Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
914World.com _ 914World Garage _ 6 vs 4
Posted by: 914fan Oct 31 2006, 11:20 AM
How do a 200hp 6 and a 200hp 4 drive compared to eachother. I know there are several ways to get 200hp out or either. I am interested in a daily driver 200hp 6 or 4. Does anybody have any dyno charts of these? Is the 6 more peaky? is the 4 more torquE? Type IV and Porsche 6 please.
I am not trying to start a flame war. I am just looking for information cause I found an empty spot in my brain, and I need to fill it before something else goes in there.
Posted by: porschecb Oct 31 2006, 11:26 AM
![popcorn[1].gif](style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif)
Posted by: Racer Chris Oct 31 2006, 11:36 AM
Displacement makes a big difference. A 2 liter producing 200hp will be peaky whether 4 or 6.
Posted by: SirAndy Oct 31 2006, 11:37 AM
I am not trying to start a flame war
simple. if you have a /4 and you put a /6 in it, you WILL die!
IMHO, the main difference is in the location of the powerband, a /4 with similar HP output will be more responsive on a tight AX course, a /6 with similar HP output will outrun a /4 on the big track.
for the street, it ain't matter much. i drove my 1.8/1.7 /4 for years and didn't feel like i was missing out on anything.
a big /6 is fun to drive. so is a big /4. meaning, this debate is kind of useless.
dyno charts alone don't make for a enjoyable drive around the twisty backroads, never paid much attention to them ...
Andy
Posted by: TROJANMAN Oct 31 2006, 11:42 AM
i think it all comes down to cost. a six conversion is cheaper than most big 4's
depending on where you order parts, and who does the build
or you could always go SUBY 
Posted by: Bleyseng Oct 31 2006, 11:55 AM
i think it all comes down to cost. a six conversion is cheaper than most big 4's
depending on where you order parts, and who does the build
Ah, but a big 4 is going to be a nearly new motor while a six usually is not new.
I think the cost is all relative depending on what you are doing or who is doing it.
4 have a more flat torque starting more down in the rpms range while 6's usually have a higher rpm range with their hp/torque high too.
Jake is working on changing all this.
Posted by: Mountain914 Oct 31 2006, 12:50 PM
Not sure on "how they drive" - but would y'all consider a 200hp 4 to be "high strung" as a daily driver ? I.E. I would think (IMHO) I would trust more road trips with a 200hp 6 over a 200hp 4. However, Bleysing makes a good point on "newness" but I would say you would build either one up "new" I would choose the 6 (all on the assumption high horse 4 needs higher compression, better gas, runs hotter, etc.. etc..)
Posted by: Brando Oct 31 2006, 01:54 PM
This is the kind of question that begs for a vague answer.
Both 4's and 6's can be built reliably. Simply put, it all depends on what quality of parts you use, quality of assembly, etc. Both can be built to produce a good, linear torque and hp curve. Both can be built to idle high and bring the power on high, or keep it down low.
I guess what I'm saying is, tell us what your pocketbook says, and we'll tell you which is more affordable.
An original 6cyl car with a bigger motor maintains it's value much better than a converted 4cyl car, an unconverted 4cyl car can have a big-displacement 4cyl engine and still maintain it's value for being unmolested. It all depends on what your endgame goal is and your budget.
Posted by: BMXerror Oct 31 2006, 02:33 PM
Posted by: Brother Oct 31 2006, 02:39 PM
Wouldn't the four be lighter with a potentially (slightly) lower CG due to the 911's fan and induction?
Posted by: Travis Neff Oct 31 2006, 02:51 PM
The car will be easily 100lbs lighter (4vs6), obviously that means apples to apples in other weight reduction (if any).
It's all down to what you prefer.
Posted by: Bleyseng Oct 31 2006, 05:04 PM
Not sure on "how they drive" - but would y'all consider a 200hp 4 to be "high strung" as a daily driver ? I.E. I would think (IMHO) I would trust more road trips with a 200hp 6 over a 200hp 4. However, Bleysing makes a good point on "newness" but I would say you would build either one up "new" I would choose the 6 (all on the assumption high horse 4 needs higher compression, better gas, runs hotter, etc.. etc..)
