Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
914World.com _ 914World Garage _ Horsepower for all the (common) Porsche engine options
Posted by: Tdskip Jul 21 2019, 07:24 AM
Seems like a useful thing to have summarized somewhere. While you can build just about auybof these to be a monster compared to stock, how about if we list stock values for now as one reference point?
1.7 flat 4 - 79
1.8 flat 4 - 84
2.0 flat 4 - 99
2.0 flat 6 - 109
2.2 flat 6 -
2.4 flat 6 -
2.7 flat 6 - 150-200
3.0 flat 6 -
3.2 flat 6 - 213-240
3.6 flat 6 - 275-300
Look like the right list?
Posted by: mepstein Jul 21 2019, 08:05 AM
Sort of. Engine power varied by year and spec. For example, a 914-6 was about 110hp but a 69-911S was about 180-190hp. Both 2.0 engines. Even US vs ROW could vary 10-20 hp.
Posted by: Big Len Jul 21 2019, 09:51 AM
https://www.porsche.com/usa/accessoriesandservices/classic/models/914/914/
Posted by: Cairo94507 Jul 21 2019, 10:03 AM
My '87 3.2 was 217 stock I believe. I believe with the 964 cams, Steve Wong chip and Ben's full exhaust I should be at 240. At least that is what I am told. 
Posted by: Larmo63 Jul 21 2019, 10:35 AM
I'd say my 2.4 S spec 7R cased, Solex cam'd, Weber carb'd, Clewett ignition'd engine is turning about 175 HP?
MSDS headers, GT muffler, ported heads with big valves. My car scoots.
I could be wrong +/- a bit, but that's how it feels.
It's guessing game until you dyno your car's motor.
Show and tell:
Posted by: Steve Jul 21 2019, 10:41 AM
My stock euro 3.2 is supposed to put out 231 hp with stock exhaust and catalytic converter. My car has no cat, but also has Steve Wong chip, MB heat exchangers and muffler. So at least 240 hp.
Posted by: bbrock Jul 21 2019, 10:46 AM
Sort of. Engine power varied by year and spec. For example, a 914-6 was about 110hp but a 69-911S was about 180-190hp. Both 2.0 engines. Even US vs ROW could vary 10-20 hp.
Plus, later model cars had more emission controls that reduced hp a bit.Posted by: GeorgeRud Jul 21 2019, 11:28 AM
My 2.7 Henry Schmidt built engine (RS P/C, S cams, Weber’s) dyno’d at 199.5 at the rear wheels. The torque advantages of the larger engines are nice however.
Posted by: jfort Jul 21 2019, 01:22 PM
My 2.7 by Jay Kjoller dyno’d at 197 at the wheels. JE Pistons, Solex cam, DFI twin spark, PMO’s. The sound and the power are intoxicating
Posted by: Tdskip Jul 21 2019, 02:18 PM
Those sound like especially healthy 2.7 builds gentlemen.
Posted by: GeorgeRud Jul 21 2019, 03:16 PM
It’s a very nice choice for a -6 conversion without the DME complications of the 3.2 or 3.6. A carbed 3.0 SC motor would be great as well once you replace the pistons and cams with ones that are not so limiting (and also replace any Dilivar studs).
Posted by: ConeDodger Jul 21 2019, 03:38 PM
Supposed to be 207HP US Spec 3.2. Marty’s headers, no Cat, K&N, I’d guess 225HP?
Attached image(s)
Posted by: SirAndy Jul 21 2019, 04:14 PM
Stock 3.6L aircooled, naturally aspirated, HP range from 272 - 285
With headers, Steve Wong chip and some other minor improvements you can get in the 305 range.
Posted by: mepstein Jul 21 2019, 04:51 PM
My '87 3.2 was 217 stock I believe. I believe with the 964 cams, Steve Wong chip and Ben's full exhaust I should be at 240. At least that is what I am told.
Mine is similar. 964 cams, euro compression, slightly stiffer springs to rev to 7K and a custom SW chip to run on 93 was dynoed at 244 by the PO.
Next engine will be 3.4 with Sal's custom MAF, injectors and chip to hopefully get to 280. A early 915 trans with 7:31 ring and pinion for a quick getaway.
Posted by: Tdskip Jul 21 2019, 05:34 PM
Those cars must MOVE.
How about 2.2, 2.4 and 3.0?
