cars with less oomph.

Bottom line is that for a fixed price a six will get you more zing and a six will go way, way thru the 'power glass ceiling'. Me, I'm going with a 2.8 and shooting for 275 at the rear wheels. Cheap, no... But not even obtainable in the 616 platform. Only diff will be those two rear engine mounts which with the 616 in place you'd be hard pressed to notice I'd bet.


t

I have to agree, the 912 does seem a little unloved in the retail market, but appears to be getting some more love, ie. money paid, these days. I figure it is like anything, when prices rise, all related products tend to rise as well. However, with the recent down turn, it seems that the 912 is becoming a little more popular maybe due to the value. And the fact that some of the prices people are asking for 911's is just stupid. High prices for junk cars. IMO.

Also, I agree with tadd, there are little to no differences in the 912 vs. 911 other than the engine and related hardware. So if a 912 can be had for reasonable money, why not put the motor of your choice in it. As I have said before, it is so ironic that some folks will take a 356 and stuff a 911 in it, take a 911 and stuff a bigger 911 in it, so on and so forth, but when someone mentions putting a 911 motor into a 912, suddenly it is a bastard. Sounds a bit snobish to me. I say do what makes you happy. If you are concerned about value go for it, if you want a hot rod, go for it. I myself have been wrestling with the value thing vs. the fact that the 912 will have small balls with the stock motor. But for now I am sticking with the stock motor. I can always change it later with a couple of motor mounts.

3.2 is the go
 

I've just finished putting a 3.2 in my 912. Fairly straight forward accept for some flange work. Hope you proceed.
Good fun.

912/6
 

"Also, I agree with tadd, there are little to no differences in the 912 vs. 911 other than the engine and related hardware. So if a 912 can be had for reasonable money, why not put the motor of your choice in it. As I have said before, it is so ironic that some folks will take a 356 and stuff a 911 in it, take a 911 and stuff a bigger 911 in it, so on and so forth, but when someone mentions putting a 911 motor into a 912, suddenly it is a bastard. Sounds a bit snobish to me."

merbesfield, i totally agree with you! it's also like turning your regular LWB 911T to an RS, RSR, ST, Turbo look, etc. there's the purist, the outlaws or hot rodders. i belong to the later crowd. why? because life is boring when your car is too original and perfect that you can't even afford to have a non-factory screw hold your radio in place.

bottomline, do what you want and just have fun! after all, it's going to be you sweating bullets trying to catch-up with the cars going 55mph on the freeway, if you don't. my .02