Spot the engine competition.

Herr Kuult · Post by **Herr Kuult** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:50 pm

G'day,

Can anyone tell me which spec engine this is:

I'd like to scale a few things off the drawing, so a prediction of capacity (and therefore bore and stroke) would be appreciated.

Alternatively, any information on general engine dimensions would be even more handy (width accross barrels, pitch between cams, etc.)

Finally, I presume that 911 engines were pretty much the same external size for quite a while (2.0 -> 3.2?), or did the crankcases and/or barrels get larger to cope with the larger displacements?

Cheers,
Paul.

Berny · Post by **Berny** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:37 pm

looks like a 3.2 regards Berny.

Mick Cliff · Post by **Mick Cliff** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:50 pm

Not a 3.2? - looks to have MFI. So might be 2.2/2.4/2.7 ??

impmad2000 · Post by **impmad2000** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:32 pm

looks like an early CIS motor to me; steel pipe inlet manifolds and the fuel metering head. 2.7 ?? or 2.4 ??
Tim

Ian Donkin · Post by **Ian Donkin** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 3:43 pm

I'm with Tim in so far as that's a CIS metering unit.

Putting my anorak on (haven't you all missed me?), 2.7's had the injectors built in to the manifolds, whilst the 2.4's had the injectors direct into the head. Therefore, this should be a 2.4T.

Hope this helps.
Ian

MdR · Post by **MdR** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:53 pm

Ian Donkin wrote:(haven't you all missed me?)

Who are you?

Gary71 · Post by **Gary71** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:04 pm

I thinks he's from Yorkshire, although i do remember him buying a round. so maybe that's someone else

davidppp · Post by **davidppp** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:10 pm

I agree with Ian...2.4..

The bore is very close to the valoves..looks like 84mm..

Kind
regards
David

bjmullan · Post by **bjmullan** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:56 pm

Ian who? .........

Herr Kuult · Post by **Herr Kuult** » Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:10 am

Cheers for that chaps. I was thinking it was a CIS motor, and from the font of the text at the top I was suspecting it to be older rather than later, so a 2.4T sounds good to me.

Therefore, subject to confirmation from the olympic committee, the unofficial winner is Ian, with a time of 2 hours 53 minutes. Personal best?

Thanks,
Paul.

Ian Donkin · Post by **Ian Donkin** » Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:21 am

And now I'm posting at odd times of the day too, or is that just normal times in other locations?

Thanks for your kind p!ss taking gents

.