I think 2.2 was around 125, and 2.4 about 140? 3.0 around 175-220?
Posted by: raynekat Jul 21 2019, 06:58 PM
1.7 flat 4 - 79
1.8 flat 4 - 84
2.0 flat 4 - 99
2.0 flat 6 - 109
2.2 flat 6 - 130, 155, 180 (T, E and S)
2.4 flat 6 - 140, 165, 190 (T, E and S)
2.7 flat 6 - 150-200 210, 230-245 2.7MFI 8.5:1 and 2.7MFI hi comp
3.0 flat 6 - 180 - 204hp
3.2 flat 6 - 213-240
3.6 flat 6 - 275-300
All of the hp's above can be improved upon if you stray away from factory setups/specs.
I'm getting 230hp out of a factory spec 2.7MFI with a great space cam and 310hp out of a 3.6Vram motor (ECU'd, sport cams) on a couple of my cars.
Posted by: mb911 Jul 21 2019, 07:01 PM
Larmo is likely a little light on hp numbers for his 2.4 setup and is exactly the same as mine.. Henry from supertec expected mine to be about 200.. And that is for a 2.4..
Posted by: Larmo63 Jul 21 2019, 07:23 PM
Larmo is likely a little light on hp numbers for his 2.4 setup and is exactly the same as mine.. Henry from supertec expected mine to be about 200.. And that is for a 2.4..
I'm a grow-er.................not a show-er.
Posted by: Tdskip Jul 22 2019, 08:15 AM
Great discussion gentlemen, good to have this all in one place.
I think the next interesting thing to collectively have a chat about is the crossover point on horsepower versus cost building out a more powerful flat four versus swapping in a six.
I know that’s apples versus oranges and how the car feels, but I think it would still be useful.
For example, total cost to build 130 hp flat for versus total cost to get that same horsepower with a flat six.
Posted by: Marv's3.6six Jul 22 2019, 08:22 AM
My engine builder estimated HP for my 3.6 @ 320-325 engine is a 95 993 ROW engine (Canada) Cylinder heads massaged & milled to increase compression 1/2 point to 11.7 to 1. WebCam RS cams for 993 with hydraulic lifters. Fuel injectors blueprinted & match flowed. Patrick Motorsports intake & filter. MSDS 1 3/4" headers. B&B loud ass muffler. Steve Wong custom 993 chip. 7000 rpm red line. 11 lb flywheel. Yada yada.
Posted by: IronHillRestorations Jul 22 2019, 09:45 AM
Porsche factory HP numbers were minimum output, so an engine could make more but not less
Posted by: mepstein Jul 22 2019, 10:13 AM
Great discussion gentlemen, good to have this all in one place.
I think the next interesting thing to collectively have a chat about is the crossover point on horsepower versus cost building out a more powerful flat four versus swapping in a six.
I know that’s apples versus oranges and how the car feels, but I think it would still be useful.
For example, total cost to build 130 hp flat for versus total cost to get that same horsepower with a flat six.
Cost is a difficult way to compare. You can spend 10k on rebuilding a six and not add any hp. You can also spend $10k just to fit the six into the car. The big difference between the 4 and six is it’s possible to buy a stock six from 110-275hp. A stock 4 is maxed hp at the very lowest stock 6.
The stock 3.2 I just purchased is about 220. That’s a super exotic build for a 4 and would cost triple the purchase price of my 3.2.
So it’s tough to talk in absolutes.
Posted by: Tdskip Jul 22 2019, 12:34 PM
Good points, so it sounds like there is BALLPARK a cut over point around a 2.2 or 2.4 for what the six gives you vs when you need to start to built a really expensive 4 to keep up?
Posted by: mepstein Jul 22 2019, 12:41 PM
Good points, so it sounds like there is BALLPARK a cut over point around a 2.2 or 2.4 for what the six gives you vs when you need to start to built a really expensive 4 to keep up?
I think that makes sense. I'm not trying to say a six is better than a 4 or vise versa but I think the six has the advantage of "off the rack", stock horsepower compared to a 4 with the disadvantage, unless you already have a 914-6, of needing to do a conversion.
Posted by: burton73 Jul 22 2019, 02:08 PM
It’s a very nice choice for a -6 conversion without the DME complications of the 3.2 or 3.6. A carbed 3.0 SC motor would be great as well once you replace the pistons and cams with ones that are not so limiting (and also replace any Dilivar studs).
