2.0 and 2.2 durability vs 356/912 1.6 engine

[617collector]

Hello All,

Toying with the idea of a 912 since early 911 prices are over the top and I seem
to be able to find 912s in colors I like a lot easier. Is the 1.6 engine any hardier than
the early 911 engines? Might a well taken care of 1.6 not need to be rebuilt over
100,000 miles? ? Are they any less prone to leaks? I am not worried about
less power since none of these cars are fast by modern standards. But they don't
sound the same!

[gamin]

My first Porsche was a 1966 912. I drove it pretty hard until I sold it and bought the 70T that I still have. The new owner of the 912 lunched the engine within a year. I still have the 70T with original engine with no major problems. It does leak a bit of oil which I could care less about.

[gamin]

Some thoughts on the 912 experience. I don't think that I have ever had more fun driving any car as I had with that 912. Light, fun to toss around, not as tail heavy as the 911, simple and easy to work on. Just enough power to get you in a little trouble. Rugged too, but I won't go into details on why.

[Matt Monson]

The engines are pretty comparable in reliability. If you are asking because you are considering a 912 and then swapping it you will probably want to start with a car that is already orphaned of its engine. 912s are going up right in lock step with 911s and breaking a number matching car and welding in new mounts for the swap will hurt the value of the car.
Or are you considering a T versus 912 question? Be sure to drive both. I prefer how a SWB drives. That's why I bought my '67 912. I've also owned 2 Ts. My 912 actually drives better than my '68T.

[adam912]

Matt that's a funny thing, 911 owners are so accustomed to that wonderful, sweet sounding, responsive heavy lump hanging back there that it's a revelation for a 911 owner to driver the wimpy little 912.

The 616 engine does have its problems. I broke two cranks over the years (have had my '66 for 45 years) the main bearings are very widely spaced in a 616 block and the crank flexes as a result.

I finally gave up on stock 8 years ago and built a fantastic 2.2 liter Type 4 motor for my car. The car is still light and responsive, but now I have 50 percent more power, and more importantly, TORQUE! And the motor swap required no mods to the structure, so I could always go back. That motor cost me about the same amount as a new 616 crank!

Adam912.Out.

[mowog63]

I've had a 1965 and a 1966 912. I have a 1985 Carrera now.
I had the 66 for 12 years and drove it all the time.
A friend had a 1966 911 in the same color and condition in his shop for a little while and gave me the opportunity to drive it. The 911 definitely had "longer legs", but they were fairly similar cars in most respects. At that time, the asking price for that 911 was $45K - which we all thought was stupid money! Needless to say, they got the asking price and it is worth a lot more now.

My 912 engine was rebuilt by me and I "hopped" it up a bit with bigger P/Cs (1720cc), Scat forged crank, balanced everything within 1/2 gram, etc.

Never had any major issue with the engine or with the car for that matter, it was just solid and reliable.

As others have said, the prices are going north at the same trajectory, if you are buying a "cheap" 912, be careful.

[Daves911L]

No, the 912 engine is nowhere near the durability of the early 911 motor.

There reasons are plain and simple. First, the 356/912 engine was a 1930's design, eventually undergoing many changes and re-designs, winding up 50% larger displacement than when conceived. Due to the original design, there was not a lot that could be done to strengthen various components as the displacement and HP grew. Crank runs in 4 bearings, but effectively only 3. Similarly there were limits on cooling efficiency. The oil filtration system is the old-fashioned and primitive bypass type. Every 912 I've had has tended to run a little hotter than a 356, and I've long speculated that the shape of the 900 series cars inhibits the draw of cooling air to the 912 fan. In its 912 form, the engine is producing 90 hp, and its moving around a car that is larger and heavier then it was originally planned for. It is a stressed little engine for what it does.

On the other hand, the early 911 engine represented 25 year newer technology. It was built with possibly one of the most robust and bulletproof lower ends ever conceived. Crank runs in 8 main bearings, effectively 7, with a very short stroke). It has copious cooling air and oil system capacity. The 2.0/2.2 are at the beginnings of that engine series development, and the excess design capacity of the engine is obvious with modern versions easily capable of producing 2 to 3 times the hp. The original was planned with expansion and racing development in mind. In the early 911 form it produces about 130 hp pushing a car around that is only about 150 lbs heavier than a 912. It is extremely understressed for what it does.

Don't get me wrong . I like 912's. Have had several, along with many 911s and also 356's. But there is a very fundamental difference in the engine technology, and the 911 is much more durable than the 912. 100,000 miles is probably the upper limit for 912 durability, assuming a perfect condition when new (NOS specs), frequent oil changes, and no abuse. The reality is probably less, 40-60K miles with turned cranks, linebored cases, rebuilt rods, worn oil pumps, etc. There have however been examples of 356 1600 normals running much longer, demonstrating the effects of 60 hp in a much smaller and lighter car. Most of the early 2.0/2.2 911 engines greatly exceeded the 100,000 mile mark, and many went into the 200K-300K range. My own '68L went 246K miles before being taken apart. The top end was very thoroughly worn (P/C's/valves/guides) but still functioning. The lower end looked like the day it was built (even the bearing shells!). Its downfall was a plugged spray bar, leading to a flat cam lobe.

[sleepy911]

I have a 356 with a 912 motor. It has Shasta pistons, scat crank, norris cam and upgraded valve guides. I added a full flow external filter and cooler just for added durability. It has around 125 horses. Remember that 90 number is DIN so thats like 103 SAE. I would get in that car right now and drive a 1000 miles without blinking an eye. plus valve adjustments only take 15 minutes from start to cleaning my hands.