2.7 issues

dmarv · 12-16-2004, 02:38 PM

Is it just me, or does the 2.7 cars get a bum rap. I know all about the problems the factory had with the 2.7 cars. But IMO, I believe that these cars are just as good as the later SC and Carrera models. Most of these cars that are available now have had most of the upgrades done to them (studs, fan, reactor removal, oil cooler install, etc.) These cars are selling well below the later cars and offer a great value for someone looking to enter the world of Porsche. Am I crazy?

concentric · 12-16-2004, 02:48 PM

No, you're not crazy. Sometimes the 2.7 cars make sense! I bought mine for dirt cheap.

RoninLB · 12-16-2004, 04:21 PM

I think that someone who is going to by a 2.7 911 should have someone around. who really knows the issues, for advice on the specific car.

Fishcop · Fishcop's Garage

If the 2.7 is a project then it's a great place to start. If you do all the mods Anderson/Dempsey outline then you'll have a terrific engine at a good price.

Grady Clay · 12-16-2004, 05:37 PM

dmarv,

Just like every situation, it depends on the car.
There are some I wouldn’t keep even if I were given them – CGTs included.

To find a nice original ’77 (galvanized body, aluminum 915) with an original slightly distressed engine would be wonderful. A 2.7, up-rated properly, is a good long-term driver.

To find a fresh 2.7 with all the updates is even better.

It’s not the engine, it’s the car. I agree, many are under valued.

Best,
Grady

PorschePilot · 12-16-2004, 06:54 PM

I have to say, done right a 2.7 is a good engine. I bought my 74 Targa as a basket case for $500, but everything was there. Did a high quality rebuild with many upgrades and new paint and interior and I am just a little over $8500. Of course I did just about all the work my self. But the car is like new and is a great driver.

Matt Holcomb · Matt Holcomb's Garage

If you were going to rebuild a CIS 2.7 with the original (7R) crankcase, then it would be prudent to have the case assessed by a metallurgist to ensure that it's not porous. It doesn't matter if it's a RoW CIS 2.7 or a Ralph Nader CIS 2.7 from 1975-76, the reality is these crankcases are nigh on thirty years old, and have been operating at temperatures higher than your average 2.4 or a 3.0.

The problem with CIS 2.7 engines, and a big reason why they've earned the reputation of being Porsche's only problematic mill (early 3.6 engines can be just as problematic, IMHO), is that very few people know how to prepare the case halves properly. Unfortunately, many CIS 2.7s have been rebuilt by people who are not au fait with all the foibles of a 7R crankcase.

andrew johnson · 12-17-2004, 12:37 AM

dmarv

I am a bit of a novice however I have owned a 2.7 for about 8 months so feel a bit qualified to give an opinion. I looked around at about 7-8 cars before buying. My budget allowed me to look at early SC and 2.7's. All of the sc's i looked at were very tatty in the body or not australian delivered.

I was aware of the problems with the 2.7 and the ways in which they could be overcome.

The car I eventually bought was a 1976 2.7 with most of the required mods. I had a leakdown and compression test before purchase.

The body was in really good shape - no rust thanks to galvanising, and really straight. In essence it was old, but no one appeared to have abused it and it belonged to two owners who clearly loved her.

In short, the engine is not everything, dont prejudice your decision but get it checked out.

Andrew