70 911T Performance Potential

[onewhippedpuppy]

Hi all, I'm still a poser member because I don't yet have a Porsche, but I have a question regarding a car I am condsidering, I'm sure there will be no shortage of opinions. I'm considering a 70T, and I like the sound of everything I have been told about the car so far, but am concerned about the performance. The T's 130 (+/-?) hp and roughly 9.5 sec 0-60 time are only slightly better than my F150, and I was wondering what sort of potential the 2.2 has without simply replacing the engine. The car supposedly has oil fed tensioners, webers, and drips very little oil. I recall from my 911 Story book (Bible) that the T has a different crank, and some other differences (case material?) than the other 70 models, does this handicap it in any way? The only difference on the surface I can find between the S and T engine is the compression ratio, is that it or am I missing something? Finally, should I just shut the damned book, forget about the numbers, and enjoy the car....I'm thinking yes here. Regardless, thanks in advance for the input, hopefully soon I will be posting pictures of my first Porsche, are you listening God? Matt

[Jim Richards]

Matt, I take it you haven't driven this car yet. If so, I'd suggest you try 'er out and form your initial opinion. There's some ability to increase a T's performance, but I think they all require you spend a fair amount of money. You might enjoy it enough as it is to keep you happy for a couple of years while researching your options. If you know you absolutely want more power from the get-go, then set your sights on a different model, such as an E or an S, or those short hood cars

[chuckw951]

Another difference between the 70 911T and the E and S models is the fuel delivery system. While the 911T has carbs, the E and S models has mechanical fuel injection. I don't have the book in front of me, but I believe the E and S used different P & Cs to get the higher compression. Heads might be different too. In terms of mods to the 911T motor I believe folks have increased displacement/compression ratio to get more power. Check BA's performance handbook. Myself I'm a believer in motor swaps.
I also think that while the car isn't that much quicker than your truck, I am certain that it is faster. By that I mean it will go faster through the backroads.

Re: the car your looking at. Check for rust, check for rust again and then check again!

Chuck

[steveW]

I've got a '71 T and believe me it is a lot of fun to drive and there is a lot you can do to make it more lively without spending lots of money.

Add lightness is the first area. The real beauty of the smaller engines is that they rev freely. Change the air filter and exhaust and you'll discover it has a built in rev limiter........

[TimT]

Early T's are great cars. Id like to add one to my stable, but clean unmolested ones are few and far between. Even though it "only" has 130 or so hp, thats enough to get you into some serious trouble. Before I tranSmogrified my T into a GT5 car it was a solid running great handling car, people at driving events couldnt believe it "only" had a 2.2 in it.


CHECK FOR RUST!!!

[twin plugged targa]

Welcome to the board!
My PO did an engine swap, so I cannot comment on the original power.
If you are after more power, I would either concider a larger engined later car- 3.0 Carrera, SC with Galv. body. Or do the engine transplant but budget it into your accounting now.
If you can afford the transplant and love the shape, rawness and character of these cars then I say GO FOR IT!
The older lighter cars have that Go-cart feel!.
Stick a bigger engine in and you have a street rod!
rgds Ben

[cegerer]

I've driven a 2.2T (only modification was a 2-out sport muffler) and was surpirised by its performance. Are they really only 9.5 seconds from 0-60???? This one felt much quicker than that! I suggest you drive it and chances are you'll be impressed. -- Curt

[onewhippedpuppy]

Thanks for the input guys, your responses have been pretty much what I expected, just sometimes you need to hear someone say it. If the car wasn't four hours away I would have driven it by now, unfortunately most everything is hours away from Great Bend. Chuck, I love your comment on the T being faster than my truck, with the point and wait handling of a cruise ship and something like 220 Hp to push around 5000lbs (how's that for a power/weight ratio), my truck makes my wife's '03 4Runner feel like a go-kart. That's why it's for sale. Anyway, the look of the pre '74 cars really appeals to me, but my budget will make it hard to find a decent E or S. The car in question has webers on it, to address Chuck's fuel delivery statement, oil fed tensioners, which seem to be rare on 2.2s (?!), leaks very little oil, supposedly a solid and good running older restoration with no rust, but that remains to be seen with a PPI. Well, thanks for the replies, it looks like I need to take a little road trip, post me some encouragement to keep me motivated. I love this place...Matt

[boston95]

