![]() |
Quote:
The major difference is the 904 main shaft, gear ratios and the additional oiling hole in the intermediate plate to lubricate the main shaft bearing. This design feature was transferred to the mid-engine transmissions used in the 914/6 but not the 914 /4 cylinder cars. As you look at the case you will notice that it has extra fins for cooling and structural rigidity. Although it looks similar to the 901 aluminum case, it is in fact sand cast magnesium. There are also additional bosses for mounting the trans into the chassis. Looking at the shift selection fork you'll notice a large bolt in the center. That is an additional detent designed to aid in rapid shift selection. Looking through the hole you might be able to notice that the LSD is tiny. It is haft the diameter of the 901/915 LSD ad half the weight. The output shafts protrude from the differential unlike the production piece. These shafts have an external spline design adapted from the 904. I believe the flanges are identical to the 904. The last major difference is the provision for the shift shaft. As you can see, the shift shaft is accessed under the bell housing. this design is different from either the tail shifter or side shifter of the production models. |
Quote:
This adjustment technique proves that "old habits die hard." :) |
Quote:
|
What was he adjusting with the hammer?
|
Endplay.... ;)
|
Hi Henry,
Do you have a pic of the combustion chambers? Those pistons have a huge dome. Whats the compression? Thanks John |
Cam Chains
Henery
It appears thgat you are using aluminum chain wheels. The 1973, and later RSR also uses those aluminum wheels. The RSR parts book shows an unusual Porsche part number for the RSR chains. Different from a normal split chain, or non split chain. Do you know why the RSR has a different chain number? Do you use anything special chain wise for the aluminum wheels in your engines, Mike Curnow |
Quote:
|
Second answer
James
Apparently you like to answer other peoples questions, INTERNET expert I guess. This is the second question I asked that you have answered, incorrectly. If you insist on doing this, read the question. What is unique about the 1973 , 74, 75 cam chain? Part # 901 105 529 02, that part number is not the solid or split chain part number. I thought it may have something to do with the aluminum chain wheels since they are the only real unique pieces in the RSR valve train. Anyone have any facts, and not opinions? Quote:
|
Quote:
|
sorry
Quote:
Sorry, I thought you were answering my question to Henry. Mike |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The heads are basically the same as a 69 chamber with 12mm plug holes. The compression was measured @ 10.8:1. |
Quote:
993-105-529-00/255 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1342569773.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1342569788.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1342569802.jpg The crank was made from a std/std 2.2 911 "S" crank. It can be replicated for around $1.2K if you supply the crank. |
Quote:
Magnesium protection |
I really hope that some day I've got a good excuse to have Henry build an engine for me...
|
Matt - you will NOT be disappointed!
Hope you don't mind, Henry - it was a great experience (and mine was just a lowly T). http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1342647567.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1342647585.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1342647600.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1342647611.jpg |
|
Beautiful engine. Couple questions:
1. What oil pump did you use, and is it modified or different from a street pump? 2. Do you actually measure the Play-Doh after it squished, or just see if there's enough clearance? I've been reading about the solder method, which holds up enough to measure. Thanks for the pics, looks great. |
Quote:
Quote:
You turn the engine over, squish the clay and simply push the depth gauge through the clay to measure the thickness. I've been doing it this way for 30 years. I have never seen a better way to check multiple clearance dimensions. |
Very nice build. Brings back old memories...
|
Great engine. Henry, years ago you posted a thread about your own 81mm 906 cylinders with later sealing surface (link http://forums.pelicanparts.com/911-engine-rebuilding-forum/288133-81mm-906-cylinders.html). Why was it not chosen for this engine?
|
Quote:
We chose not to run my cylinders because the 906 heads have too much value and modifying then seems somewhat sacrilegious. We actually welded a set of 906 heads recently to bring them back to original. |
Awesome. More please... I need another fix!
|
Hi Henry,
May I ask what is the black coating used on these fasteners - and why? Looks very good to me, something distinct from the yellow zinc plating we're used to see here! Quote:
|
That does it. If I need a rebuild, Henry gets it. Fantastic stuff here!
|
I am curious about the fasteners also! Could they be black oxide? But if I had to guess I would say they are zinc plated with an olive drab chromate. Could it be so? If so, that would be too cool for school.. I was thinking of doing that on my motor instead of yellow zinc. Better corrosion resistance, and looks bad ass.. but I am worried it might be too thick for the fasteners to thread correctly. This is based on zero experience on my part.
|
his prices are very reasonable for what you receive back...= a very well built engine w/ long life ahead of it...
|
Quote:
The hardware is black oxide because in 1964 most of the 906 hardware was either black or clear cad. With some of these projects, appearance counts almost as much as performance. Strangely enough, this engine had a premature failure do to what appears to be a lack of proper hardness on the lash caps we purchased from Porsche Motorsport. Sometimes even sourcing parts from the "best" supplier can throw you for a loop. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1387207751.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1387207766.jpg |
Guess I should have stuck with my first hunch based on period correctness... Maybe zinc with black chromate would give one both proper appearance and up to date performance, but maybe the thickness issue I was worried about becomes a problem then. Thank you for sharing this engine with us!
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Shame to see the engine failure. Working with aged/used parts often means you're either lucky or dead even when greatest lengths are taken to inspect, refurbish and source suitable replacements. Comes with the territory. Hopefully the owner understands this is an inherent risk of mechanized toys. |
Andrew, you never cease to amaze me with your absolute grip on the obvious; thank you for that.
|
Just to be clear for those who seek accuracy, the failure was simply excess valve clearance.
Valve noise caused by lash cap failures. After the replacement of lash caps, the engine runs perfectly. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
We thought for about a second that we might try to use the rods... until we took a close look... and saw the nicks and blemished that were present from the way the rods were shipped.... Returned to PMNA |
Quote:
Thanks for the input. Your issue sounds more like competence in the shipping department as opposed to quality control. We have rarely seen an issue with quality from PMNA but with the advent of sourcing small quantity items for vintage race cars (old street cars as well) from previously untested or new management suppliers, we really have to be on our toes. I feel certain that this lash cap issue will be address but after 30+ years I'm constantly surprised at where the next challenge will come from. |
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website