What is changing in the 4 engine world is the availablity of high quality parts.
These are or will be here shortly:
Nickies- Nikasil cylinders even better quality than the 911 ones
Rods- high quality rods better in quality than stock
Pistons- of course better ones
Cams- lots of good cams now that don't go flat
Lifters- anything from good stock replacements, ceramic, or soon roller lifters.
Heads- New castings that are CNC'd to perfection with seats that don't drop out
Sure this will cost money but a hipo 200hp 4 that will last 100k.
yes, it will need a oil cooler but so does a six over a 2.4L 130hp.
Posted by: john rogers Oct 31 2006, 05:25 PM
Since I have raced both here is my take on it. The 2.8L four was easier to drive as the torque came on earlier than the 2.2L six. Both had 185 HP at the rear wheels where the four made it at 4800 RPM with long stroke, the six made it at 6000 RPM. The six lasted 22 race weekends before breaking a rod this past spring while the four would get two races before needing work. In the cost race, the six is way ahead over time. Now remeember, this is racing with 4 to 6 30 minute full bore sessions a weekend which is much different than street driving and occasional auto-x use so it is much harder on the engine internals. The engines both had pretty good hardware, with the four having Pauter forged rods, forged crank, custom heads with titanium valves and dual springs, etc. The six was made with mostly Porsche racing components except for the 906 grind cams.
Posted by: Brad Roberts Oct 31 2006, 05:38 PM
I think that 6 is better than 4. Most girlfriends would agree
I feel bad for those of you with small bore 4's...LOL
B
Posted by: Jake Raby Oct 31 2006, 05:43 PM
Go ahead and lock this one up- there is bound to be no good from it for anyone, there never is.
The two can't be compared.. Nothing about them or their characteristcs are the same..
And not all /4s are the same- some are totally different than others.. Its very hard for most tuners to get 200 REAL HP from a -4 thats not a grenade, development is the only way we do it...
I haven't built an engine all year that made less than 150 ponies on my dyno..
I'm going over to my forums to finish some tech articles- see ya'll later.. Have fun
Posted by: trekkor Oct 31 2006, 06:30 PM
If I didn't find such a deal on my small six, I think I would have shopped for a $4-6k 3.0 SIX. Spend about $3k to convert.
Last time we heard, I thought 200HP FOUR's are over $15k plus and need constant care or they will suffer. ( explode )
the 115-150 hp FOURs last longer, but that's not 200hp, now is it?
If ( when ) my SIX blows to bits, I'll find that used 3.0 with a warranty and keep moving.
KT
Posted by: Bleyseng Oct 31 2006, 06:56 PM
I said "soon".
roller lifters will help alot to be 200hp and last.
If ya want big, get 8.
Posted by: Lavanaut Oct 31 2006, 07:28 PM
Go ahead and lock this one up- there is bound to be no good from it for anyone, there never is.
The two can't be compared.. Nothing about them or their characteristcs are the same.
I don't claim to know a fraction of what you all know about these cars, but the above statement (which I see on the board all the time) simply doesn't ring true to me. It's not comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing cars to cars. Are you really saying that after driving a ~200HP 4 for a half hour, then driving a ~200HP 6 for a half hour, the two experiences cannot be compared?
Not trolling here. I'm just one of the many less-experienced folks on this board who I'm sure would love to hear some informed opinions on this topic. I think it's a great question, and I have a feeling that more folks on the board will have educated, experienced feedback for 914fan...so hey Mr. Admin, don't lock this thread just yet.
Lava
Posted by: Bleyseng Oct 31 2006, 08:27 PM
Go ahead and lock this one up- there is bound to be no good from it for anyone, there never is.
The two can't be compared.. Nothing about them or their characteristcs are the same.
I don't claim to know a fraction of what you all know about these cars, but the above statement (which I see on the board all the time) simply doesn't ring true to me. It's not comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing cars to cars. Are you really saying that after driving a ~200HP 4 for a half hour, then driving a ~200HP 6 for a half hour, the two experiences cannot be compared?
Not trolling here. I'm just one of the many less-experienced folks on this board who I'm sure would love to hear some informed opinions on this topic. I think it's a great question, and I have a feeling that more folks on the board will have educated, experienced feedback for 914fan...so hey Mr. Admin, don't lock this thread just yet.
