3.0L engine into my 72 T
 

I found a great deal from another Pelican on an 82 SC engine, 154k miles, clean PPI by John Walker. I bought it, had it delivered to Buffalo, barely squeezed it into the back of our Honda Odyssey, and almost broke my back getting it out into the garage :) This weekend I tore into the engine swap.

A bit of background: I pulled the original 2.4L engine because it was smoking, and was tired. I bought a rebuilt 1967 2.0L that had apparently been hotrodded to E specs and came with freshly rebuilt Webers. Power felt very similar to my 2.4, and I was happy with it, considering it was only supposed to be a temporary replacement while I rebuilt my 2.4.

Well, life gets in the way often, and the 2.4 sat for two winters. And it'll probably sit again this winter. So I bought the 3.0. Hmm, 204 hp in a 2100 lb car... That'll be fun!

So first step was pulling the engine:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1315269348.jpg

I want to reseal my leaking tranny while it's out:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1315269364.jpg

I'll post more updates as they come.

why put that old 4 speed back in when you could trade me for a nice 5 speed ;)

I didn't know you wanted to trade, I thought you were just asking!

I do love mucky pictures (of engines and transmissions).

Nice ! Are you using your webers for the new engine?

Good luck with the project. I have an 81 SC engine in a 1970 T. Allot of fun!
If you keep the CIS (which I still have at the moment, there are a few things you will discover with the change - one being needing to power the AAR/WUR/etc of the CIS - an easy job. After that I'm curious about the space between the right rear shock tower in the engine bay and the additional air valve.

After that, its a fabulous daily driver with plenty of fun.

I'm keeping the Webers. I don't want to deal with the cost or hassle of installing CIS. Plus, the Webers have only got maybe 10K km on a rebuild, so they're in really nice shape. I've got new jets for them, which I'll install after the tranny reseal. Man, I hate the smell of tranny fluid...

I swapped a 3.2 into a 72 before about 15 years ago, cool project. Your 3.0 must be a ROW engine...if so, nice find.

I considered the 3.2 swap, but I'd have to not just deal with the fuel injection, but also additional oil cooling and bigger brakes. When all was said and done, it would've been at least $10k, and a ton of work. I just wasn't up to either. The 3.0 is so much simpler.

If the 3.0 you have has 204 hp = euro, then its only 3 shy of a 84-86 3.2, and you say your using carbs anyway so there would be no FI to mess with. and for the brakes - you could do carrera stuff real inexpensive - Just saying.

this swap will make that 72 get up and move ... no more being the slowest on back straight now.

Brad

Not too much time tonight. Got the tranny resealed:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1315363883.jpg

Cleaned the hell out of the case matings - scrubbed as much of the old paper gasket off as I could, then scrubbed it clean with brake cleaner. Applied loctite and closed her up. Yummy orange goo... :)

Next up: rejetting the Webers.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1315364055.jpg

if you like I can look to see what my webers have for jets, etc. give you a starting point anyway.

Already got the new jets, venturis, air corrections screws and emulsion tubes. Thanks, though!

Well, it's a learning curve, right? The 3.0L didn't come with a flywheel and the the 1972 engine has a 6-bolt flywheel (compared the later 9-bolt style). So I had to source a new one, which arrived yesterday. So I get it on and I'm all ready to mate the tranny to it, when I look a bit more closely and realize something's missing. No pilot bearing. *****. So I'm stalled again while I locate one, hopefully locally so I can finish up tonight.

Another problem. The clutch lever on the 72 915 won't allow me to mate the transmission to the engine, because there's an exhaust cross-piece preventing it from swinging out to allow the fork to engage the throwout bearing. Details are here: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/630186-mating-engine-tranny-fork-stuck-exhaust.html

I ended up removing the cross piece, which I'll reinstall when the engine's back in - it'll be much easier to access from underneath, now that the tranny's in place.

The engine should go back in tomorrow, then I need to deal with whatever electrical issues pop up. I might yank the exhaust of the 2.4 and use that, too. Again, easier to do once the engine's back in.

