Pelican Parts Forums

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)
-   911 Engine Rebuilding Forum (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/911-engine-rebuilding-forum/)
-   -   Correct cylinders for 1994 964 (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/911-engine-rebuilding-forum/882826-correct-cylinders-1994-964-a.html)

993buyer 09-12-2015 01:22 PM

Correct cylinders for 1994 964
 
Hi All,
Are these considered to be the correct cylinders for a 1994 964?
Thanks! Q.http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1442092832.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1442092851.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1442092877.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1442092894.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1442092914.jpg

Henry Schmidt 09-12-2015 02:21 PM

964 103 915 22 is the correct number for the piston and cylinder set for a 1994 Porsche 964.

993buyer 09-14-2015 07:26 PM

The box shows the correct number for later model 964's, however the cylinders and pistons seem to be the earlier cylinders/pistons....

Henry Schmidt 09-15-2015 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 993buyer (Post 8794968)
The box shows the correct number for later model 964's, however the cylinders and pistons seem to be the earlier cylinders/pistons....

The pistons and cylinders shown in the pictures are definitely the late style 964.
Early 964 cylinders had the conventional style sealing surface No gasket and no head support around the studs.. Much like the 3.2 Carrera cylinder.
There were two different late cylinder types that used gaskets. One used the asbestos/paper gasket and the other used an aluminum ring style gasket.
The cylinder pictured appears to use the asbestos style gasket.

993buyer 09-15-2015 07:42 AM

Does either have an advantage over the other, Henry?
Thx. Quinn

Henry Schmidt 09-15-2015 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 993buyer (Post 8795452)
Does either have an advantage over the other, Henry?
Thx. Quinn

The aluminum ring is the later style so at least one engineer at Porsche or Mahle thought it was a better idea.
I don't have enough information to give a definitive answer.

brp914 08-15-2022 12:02 PM

ok, I'm even more confused than usual. PET lists 964.103.915.22 for use in M64.01, 02, which is C2 NA, as well as M64.50 - which is 964 Turbo. ?!?!?!

PET lists 964.103.915.25 for use in M64.01/02, after 1991, only - not turbo. Did 964 turbo and NA use the same pistons?

Henry Schmidt 08-19-2022 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brp914 (Post 11771697)
ok, I'm even more confused than usual. PET lists 964.103.915.22 for use in M64.01, 02, which is C2 NA, as well as M64.50 - which is 964 Turbo. ?!?!?!

PET lists 964.103.915.25 for use in M64.01/02, after 1991, only - not turbo. Did 964 turbo and NA use the same pistons?

The 91-92 964 Turbo was actually 965. It was a full fin 3.3 liter engine. 97mm bore.
These are definately not those pistons/cylinders.
I don't know what later Ps&Cs look like but something in my memory tells me they had a elivated deck piston.

superninety 08-20-2022 01:33 PM

I show the part number that I used for the updated P&Cs for my 964 to have been

964-103-915-22

These are the upgraded P&Cs and appear to be the same as your photos

Been in the car for several years now.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1661031166.jpg


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:04 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


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