Yes I may have secured a 2.7

[dann944]

As some of you will know i sold my 2.5 a few months back in search for a turbo, however, my plan didn't go that well and i ended up buying a rep-mobile, the other day i was offered a 2.7 so i'm going to have a look, my question is, what benefits do i get from the extra 0.2 capacity? midrange torque perhaps? better fuel economy?

or just the fact that i get the chance to own a 2.7?

Cheers Dann

 

[DavidL]

You get the chance to sell the head to one of us turbo boys if you break it!

 

[422hp944]

You wont notice any difference to the 2.5 in power terms but you do get to own a rarer car being it was a one year only model.

 

[Diver944]

ORIGINAL: DavidL

You get the chance to sell the head to one of us turbo boys if you break it!

The vultures are circling

It's not only the head that's in the demand, the bottom end only needs an S2 or 968 crank to make it into a 3 litre []

On paper there is very little difference in the numbers between a 2.5 and a 2.7 yet people (and contemporary magazine reviews) say that on the road it is a better, torquier drive. They were only built in 1989 so are pretty scarce, as a consequence not many people have driven both and are really qualified to judge the difference.

 

[Eldavo]

That's the 2nd time someone has mentioned this 2.7 - 3.0 conversion, is there anyone who knows a bit more about the feasibility and costs involved?

My 2.7 was registered September 1988 so there must have been a bit of overlap on the dates.

Top end wise I think there's only 2bhp in it but there is plenty of torque from low down. I've not driven a 2.5 but I have a friend who has driven one, and driven mine and he was suprised with how much more torque it had.

 

[Suffolk944]

2.7 has more torque couple extra BHP and have heard its slightly "smoother" engine. Down side is with its limited production run there are some 2.7 specific items (valves spring to mind) that are far more costly than those for a 2.5.

 

[944 man]

1989 cars were built between September 1988 and August 1989. I have a 2.7l and Im disappointed with it. Id hoped that itd be brisker than my old car and its a good deal slower: obviously as a result of the lightening...

 

[dann944]

So what sort of BHP / torque should it be kicking out?, as ive read conflicting reports.

 

[Diver944]

I have a 1989 owners manual and Porsches own figures state 165bhp and 225 Nm (which equates to 165 ftlb also), but for a true comparison you need to see the graphs compared with a 2.5litre. If it makes 165bhp/165ftlb 1000rpm before the 2.5 makes it's 163 then it should be noticeably faster.

 

[ChasR]

Here's a silly idea. If the 2.7 doesn't appeal to you, how about getting an S and putting in a Lux 'box into it? I think it will be significantly faster than a 2.5 then in almost all circumstances. In theory anyway.

 

[dann944]

The 2.7 is pretty much set in concrete now, i pick it up sunday! i was just asking what the difference is really, overtaking midrange is what i am after essentially, i like to drop a gear at 70 sometimes

 

[Mike_Pollock]

I'm wondering if my engine is a 2.7!
150-160 ft/lbs all the way from 2000 to 5500 on the dyno a few weeks ago.
Mike

 

[422hp944]

ORIGINAL: Diver944

I have a 1989 owners manual and Porsches own figures state 165bhp and 225 Nm (which equates to 165 ftlb also), but for a true comparison you need to see the graphs compared with a 2.5litre. If it makes 165bhp/165ftlb 1000rpm before the 2.5 makes it's 163 then it should be noticeably faster.

A good friend of mine owned a 2.7 lux some years back .... I had my 83 lux back then also. Needless to say we had the chance this one particular time on a nice stretch of road to 'see which was faster'!!! I can honestly say that neither of us gained or lost ground to one another......a neck and neck stalemate. In my view and in real world comparisons you would be hard pressed to notice any power difference. I'm editing this to mention I was also a good 5 stone heavier than my friend at the time

 

[944 man]

His car was more than a good five stones heavier than yours of course. My early 944 is markedly faster, but its been substantially lightened and it was a fair bit lighter to start with.

 

[ChasR]

ORIGINAL: A9XXC

I'm wondering if my engine is a 2.7!
150-160 ft/lbs all the way from 2000 to 5500 on the dyno a few weeks ago.
Mike

What does the engine code start with? As an example, my S2 engine is M44.1 42K xxxxx.