I love snags. Really, don't they just make life worth living? :rolleyes: I accidentally hit the bell crank bolt shaft with a hammer, and managed to snap it off. So off to the tool store for a better screw extractor, a nice new sharp dremel grinding bit, and some fancy-pants new drill bits. A day's delay, and it's out:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1316577314.jpg

Luckily I was able to source a replacement locally, and picked it up last night.

So time to move on to the engine. Actually, once I was able to get the jack positioned properly underneath (difficult, because the engine was still on the crate bottom) it was a piece of cake to get it up and aligned. Just time consuming, having to check everywhere to make sure everything's aligned. It's a lot easier with 2 people. But man, I LOVE the fact that the mount bolts thread into the engine mounting cross brace piece, rather than having to get the nuts on the bottom with the older engines - it's so much easier!

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1316577343.jpg

Next up is wiring. I had a look at it tonight, and I think this is going to be a real PITA, partly because it's all so different, and partly because there seem to be a lot of connectors missing on the 3.0 wiring. I think they were just cut in a few places. So I'm thinking I'll just take all the wiring from the 2.4 and use that. So long as the alternator connections are the same, then I think it should all be fine.

Let me preface this by saying that removing the exhaust is probably one of the least pleasant jobs I've ever done on a 911. Lying on your back with penetrant dripping on you, bits of crud falling into your eyes, and then trying to find an angle to get some torque on the nuts. Ugh. When I first pulled the exhaust off my 72, it was a PITA, but with penetrant and heat, I got them all off with no broken studs. When I installed the exhaust on the 67, I made sure to use anti-seize on the studs, and it came off tonight in about 10 minutes. No problem with any of the 12 nuts. On the 3.0L, however, even with 2 days of penetrant, heat cycles, and then heat blasts, still broke 2 damn studs. Luckily they broke right at the nut, so there's plenty of stalk left to do the 2-nut removal thingy, though after almost an hour at one, I packed it in for the night. The upside is that this should be the last step before filling it up with oil and turning the key.

Might I suggest next time to use:


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1317153060.jpg

And use your finger to paint a coating on. You don't need a 0.5"x0.5" bead!

Do you think that's better than the Loctite? My experience so far with permatex stuff is that it's good, but not great. Maybe they're improving?

what cams will you use?

I've discovered a new adhesive so strong that NASA could use it for the space program. Simply heat cycle a bolt over 30 years, and it becomes permanently attached. I bloody well hate exhaust studs. I've broken two, and let me tell you, those bastards aren't coming out.

I've PB Blasted them for 3 days now, heat cycled countless times, and heated up the heads as hot as I can get them with mapp gas. I can't believe how tight I was able to get the vice grips on, but they still won't budge. So I've decided to dremel, centre punch, drill and then either tap or helicoil.

I need a new dremel bit for the cutting wheels (bent it last week and forgot to replace it yet), so I'm done for the night. I also need larger drill bits - I've only got some small ones.

What's the consensus, tap vs. helicoil? I've never done either, so I'm clueless. From what I've read here, helicoil seems to be the more popular option, but I was recommended to tap it by a mechanic friend.

Gawd I hate exhaust studs.

Huh?

I was more generically suggesting using a non-hardening sealant and using it sparingly. I've opened a lot of transmissions that had silicone beads inside and out.

On monday, I had to make an adjustment on a 1979 915. We moved the engine and tranny rear-ward enough to drop the shift-rod. We then popped the end cover off, and I tore the gasket in the process. After adjusting the shiftrod/shiftfork for 5th/reverse about a millimeter, I cleaned then surfaces with a gasket scraper and a scotchbrite pad with brake cleaner. I coated the end cover with the above product and we closed it up. No leaks.

Christien, if you are still jambed up on the broken exhaust studs give me a shout.
I have a jig that I could loan you. It uses one good stud at the port and two centering screws and had progressively larger drill bit guides to keep you straight and perpendicular.
It works.
my cel is 757 469-7219
Good luck either way,
ps: I'm putting a 3.0 with a 901 gearbox in a 73 St type set up. Webers, Elgin Modified S cams and ross forged pistons (10.5:1CR). It is a shop project but should be sweet.
Louvered aluminum decklid. What the hell, nobody cares

yes, if the beads were squeezed out that much on the exterior, then what big globs will be moving thru the unit on the inside after they break off?

maybe I missed what you planned, but if you use CIS cams with carbs you will be giving up a lot.

