Just another 3.2 Short Stroke

[gt3racerich]

Nice!

[Mitch1]

Wow. That is beautiful. Haven't seen rocker shaft screws plated. Cool. Probably all should be.
Mine have some slight surface rust. Now, if I could just win the lottery.

[Henry Schmidt]

What the engine might look like with PMO carbs.

[atcjorg]

Beautiful, lovely work, thanks for sharing

[IXjamesXI]

That thing looks amazing.. if I had a few bucks I would buy the long block. In the meantime I am working on my own 3.0 rebuild and I am stripping off every fastener etc to take them for yellow zinc plating. I am inspired to throw the rocker hardware into the pile as I see it was done here. I notice that the perimeter studs on this engine case were not touched.. Should I be wary of removing all my perimeter studs? Some of them are a little funky on the ends, and I am tempted to pull them to have them re-plated. But I won't do it if I am asking for trouble later on when trying to mate the halves etc.

[gt3racerich]

If I could only find a car to put it in!
Rich

[KTL]

Originally Posted by IXjamesXI

Should I be wary of removing all my perimeter studs? Some of them are a little funky on the ends, and I am tempted to pull them to have them re-plated. But I won't do it if I am asking for trouble later on when trying to mate the halves etc.

No worries about pulling the perimeter studs. They're basic M8 studs, nothing special about them. They get removed all the time when work is being done on the case halves. No different than removing head studs. Just be sure to threadlock them in place upon reinstallation. Blue/medium strength is fine. No reason to use red.

[IXjamesXI]

Just casually looking at this again for inspiration.. The picture posted of the carrera heads shows no chamfer of the lip for the 98mm pistons. Was it performed as part of the build or was it not needed? I have been reading up on this and it seems like there is no standard for this and its best done by matching the diameter and angle of the chamfer to the pistons you have for optimal deck and squish. However I would be curious to hear Henry's point of view on this .

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by IXjamesXI

Just casually looking at this again for inspiration.. The picture posted of the carrera heads shows no chamfer of the lip for the 98mm pistons. Was it performed as part of the build or was it not needed? I have been reading up on this and it seems like there is no standard for this and its best done by matching the diameter and angle of the chamfer to the pistons you have for optimal deck and squish. However I would be curious to hear Henry's point of view on this .

A quick look at the pistons shows that we had the pistons made to fit the chamber rather than cutting the head.

[tocobill]

Henry ... Love the caustic treatment of the case. Can you share the cost of having this done? Would like to do this to my rsr engine based on a 993 case. Did you do this in house? Thanks.

[IXjamesXI]

Originally Posted by Henry Schmidt

A quick look at the pistons shows that we had the pistons made to fit the chamber rather than cutting the head.

A ha! The kind of thing I would never, ever notice.. so thank you for pointing it out. Any particular reason for altering the piston and not the head? The only thing I can think of is that it preserves the head to be used again someday in another configuration of piston size or shape.. or that it preserves your cylinder head volume... very interesting nonetheless. I assume shelf JE's have not as much of a lip around the edge before the dome starts.. I will have to wait and see what mine look like when they arrive and proceed accordingly.

[KTL]

After thinking about it a bit, certainly makes sense for the piston to be shaped to respect the existing shape of the head/combustion chamber. Since achieving desired comp ratio is sometimes a challenge, it doesn't make good sense to cut the head since that only serves to further reduce your comp ratio.

The std "off the shelf" JE 98mm 10.5 C/R pistons come built with the flat lip around the periphery of the dome. Here's a picture of a retired 98mm 10.5 I replaced this year.

[Henry Schmidt]

All done and ready for installation. It will be going in a 67 Vintage race car being put back on the street.

The beautiful distributor highlighted in picture 3 is made by Aaron Burnham @ Burnham Performance.

[White911SC]

Henry...

Could you comment on need/benefit of adding properly sized copper sealing rings to top of 98mm cylinders for this engine build? Are the copper rings used here a stock Porsche item or custom, and do you recommend this retrofit for all hi-performance 3.2SS builds?

I'm interested because....

While gathering researching for future re-build of SC engine as a 3.2SS I learned my 3.0 cylinders are not recommended for boring to 98mm because inadequate material thickness would exist at ID of original sealing ring, post-bore (I realize yours are original 98mm, not 3.0). One option suggested is to use a set of 3.2L cylinders and once bored/replated to 98mm they are compatible with SC heads and no sealing ring needed (not intuitive to me, but apparently same as original 3.2 Carrera).

