|
|
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 9,104
|
Trying to make a decision
OK Guys:
I don't ask too many questions, since I don't have the time I would like to look at this BBS, which I like and appreciate very much. I've got a stock "69 911E and a '72 911E. I also have engine, brake and suspension upgrades for them both, which I plan to install. I want to keep the '69 close to stock, so it can be returned to stock later on. The '69 runs well, but has a low cylinder, so I'm thinking of changing the motor and taking the stock motor out and storing it. Basically, I'm thinking of putting my 2.7L (JEs, E cams, Webers, etc. that I was going to install in the '72) with a '74 915 trans into the '69 and getting rid of the '72 and having just one car (I currently have 3). I have heard the transmission tunnel on the older cars needs to be slightly modified to accept the 915. Question is - What kind of modification and how much? I don't want to change it too much. What about CV joints, swing arms, etc. Also, would the 901 transmission be fine to use with the 2.7L (it has been balanced with the 225mm lightweight pressure plate & they are bolted up together right now) THANX
__________________
Marv Evans '69 911E |
||
10-27-2002, 07:09 AM
|
|
|
Bandwidth AbUser
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 29,522
|
So Marv, what's the deal with the 72E? You know I'm looking for one? If you're planning on getting rid of it and it lines up with what I'm looking for, let's talk about it.
__________________
Jim R. |
||
|
10-27-2002, 07:44 AM
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Vancouver,Wa.
Posts: 4,457
|
The 901 in my car (behind
 a hot rod 2.7L) is holding up just fine. It leads a hard life, tho, with no succor in sight.In keeping with the KISS axiom, I'd stick with the 901.
__________________
JPIII Early Boxster Last edited by J P Stein; 10-27-2002 at 10:47 AM.. |
||
|
10-27-2002, 10:41 AM
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 9,104
|
Sorry Jim:
My '72 is in California, totally disassembled and has some rust repairs that need to be done. I don't think it's what you are looking for.
__________________
Marv Evans '69 911E |
||
|
10-27-2002, 01:40 PM
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: TX USA
Posts: 9,804
|
Marv,
Actually, I believe the 915 route would be easier, as a bit of sledge-hammer 'clearancing' for the forward nose hump is all of the 'modifying' needed to fit the 915 in. Use the 915 axles and CV's and they bolt up perfectly to your four-bolt axle flanges! Otherwise, you would have to deal with changing the flywheel on the 2.7!
__________________
Warren Hall, Jr. 1973 911S Targa ... 'Annie' 1968 340S Barracuda ... 'Rolling Thunder' |
||
|
10-27-2002, 02:03 PM
|
|
|
Bandwidth AbUser
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 29,522
|
Your 72E being in CA is no problem, but you're right, it being disassembled and needing rust repairs doesn't quite fit my buying criteria. Oh well, I'll keep looking. Good luck on your project.
__________________
Jim R. |
||
|
10-27-2002, 03:34 PM
|
|
|