Lava
the fours hp/torque are at lower revs!
the sixes hp/ torque are at higher revs!
thats the difference.
How does it feel? You have to rev out the six more. big deal.
The difference has been is the fact that the 200hp six is factory and the four are custom.
Posted by: 9146986 Nov 1 2006, 09:18 AM
It all depends on displacement. I had a 3.0 SC engine with Webers, and you could start from a dead stop in 3rd gear. It wasn't peaky, but pulled hard until you hit the rev limiter. Those engines have that much torque. There was no problem starting in 2nd. I've drove a couple of 3.2's (Motronic injection) and they were the same way, loads of torque through the entire range.
The smaller displacement sixes are indeed peaky, but those that I know who have such an engine, like the rev factor. You get over 4k rpm and they zing!
Driveability depends on matching the engine to the gearing.
I don't know about the big fours, although I'd love to drive a few.
What's my line here Trekkor? "I don't know anyone who has converted to a six and wishes they have just built a big four".
I respect Jake and everything he's doing, and believe me he knows his stuff.
This issue with 914's is you have a choice to put a Porsche flat six in your car, and for many of us that is very desireable. It is getting much easier and affordable to convert a 914 to a six, better parts, more guys with experience to help, etc.
With a Bug, the best choice is in fact the best air cooled flat four, the type 4.
The fact that the 914 offers us these choices also provides for an endless arguement; four or six.
It's your car do as you wish. You'll find lots of arguements to go both ways.
If it's opinions you want, then my opinion is without hesitation to go with a six.
Posted by: DNHunt Nov 1 2006, 09:23 AM
Of course the best solution is to have 1 of each. Oh if life were so good. Not sure but, I might have to move to Utah to pull that off.
Dave
Posted by: anthony Nov 1 2006, 10:30 AM
Here's my two cents. I actually kind of think that over 200hp is the tipping point in the 4 vs. 6 equation. I mean if you are looking for hp in the 220-300hp range then you might just want to start with a 3.2, hot 3.2 made into a 3.5, or a factory 3.6. Under 200hp, I think, modern "big fours" make a compelling case.
With a header a 3L six makes 200 reliable horses and has a nice flat torque curve. The only downside IMO, is that one will need to pay $4-5K for a used 120K mile engine and off the shelf conversion parts cost another $4K. A first timer can also add in a 100 hours to get the job done or pay a pro another $2K. When you need a minimal top end rebuild on a big six and you can add another $2500 to the equation assuming you are pulling the motor and heads yourself or $4000-5000 if you are paying a pro. So just getting the motor into the car can cost $8-10K and one could easily be up to $15k with just a top end rebuild.
I made a torque graph using Jake's 2316 kit numbers versus a 3.0L 911 six. I took the 3L numbers directly from Porsche factory literature that came with my SC. The curves look surprisingly similar!
You can build a 2316 for around $5000. You need Webers or EFI so figure on $500 up to $2000 depending on which way you go. You also need a header system so add in another $600 for a Euro or up to $2000 for a Tangerine system with all the options. Low end - $6K, high end $10K.
Posted by: Racing916 Nov 1 2006, 11:15 AM
nothing is better than the sound of a six.
IMHO
Posted by: SirAndy Nov 1 2006, 11:21 AM
nothing is better than the sound of a six.
and i call
ever listened to a warmed over /4 with webers? it's the webers, not the motor. more intake noise makes for a "better" sound, *if* you're into that kind of thing and if you don't use your car as a daily driver.
if you do drive it frequently for longer periods of time, a quiet FI is a blessing ...
all that aside, i'm not sure it's the smartest move to buy your engine based on the sound it makes ...
Andy
Posted by: trekkor Nov 1 2006, 12:09 PM
On the SIX transplant, bargain hunters can get a reward. Big time.
The small SIX I use set me back $4k installed as a daily driver.
I am confident a $9k budget can be easily met while using a 3.0.
( I think I could do it for under $7k )
I haven't heard of any bargain hunting happy endings on any high output FOURS.
In fact, just the opposite.