Matt, I feel your pain. I love the early cars and therefore set out to find the best condition one I could find. You will absolutely be amazed how awesome these cars are to drive. A word of caution.....finding one in great condition is a challenge (be patient). I am more concerned with condition than performance (like some posters said, an engine swap is always an option) When you find one, it shouldn't matter which model it is (I'm sure I'll be corrected here). Be happy if you find a car that is unmolested and rust FREE. Here is my T which I purchased a month ago from the original owner. Good Luck!

http://home.earthlink.net/~cbwx2/porsche/opening.html

[onewhippedpuppy]

boston95, that's a beautiful targa, I especially like the mirror on the passenger side fender, I don't believe I've ever seen that before, is that original? Somehow I don't think I'll be able to afford one that nice. Very unique, thank you for the encouragement, keep it coming everybody!

[HarryD]

Hi,

2 years ago I completed my quest for a rust free long nose. Check my website (below) for some pics.

As you already know, watch for rust, be patient, look for rust, be sure to have a ppi, check for rust, get records (if they got 'em), look in nooks and cranies for rust.

I spent about 12 months looking for mine but it had no apparent rust. It did need a rebuild but the price was right.

Did I say watch out for rust?

[Dan Morton]

I think one of the main reasons they are slow in the 0-60 is the slower shifting that is needed compared to modern day cars. When I purchased my 1970 911T I was not impressed by the off-the-line performance and was not disappointed either because the car was just plain fun to be in period!

Since then I've completely rebuilt the engine and added S pistons and E cams. I still have the stock exhaust and zenith carbs and this car really screams now! The sound is awesome. I also have a sport exhaust that will make you go deaf and wake all the neighbors so I opt to leave it off and I don't think it would add any hp increase.

I've really enjoyed changing the look some over the years too. Here's a couple pics.










--Dan
1970 911T

[Slow911]

hey Dan- If you don't want the sport exhaust I could use it......my neighbors are already use to me and loud noises at all hours of the night & day

[dotorg]

That 0-60 time is largely, it seems, related to the speed you can shift from 1->2 and 2->3, etc... not engine power.

My car (admittely not a stock 2.0 engine, its got S-cams) feels as fast as my S4 which has almost twice the power once I'm above 30mph or so. Being 1700lbs lighter helps!

911's aren't drag cars. You won't get stellar 0-60 or 1/4 mile times, but they're damn fast once you're moving, even in the older smaller engines.

[thrown_hammer]

Get a T. That way you can do whatever you want to it and the Purists (for the most part) won't freak out.

[Early_S_Man]

The 2.2 'T' gained more hp -- 15 hp vs 10 hp ... than the 'S' did from the 204 cc displacement increase! Compression, port sizes, and cams are the major differences for the 'S' engine, and the gains were in the upper rpm range. Gearing was close to perfect with the 'T' engine ... not so with the high-winding 'E' and 'S' engines!

[chuckw951]

Originally posted by thrown_hammer
Get a T. That way you can do whatever you want to it and the Purists (for the most part) won't freak out.

I would say get whatever you want, despite the pursists.

To do my engine conversion I need to hack a 911SC engine wire harness (the horror!). Then the throttle linkage wouldn't fit so we used a dremmel to widen the sheet metal. Picture that, a dremmel hacking up an early 911 to make it even more unoriginal!

Are said practices allowed in that GruppeB group?

Chuck

[thrown_hammer]

Are said practices allowed in that GruppeB group?

Chuck,
Lets just say I have two dremels and leave it at that...

[Bobboloo]

If the 2.2 car in question is for street use then it's my opinion that the T might be the better choice. The S has braggin rights in the HP department but you have to wind the motor up to get to the power.
A swap to S pistons would be nice to give you more snap but porting and installing S cams and the proper MFI is not only extremely expensive but not necessarily desirable.

The popularity of the 2.7RS motor that has the S cams and ports is largely due to the displacement increase offsetting the peakiness of the previous S motors.

Point being that a 2.2T is already a peaky motor. It won't hit it's power band until you hit atleast 3500rpm an S on the other hand doesn't hit it's power band until about 5000rpm.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Sometimes when you have nothing to drive, and plenty to read, the numbers take on a little too much importance. I've outgrown the wanna-be bad ass driving of my younger years, now I just want something that will put a smile on my face every time I get in. Thanks for the opinions guys, and if anyone else reads this post I'd love to hear more waxing poetic about your cars, it helps keep me motivated. Thanks, Matt