Jump to content

SilverWT

Gruppe IB
  • Content Count

    3,177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

36 Excellent

About SilverWT

Find me at:

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Location
    London

Previous Fields

  • Current 911
    1984 3.2 - Lightened & Tweaked + 1983 SC - Stock-ish

Recent Profile Visitors

1,560 profile views
  1. Sessioned days usually have 2 or 3 groups going out alternately. You are allocated a group at sign up. 30 min sessions would indicate 2 groups, 20 min sessions 3 groups, but you should check. Sessions are fine. Mark
  2. Just renewed my insurance, decided to stay with Lockton. They keep the premium the same as last year at £612.40, which is for both 911s (SC agreed value £50K and £3.2 agreed value £46K). Mark
  3. Ian, just to let you know, it won't fit a 3.2. It has the small indentation on the back so good for an SC and earlier. A 3.2 version has a bigger indentation in the top half and a long indentation in the bottom half. Mark
  4. Ahh, can't do those dates. Clashes with Wedding anniversary celebrations
  5. Sorry, remembered wrong thread. Here it is - And here - Mark
  6. I'm talking about engine weight alone, out of car. The length of the crankcase is the same for all the engines, if the gbox is not moved/changed the engines sit in the same place in the car. If the 3.6 engine mount is used some of it protrudes about 25mm further back, but is not heavy enough to make any difference. If a 964 derived engine retains it's harmonic balancing lower pulley that protrudes about further 10mm back, but again, not significant. Mark
  7. Negligible in the same configuration. The same is true of a 3.6/3.8 if it is in the same configuration . I have weighed a 3.6 to prove it was not significantly heavier than a 3.2. Details are in my old 3.6 conversion thread. Mark
  8. +1 A Turbo MC will give you a firmer feel and less pedal travel, if that's what you want go for it. Boxster calipers have more piston surface area and so require more fluid per given movement. This gives a softer pedal feel and more pedal travel compared to std, regardless of the rear set up. Mark
  9. We never got around to doing some tests on my SC with CDI+ No1. I would be interested in a RR session, even more interested in a optimised tuning session on the RR. Mark
  10. If old Tbars change in any way they usually get brittle/stressed from overwork, corrosion, or if used on the wrong side (they are marked L & R) and then they snap. As they say, anything is possible, but old Tbars sagging would be unusual. Defective new bars that have been manufactured poorly, not been tempered properly can gradually sage, a few on here have had this problem with OEM replacements. Snagging bushes during indexing? Mark
  11. A 3.2 oil tank has the extra connection for the missing system next to where the filler neck joins the tank, IIRC. Looks like your oil tank has been replaced with an earlier spec one. Mark
  12. Next to where the filler neck joins the tank. It is a 3.2 thing. Mark
  13. This has been covered in detail before, have a search for the details. From memory, the stickers started around MY '83. So some late SCs have them and all 3.2s should have them. Mark
×
×
  • Create New...