Perry, I love that line
KT
Oh and, why didn't the 914 GT entries at LeMans run FOURs? 
Posted by: East coaster Nov 1 2006, 12:17 PM
I don't think this should be locked. I think if we can keep from pissing on each other and provide good info it may help folks figure out which of two paths (both good) is for them.
I'll throw in my 2 cents and I won't claim that it makes sense for anyone else but me. My goal when I built my car was a good/strong street car that I didn't want to tinker with constantly or be afraid to take anywhere/anytime. I thought the easiest way to achieve this goal and have a sh*tload of power is to go with a big 6 (3.6 in my case) and keep it as stock as possible (stock injection, electronics, etc..). In my simple mind, there should no reason for this to be any less reliable than a factory 993 and folks don't think twice about driving them anywhere, any distance without wondering if they'll make it without needing AAA.
I've only driven 1 big 4 and it was quite impressive. It also didn't live a long life. From what I've seen of the new generation of big 4s on this forum, maybe that's a thing of the past and they will live long and prosper? I think only time and miles can decide that one. A big 6 just seemed like a known quantity, albeit not a cheap one. Although, to do either engine choice correctly probably isn't cheap. I know if I ever build a Spyder replica Jake will be getting a call from me though....... 
I'll shut up and go away now!
Posted by: SirAndy Nov 1 2006, 12:26 PM
Oh and, why didn't the 914 GT entries at LeMans run FOURs?
so you could ask a dumb question 35 years later?
Andy
Posted by: ChrisNPDrider Nov 1 2006, 12:36 PM
As I quietly sit and save $$$, the big ? that comes to me is
"How long has your TIV >2300 cc been running trouble free?"
I love my little TIV because it is so worry free, and it seems the big ones fight the "hand grenade" stigma. Sixes are also pretty worry free...OK, back to sitting and saving. 
Posted by: thesey914 Nov 1 2006, 01:15 PM
nothing is better than the sound of a six.
IMHO
I agree 100%. The only four I've heard that sounds <i> really </i> nice is the four cam either in the back of a 356 or a 904. The six rumble has a massive appeal in my view
Posted by: 914fan Nov 1 2006, 01:22 PM
They can be debated / compared.
I have driven 4 and 6 cylinder vws with close power. chipped tdi vs vr6. Both fun. The vr6 was quicker off the line but the tdi was way better on the freeway. I do believe a 4 can be built around 200hp worry free. look at jakes latest 2270s. they are around 145-150hp. Thanks for the graph. When I asked about this I was looking to see where a 200hp 6 has its torque. It looks like depending on the 6 and or 4 they could drive about the same. Like I said, I'm just curious. I'm not looking to get anything, just fill some empty space.
Yes to build a big 4 can cost $$$$$. To rebuild that same 4 shouldn't cost as much. (provided it didn't explode) What is the average cost to rebuild a 6 that didn't explode. Bearings, pistons, seals, cam, lifters, etc. I am guessing it will be more due to the porsche name (that sucks) and the 2 extra pistons. ( if the same engine had a vw or chevy tag it would probably cost less. Again if it said bugatti, it would probably be even more)
Again not a flame, just trying to wrap my head around the whole topic.
Posted by: trekkor Nov 1 2006, 01:24 PM
Oh and, why didn't the 914 GT entries at LeMans run FOURs?
so you could ask a dumb question 35 years later?
AndyI may be out on a limb on this one, but I think the reason they ran SIXES at LeMans was because they were interested in winning or at least finishing the race.
KT
Attached image(s)
Posted by: trekkor Nov 1 2006, 01:35 PM
Here's the bonus on doing a SIX conversion.
You don't *ever* have to rebuild your blown or tired motor. ( $10k )
Just buy another low priced used SIX of your liking. Maybe upgrade?
There is no shortage of used air cooled SIXES on the market.
KT
Attached image(s)
Posted by: SirAndy Nov 1 2006, 02:02 PM
I may be out on a limb on this one, but I think the reason they ran SIXES at LeMans was because they were interested in winning or at least finishing the race.
dead wrong!
i think the main reason the PORSCHE factory ran a /6 that was build by PORSCHE at a PORSCHE owned factory with a PORSCHE engine was that they most certainly didn't want anybody to think PORSCHE would be willing to race a PORSCHE race car that was powered by a VW engine ...
call me sceptical, but i don't buy the "superior" argument of the /6 engine in this case. i'm sure porsche could have easily built up a /4 motor to qualify/run/finish Le Mans ...
but it would still have been a VW engine, no matter how much R&D porsche would have put into it ...