Some of the guys have asked what is in this Engine. Scott Kinder built it for me and this is what it has inside. 1978 3.0 SC big-port base (case, crank, rods, oil pump) Custom JE Pistons, replated Nikasil cylinders, 9.8:1 New valves, 38/37 ports (stock) in 3.2 heads ARP head studs & rod bolts GE40 "Mod-S" cams . PMO 46 carbs & manifolds J WE custom curve on SC distributor to match the carbs/cams - 930 tensioners, idler arms--all rebuilt , Otherwise just everything new or refinished, redone, rebuilt
At this point we can only guess. 230-250? We will dyno it tater when it gets it finished tune at Sea level. It is at Sandy UT with E @ PMB
https://vimeo.com/337332800
Bob B
Posted by: Rand Jul 22 2019, 02:10 PM
It's a very slippery slope. There are 4 cylinder engines making 1000hp. Not TIVs mind you. More cylinders are going to provide longer longevity in general. But times change and technology does faster.
Posted by: mepstein Jul 22 2019, 02:19 PM
It's a very slippery slope. There are 4 cylinder engines making 1000hp. Not TIVs mind you. More cylinders are going to provide longer longevity in general. But times change and technology does faster.
My boss bought a machine shop and said the guys there are making 900hp from the Suby turbo fours.
The 962 at our shop uses an air cooled 3.0 with a single turbo to get 780hp. Mid 80’s tech.
Posted by: Tdskip Jul 22 2019, 02:32 PM
Good discussion, and man you guys have some awesome cars.
@http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showuser=10825 - that was the trade off I was trying to get to, but as you and others point out it isn’t an apples v apples thing.
Posted by: 914_teener Jul 22 2019, 03:34 PM
Great discussion gentlemen, good to have this all in one place.
I think the next interesting thing to collectively have a chat about is the crossover point on horsepower versus cost building out a more powerful flat four versus swapping in a six.
I know that’s apples versus oranges and how the car feels, but I think it would still be useful.
For example, total cost to build 130 hp flat for versus total cost to get that same horsepower with a flat six.
Total power at the crank? Also the converted power is torque.
Torque is what you feel.
Posted by: thelogo Jul 22 2019, 04:03 PM
were they thinkingPosted by: Larmo63 Jul 22 2019, 05:04 PM
Tom, I'll take you for a ride in my /6.
You'll want a six.
Believe me.
Posted by: 914_teener Jul 22 2019, 05:21 PM
It's just not worth it to build a four for real torque or horsepower unless you are keeping it stock or near stock. A 2056 is probably your best bet. Done right 15k. There is really is no comparison to a six.
Like Larwrence said....ride in one or drive in one...end of discussion.
Posted by: mb911 Jul 22 2019, 07:26 PM
Oh also want to point this out as some people get very confused from inaccurate advertising. K&N air filters add zero hp.. Don't buy into the hype it's complete b.s... I am not arm chair QB ing here this is from real data in my former life as an experimental aircraft engine builder.
Posted by: Tdskip Jul 22 2019, 07:30 PM
Thanks for all the discussion. I’m definitely putting the 3.2 in. I’ve just been trying to educate myself on other engine options as well ( part of figuring out what to do with the spare 2.7 L ) and so forth and wished there was one place that had everything together, so I thought I’d start the thread.
Posted by: Coondog Jul 22 2019, 07:57 PM
Just do it.....but don’t forget about your Trans and Brakes. 
Posted by: VaccaRabite Jul 23 2019, 08:11 AM
It's a very slippery slope. There are 4 cylinder engines making 1000hp. Not TIVs mind you. More cylinders are going to provide longer longevity in general. But times change and technology does faster.
My boss bought a machine shop and said the guys there are making 900hp from the Suby turbo fours.
Usually for just long enough for the dyno run before the engines scatter.
The BS my Suby brethren
do to their engines (spending money they don't have on a very powerful and equally short lived motor) and then complaining bitterly about horrible Subaru reliability... 
Ring-land failure. Premature clutch failure. Asshats. "How do you have a WRX with over 100K miles and still on the original clutch? Mine failed in 20K miles..." There are not enough eyerolls.Zach
Posted by: mepstein Jul 23 2019, 08:28 AM
It's a very slippery slope. There are 4 cylinder engines making 1000hp. Not TIVs mind you. More cylinders are going to provide longer longevity in general. But times change and technology does faster.