Cams make for an entirely new game. That would mean new pistons etc. You can take a standard CIS 3.0, add carbs and the later free flowing exhaust and get about 20hp+ improvement over stock. Those stock cams should be advanced 6deg to work best with the carbs.

Not optimal but still a fun engine in a light car (torque).

The loctite 574 (or whatever it is) is non-hardening. It hardens in the absence of air. The stuff on the outside of the case is still liquid, even though it was applied 2 weeks ago. The stuff on the inside will get mixed up with tranny oil, which I'll clean out after a few weeks of driving.

Thanks for the offer! I'll probably just make my own, though. I've got gaskets to use as a template.

Ah, ok. I'm just going to go with stock. The whole point of doing this is that I want to rebuild my original 2.4 and upgrade it, but it's been almost 3 years since I pulled it, and it'll be a while till I get around to rebuilding it. So I had this 2.0L in there that I found locally cheap, then this 3.0L came along. I'm not going down that "while you're in there" slippery slope! :)

you'll have plenty of torque and can save your pennies for new cams, pistons for a nice top end later on

Hi Christien,
I didn't notice you were local until I saw the brafasco bag!

You might try welding a nut on the exhaust studs and using the nut to back the stud out. I've found success with that method.

J

You could stop by and take a look at my 3.0 in my 71 if thts any help.

My 73T has an '80 3.0 with stock cams, early exhaust and Weber 40s. You will LOVE it!!

A wise man... I went down that slippery slope until I fell down the mineshaft. My 3.0 in my '72 is certainly anything but "stock", and makes darn near 250 hp and 235 ft lbs of torque. In the end, it has cost me a good deal of time and money, so one alwats has to ask "was it worth it?"

Compared to the relatively hassle-free and inexpensive installation of a stock 3.0 (save for the Webbers and exhaust), for the satisfaction one gains from that, I don't think so. Significantly improving upon the performance of a stock internals 3.0, for a street application, is difficult and expensive. The really big gains come at significant cost.

Seems that stock 3.0 cams come under a good deal of derision these days. Everyone "knows" they must be swapped out for 964's or 20/21's for any kind of decent power whatsoever. Well, ask Jeff Gamroth or Earl Green at Rothsport Racing about that one. These guys are building 3.0 motors for the "spec 911" class (stock internals, induction and exhaust "open") that are churning out 240 or more hp on those "anemic" 3.0 CIS cams. They are not a bad cam at all. They have earned their bad rep purely through the internet, where everyone is an "expert", especially the guys with no experience who simple parrot what they read. Over and over again...

I've never seen the much vaunted 964 or 20/21 cams up the power on a 3.0 by all that much. 5 to 10 hp, maybe, on their best day. Hell, I've even seen stock cammed 3.0's out-pull 3.0's with those cams on the dyno (with similar induction and exhaust). Them's some expensive, pretty minimal ponies... No, the simple switch from CIS to Webbers and backdating the exhaust is the biggest bang for the buck. You are on the right track. That combination will give you one very sweet little car, with plenty of power where you will really use it on the street. You'll have a ball.

I ended up drilling and tapping the exhaust studs. Pulled a few studs out of the 2.0L case to replace the destroyed ones. Got the exhaust back on last night, minus a few nuts because it was 1:30am, and my fingers were hurting they were so tired. I'll finish up tonight, put some oil in and hopefully fire it up!

God damn, I hate dealing with exhaust studs. I think placement of those nuts is part of the German's revenge for losing WWII.

Yeah, I'm really not about sinking thousands of dollars into the car to get another 20 or 30 hp, or even 50 or 60. I just want something that's fun to drive. Hell, the 2.4 wasn't too far off the mark, but who knows when I'll get around to rebuilding it.