IMHO, that is the main reason they went with the /6 engine. it had the PORSCHE name all over it and it had been proven itself already in the 911.
there was no need for porsche to experiment with the /4 engine for racing. but that in itself does not mean the /4 engine would not have been up to the task.
Andy
Posted by: trekkor Nov 1 2006, 02:23 PM
Hmmm...Good point. 
NARP 
KT
Posted by: thesey914 Nov 1 2006, 03:03 PM
So why did they bother to go to six cylinders in the first place, why bother with overhead cams + dry sump? Because the four had been taken as far as it could. Even the Porsche racing four had overhead cams
Posted by: Cloudbuster Nov 1 2006, 03:13 PM
There may be some historical context why Porsche went with a six. It doesn't necessarily mean that a four cylinder powerplant was simply played out in the course of things.
IIRC, Porsche liked to play in the 2 liters and under category back in those days. When limited on displacement, the best way to get high specific power (hp/liter) is through revs. More cylinders rev better.
Posted by: McMark Nov 1 2006, 03:32 PM
How do a 200hp 6 and a 200hp 4 drive compared to eachother.
FYI, VERY VERY VERY (did I say VERY) few people here have any REAL experience in a 200 hp Type IV. 200 hp Type IVs have only come on the market recently (street motors, non-race motors) and so there isn't a lot of experience out there to tap into.
As far as my opinion on all this, there isn't a better engine. You need to pick what direction you want to go and get the engine that fits it. And these arguments that you can get six cylinder throw away motors for cheap is
and $15k+ for 200 hp Type IV is . That's the problem with this question, you get lots of people trying to justify their (usually) biggest expense on the car, so they throw out unbiased information to tip the scales in their favor. Not intentionally or maliciously, of course, but it still happens.Is it getting hot in here?
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 1 2006, 03:43 PM
Mark is correct... Very, very few people have experienced the power OR the sound of a true MassIVe TIV engine, they are trying to compare the six to a four of yesterday- not today.. As we have increased power levels and started making our own components things have really taken a huge turn in the past 5 years for the -4.... As this has happened prices on some things have dropped while others have stayed the same while the power levels and reliability were increased.
I have to say that 90% of the failed -4 engines in 914 have come from poor internal configuration or poor installation with inadequte plumbing, crankcase breathing and the like- that can kill any engine. If you couple that to people rushing projects and doing things half assed you start seeing the "Big picture".
With my new forums I hope to remove guesswork involved with creating the engine as well as installing and tuning it, our radio show has already saved the lives of 6 engines as those customers have already emailed and phoned me with thanks for the show. The main thing that has killed the TIV engine since conception is a lack of correct information..
With that being said I started a 4 Vs 6 thread over on my forums earlier today :-)
Back to my side of the world, see ya'll later!!
Posted by: trekkor Nov 1 2006, 03:57 PM
Call around and shop around.
A good used SIX in varying trim can be found from $2-6.5k every single day.
FYI...There is a good 2.0 in our classifieds right now for $2k
and Spencer at Partsheaven will sell you a 2.7 longblock for $2500.
Then there is EASY and don't forget E-Bay and Craigslist.
Why would I lie?
KT
Posted by: trekkor Nov 1 2006, 04:03 PM
The one thing that is always missing in these 4 vs 6 debates, is the PRICE of a new built 200hp FOUR. Delivered turn key. *everything*
Give us the price of this motor and it's warranty. This is critical data.
Don't leave it out.
If it's not $15k, then what is it?
KT
Posted by: Mueller Nov 1 2006, 04:08 PM
Call around and shop around.
A good used SIX in varying trim can be found from $2-6.5k every single day.
FYI...There is a good 2.0 in our classifieds right now for $2k
Does it put down 200HP??? Nope, and how much will it take to make it so and freshen it up??
and Spencer at Partsheaven will sell you a 2.7 longblock for $2500.