My boss bought a machine shop and said the guys there are making 900hp from the Suby turbo fours.
Usually for just long enough for the dyno run before the engines scatter.
The BS my Suby brethren
do to their engines (spending money they don't have on a very powerful and equally short lived motor) and then complaining bitterly about horrible Subaru reliability... Ring-land failure. Premature clutch failure. Asshats. "How do you have a WRX with over 100K miles and still on the original clutch? Mine failed in 20K miles..." There are not enough eyerolls.Zach
They are race engines. The good thing is I now have machine shop availability at reasonable prices.
Posted by: defianty Jul 23 2019, 08:43 AM
Thanks for all the discussion. I’m definitely putting the 3.2 in. I’ve just been trying to educate myself on other engine options as well ( part of figuring out what to do with the spare 2.7 L ) and so forth and wished there was one place that had everything together, so I thought I’d start the thread.
To educate myself on six cylinder engines I bought this book.
https://www.amazon.com/Porsche-911-Red-Book-Specifications/dp/B015QNJUCE
It lists every engines spec, I've referred to it so many times my copy is starting to get a bit tired. A great reference book.
Posted by: 914Toy Jul 23 2019, 08:51 AM
Tom, I'll take you for a ride in my /6.
You'll want a six.
Believe me.
Posted by: 76-914 Jul 23 2019, 09:32 AM
Posted by: ValcoOscar Jul 23 2019, 10:03 AM
Okay guys....
Who has access to a Dyno here in SoCal?
Let's see some actual (rear wheel) figures.
I'm curious about my cars.
HP is great however I measure my 914 driving experience in 
Oscar
Posted by: 914_teener Jul 23 2019, 10:20 AM
THAT is a copy.
This is a Porsche flat six - 320 HP and 295 ft lbs of torque. 3.4 liters of pure fun.
Typical World thread....off the rails.
Posted by: campbellcj Jul 23 2019, 10:51 AM
Tom, I'll take you for a ride in my /6.
You'll want a six.
Believe me.
Pretty much guaranteed.
Basically what happened to me is back when I first got into the track stuff with a stock 73 2.0/4, nearly 20 years ago now, I was assigned a couple of POC instructors with well-prepped (but not extremely modded) factory -6's and those ride-alongs at Streets of Willow were the proverbial first couple hits of crack...
(Slightly OT) One of the culprits back in 2001 - Martin Jansen's six, a neighbor from Agoura Hills, now retired from racing. Last I spoke with him, he still had the car but had retired from racing.
My current engine dynos at 230-235hp at the wheels @ 7500rpm, a tick under 200lbs-ft torque; 7R case 2.7 with significant power and reliability mods. Deafening and chugs fuel like there's no tomorrow. Love it.
I would truly love something like an 3.0 RSR w/ MFI in this car, but at probably 50-100% more $$$ vs. the already spendy setup in there now...not happening.
Posted by: thelogo Jul 23 2019, 11:16 AM
Okay guys....
Who has access to a Dyno here in SoCal?
Let's see some actual (rear wheel) figures.
I'm curious about my cars.
HP is great however I measure my 914 driving experience in
Oscar
Lets call 120 ( big /4)
Posted by: ConeDodger Jul 23 2019, 11:49 AM
Oh also want to point this out as some people get very confused from inaccurate advertising. K&N air filters add zero hp.. Don't buy into the hype it's complete b.s... I am not arm chair QB ing here this is from real data in my former life as an experimental aircraft engine builder.
If you’re talking about my post, I’m simply listing the modifications. I don’t mean to imply that the K&N increased HP. But a blanket statement that it doesn’t is incorrect as well. I’ve seen testing where it improved and also testing where it hurt HP. It depends on the car.
Posted by: mb911 Jul 23 2019, 01:50 PM
Rob,
I will respectfully disagree.. I did this as part of factory dyno tests and back to back it didn't help whatsoever.. It is pure marketing.. I was the one actually doing the testing along with factory engineers. The only advantage was it was reusable. We actually proved that it increased wear to the engine much faster..
Posted by: 914_teener Jul 23 2019, 02:46 PM
Rob,
I will respectfully disagree.. I did this as part of factory dyno tests and back to back it didn't help whatsoever.. It is pure marketing.. I was the one actually doing the testing along with factory engineers. The only advantage was it was reusable. We actually proved that it increased wear to the engine much faster..
