911 engine conversion

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by stephen rodgers, Jun 14, 2013.

  1. Thanks Zebedee ,i think i need to look at capacity as this is seeming to be what most on here are pointing at .Also gearbox etc
     
  2. All I can say is I have a 2.ol engine coupled with an 091 gearbox (6 rib)
    and I can easily cruise 65-75 mph motorway and hills without changing
    down or revving the nuts out of it :thumbsup:
    Paul Weeding is a bit of a "Guru" on this set up ;)
     
    Paul Weeding and stephen rodgers like this.
  3. I think i have a 3 rib box ,is the difference really that much ? .I have had blisters on my feet from the amount of changing gears ive had to do on some trips.
    Is the 6 rib a direct replacement ? and are they easy to get .Wouldnt do it till end of September but if doing this gearbox change and increasing capacity [stroker] makes
    the difference then happy me.
     
  4. rickyrooo1

    rickyrooo1 Hanging round like a bad smell

    6 rib are just stronger i belive? and are as rare as rocking horse poo..... well not quite but they are not cheap, the scooby boys like them, send a message to Paul Weeding he'll build youa nice strong engine - drop the porker idea unless you win the lotto.
     
    stephen rodgers likes this.
  5. Thanks for the tag :thumbsup:

    I had been keeping an eye on this thread!! ;)

    Main question you want to ask yourself is, how do I want my van to drive? If you want to pootle, stay stock... a bit more grunt, then a mild tune on a 2l with matching box is the way to go!!

    Anything more than that, and then it's your own personal call!! :)

    But if you are wanting to go porsche, then you need to put the porsche box in too!! Mainly as you'll be thrashing the engine on the larger A roads and motorways!!

    I've got a 2270cc type 4 in my van (under the workbench at the mo) and I'm part way through putting in a Porsche 911 915 box in, as the engine was too big for the 2l box, and they weren't working well together!!

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    bootsam and stephen rodgers like this.
  6. Thanks for advise.
    I have a CA code 1700 type 4 with a cb mild cam and twin 40s , Thunderbird full exhaust . I am not looking at doing 100 mph everywhere .
    Just started this thread to look into the pros and cons of a possible 911 conversion and costs that go with it and just from the reaction its a massive cost.
    It seems to run out of gears very quick , --just being able to pull away nicely and not have to change all the time would be great and to have enough power
    to enjoy the drive more.I love the van and its not a case of just get a T4 or T5 .
    I am going to look into this more Paul and when ready will contact you to see into getting a rebuild / gearbox upgrade.
    Its now likely that upping the capacity and power on this engine would be a waste if i kept the box as it is .
    Its a minefield ,thanks god for this site.
     
    madpad and Paul Weeding like this.
  7. The 1700 and 1800 type 4 engines both use the 66mm crank. The 2.0 uses a 71mm throw crank which explains where the extra torque of the engine comes from.
    Its a shame the type 4 stroker cranks cost way more than the type 1 versions. They are 800 euro for an 80m stroker crank from B.A.S in Germany. :(

    Paul is the 901 porsche 'box easier to fit than the 915 due to the size?
     
  8. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    Not wishing to start a confrontation - but this gets right on my tits.

    It's not a traction engine that can't be modified, or has significant history in terms of industry so don't touch it - it's a machine that can be improved so that you can use it more often or in a more flexible way, of which there are millions.

    I still fail to understand why people are given only 2 options it seems - buy an antique (and ignore the fact that pretty much every other one on the road has been modified be it a new stereo or suspension, wheels lighting etc) or buy a T5.

    I absolutely do not agree that there is any 'point' to owning one other than what strangers are trying to impose on you.

    Personally - I want something that 'I' choose what speed it travels at.
     
    sjhjoinery, skirk and Brum like this.
  9. Paul Weeding now youre just showing off. I hate you. :) btw what part of the borders you in. I'm from Newtongrange but i pop to Auldgirth nr Dumfries often to see my Auntie. Just for future reference like....

    I live on a hill and Percy just makes it in 2nd. He makes it tho.
     
    stephen rodgers likes this.
  10. I'm running a 2.1 type 4 built by Paul Weeding. Still going great Paul :)

    Lots of torque and power but I definitely need to look at upgrading the gearbox next. It was fine with the 1700 engine but now first is pretty much pointless as i need to change up immediately and the engine has loads more than top can handle. A high quality problem :)

    In Cornwall camping right now and it's flown up some serious hills on the way down here. Fully loaded interior as usual :cool:

    Not sure exactly what spec box to go for but next project for the winter... Definitely needs to be factored into the upgrades.
     
    paulcalf likes this.
  11. Baysearcher

    Baysearcher [secret moderator]

    My thoughts exactly!
     

  12. I'm just near Kelso dude :)


    Glad to hear it dude :D

    Porsche 901 might be a good option for you :thumbsup:
     
  13. 091 are not just stronger. Yes, they have a beefier diff and the extra ribs add strength to the case, but they also have a higher final drive, meaning lower revs at motorway speed.
     
  14. Zed

    Zed Gradually getting grumpier

    Well, I have a 1955cc stroker T1 engine on the earliest of prototype bay boxes and it's just fine and dandy. I don't feel the need to change the gearbox as the higher it revs the smoother and quieter it sounds and of course the acceleration is better. It's supposed to be 90-100HP though I've never tested that. I can overtake stuff without a run-up, it doesn't slow down up hills, lots of low rev grunt means not having to keep changing down.

    But for many years I had a completely std T4 1700 and I blurry loved it - the power's at the high end of the rev range so the nearer you got to 60 in 3rd (my fav gear), the faster it seemed to accelerate and it sounded great doing it. Unlike my mates in their 2l jobbies, I sailed up the motorway hills - if the speed was 65 or over it kept going while theirs slowed down.

    I'm with others up there - modifying it to suit modern traffic speeds isn't a bad thing to do. Personally I stayed air-cooled, but that's just my preference - If I'd gone scooby and it subsequently went wrong, I wouldn't want to try and fix it.
     
    stephen rodgers likes this.

  15. I'm not against modifying or upgrading anything ,if you look @ my van in readers rides you will see my bus if far from standard . A T5 was an option for reliable power at probably less cost than a 911 lump and paying someone to fit it . It's your bus your moolagh your choice
     
  16. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    No issue with that as a reply - just think that people can have their bay shaped cake and eat it, without having to go buy a builders van!

    Interesting point about the cost comparison - never considered that, but then I went Japanese with my engine.
     
  17. Well put ,thanks moons
     
  18. Zed

    Zed Gradually getting grumpier

    I like cake. :thumbsup: And I'd like a go in a 200hp camper. :)
     
  19. Mine'll be in that ballpark once I've done the engine mods!! :cool:
     
    zed, stephen rodgers and sjhjoinery like this.

Share This Page