I'm curious to hear what Jeff does if he leaves the CIS cams dead stock. Also, curious where the hp peaks...

Exhaust on, engine running (after having the distributor in 180* off and getting fireworks out of the carbs!), but exhaust nuts only on half-way and I can only get 3rd and 4th gears. I decided a week ago that the local shop would soon get well aquainted with my nuts (exhaust nuts, that is) and last night decided they'd also get familiar with my shaft (shift shaft, that is). I've adjusted the shift coupler countless times on multiple cars, and I checked everything with it, including the access plate fork on the tranny, and I'm completely baffled as to what's wrong. So I sent it in this morning, and hope to be driving it by the weekend.

I hate throwing in the towel, but I've just had enough at this point, and there's only a few weeks of driving season left.

Got it back from the shop today. A couple hours in labour and I'm back on the road. Needs another valve adjust, needs new valve cover gaskets (leaking really badly), and needs a good wash. But what a difference in power!!

So, as a summary for future transplants of this kind, here's a list of pitfalls I ran into:

1. carburetors need rejetting. Not hard or overly expensive - maybe $150 and took only an hour or so.
2. Flywheel needs to replaced with a later 9-bolt flywheel. PITA, $150 for a resurfaced flywheel.
3. Exhaust - if you're using a 72 915, the SC exhaust with the crossover pipe won't fit - you won't be able to get the clutch fork onto the throwout bearing. Most people recommend using the early exhaust anyway. Of course, then you've got the massive PITA of getting the exhaust off. Take everyone's advice - heat the nuts until they're cherry red. And watch your studs - SC exhaust flanges are almost an inch thick, whereas the exhaust flanges on earlier exhausts are about 1cm. The studs will be too long for the barrel nuts, and the 8mm hex head will bottom out. You can either swap studs (massive PITA), cut the long studs down (maybe not the best solution) or add spacers/washers underneath the barrel nuts. That's what the shop did.
4. Distributor: you WILL need an SC distributor, but get a 78-29 one without the vacuum advance and retard.
5. Alternator - keep the early one, because it's externally regulated, whereas the SC alternator is internally regulated.
6. Electrical - go with the original wiring harness. I'm still sorting a few things (oil pressure is spiked) but there's no sense trying to get the SC wiring to fit the older electricals, unless you keep the CIS. I've got an MSD box and coil, so I didn't have any issues with the tach. I did however have to remove the points wire (white) and dig up the original purple and green wiring combo from the MSD box (thank god I kept it) for the SC magnetic resistance disbtributor. Most everything else was a straight ahead hookup, just like the old engine (except for the oil pressure - still gotta figure out what I connected wrong there).
7. Oil plumbing - I chose to stick with my original oil tube that comes from the engine block beneath the exhaust, rather than the SC hard line. (The connection on the engine block is the same size) A few years ago I had a new one made up that's flexible hosing, and very tough. It's much easier to route around the engine than the hard lines. If you go with the SC hard oil line, I expect you'd need to fabricate a connection to the old oil line, but I'm not sure, because I didn't do that. But I can see the potential for another pitfall there.
8. Engine tin - as if to just add one more slight pain in the butt, the throttle cable from the transmission to the CIS injection is about an inch too far to the left for a carburetor hookup, so I had to drill and dremel out a hole in the rear engine tin for the throttle cable. Minor, easy and free, but one thing to note.

My goal with this was to keep the project simple and fairly low cost. I didn't want to go down the road of "while you're in there" or crazy upgrades. Basically, I tried to get an extra 50 or so hp for little or no cash, just some labour, and I've more or less accomplished that. I've got the 2.0L engine, SC exhaust and alternator for sale, which should get me to the break-even point.

That's about it. I'm at least back on the road, and I'll finish things up over the next few days.

Back on the road, finally got the last few things finished up last night, including setting the timing. Definitely need a new distributor (can't get much more than 20-22 degrees advance) and the valves need to be adjusted badly - sounds like a bloody diesel engine! :)

But wow, what a difference! It feels like someone slapped on a twin turbo! I love it!

your not going to add a front oil cooler?