Engine replacement question

[phillipj]

My engine replacement drama for my 2000 C2 continues. As I have posted here before I'm doing a conversion from a 3.4 to a 3.6

I purchased a 2004 3.6 from a dismantler back east on the 9th of December. After many phone calls in the last weeks wondering where the hell my engine was.... :huh: Well it seems the trucking company lost it!!! :unsure: :angry: . Oh My.......

I cancelled the purchase and have gone on a search for another engine. I found an X-51 3.6 (locally in L.A.) with 20k miles for $9k. I have another lead on a standard low mile 3.6 which will probably be around $7k.

Question is.... Is the X-51 a significanly better engine than the base 3.6? (I'm well aware of the HP difference) Are the pistons and sleeves different? Is it more bullet-proof than the base 3.6?

Should spend the extra $ and go with the X-51 knowing that it will be more relaible in the long run than the base 3.6? I'm going to keep the car long term.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Phillipj

Edited January 7, 2009 by phillipj

[c70Pete]

My engine replacement drama for my 2000 C2 continues. As I have posted here before I'm doing a conversion from a 3.4 to a 3.6

I purchased a 2004 3.6 from a dismantler back east on the 9th of December. After many phone calls in the last weeks wondering where the hell my engine was.... :huh: Well it seems the trucking company lost it!!! :unsure: :angry: . Oh My.......

I cancelled the purchase and have gone on a search for another engine. I found an X-51 3.6 (locally in L.A.) with 20k miles for $9k. I have another lead on a standard low mile 3.6 which will probably be around $7k.

Question is.... Is the X-51 a significanly better engine than the base 3.6? (I'm well aware of the HP difference) Are the pistons and sleeves different? Is it more bullet-proof than the base 3.6?

Should spend the extra $ and go with the X-51 knowing that it will be more relaible in the long run than the base 3.6? I'm going to keep the car long term.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Phillipj

Hi Phillip,

I don't think the X51 will be more reliable than the 3.6... your pushing more HP out of the same block so there is more stress everywhere... if anything the standard 3.6 is a better long term motor in my opinion.

[phillipj]

My engine replacement drama for my 2000 C2 continues. As I have posted here before I'm doing a conversion from a 3.4 to a 3.6

I purchased a 2004 3.6 from a dismantler back east on the 9th of December. After many phone calls in the last weeks wondering where the hell my engine was.... :huh: Well it seems the trucking company lost it!!! :unsure: :angry: . Oh My.......

I cancelled the purchase and have gone on a search for another engine. I found an X-51 3.6 (locally in L.A.) with 20k miles for $9k. I have another lead on a standard low mile 3.6 which will probably be around $7k.

Question is.... Is the X-51 a significanly better engine than the base 3.6? (I'm well aware of the HP difference) Are the pistons and sleeves different? Is it more bullet-proof than the base 3.6?

Should spend the extra $ and go with the X-51 knowing that it will be more relaible in the long run than the base 3.6? I'm going to keep the car long term.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Phillipj

Hi Phillip,

I don't think the X51 will be more reliable than the 3.6... your pushing more HP out of the same block so there is more stress everywhere... if anything the standard 3.6 is a better long term motor in my opinion.

Thanks for the input Pete...

[phillipj]

Anybody else have some feedback?

[JeTexas]

Stock motors are built for longevity. Anytime you tweak the engine by stroking it, adding higher compression, etc., you increase the wear and reduce the reliability -- although it may not be enough to make a difference. But my guess for long-term reliability, you'd want to go stock. You'd also have an extra $2k in your pocket for repairs.

However, the X51 may be a lot more fun to drive and increase the wow and resale factor of your car. Seems like you'd be getting the benefits at a fraction of the cost.

I could argue this either way. Especially since car parts are kind of a crapshoot to start with. Pull two motors off the assembly line. One may run 200,000 miles. One may have some sort of catastrophic failure at 30,000. Who knows?

[c70Pete]

Stock motors are built for longevity. Anytime you tweak the engine by stroking it, adding higher compression, etc., you increase the wear and reduce the reliability -- although it may not be enough to make a difference. But my guess for long-term reliability, you'd want to go stock. You'd also have an extra $2k in your pocket for repairs.

However, the X51 may be a lot more fun to drive and increase the wow and resale factor of your car. Seems like you'd be getting the benefits at a fraction of the cost.

I could argue this either way. Especially since car parts are kind of a crapshoot to start with. Pull two motors off the assembly line. One may run 200,000 miles. One may have some sort of catastrophic failure at 30,000. Who knows?

you would definitely have more power with the X-51 on the track... where high rpm driving is what wins.... 5000 RPM and beyond that is.... but if your not tracking it makes no sense at all to buy that engine...

I've also heard a lot of x-51 motors breaking... don't know why but they do. probably cause of more stress on the motor becaue of all the performance parts...?

[phillipj]

I have run out of patience with this engine chase. I'm buying a new 3.6 from Porsche for $8500 and be done with it. At least I get a warranty and I know where the engine came from. Will install on the 19th and will have the most expensive 2000 C2 on the block :(

Thanks for all of your input. :cheers:

Phillip

[c70Pete]

I have run out of patience with this engine chase. I'm buying a new 3.6 from Porsche for $8500 and be done with it. At least I get a warranty and I know where the engine came from. Will install on the 19th and will have the most expensive 2000 C2 on the block :(

Thanks for all of your input. :cheers:

Phillip

Hi Phillip,

is $8,500 including your 3.4 core being returned to Porsche...?

I think your making the right move here... brand new motor... you don't want anybody's else's problems... cause you never really know what the "other" used motor had done to it... new with warranty is best... and the 3.6 will make your car really move!

Edited January 7, 2009 by c70Pete

[phillipj]

I have run out of patience with this engine chase. I'm buying a new 3.6 from Porsche for $8500 and be done with it. At least I get a warranty and I know where the engine came from. Will install on the 19th and will have the most expensive 2000 C2 on the block :(

Thanks for all of your input. :cheers:

Phillip

Hi Phillip,

is $8,500 including your 3.4 core being returned to Porsche...?

I think your making the right move here... brand new motor... you don't want anybody's else's problems... cause you never really know what the "other" used motor had done to it... new with warranty is best... and the 3.6 will make your car really move!

Pete,

Probably be more like $9k with the core return. Some dealers will let you return the 3.4 core in exchange for the 3.6 and some won't. Sunset unfortunetly won't...

[Dharn55]

Philip - Call Suncoast in FL. Their price for the 3.6 is also $8,500 and they will take the 3.4 core for a 3.6 engine. The only difference is you have to pay the core difference between the 3.4 and the 3.6 which is a few hundred dollars. Good Luck!!!!!!!!!!