3.6 or just modify the 3.0?

[Bryantch]

Assuming a 3.6 conversion is 13k+/- less the 3-4k you can get for your existing 3.0 would you spend the 10k give or take on the 3.6 conversion, or spend 10k or less on engine, suspension, racing seats, cage, etc. and just upgrade the 3.0? My car is an 82 sc with a 993 tt fiberglass body, big blacks, limited slip and stock suspension. I am making this car into a fun reliable track/street car (DE/Autocross).


I mainly want a car that will be very quick/reliable and will be able to run with friends at the track who have an 84 euro carrera cab with chip/exhaust and another with 993 cab. I dont like to have to waive other cars by because of lack of power!

Ability aside, will a 3.0 with 964 cams, ssi, nology wires and 7.31 rp and a good suspension/brake system run with a euro 3.2 or a c2/3.6 on a 2nd/3rd gear or a 3rd/4th gear track?
Or would further hp mods be required? and what would you guys suggest?

I know a 3.6 conversion (280hp) would be unbelievably fast in the lighter sc (I also have a c2/3.6) , but wonder if the dollars would be better spent on the combination of motor/suspension/transmission/safety
equipment...

Please let the abundance of knowledge flow!!!!

thanks
ian

[pbs911]

Can you post a pick of the car it sounds nice.

HP wins drag races, suspension wins in the corners, the correct combination of the two wins the race. Personally, I like the available HP and reliability of a stock 3.6. Seems to me that a built 3.0 to the same HP and torque of a 3.6 may require a little more constant attention.

The first dollar I would put in the car for the track is in the safety department. Roll bar, seats and harnesses.

From what I hear Tyson with TRE ran with the bigger HP cars with a little 2.7 in his early car with a trick suspension set up. Then again he is a hell of a driver from what I hear.

[Bryantch]

I have never met anyone with a mildly modified 3.0 like i suggest with the low gear 915 but know a 3.6 will be all the power the car will ever need. I also have a 90c2 cab and want it to be at least as quick as that.

[MotoSook]

Ian, that's a great looking car. What's with the wipers..looks odd to me, but cool.

As for motor, why not build a short stroke 3.2? I heard from one gentlemen that his SS3.2 was more fun to drive than his 3.6 C2.

[Bryantch]

Souk,

Thanks for the compliments...I have a long way to go. The wipers and cowl are from a 993.

If someone who has a 3.2 short stroke could chime in...That option is still on the table. Fun to drive is one thing, but excellent power out of the corners is what I am after. I just dont know if modifying the 3.0 is the way to go.

Where would I get p/c for the 3.2 option and what other costs are involved...difference injection system? twin plug?

Thanks
Ian

[dd74]

Ian - I think it depends on what kind of driver you are. If you like a lot of torque out of the corners, I'd do the 3.6. Aside from oil cooling and exhaust (which would have to be changed), I think your car would be a good candidate for a 3.6 - it already has wide wheels and tires and a later 915 gearbox. For a 3.0 to achieve a 3.6's horsepower, you'll need to take apart the engine, put in new pistons, cams and induction, and come to grips with an engine that will work well on the track, but be hard to drive on the street.

[dean]

If it were me. I would get new low comp. pistons and cyls. Port the heads and put a turbo on it. I would also run efi. That way you could barbique yer friends when you pass them

[Bryantch]

I am sure the 3.6 would go like heck, but how will the short gear, mild mod 3.0 run against a stock c2? I dont need all the power in the world and I dont have an endless budget. What I am trying to get a handle on is wheter the 3.0 with relatively minor mods outlined above will accelerate equal to or better than a c2 (to say 110mph)? if so the balance of the money can go to suspension/safety/tires/etc?

No doubt the 3.6 is "enough", but if 3.0 CAN run with a c2 with the mods outlined, I would be content to then spend the rest of the money on other stuff.

I guess put the question this way...will a 3.0/964 cams/CIS/SSI motor with 7.31rp get to 60 in 5.5-5.8 sec? I dont dragrace, just looking for perspective.

Again thanks for any input

Ian

[nostatic]

I might be in the minority, but I'd go with the 3.0 and spend the rest on suspension and a car diet (just avoid the sawzall).

[Jack Olsen]

A friend of mine recently rebuilt a 3.0 with mild race mods. We did a track day together a couple of months ago.

His car actually pulled mine on the straights, since it's significantly lighter than mine and has a lot less drag. But the 3.6 makes my car quicker around the track. Even when I was on street tires and he was on r-compounds, he wasn't able to keep up.

It's called torque, baby.

Now, the flipside of this is that I have a more-developed suspension than he does. So it's not purely an apples-to-apples comparison.

[k9handler]

I seen a banner on a site the other day...
"My lug nuts require more torque than your Honda makes"!
Ha Ha...ok back on the subject

Go with the 3.6...and you can always add and tweak the suspension in the future as money and skills develope.

