Engine weights
 

Did a search and couldn't seem to find what was looking for. What is the weight difference between the early Magnesium cases (2/2.2/2.7) and later aluminum? Is it significant? Were any Mag cases better than others either from a casting/strength or longterm durability standpoint? As for the aluminum engines, did they get (significantly) heavier as they progressed from 3.0 to 3.6 in displacement? Thanks

Most of what you are loking for is in there but here it is again
<pre>kg lbs models Source
182 400 2.4L E, S, RS 1972-73 Tech. Spec. book
183 403 2.4L T 1972-73 Tech. Spec. book
182 400 2.7L 1974 unknown
200 440 2.7L 1975-1977 Aichle - 911 Engines
190 419 78-83 930/09,19,10 78-81 78-81 & 82-83 Tech Spec. book
200 441 78-83 930/03-08,13-17 78-81 & 82-83 Tech Spec. book
190 462 3.0L 1980-82 Aichle - 911 Engines
190 418 3.0L SC w/ SSI & heat,w/o AC measured
219 483 84-87 930/20,26 84-87 Tech Spec. book
220 485 84-87 930/21,25 84-87 Tech Spec. book
219 482 3.2L 1987 - 1988 Aichle - 911 Engines
238 524 964 89-94 M64/01,02 ROW &US 964 Tech Spec. book
226 497 M64/03 RS 964 Tech Spec. book
275 605 M30/69 3.3L 964 Tech Spec. book
276 608 M64/50 3.6L 964 Tech Spec. book
232 510 M64/05-08 993 Tech Spec. book
221 487 M64/20 993RS v-ram w/o ZMS 993 Tech Spec. book
230 507 M64/20 993RS v-ram w/ ZMS 993 Tech Spec. book
</pre>

When comparably equipped the later are heavier but not a lot, the only direct comparison I did was a C3 engine and an M64/01, w/ exactly the same equipment, no AC, same exhaust, comparable clutch and flywheel, heat fan installed the 964 was ~25# heavier

Wow... thanks Bill!

The early mag case was 24# lighter than the sandcast aluminum case.

The 930 case is actually a tad lighter than the early sandcast aluminum case. (I seem to remember it being about 2.5# lighter)



The lightest motor combo would be a Weber equipped mag case with Nikasil cylinders.

My 2.5, with MFI, 7R mag case, Nikasil cylinders and early heat exchangers and muffler complete with stock air cleaner weighs 362#.


Bill, I'd be curious what the difference would be between a 3.2 and a 3.6 comparably equipped. The C3 is a lighter engine than the 3.2, with it's early crank and rods.


I'll have to weigh my 3.2 when I have it out for a rebuild.

I have been meaning to post this for a while because I am blown away with how light my 993 3.6L is....I really cant believe it.

I will say that there is no exhaust, AC pump, power steering pump or other stuff I am not using in my 72 RSR.

When I unloaded it from the van with my brother we easily caried it 300FT to my shed(garage) where I am building up my car. I cant stress it enough how light it is for the size of motor. My brothers 1990cc bmw motor we could not even lift.

I plan on weighing it soon VS my 2.4 with the heavy MFI pump which is also out of the car. It really feels ( just from picking them up by hand) like there is not a huge difference since the 3.6 doesnt use a heavy MFI pump .

I was really woried about the weight of the 3.6L (having never had one to mess around with) VS a mag motor but I now think a striped down 3.6 is a very light package. I am almost tempted to say it will rival a 2.7 with MFI pump.

Just though I would mention that . I will get them on a scale soon

How about the 2.0 and 2.2?
Was Magnesium better than Aluminium? Which is more durable?

Al is more durable - Mg is fine for the smaller displacements and becomes a problem with a 2.7 that has thermal reactors on it.

Yes - the wt. gain is mostly in the accessories and the intake and exhaust systems.

Aichele's Engine book and Frere give valuable info about engine development, and some wt. saving engineering the factory did on the 3.6L motors.


The lightest motor combo would be a Weber equipped mag case with Nikasil cylinders [and tiny little oil pump]....
- for obvious resaons you don't want to run that combo.

Also remeber that the intake system on the 3.6 does some things that you may want to have... esp. for mid-range torque.

hmm those intial weights seem high...unless i've become un-humanly strong.

as on my 3L mag with cis, SSI's and a muffler, flywheel, me and one of my buddies lifted it form the ground, and carried it over to the work bench.


also the 3.6L i just got, w/o headers, muffler, or flyewheel, was so light. it did have carbs and some linkages....and some grime....lol...


but ya, lightest good package would be the 2.7L mag pushed out to 3L. with a set of webbers and SSI's. if done with chain tensioners and proper machine should be good.

its hard to argue with a 3.6L though....lol, expecially if u add carbs and some ncie headers

Remember that all of the weights from the spec books are fully dressed and included the 40# dual mass flywheel/clutch assemblys, AC, etc.

Good points said above. My experience was:
1. I pulled my 3.0SC (1982) out with its own exhaust, no ac, no airblower
2. Installed my 3.6 (1991) with a light exhaust(m&k), no ac, no DMFlywheel, no power steering, no airblower

Results: After 3.6 installation, I had to lower the rear of my car to match the previous ride height. WOW! my transplant turned out lighter than what I had before! I was shocked. The overall effect will come down to the rest of the components used. Remember you are transplanting.

How about a list of tranny weight?

DID I miss something?
The 7R Case is the strongest............and I have read 30pounds lighter........dont know it to be true

But what about my 3.0 turbo 930?

Tech Spec. book doesn't provide the weight for the 76-77 3.0 turbos, but the factory Repair Manual quotes 930/51 and 930/53 as 217kg/478lbs.

The Repair Manual agrees with the Tech Spec. Book for the 930/61/62/63/64/65, which is given as 240kg/529lbs.

In the Tech Spec book, 930/60 is given as 230kg/507lbs.

Nice to see figures

200 441 78-83 930/03-08,13-17 78-81 & 82-83 Tech Spec. book

190 462 3.0L 1980-82 Aichle - 911 Engines

190 418 3.0L SC w/ SSI & heat,w/o AC