Filters are all about filtration/Flow in CFM.
From what I read on them they flow no better than any other filter and their filtration is crap.
Posted by: mb911 Jul 23 2019, 03:52 PM
Rob,
I will respectfully disagree.. I did this as part of factory dyno tests and back to back it didn't help whatsoever.. It is pure marketing.. I was the one actually doing the testing along with factory engineers. The only advantage was it was reusable. We actually proved that it increased wear to the engine much faster..
Filters are all about filtration/Flow in CFM.
From what I read on them they flow no better than any other filter and their filtration is crap.
Sorry for hi jacking this everyone.. It was a nervous tick of mine.. Back to regular scheduled broadcast..
Posted by: mepstein Jul 23 2019, 03:59 PM
Rob,
I will respectfully disagree.. I did this as part of factory dyno tests and back to back it didn't help whatsoever.. It is pure marketing.. I was the one actually doing the testing along with factory engineers. The only advantage was it was reusable. We actually proved that it increased wear to the engine much faster..
Filters are all about filtration/Flow in CFM.
From what I read on them they flow no better than any other filter and their filtration is crap.
From what I understand, it’s all about finding the choke points on the engine. It’s usually not the air filter. I know that on a 3.2, it’s proven the be the AFM/flapper box.
Posted by: worn Jul 23 2019, 05:18 PM
Seems like a useful thing to have summarized somewhere. While you can build just about auybof these to be a monster compared to stock, how about if we list stock values for now as one reference point?
1.7 flat 4 - 79
1.8 flat 4 - 84
2.0 flat 4 - 99
2.0 flat 6 - 109
2.2 flat 6 -
2.4 flat 6 -
2.7 flat 6 - 150-200
3.0 flat 6 -
3.2 flat 6 - 213-240
3.6 flat 6 - 275-300
Look like the right list?
I am not exactly sure, but lately I have been driving the six rather than the four. Such fun! Headers. Thinking about changing out the stock chip.
Posted by: 76-914 Jul 23 2019, 05:20 PM
THAT is a copy.
This is a Porsche flat six - 320 HP and 295 ft lbs of torque. 3.4 liters of pure fun.
Typical World thread....off the rails.
Sure does look like a copy. Until you compare costs.
Posted by: 914_teener Jul 23 2019, 06:26 PM
THAT is a copy.
This is a Porsche flat six - 320 HP and 295 ft lbs of torque. 3.4 liters of pure fun.
Typical World thread....off the rails.
Sure does look like a copy. Until you compare costs.
Errrr......
Yes this is true. The dreaded six letter tax. Used one.s 6-7 k.. Rebuilt 20k. On topic though......air cooled 2056 15jk.
Posted by: Larmo63 Jul 23 2019, 10:31 PM
"Errrr......
Yes this is true. The dreaded six letter tax."
P - O - R - S - C - H - E has seven letters.
Posted by: campbellcj Jul 24 2019, 06:08 AM
Okay guys....
Who has access to a Dyno here in SoCal?
Let's see some actual (rear wheel) figures.
I'm curious about my cars.
HP is great however I measure my 914 driving experience in
Oscar
@Oscar - I am aware of two 'porsche friendly' dynos around LA -- Ed Pink has one in the SF Valley (2WD) and World Motorsports in Torrance has an incredible fully-enclosed AWD dyno with forced-air cooling... Also POC has a mobile dyno (2WD) at many events ie Willow Springs for classification purposes; usually $60 for 3 pulls.
I was really pleased that my current 2.7 dynoed almost identically in 2014 and 2017, and still seems equally strong now... My prior build only survived about 1.5 yrs of track abuse.
Posted by: 914_teener Jul 24 2019, 08:18 AM
"Errrr......
Yes this is true. The dreaded six letter tax."
P - O - R - S - C - H - E has seven letters.
Long day yesterday....yep. Wrong tax.
Thank you sir!
Posted by: horizontally-opposed Jul 24 2019, 10:45 AM
Seems like a useful thing to have summarized somewhere. While you can build just about auybof these to be a monster compared to stock, how about if we list stock values for now as one reference point?