Does it put down 200HP??? Nope, and how much will it take to make it so and freshen it up??
Then there is EASY and don't forget E-Bay and Craigslist.
Why would I lie?
Not a lie, just omitting some of the truth
KT
Posted by: trekkor Nov 1 2006, 04:16 PM
good points, he does have a couple of 3.2's however, and I just saw an ad on craiglist...
What did Andy pay for that 3.6 again...?
Do as you please.
I know I will.
KT
Posted by: Travis Neff Nov 1 2006, 04:54 PM
I think you guys are trying to compare a DIY six conversion on a fully built -4 by Jake. I would think with one of his kits you can hit the mark for a helluva lot less than 15k. This should be DIY vs. DIY or pay for built vs pay for converted
Posted by: McMark Nov 1 2006, 04:56 PM
SPOT ON TRAVIS!!!
Trekkor paid $3k for his installation and let's choose a price of $4k for a motor. You got your motor cheap Trekkor, so please don't take this as doubting your choice to go six. I'm just trying to make a fair comparison.
I can buy a 2316 engine kit from Jake for under $5000. Add an oil cooler for $1000 and still be under the initial $7000 for a six and probably have more power/longevity.
The engine kits are not that complicated to put together and there are a bunch of friends here and on Jake's forums helping people do it correctly. So a kit is a realistic option.
I don't think you're lying, I just think you're misinformed. I also wouldn't attack anyone for choosing to go with a six motor, it's their car and all I really want is for people to love and drive their cars. But if you're going to ask my opinion, I'll say that I don't understand why the six is so popular.
Posted by: SirAndy Nov 1 2006, 05:47 PM
What did Andy pay for that 3.6 again...?
i've got a smoking deal on my engine. $7500 ...
now add all the conversion parts, motor mount, oil-tank, front oil-cooler etc.
then add McMark's hours. then add my hours.
then compare to a turn-key T4 if you wish. suddenly, the turnkey T4 doesn't look that expensive anymore ...
Andy
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 1 2006, 06:29 PM
Don't use the cost of my turnkey engines for comparison... I don't build in volume and do not want to, I won't even complete 20 engines this year... When the engine is bought from me it has 80-100 hours into it, not counting 8-12 hours on the dyno- do the math.
15K will buy a roller cammed engine making 200+ HP and will equip it with programmble EFI with direct igntion, my cooling system etc, etc..
My 2316 K is currently at 185HP, but is being reconfigured now due to newer head technology opening up the possibilities of more cam, and more power. The 2316 will be over 200 reliable HP in about 3 months- in kit form.
I am also doing a step by step video and even offering tool rental to help assemble these kits, you can build the entire engine even if you don't own a 13mm wrench... With the video, it takes a total dimwit to screw it up!
Most of my engines run 10-12K these days and now 190 HP is easy- last year 160 was easy, 190 was a bitch...
Posted by: LvSteveH Nov 1 2006, 07:14 PM
I don't think "which is better" is a fair question. I just depend on the application.
I need to do a motor for my 912E and I happen to have a fresh 230hp 2.7L sitting right next to it. It was very tempting to make a 911 out of my 912. There were only 2000 912E's, and how many are left? It would be a crime to put anything but a type4 in it.
With 914's it's a very tough call, as they came from the factory in both forms. I agree with where this thread has gone with regard to 200hp being the magic number. I've always thought that 200hp was "just right" in a 914.
Buying a used six engine is a crap shoot. Roll the dice, you might get an engine with 75k miles left, or you could crap out and need major work very soon. These are 20-30 year old motors, so there are no guarantees in buying used. I feel bad for anyone who banks on buying a $6000 used motor and ends up needing major work without having it in the budget. That potential is always there.
With current technology, I'd guess that 200hp could be had for around $10,000 in a four or a six. At the end of the day it just depends on what you want.
Engine choices have a lot to do with character. If it was all about horsepower per doller we'd all be driving around with 350hp V8's. Engine choices in a 914 are limited only by your imagination. Fortunately, everyone wants something a little different.
