'69S vs 2.2S

[blue72s]

Which engine is better - '69S or 2.2S and why?

Many of you will probably think that bigger displacement is better but did you know that during the making of the Le Mans movie, Steve McQueen owned two cars – a ‘69S (at home) and 2.2S in France (US-spec though), and after the completion of the film he brought the 2.2S home and sold it on as he preferred to keep his ‘69S?

I’d like to know the reason why he didn’t want the 2.2S.

[50/50]

I have heard that the movie was such a dud, that he couldn't afford to make the payments on both cars.

[Henry Schmidt]

I can't speak intelligently about financial concerns, comparative vehicle conditions or personal preference (leather, color, intangible connection) but I can speak to the performance of each.
The 2.2 S performance was much nicer. It had a more refined MFI system, a better clutch and better all around engine performance. Most of the performance was head related. The 2.2 had bigger valves with a reduced valve angle which improved cylinder filling and a reshaped combustion chamber (and piston dome) that allowed for high compression with reduced propensity for detonation. As with all hemi chambers, detonation was a problem but the 2.2 was a step in the correct direction.
Most of the remaining car characteristics were the same.

[HawgRyder]

The 69 was the first of the long wheelbase cars...so perhaps that influenced him.
I know that my 69S was going to be my only Porsche...and it was...the only reason I let it go was because of my health.
If you look at the chart of value of the older cars...the 69 has a big bump in appraised value compared to the years before and for some time after.
Bob

[blue72s]

Originally Posted by 50/50

I have heard that the movie was such a dud, that he couldn't afford to make the payments on both cars.

Yes, but he could have sold the '69 rather the '70 if it was a much improved model. The '69 was just one or two years old at the time when he sold the '70.

Originally Posted by Henry Schmidt

I can't speak intelligently about financial concerns, comparative vehicle conditions or personal preference (leather, color, intangible connection).

Same color and same spec (sunroof coupe)! I think his son Chad still owns the 69.

Originally Posted by Henry Schmidt

but I can speak to the performance of each.
The 2.2 S performance was much nicer. It had a more refined MFI system, a better clutch and better all around engine performance. Most of the performance was head related. The 2.2 had bigger valves with a reduced valve angle which improved cylinder filling and a reshaped combustion chamber (and piston dome) that allowed for high compression with reduced propensity for detonation. As with all hemi chambers, detonation was a problem but the 2.2 was a step in the correct direction.
Most of the remaining car characteristics were the same.

Yes but not much bigger – like just 1mm bigger valves and reduced included-valve angle by just 1 degree. The better all-round engine performance could be due to the improved head-gasket design, do you think?

I’ve never driven a ‘69S so I’m wondering whether it had better a soundtrack? I think I ought to test drive one to find out.

In what way the 2.2 MFI was more refined?

The pros and cons of the '69S I can think of:
Pros
Less reciprocating mass (smaller pistons and lighter con-rods), revs more easily
Better soundtrack?

Cons
Slightly less bottom-end torque
Poor head gasket design (is there a fix for this without any machining work?)

[Ericv]

So, not to hijack the thread, but I have two sets of heads I'm building an s-spec engine with. The 69 heads have an intake and exhaust size of 42/38 mm and the 2.2 heads have an intake and exhaust size of 45/40mm. Which heads would you use for this engine. I'm thinking you get better overall flow with the 2.2 heads but would like to know your thoughts. Thanks.

[blue72s]

A few questions about the 2.0S pistons:

The above picture (I downloaded from a website) is a "new" Mahle 2.0S P+C (Nikasil). But the dome doesn't look like '69S to me. I asked a couple of suppliers for specs and they told me that the valve included angle is 58 degrees and that the pocket diameters are 46/40mm. Whether they are right or not, I don't know. So, does it mean those new 2.0S P+C's are for designed to go with 2.2 heads? ('69S specs were 59 degrees valve included angle, 45/39mm valve diameters)

Are '69S heads that bad?

Another thing, there's a picture in Bruce Anderson's book on page 146 (second edition), showing an "updated" P+C for a 906, which he says the cyl is Nikasil made with a CE ring head gasket. Did he mean that they came like that or modified afterwards by a machinist? I don't see a CE ring head gasket at the above pic.

Please enlighten me.