Comentary on 3.2 vs 3.0
 

THIS IS NOT A RANT THREAD on 3.2 vs. 3.0 PLEASE! Been there done that and I never did get that t-shirt!

Drove an '87 today that I am thinking on purchasing. I was not that impressed with the throttle response at all... my 3.0 stock euro CIS would beat the snot off this car in terms of response to my go foot. Granted, the trans was a dream compared to my 915. The 3.2 just felt like there was some kind of buffer between my foot and the throttle where there was some delay in communication. Would this be characterized as normal? Engine sounded great and there was no hesitation really (no miss or anything) just that the response seems like it was slow motion...

Best regards,

Michael

When I was looking I too drove an 87 and felt exactly the same way. One of the reasons I went with my 83SC. The 87 felt like a bit of a dog, can't say why.

steve wong chip, test pipe and M&K muffler will make a big difference. did so on my 84.

Pretty normal comparison from all that I have read and experienced. The "trick" with 3.2's is to open up the exhaust and add a chip. Then it is a whole different kettle of fish.

Also driving one '87 isn't exactly a fair comparison, a lot can happen to an engine over 23 years....

Mike,

The 1987 with the G50 trans will be a great investment. The euro cars with the higher compression will always be abit quicker but the 3.2 cars will the updated items (i.e. stronger cases and many more upgraded items) The pleasure of driving this car on a regular basis will grow on you real quick. Good Luck.

The car has a set of headers going into a magnaflow muffler. Great sound! Don't know if it has a chip though. I may have to experiment with the exhaust setups I have on the shelf...

Agreed and the last 3.2 I drove was back in the 90's :D The one thing holding me back a little, mileage unknown on the engine/car, but honestly estimated by the seller to be ~100k. PO did the top end already and 2nd synchro. Tiny bit of smoke at start, but that's normal and the car had been sitting. No smoke on heavy throttle.

I'm looking at this car as a daily driver so I'm interested in the niceties of the G50 and 3.2 engine management. My current car is stripped bare so there is that ~500lbs extra meat that was slowing it down too. The trans was a dream though!

I guess I'll have to start saving my pennies for that 3.4SS... that's a lot of pennies!

Also, time to schedule the PPI for a leak down. I could do it, but I just don't have the time... plus its nice to have a 2nd opinion that is not biased like mine :)

Best regards,

Michael

my engine was a dog when I first got the car. over time I learned what it needed and I think one thing that was not mentioned is to also unplug the brown wire that attaches near the ECU Plug. it is some kind of emissions circuit that kills response. unplugging it helps alot.

A couple of points.

1) We can't make comparisons between cars which are 25 or 30 years old unless they've been thoroughly serviced and tuned and in excellent stock condition.

2) Having owned both a 1979 SC and currently a 1989 Carrera, both of which were during my ownership brought up to excellent stock condition, I think I can make some valid observations (as could others with similar long-term experience).

3) My 1989 Carrera 3.2 has is all over the SC I used to have in all areas of performance except at the bottom end below 4000 rpm. It is a romper stomper next to the SC.

4) As is documented in many places, the SC was a detuned Carrera 3.0 motor with an emphasis on lower end torque at the expense of high end horsepower -- with an eye to American driving habits and ensuring emissions were easy to meet. In a recent issue of Excellence (one or two issues ago), there is an article on one of the factory's solutions to try and deal with European customer complaints with a little known 3.1 model. Once the Carrera 3.2 was introduced, all complaints stopped and it became the biggest seller of all 911's.

5) If one wants maximum performance from a Carrera 3.2, it can't be treated like a big, lazy V8 -- it's got to revved like the thoroughbred sports car engine it is. The 911SC, with its milder low end torque cams is more in line with the American idea of what a sports car engine is like. At the time, anyways.

6) All that said, I liked the 911SC I had quite a bit (who wouldn't?). But the Carrera 3.2 I own now has everything that I thought was wrong with the SC, fixed.

Just my two cents on the subject. I am pretty sure that the 3.2 is faster, it is just that is has a more linear power band. The 3.0 seems to " hit " just a little harder when it comes in on the power band. My hot rodded 3.0 cis is definately faster than a stock 3.2, but I bet a 3.2 with a cat bypass, good muffler, and good chip is about equal.
My buddy has a 3.2 with exactly those mods, and I had a stock euro SC at the time. I was absouletly sure that the SC was faster, but we did line up, and they were pretty much equal up until about the top of third gear, and then the 3.2 slowly pulled away.
I still think I prefer the way a 3.0 runs, but right now, I have a bone stock 3.2 with 40 webers, and ssi's, dual in , single out muffler, in my SC, kind of just a hodge podge of parts I had laying around. This motor feels real quick, the carbs really wake it up a bit and make it a blast to drive.

I have a '74 with a hotrod 3.0 and an '89 Carrera with the 3.2. The '74 accelerates much faster up to any speed that I would drive on the street and is great fun), but is pretty wound out at higher speeds. The '89 does everything else better, includeing getting great gas mileage, and is geared so that it loves high speeds...so it is great for trips or as a daily driver. The gearing obviously makes much of the difference.

My 3.2 has made me smile the last 2 years 15,000 miles. My next one will be another 3.2.

FWIW, this is a red flag for me. If the exhaust has already been done -especially with headers- and the car still feels "buffered" I might at the very least want a more through PPI than normal. Something is not right.

When I bought a 85 Carrera I thought it was a dog also, but after a tune up, sw chip ,cat bypass it ran much better, but the biggest improvement was replacing the injectors, the performance increase was amazing!

I just bought a 3.2 "kit" to replace my tired 2.7. I have the complete stock exhaust system sitting there waiting to modify however I please. Any input on reasonable costs mods to exhaust syst, chips, etc and what brands to use would be greatly appreciated!!
jack

I would guess that modifications to the 3.2 fuel or exhaust systems (other than perhaps a chip) are really not options for most folks that have emissions testing...unless you have transplanted it into an early car that does not require testing.

My car is a 76 Targa, there is no testing required, plus it is mostly a DE track car. A cat bypass seems to be first place to start. Headers into a 2 inlet muffler is out of my price range at the moment and we do have noise restrictions at local tracks. Are all bypass set-ups created equall ??
j

I would think if you had both engines, stock, with the same intake and exhaust system (lets choose PMO carbs and headers), the 3.2 should make more power (there is no substatute for more cc's). Same goes for a 3.6 with the same setup.