Newsgroups: rec.autos
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!noc.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!newsfeed.rice.edu!nb.rockwell.com!drexler!wade
From: wade@nb.rockwell.com (Wade Guthrie)
Subject: Re: Curious about the Porsche I drove
Message-ID: <wade.734834388@drexler>
Organization: Rockwell International
References: <wade.734807124@drexler> <1993Apr13.160535.20123@progress.com> <takaharu-130493180407@microlab2.med.upenn.edu> <1qhnrp$n3p@news.ysu.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 00:39:48 GMT
Lines: 43

ak954@yfn.ysu.edu (Albion H. Bowers) writes:


>In a previous article, wade@nb.rockwell.com (Wade Guthrie) says:

>>takaharu@mail.sas.upenn.edu (Taka Mizutani) writes:

>>>In article <1993Apr13.160535.20123@progress.com>, damelio@progress.COM
>>>(Stephen D'Amelio) wrote:

I wrote:
>This is consistent with the pre-'74 911.  The engine before that was a 2.2
>litre (or less, depending on how early you go), and got its power at high
>revs (starting slowly at about 3K, and jumping up at around 5K) with a 
>narrow band.  The '74 was a 3 litre and had a lot of smog equipment.  If
>you got much power at all, it'd be better distributed through the rev
>range.

>Bzzzt.  Wrong answer.  It really depends on whether you are talking model
>year or date of manufacture.  For instance, mine was a '67, but was
>manufactured in August of '66.  Prior to 1970 all 911s were 2.o liter.  For
>the '70 and '71 model years they were 2.2 liter.  for the 1972 and 1973
>model years they were 2.4 liter _EXCEPT_ for the '73 Carerra RS which was a
>2.7 liter.  The '74 and later years were easily identified by the new 5 mph
>bumpers.  Most models in the '74 year were 2.7 lietsr _EXCEPT_ the Carerra
>RSR which was a 3.0 liter (US Carerras from '74 were 2.7 liter models).  In
>'78 they went to 3.0 liter and there was only a single model, the SC (think
>of it as a cross between the S and the Carerra models).  note all the above
>are based on _MODEL_ year, not date of manufacture.  

I stand corrected.  This is all from memory, mind you  :-)

>As for the rev happy behavior, the earlier cars are even more prone to
>this.  The 2.4 liter cars used low compression engines, and suffered a bit
>in this regard.  The early 3.0 liter and 2.7 liter engines also got a good
>dose of smog gear as well.  The 2.0 and 2.2 liter engines were far and away
>the quickest revvers of the lot. 

Yeah, that's what I was trying to say.  No, REALLY!
-- 
Wade Guthrie                     | Trying to program on MS-DOS is like trying
wade@nb.rockwell.com             | to shave with a chain-saw.
Me be not speaking for the Rock. |
