3.0L in a SWB car ...... How does it handle??
 

So, I just bought a 1966, SWB, 912 coupe with the 356/912 engine..... Car is completely dismantled and chassis is getting media blasted this weekend.

Trying to decide between a 3.0L or the 356/912 90HP engine. I am leaning towards the 3.0L but I am concerned about the handling.

Any opinions appreciated SmileWavy

pm me your phone number and a good time to call. this may be something I actually know about :rolleyes:

Hi,

Thanks for the reply...... when I was doing a google search on this topic, all I came across was posts that you made. SmileWavy

I'll send you a PM to discuss.

If anybody else has any opinions on this, I would really like to hear it. :)

I know it is not a 3.0, but my 2.7 RS Spec in my '65 was the most fun I have had in any of my cars.

Thanks scooter

I like the way that sounds :) so the extra weight in the rear did not stand out as something to be concerned about


I have not found to much but it would be very similar to this car, not the same colour though :) http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-cars-sale/395263-fs-offically-1968-911l-3-0-hot-rod-done-tre.html

There shouldn't really be any difference in weight with an RS spec 2.7. The SWB came with an Aluminum case and Biral cylinders. The 2.7, even with the extra reinforcement of the 7R case that added back a couple pounds, should actually be lighter than the SWB motor since the difference between Magnesium case and Aluminum case is 22 pounds and the Nikasil cylinders should be lighter than Birals.

So, I don't see why a larger displacement motor (within the 2-2.8 liter range) should be any heavier.

Edit: I missed the 912 part. Nevermind.

I have another '68 SWB 911 that TRE built for a customer many years ago w/ a 3.0L and 915 transaxle. This one was originally built as a street "sleeper" hotrod and little was done to the suspension at the time. It is a very fun and reliable package when sorted out and set up properly. The CIS does not have the peaky scream of a carb'ed or MFI'd engine, but it has a lot of low-end grunt and is very reliable--not the least bit finicky--starts first time/every time in cold weather or hot, without any painstaking tuning.

In turning it into a well-balanced autocross car, I offset the additional weight of the later engine and transaxle as much as possible by removing weight from the rear of the car. These steps included using FRP parts for the bumper, tail light housings and rear lid as well as lexan for the rear window and a lighter sport muffler. Rear suspension was stiffened with 26mm rear T-bars and an 18mm ARB to deal with the added drivetrain weight. Even with the short wheelbase and running a square tire setup of 205/50-15s on 7" Fuchs, it handles very well and has won it's class for 3 years straight in the local PCA region autocross series.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1317576864.jpg

Thank you for the replys.

after reading all the replies and the post above, I went out and purchased a 3.0L engine. So I now have a 3.0L engine sitting on a pallet in the garage and I could not be happier. From the sounds of it, its EXACTLY what I want.

For this car , I did want to deal with MFI and carbs.

I plan to run the 901 transmission for a bit.....

Thanks again for all the replys.

Congrats on the 3.0l purchase! You won't regret it.

That wine red 68 hot rod by TRE you posted the link for used to be mine! I loved the way that motor felt in my little swb. I'm definitely biased, not having driven any other 911s before owning that beast. It definitely got squirelly on me a few times, but it was LOADS of fun. I wish I never sold her as I think about her every day.

If I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't change a thing (motor wise). I ran a 901 tranny as well, with no issues. I obviously wasn't doing donuts or launching out of first gear, but I definitely wasn't completely feathering it out of 1st either.

-Brian

what engine are you planning to install?

onestly I would be scred :)

I run a -66 with hi comp 2,2 E mfi and love it.
Todays tires are so much better then some 20 years agoo.
Also I got cloose ratio gearbox with 125 mph at 7k so thats why I picket the short stroke.
So just do it you want regret it.
Bo

OK, I will play the minority here. From your signature you have a '72 with a 3.6? Why not keep the SWB 912 with original (type) engine and have a fun beater to drive around town? It is nice to beat around in a car you cant get in much trouble in. 3.0s are really fun fast, not really stop light to stop light. Ok, rant off. :D

Would be way, way more fun to set up the 912 and go kick 911 butt in autocrosses. Last time out, my 912 beat nine 911s. It was the oldest car there, and I was the oldest driver. But then, I've only been autocrossing it since 1968...

Frank

if running the 901 with a 3.0 you'll need to get an adapter flywheel and PP/clutch from Kennedy or a PP kit from PMS. either way probably $500 plus. I'm in the process of doing this now. I have the 915/3.0 combo in my '67 but am changing back to a 901 four speed. you might be further ahead to just convert to a 915, it's not difficult or expensive.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/446991-915-trans-into-swb-step-step-conversion.html



.

Somehow I suspect that the any car you drove would have gone around very fast.

angela

I would go with the 911 engine. Remember the 912 is basically a retuned 911,so it was designed to have a 6 in it. The cost to rebuild a 912 is actually quite expensive. With modern tires you should not have any handling problems.