1.7 flat 4 - 79
1.8 flat 4 - 84
2.0 flat 4 - 99
2.0 flat 6 - 110-170 (~210 race)
2.2 flat 6 -125-180 (~230 race)
2.4 flat 6 - 130-190 (~250-270 race)
2.7 flat 6 - 150-210
3.0 flat 6 - 180-204 (~310-330 race)
3.2 flat 6 - 207-231
3.6 flat 6 - 250-285 (300 with rare Powerkit)
3.8 flat 6 - 300 (310+ race)
Look like the right list?
^ Quick stab working with some factory numbers from reference materials here. These reflect the lowest lows (typically but not always U.S.-spec), and the highest highs (typically RoW). Tried to add some numbers for same-displacement race engines from the factory in period, but not all of them (2.2, SC/RS, etc) are accounted for.
As you note, these can be built into just about anything, and engine builders and hot-rodders have learned a lot since these engines were new—the youngest among them is now 21 years old while the oldest is 50+.
I would have been happy with the stock 160 hp from a 2.2E with my budget build, but it made 169.9 hp at the wheels when we dialed the carbs in. Mods were Solex cams, headers, a little compression, "a little head work" (I am still suspicious), and crank-fire ignition. Stock Mahle 2.2E pistons, mag case, and Weber 40s...nothing special...but I suspect tricks gained over time allowed John Holleran to build a 2.2 "E" that makes more power than a stock 2.2 S did. And it's more tractable too, feeling like a 3.0 down low with the only downside being it doesn't love going past 6000-6500 rpm. It'll do it, but it doesn't race to redline up top. Offset is very usable power.
Posted by: get off my lawn Jul 24 2019, 04:44 PM
you can't turbo a 914
Posted by: 76-914 Jul 24 2019, 05:47 PM
Portable? $60 for 3 pulls? I wonder if he'd be willing to measure a group of 914's. Pretty sure there would be at least 15 people here willing to meet and have this done. @http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showuser=16669 @http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showuser=17068
Posted by: campbellcj Jul 24 2019, 06:27 PM
Portable? $60 for 3 pulls? I wonder if he'd be willing to measure a group of 914's. Pretty sure there would be at least 15 people here willing to meet and have this done. @http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showuser=16669 @http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showuser=17068
The past two summers, Craig at World Motorsports organized weekend Porsche dyno days via Rennlist which seemed to work out great - at least for me as I got there early (this was re. my 911). Their facility is amazing and is available just about anytime M-F. A group of us could try organizing a similar weekend thing.
Posted by: cali914 Jul 24 2019, 07:41 PM
If you have 15k to 20k laying around for an engine swap then 3.4 to 3.6 is the only way to go. If you are looking for best bang for your buck JDM all the way. I have had 350 to 427 small block Chevys in my 914. 5 to 10 grand minimum each engine. Then I went to a 3.5 liter Honda Oddyssey engine for 500 bucks 240hp 240 torque. Andrew damaged the engine smacking the redline at the POC, and it still drove home in limp mode. Instead of me pulling engine apart I bought another one for 300 bucks and in one day was back on the road again. Oh I forgot to mention fuel injection and V-tech hahahahahah 
Posted by: cali914 Jul 24 2019, 07:43 PM
you can't turbo a 914
yes you can. The question is longevity of the engine.
Posted by: Coondog Jul 24 2019, 07:47 PM
3.2 with all the usual stuff...........212 RWHP
I know the old rule for V8 motor RWHP was 15% less then total engine HP. Don’t know if this equates to Porsche motors. 
Posted by: type2man Jul 24 2019, 09:27 PM
Ive got a 2.0 914. The previous owner put a cam, a type1 oil pump. and 40 webers. Since I got it, I added a CB performance distirbutor, 45 dells, and a bursch exhaust.
It moves just fine, maybe 100 hp. It doesn't disappoint. Next step might be to transplant my 2733 FAT performance engine into it.
Posted by: 914werke Jul 24 2019, 10:03 PM
That is tuned 2056 territory
Id call 2.4L a Big /4 that is more in the order of 160-180
Posted by: ValcoOscar Jul 25 2019, 08:05 AM
Portable? $60 for 3 pulls? I wonder if he'd be willing to measure a group of 914's. Pretty sure there would be at least 15 people here willing to meet and have this done. @http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showuser=16669 @http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showuser=17068
Sure Kent!I'd be in on this for a few of my cars.
Oscar
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)