![]() |
|
|
|
Registered
|
2.7 compression
Does 120-125 across all cylinders seem low for a 2.7 from a 77 911s?
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Newport Beach CA
Posts: 1,873
|
If they are consistent, it's a runner. But 140 is what I would consider as "good".
__________________
I will use a FAF when I am dying of thirst ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
76 911S Targa
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,150
|
Wayne Dempsey's book on rebuilding Porsche 911 engines is a good source on this topic. Look on pages 14-15 where he discusses this very topic. If the 2.7 is fitted with hotter cams, these readings may mean a good engine. If fitted with standard 2.7 cams, 120 is low. Also depends on how the test was done. The numbers are consistent which is good. Did you do the test yourself? Was the throttle wide open during the test? Did you add a tablespoon of motor oil to each cylinder and test again? Is this engine in Ontario or in Denver? In Denver, 125 psi is not bad. In Ontario, not so good.
__________________
76 911S, 2.7, Bursch Thermal Reactor Replacements, Smog Pump Removed, Magnecors, Silicone Valve Cover Gaskets, 11 Blade Fan, Carrera Oil Cooler, Turbo Tie Rods. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
Yes in Ontario. Described as stock. Compression results are from a bench test by an experienced mechanic completed about 6 years ago before the motor was placed in storage.
Leak down numbers were 8-12% with one cylinder at 20%. |
||
![]() |
|
Max Sluiter
|
If you assume 14.5psi atmospheric pressure then you should get 123psi gage with a 9.5:1 compression ratio and 100% VE. Your numbers sound good to me.
__________________
1971 911S, 2.7RS spec MFI engine, suspension mods, lightened Suspension by Rebel Racing, Serviced by TLG Auto, Brakes by PMB Performance |
||
![]() |
|
abit off center
|
You can change those numbers a lot by timing your cams different in a 2.7 too
__________________
______________________ Craig G2Performance Twinplug, head work, case savers, rockers arms, etc. |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
gearhead
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Loverland, CO
Posts: 23,539
|
Am I the only one concerned by the leakdown?
__________________
1974 914 Bumble Bee 2009 Outback XT 2008 Cayman S shop test Mule 1996 WRX V-limited 450/1000 |
||
![]() |
|
Wer bremst verliert
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 4,767
|
I wouldnt place much faith in those numbers. Thats a few big gaps, a lot of time to pass and variables. Pretty leaky too.
What are you looking at and what are you trying to achieve? Also here in Ontario....
__________________
2007 911 Turbo - Not a toy 1985 911 Cab - Wife's toy 1982 911 3.2 Indiash Rot Track Supercharged track toy 1978 911 3.0 Lichtbau toy "Gretchen" 1971 911 Targa S backroad toy |
||
![]() |
|
Functionista
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: CO
Posts: 7,717
|
My first 2.7 made 160-170 at 8500 ft. CIS with S cams. No idea on internals but it was a strong runner.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
It's a basically complete motor but with carbs. I'm looking for something to drop in and run.
|
||
![]() |
|
Project Addicted
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Shore. MD
Posts: 919
|
Here is a data point for you:
![]() This was done on a '77 - 2.7 with 100K miles in storage for about the same amount of time, maybe a bit longer. How was the test done?? All plugs out? Throttle wide open? strong battery? cranked until the needle would no longer rise? On a cold engine that has been sitting it's a bit if a crap shoot with these tests.
__________________
Jon 1966 912 1976 911 3.4 Backdate Project 1986 944 |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
Hi Jon, thanks for your post, if this motor showed those numbers it would be in the back of my truck already. It's because the comp seems low and the leakdown seems high that I'm concerned.
The guy who did the testing is a legendary porsche guy (heck he could find 6 year old detailed records in ten minutes) so my guess is his numbers are accurate. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: outta here
Posts: 53,220
|
Quote:
A '77 didn't have 9.5:1, though. It had 8.5:1. His numbers are low, even for that compression ratio. The leakdown numbers are worse. If the test was done properly, that motor could use a rebuild. JR |
||
![]() |
|