installing 2.7L in my '76 912E

I am considering installing a 210hp 2.7L in my 1976 912E. The original 2.0 4 cylinder needs rebuilt and the 2.7 looks conversion attractive. What issues must I consider? cooling? mounts? electric? transmission? guages and sending units? other? Has anyone done this? I plan to keep the original motor for future resale with the car, I think?!!

Dennis G.

Go 3.0 Nothing to lose, everything to gain...

Wouldn't there be horsepower to lose if he went to a 180hp SC engine instead of the 210hp 2.7 he is speaking of?

Is it a true 911/83 engine, or just a CIS 2.7 with Webers that has been converted and someone 'claims' to have 210 hp? Does it have TimeSerts and pressure-fed tensioners? If the 2.7 is a fresh, reall good engine, it would be a lot cheaper to rebuild/boost the size and power of the VW engine than to make a conversion to a six!

The biggest concerns you have will be with instruments and wiring to make them work! And that will be true, regardless of which six-cylinder engine you pick! You will need a 'console' with relays, Voltage regulator, and CDI-unit for the 2.7 on it, and the oil tank and plumbing for a front oil cooler ... don't even THINK about running a 2.7 engine without a front cooler, preferably a 'Carrera-style' with fan!

------------------
Warren Hall
1973 911S Targa

Warren,

Thanks for the reply. The 210 hp comes from carbs. I can get the 2.7 w/FI, but obviously w/less hp. I was considering the 2.7, because this is what came in the 76 911S. Several others had indicated that a front oil cooler is not necessary. It wasn't installed on the 911S 2.7L. I am aware of the new engine mount requirement and the oil pressure gauge (the 912E only has oil pressure gauge). thanks for the comments...more advice is welcome as I contemplate my decision.

Dennis Gibson

The 1976 US 911S engine put out 165 hp. I don't think they've invented a carbureter yet that can change that number to 210.

------------------
Jack Olsen
1973 911 T (3.6) sunroof coupe
jackolsen@mediaone.net

Jack,

Thanks for your reply. The 200+ hp figure comes from carburetion and other upgrades including cam, etc.. The 200+ hp engine comes with turbo tensioners, 11 blade fan, recurved distributor, and other performance upgrades. I have not decided whether or not to go with FI (165 hp) or Carbs. I am still doing research. BTW, your car with new motor looks great.

Dennis

Dennis,

The 200+ hp figure is highly questionable! The only 200+ hp version of the 2.7 that was built by the factory was the RS 2.7 ... and it DID come with the front fender oil cooler!!! The RS 2.7 also had MFI, which always gives 10 hp more than Webers, and it had the early tuned header heat exchangers! Does this 2.7 have SSIs or early heat exchangers?

The people telling you you dont need a front oil cooler are either misinformed, or don't have your best interest in mind!

You need to find out just what EXACT cams were used in this upgraded, CIS smog-controlled engine! Because, if they weren't GE-60 or Early 911S cams from '67-'73, then you are being SNOWED RATHER BADLY! Nobody ever talks about a '76 911S engine, because 'S' engine production ended in 1973 ... '74-'77 'S' cars were just a trim level option! You also need to find out if all 24 head stud locations have been TimeSerted, and what studs were used. The 'Turbo Tensioners' are not special or currently acceptable without collars, because the double-bushing chain-wheel carriers were not introduced until '80.5 production for the SC and Turbo engines.

One last note. the engine 'console' I mentioned has nothing to do with engine mounts ... it is a mounting 'subframe' for a major portion of the electrical system components associated with the engine.
------------------
Warren Hall
1973 911S Targa

[This message has been edited by Early_S_Man (edited 03-26-2001).]

Warren,

I'm beginning to lose interest in this endeavor. I don't know what to think about the Motor Meister 200+hp claim. My local Porsche mechanic is recommending a 3.0 if I choose to do this at all. He has the same timeSert concerns of the 2.7L. The console subframe is also another consideration that is making my decision more difficult, alsong with an oil tank install. I may just rebuild the 2.0, with a couple upgrades such as Euro pistons, let my son drive it and look for a good 78-83 SC.

No offense on the 911S. I was referring to the engine in the '76 model as referred to in my 911S/912E Owners' Manaul, not the engine type. Also, I got the cooling message...I do understand that the 2.7s run rather hot.

I was lead to believe I could easily drop a six in this car. It doesn't seem to be the case.

I appreciate all your advice.

Dennis

Dennis:

I have a fresh Motormeister 2.7L with numerous upgrades. The motor is very strong, but I don't have dyno results to show hp output.

Started with a 7R case added forged pistons, Nikasil cyliners and rebuilt heads - then port and polish of intake/exhaust.

Timeserted and shuffle pinned case. Solex cams and the Weber 40mm carb set-up. I added the PMO fuel bar. Also runs an Electromotive ignition.

I have researched adding an aux oil cooler to this '72 and will do it if temps warrant it (have B&B cooler/fan set-up waiting in the garage). So far, 210 is the highest temp I have seen in fairly spirited driving at ambient temps in the low 70s. I think I will need the aux oil cooler when temps warm up here in So Cal.

Power-wise, Bruce Anderson says that a very good hot rod 2.7 set-up should be good for 225ish hp with all the proper trimmings. My motor sure feels like it has this kind of power.

You will hear some negative comments about some Motormeister rebuilds here and at the Rennlist board, but there are also some very positive comments. I think the 2.7 may be a Motormeister specialty as all the positive comments I have heard are from owners of hot rod 2.7s built by MM.