[dd74]

Originally posted by Bryantch
I guess put the question this way...will a 3.0/964 cams/CIS/SSI motor with 7.31rp get to 60 in 5.5-5.8 sec? I dont dragrace, just looking for perspective.

Again thanks for any input

Ian

Here are two scenarios:

I know of a guy who has a completely stripped SC. It is also completely stock engine-wise. He has set up his suspension with so much rear torsion, that if he sneezes, the car oversteers. Take that and a 2250-pound SC, and he says he can outrace everything on the track, including 3.6s transplanted into early cars. What's his secret when he has only 180, maybe 190 hp and an 8.31 r/p. He's learned how to drive absolutely fearlessly and keeps the engine at 4,500-5,000 RPMs. His torsion size is 23f-31r, good alignment and up-to-snuff brakes. He isn't into 0-60 times. He's into going sideways and chasing down turbos.

This guy will tell you, "Learn to drive."

As for your mod ideas (second scenario): opinions vary drastically depending on whom you talk: I would go with the following in this order: 7.31 r/p, SSIs and a good muffler (though you might have to contend with smog laws with this exhaust), and when your engine starts spewing smoke and/or you need a valve job (not adjustment), I'd do the cams.

Or you can lighten the car and possibly have comparable performance to the listed modifications.

Some say the real hp gain is in the SSIs - 10 to 20, the cams simply shuffle around the torque pattern of the SC engine, yielding virtually no hp gain, just stronger lift and duration (the strongest you can get with CIS), but that it's the 7.31 r/p which eclipses both SSIs and cams. Gearing is what makes the car faster, whether stock or modified.

0-60 in 5.5 or less is doable with a 3.0 set up like what you suggest. But with the 7.31 r/p, those kind of starts should be far and few between - hence you'll blow your box.

[Jack Olsen]

Originally posted by dd74
I know of a guy who has a completely stripped SC. It is also completely stock engine-wise. He has set up his suspension with so much rear torsion, that if he sneezes, the car oversteers. Take that and a 2250-pound SC, and he says he can outrace everything on the track, including 3.6s transplanted into early cars.

When does Mr. Sideways want to go to Willow?

[dd74]

He does Phoenix Int'l. Don't know if he comes out west.

[speeder]

Jack Olsen hanging up the phone in the Porsche library of his tastefully appointed Los Angeles home:

He say he wont too dance tonite. I say, my car is in the shop, but wot the hell! This chance not come every day! So we drive. I wonder if Starbucks is still open. Willow in one houre. I will hand him ass on whale tail.

[Jack Olsen]

Originally posted by speeder
He say he wont too dance tonite. I say, my car is in the shop, but wot the hell! This chance not come every day! So we drive. I wonder if Starbucks is still open. Willow in one houre. I will hand him ass on whale tail.

Denis, that had me spitting expensive cognac all over my computer monitor, as well as on my tasteful French smoking jacket.

I'm completely, 100% busted on the boastful, adolescent response.

(But DD74, all other things being equal, IMO a good driver in a light, well-set-up 911 with a 3.6 will beat a light, well-set-up 911 with a 3.0 unless the 3.0's been tweaked into the 300 hp range.)

[dd74]

Originally posted by JackOlsen
(But DD74, all other things being equal, IMO a good driver in a light, well-set-up 911 with a 3.6 will beat a light, well-set-up 911 with a 3.0 unless the 3.0's been tweaked into the 300 hp range.)

I don't doubt that. I think the guy beat a so-so driver...sideways, of course.

[ChrisBennet]

Even spending half the amount of money you would spend on a 3.6, on track time and suspension instead, would make you faster with your car than if you put a 3.6 in it. This is assuming you aren't in the top run group. I get passed a lot by "slower" cars that are better driven and on occasion I even pass "faster" cars. Being a faster driver is sooo much more satifying than having a faster car IMO.
-Chris

[3.6 911]

go with the 3.6. you won't regret it!

[Don Wohlfarth]

I have a 82SC with a short stroke 3.2, CIS, SSI's, sport muffler, stock suspension and I also have a 93 RS America. I've had the SC for 18 years and my plan was to redo motor and keep it forever...until I found a deal on the RSA. My SC has been on the track once, my first ever de many years ago. The RSA has been on the track 3 times. (I've also have a highly modifed 914-6 and have something like 150 track days.)
The seat of the pants performance between cars is similar, with a different r&p in the SC it would be faster except on the top end.
Had a shop do motor, nothing special with the 3.2, did not split cases but everything redone, replaced a couple rockers, reground cams to SC, new p&c's, valve job, etc, cost about 8200. Already had SSI and muffler. Think your motor would have similar costs.
Have no idea what I'd do in your situation.