Has anyone had experience in fitting a porsche 6 cyl ( 2.2 or 2.7) into a replica speedster, anyone in australia ?? I noticed online that CCW in the US do it. Any concerns ?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I know people love the idea and seems to have been done more than once....concerns, a few like wrapping a paper cup over a monster engine. But I do get the "fun" aspect of it. I have an 1800 cc twin carb engine. It's enough for me....used to drive an E-Type, 4.2.
CCW, as far as I know is out of business. The only people that I know for sure are doing it is Intermeccanica http://intermeccanica.com/athi...r-vehicles/speedster I believe that they have a special frame and the car might even be a tad longer. There are a couple of us that have them. I'm sure that they have more clues than me.
This is an Intermeccanica 911-6 from many years ago. Things have only gotten better since then. The newest frames configurations can handle a 3.6 litre. The car weighs 2600 plus pounds and it feels nothing like an ordinal Speedster (I mean that in a good way). Just depends what you are looking for.
Another IM. 
Attachments
Images (2)
You're right, Marty, an IM6 doesn't really feel like an ordinary Speedster. With the 911 suspension that Henry uses, the car rides a heck of a lot better.
Here's a long quote from a while ago on this site:
"The first thing I noticed was the sound of the engine. It's pure adrenalin! I could listen to that engine and exhaust all day.
Next is the power. It comes on strong from idle. Forget the throttle, just let out the clutch and she just goes. Give her gas and your butt is pushed back in the seat as your ears are filled with music. You want torque, buckets of it at all rpm? This is the setup!
The shifting is smooth and clean, the pedals are setup nicely, and the leather seats........that leather is NICE! Its buttery soft!
What hits you later is the suspension. If any of you order IMs in the future, regardless of the engine, you have to get the Porsche suspension. The car handles like a race car, but at the same time soaks up every bump thrown at it. I drove the road to Whistler, and at the moment, that's the worst road on the planet. The car never bottomed out, and never passed a harsh bump to my backside. For me, that is probably the best feature of the car.
And the steering is light, precise and exact with no play. The car is a dream to drive. It's way too easy to go fast, and you don't feel the speed."
Obviously, Ron (Leonard) was pleased with his drive that day. Having driven two IM6s this past summer, I agree completely. It really is a different car.
Now, we can all drool...
Originally Posted by Tom Blankinship-2010 Beck-Dearborn, MI:
CCW, as far as I know is out of business. The only people that I know for sure are doing it is Intermeccanica http://intermeccanica.com/athi...r-vehicles/speedster I believe that they have a special frame and the car might even be a tad longer. There are a couple of us that have them. I'm sure that they have more clues than me.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe IM no longer uses the rear torsion tube and moves the transaxle forward (exactly how much I don't know- 3? 5"? not so much that it stresses cv's) to better shoehorn the 911 engine in. It has the added benefit of better front/rear weight balance. The firewall is even moved forward slightly to accommadate. I'm pretty sure they haven't lengthened the car. Al
Al, I think the car is a tad longer too, Henry disguises it well. Stan knows this answer.
So to summarize, it isn't practical to just drop a 6 cylinder engine into an existing speedster. Al lot of engineering and design needs to go in to beefing up suspension to carry extra weight and stop the beast. I noticed as Bob said the rear isn't as slopped but more "bulbulous" or rounded - you can't tell though.
I was under the impression, Marty, that the basic shell and the wheelbase were the same but by moving the engine/trans forward and running a little more extreme cv angles that everything worked. I could be wrong though. I know who to ask locally.
Originally Posted by ALB:
I was under the impression, Marty, that the basic shell and the wheelbase were the same but by moving the engine/trans forward and running a little more extreme cv angles that everything worked. I could be wrong though. I know who to ask locally.
We ran into this problem when Henry installed a new rear clip on my old pan based IM. The three inches difference means I had to use much thinner air filters and the shroud had to be modified because it hit the underside of the engine lid. One plus is I have lots of room between the back of the fan shroud and the firewall.
Originally Posted by ALB:
I was under the impression, Marty, that the basic shell and the wheelbase were the same but by moving the engine/trans forward and running a little more extreme cv angles that everything worked. I could be wrong though. I know who to ask locally.
For a four cylinder car, Henry does move the engine and trans forward three inches, for better weight distribution. For a six cylinder, he has to actually move the position of the rear wheel well back somewhat, as the 911 engine, transmission, and rear suspension takes up more room.
The six cylinder car also has a different frame design than the four cylinder. For an IM6, Henry starts with a frame that has differences, and then goes from there.
So, yes, the wheelbase on an IM6 is longer than for a four cylinder car, but the body is still the same length.
Not sure that I want a longer chassis, I had seen a couple online that looked relatively unassuming but it looks like it is a bit of a mission and perhaps not worth the trouble. Maybe just a modified four cylinder for that extra pep... Cough cough. Well I have my tickets booked to the good ole US of A, shopping list consists of one replica speedster. Gulp haha.