My motor is strong, but still smokes at start up and is still dropping some oil from the driver's side cam covers. I'm taking the car in at 1500 miles and Roy promises that these problems will be remedied. I will fully exhaust a MM remedy . . . and if MM can't get it right by the time my 6 month warranty expires my car will be heading to Andial in Santa Ana.

Hearing negative comments about MM and seeing some of the damage does not help my confidence level . . . and introduces a 'worry level' that I do not like.

For now, I am pleased with the motor and it runs very strong.

My next motor will probably come from Andial or Jerry Woods - the extra cash spent at either of these places is surely worth it . . . and the confidence from such a rebuild is valuable 'peace' of mind!

Best to you in your Porsche endeavors!

Kurt

In my opinion, the best way to transplant a six-cylinder engine into a 912 is to move the "912" badge over to the decklid of a six-cylinder 911. Those little press-on bolts can be tricky, but all your swap issues get resolved in about ten-minutes' time!

Thanks for the compliment, though, Dennis. I think the consensus on swapping 911 engines into 912s is that it's more trouble than it's worth. Building up the 912 engine will improve on that car's virtues (light weight, nimble handling). But 911 tubs are still cheap and plentiful enough to have it make more sense to just buy a 911, and build up from there.

My .02.

------------------
Jack Olsen
1973 911 T (3.6) sunroof coupe
jackolsen@mediaone.net

[This message has been edited by JackOlsen (edited 03-26-2001).]

the 912E trans has a smaller mainshaft spline,a smaller t/o bearing guide tube and it's set up as a push clutch. so that clutch release stuff has to be swapped too. or use a 915 trans out of a 911. or swap a 911 mainshaft/1st gear into it. yow! maybe someone makes a custom disc for this swap???

[This message has been edited by john walker's workshop (edited 03-26-2001).]

Early,
I have to call you out on one of your comments on 74-77 models and ask your advice on another. First the 911S has a different VIN number than the straight 911, without looking at my owners manual I believe the straight 911 starts with "911411" and the 911S with "911415". Engine HP also differs between the two...150 v 165. My car is a straight 911 with S trim.
On an aux cooler which you say is the only way to go I have a question. My car usually runs between 180-200 without a cooler (I do have the 11 blade fan). This seems pretty much within limits. Since the shop quoted me about 1500 for an aux cooler install is it worth it? Will the engine run hotter as it gets older(currently only 37K original). Thanks for your advice.

------------------
Dan S.
1974 911 Targa

As far as the need for oil cooling; HP=heat the more power the more heat! If you run your car at higher revs you also make more heat, the fan moves more air but not enough to keep the temps down! If you have a 2.7 that runs cool I would have the temp gauge calibrated just to be sure; they usually run hot and 28 year old gauges can be wrong.

Dennis,

I bought a 2.3L conversion from MM for my 914 last summer, I am still not sure I got what I paid for! Quite a few little problems that had the engine in and out several times since then. If I could do it again I would buy a converted 914 from the start, or a 911. The 912E is a rare car if undervalued; I would recommend having the type 4 rebuilt using euro p/c's(or a big bore kit if you can find some good ones, a lot of junk on the market for 2L type 4's), port and polish, a hot cam and 40mm webers; this should get you close to 120 HP and make the 912E fun to drive, if not quick!

Dan S.

Yes, there was a 911S model for '74-'77, but it did not have an engine unique to the model, just another CIS 2.7 engine, shared with the USA 'Carrera' in '74 and '75 ... it had neither the cams from the '67 model, nor the red shroud, or a 7300 rpm redline. The comment was not intended to raise another 2.7 flame war. My definion of an 'S' engine includes all carbureted or MFI engines from '67 thru '75 that had a redline of 7300 rpm, and all shared the same '67 cam specifications, whether 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, 2.7, or 3.0 liters!

All of my comments about a front oil cooler and a 2.7 engine were predicated on a high-performance 2.7 engine of 210 hp, not any stock CIS 2.7 engine or some questionable MM 'upgrade' from a '76 CIS 2.7! Bruce Anderson says engines of 170 hp DIN ratings or above need the front coolers, and I agree with that assessment!

A '74 2.7 CIS engine of 150 hp DIN probably doesn't NEED a front oil cooler, but it probably does or will need a top-end job to replace valve guides ... in the near future!

------------------
Warren Hall
1973 911S Targa

Thanks to all who have replied. I got plenty of feedback and got a clear picture of who likes and dislikes the 912Es. I am pretty sure I will rebuild the original 2.0L. There are some performance parts available. This is a great little original car. It will serve its purpose.
I'll look for a 80-83 SC and let my son use the 912E.

Thanks to all!

Dennis

Warren,
As usual you are a fountain of info At about what mileage should I be looking at that top end job. When I bought the car I had it checked out thoroughly(pressure etc..) here in San Diego by Black Forest and Dieters and both declared it completely sound but no mention of a future top ender looming.

------------------
Dan S.
1974 911 Targa

Dan,

It is hard to predict a mileage for the valve guides ... Bruce Anderson says it could be as early as 60K miles for any early engine with the copper guides, which were replaced with the phosphorus bronze guides in mid-'77 production. The best check I can recommend is to check the exhaust valves at 0.375" or 10 mm lift ... press sideways on the valve tip with a large flat-bladed screwdriver, and see if there is noticeable displacement or play. If there is no play, you are safe for a while longer ... the check should be made at every oil change, when you can get at the exhaust valves easily!

------------------
Warren Hall
1973 911S Targa

[TOM RUE]

If you do could I buy the 912E engine mount