2,2 engine "powered"?

[neilbardsley]

Looks like you have a pretty good situation? You get more power lower down the rpm range. Looks like peak torque is in the 3.5 to 4.5k range? This means you will stress your engine less going as fast as the standard engine?

[Ashley James]

Anyone who’s ever driven a Honda S2000 will know what a PITA high revving engines are. My 987 was better and needed less revving than my chum’s 964, but the 718 is in another league, it has power everywhere and is so much more fun to drive, so I’d enjoy your 911 as is and not modify it.

[hot66]

High reving motors are where it’s at ... 964 motor feels like lazy torque compared to a 2.4S .... the 2.4S is way more fun... depends want you want from a car. ... remember these are toys rather than daily drivers

[911hillclimber]

Always horses for courses.
I'm in the middle of a Euro tour in the 2.9 litre 987 Boxster.
Italian driving at the moment is a real drag, almost wish I'd come in the mighty Skoda diesel instead.
Never driven in so much 50 Km/hour zones ever in relentless lorry traffic with nutty AUDI drivers and manic Italian white van men.
Thank goodness the Boxster is so flexible or this tour would be a real pain.
So many roads fast and urban are punctuated by roadabouts and speed cameras hidden to get-ya!

2800 Km so far, and about 1/2 way through. Will fly- drive next time as we have done in the years past many times.
Road driving is getting so boring now.

Stick with the 2.2 unless you need a 911S scream and rush, I'm with you Ashley!

[impmad2000]

I have a 2.2T that is running EFI on throttle bodies, with crank fire ignition. This is my rolling road plot. Stock motor remember.

IMG_0758.jpg

The car is fantastically drive-able, right through the Rev range.
You can probably get more from the stock motor with better feeling and ignition.
I have driven John Milburn’s 2.2 also and that too is fantastic. I love a 2.2.

[Max911]

Thanks to everyone of you Gentlemen for tour considerations:

@Ashley: you're right I'll continue to enjoy my 123hp powered that seems many more

@911hillclimber: I'm italian and I understand you perfectly: I wait late sunday evening to get out and drive or I go diretcly to
Slovenia(I'm close to the border...) where I have my "personal hidden empty Ring"

@impmad2000: great info! I was considering that my car in terms of ignition has probably margin for improvement! Ps your attachment is not so clear... Have you got any clearer or could you write hp and torque value?

Thanks!!


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

[impmad2000]

156bhp, 170Nm and rips round to the redline with no hesitation. Bob Watson’s rollers, a few years back.

[Lightweight_911]

I agree with James - high revving engines are much more fun - taking it to the redline before changing up a gear ...

These are 'fun' cars - I don't want a 'relaxed' drive - where's the fun in that ?!!

[Ashley James]

I agree with James - high revving engines are much more fun - taking it to the redline before changing up a gear ...

These are 'fun' cars - I don't want a 'relaxed' drive - where's the fun in that ?!!

As my chum says, high revs are all very well, but until you reach them, 2L diesel estate cars are disappearing into the distance.

Consider that the power band in my 718 extends from 1950 to 7,500 where in my 987 it was from 4,500 to 7000. One definitely is fun and the other is just hard work in comparison.

The great thing about the old T and E models were that they were excellent, fast, cross country transport while the S was always in the wrong gear, especially on unfamiliar roads.

[Lightweight_911]

Maybe this topic should have its own thread - as it often crops up - rather than hijacking the original poster's questions ?

However, while we're on the subject, I enjoy the 'hard work' in achieving rapid* progress in old cars with high-revving engines - that's an integral part of the attraction for me !

Unlike everything in today's world where the objective seems to be to remove any input/effort/involvement on the part of the owner ...


* of course even most small modern hatchbacks will equal of better the performance of old cars - but who's getting more enjoyment from the experience ?

.

[Ashley James]

Maybe this topic should have its own thread - as it often crops up - rather than hijacking the original poster's questions ?

However, while we're on the subject, I enjoy the 'hard work' in achieving rapid* progress in old cars with high-revving engines - that's an integral part of the attraction for me !

Unlike everything in today's world where the objective seems to be to remove any input/effort/involvement on the part of the owner ...


* of course even most small modern hatchbacks will equal of better the performance of old cars - but who's getting more enjoyment from the experience ?

.

I think you’re mistaken, the old 911s were special, hence their very high values now, but you mustn’t assume progress means "removing input/effort/involvement from the experience" because the opposite is true. Everything gets better all the time whether it be a phone, a car, a yacht or a plane.

But you can still love the old stuff as well, especially a nice standard 2.2T

[neilbardsley]

I have a 2.2T that is running EFI on throttle bodies, with crank fire ignition. This is my rolling road plot. Stock motor remember.

IMG_0758.jpg

The car is fantastically drive-able, right through the Rev range.
You can probably get more from the stock motor with better feeling and ignition.
I have driven John Milburn’s 2.2 also and that too is fantastic. I love a 2.2.

Not bad for a Targa Tim!!

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[911hillclimber]

Post deleted to avoid me drifting the op's post further.

[Lightweight_911]

.
As I hinted above, maybe one of the moderators (James or Tim) can move these 'off topic' posts into a thread of their own in the 'General' section ?

[911hillclimber]

Yep, agree.
Didn't start one as I don't think many are interested in the subject!
To avoid more thread drift I've deleted my ramblings.