Recognizing your build decisions are based on extensive knowledge and personal experience, any help correlating different opinions on this topic would be very helpful.

[Turbo_pro]

I just saw this at Supertec. She found a new home and is up and running.

[911 tweaks]

1 word Jim...SWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET... WHAT AN ENGINE...!!!BEAUTIFUL...
CARE TO SHARE THE ENGINE SPECS & THE OIL SET UP YOU ARE RUNNING & ITS PLUMBING...?
THX FOR SHARING THE PICS & UPDATE...AS I AM SURE YOU KNOW, HENRY WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU...HE IS ONE OF THE STRAIGHT SHOOTER TYPE OF GUYS...! :-)

[Turbo_pro]

Hi Tweeks
I didn't mean to suggest that this beautiful project was mine. Henry asked me to take some pictures of a project he had finished and the pictures were still in my camera.
I think you can find all the specifications about this build at the a beginning of the thread.

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by White911SC

Henry...

Could you comment on need/benefit of adding properly sized copper sealing rings to top of 98mm cylinders for this engine build? Are the copper rings used here a stock Porsche item or custom, and do you recommend this retrofit for all hi-performance 3.2SS builds?

I'm interested because....

While gathering researching for future re-build of SC engine as a 3.2SS I learned my 3.0 cylinders are not recommended for boring to 98mm because inadequate material thickness would exist at ID of original sealing ring, post-bore (I realize yours are original 98mm, not 3.0). One option suggested is to use a set of 3.2L cylinders and once bored/replated to 98mm they are compatible with SC heads and no sealing ring needed (not intuitive to me, but apparently same as original 3.2 Carrera).

Recognizing your build decisions are based on extensive knowledge and personal experience, any help correlating different opinions on this topic would be very helpful.

Sorry for missing your question:
The copper ring was what I would label a creative attempt to reuse old racing parts. This engine was built for my own car which meant I wanted to be as frugal as possible and still build something special. I know, some of my choices don't look very frugal.
So, the cylinders I used were a set of low mileage but out of spec, flame ringed 98 mm Mahles.
Because I'm not a fan of flame rings on NA engines, I needed to deal with the groove. I searched the catalogs for a generic sealing ring with no success. Finally I decided to enlarge the groove and make a copper sealing ring to fit. The ring sits about .002" proud of the cylinder allowing for some crush.
As you might imagine, having the cylinders replated at Millennium, machining the grooves and fabricating the gaskets, we are now well over the cost of new cylinders. I believe our solution is a sealing enhancement but at the same time not a requirement. I may use thing process on future high performance turbo engines but who knows?


BTW: Thanks Jim for posting the pictures. I had plans to do it when I found some time.

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by 911 tweaks

1 word Jim...SWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET... WHAT AN ENGINE...!!!BEAUTIFUL...
CARE TO SHARE THE ENGINE SPECS & THE OIL SET UP YOU ARE RUNNING & ITS PLUMBING...?
THX FOR SHARING THE PICS & UPDATE...AS I AM SURE YOU KNOW, HENRY WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU...HE IS ONE OF THE STRAIGHT SHOOTER TYPE OF GUYS...! :-)

Wow , thanks for the vote of confidence. What's that old saying? "you can fool some of the people some of the time"

The engine specs are indeed posted in the early part of the thread.

As for the coolers:
On early cars I hate seeing the cooler lines on the outside so we run flexible -12 line through the passenger side rocker, across the corner of the floor and out through the dope box.
On this car, because of the horse power being generated, the customer elected (wisely I might add) to employ a dual cooler system. We placed a 19 row Mocal cooler in the front of each wheel well. After that it is simply a matter of plumbing a thermostat and connecting the coolers. We plumbed the coolers to fill from the top to allow the oil to cascade down through the radiator cores (as opposed to filling from the bottom) but I'm not certain that natters.
The line is Aeroquip "Startlite" and the hose ends were chosen for their vintage aesthetics.
All the plumbing parts are available through BAT - MOCAL Oil Control Systems

[911 tweaks]

thx guys for where the info is...
I say em as I see em... :-)
carry on all & sorry Jim that motor is not yours... :-)