If you put FlatVW’s Raby powered car (RIP) next to a nice 200hp six, and asked me which one I’d like to have, I’d be torn. In the end, I’d choose the four cylinder car, because there will never be another one like it, and it was a work of art in my opinion. That says a lot, because I really like 914-6’s.
If you look at what guys spend to build horsepower in most vintage cars, a big type 4 or a six conversion is extremely cheap in comparison. I’ve driven just about every 914 engine option out there, and every one of them put a mile on my face, from the 70hp Dijon bomb, to a 400hp tube framed V8.
If I had to choose just one, well, I'm not ready to answer that yet.
Posted by: trekkor Nov 1 2006, 08:30 PM
I am always happy when someone get's to drive a car they like.
That's the whole point of this site, right? It's not about who's right and who's wrong. Helping your 914 Bud's, I'm all for that, too.
For me, I just won't spend that kind of money on a FOUR.
That's who I am.
KT
Posted by: nebreitling Nov 1 2006, 08:50 PM
i can go either way. 200 hp is somewhat expensive no matter which route you take. 200 hp becomes very expensive if you are limited by rules on displacement, etc.
i like the fours -- especially for street and AX -- and never really bought into the 'mystique' of the six. there is still an impression, however, that they are not up to abuse of the track. i can say that after some initial sorting, my <$3k four held together quite nicely with track abuse. they are simple engines, and i like that.
at this point, though, i don't really care. give me something fast, and i'll drive it
Posted by: porschecb Nov 1 2006, 08:57 PM
Can we not just DRIVE!!!!!!!! We all know the choices in engines!! this wears me out and nothing gets solved! So figure it out!!!!!!!
Posted by: jimkelly Nov 2 2006, 09:08 AM
a heated debate - is good for all.
i emailed jake yesterday sorta asking this very question.
besides the 2316 kit plus shipping, what else is needed, carbs $, header $, DTM $, mallory distributor $, raby machining of case halves $ - what else ?? and cost.
I think Jake's awesome work and ability to keep some prices down - changes this overall debate on a daily basis - bravo Jake !!!
I think I would prefer a fresh 4 over a used 6 of similar HP but I can see - easily - Trekkor's point. I think a bullet proof 150 or so HP 4 would be great but I have yet to own a 914 reliable driver that could be taken to the track : (
Posted by: anthony Nov 2 2006, 09:40 AM
besides the 2316 kit plus shipping, what else is needed, carbs $, header $, DTM $, mallory distributor $, raby machining of case halves $ - what else ?? and cost.
It's probably easiest to start with a full core engine (1.8 or 2.0L) but you could start with a 1.7. For core parts you need to send Jate a 2L crank, flywheel, and 914 fan. You'll need all the little bits off of the core engine to assemble the new engine. If you start with a 1.7, you'll need to find a 2L crank to send Jake or pay the core charge.
You also need fuel and spark. You could use a stock 914 distributor but the Mallory is way better. For fuel you can do Webers or EFI. (You can't use stock injection but having a complete stock injection setup would be needed if you wanted to do Megasquirt or an other FI system,)
Posted by: Brett W Nov 2 2006, 07:03 PM
Why are we using 200hp as the mark of performance? That is the low end for a six and the high end for a four. Lets push this argument out to something a little more realistic.
250-350hp. Can't even come close with a four cylinder. Durability goes to the six. Notice the power curves listed a few pages back. The six makes more power everywhere.
There really isn't an argument, you either like the fours or sixes or both. Build your car to make you happy and enjoy it for what it is.
AS far as race cars go, with the same rules a four cylinder car will be faster and easier on tires, but it will be an expensive grenade.
Posted by: Cloudbuster Nov 2 2006, 07:21 PM
There really isn't an argument, you either like the fours or sixes or both. Build your car to make you happy and enjoy it for what it is.
(However, the preceding graph is a 2.3 four vs a 3.0 six. Sixes start as low as 110hp, not above 200. Plus 200hp is still a little bit on the extreme for an all-out 2.0 six, or even a stock 2.4. N'est pas?)
Posted by: J P Stein Nov 2 2006, 07:27 PM
Should my 2.7L need a refresh (assuming it doesn't go BOOM)
a bottom end rebuild kit (containing all the expendables) is 600-700 bucks).
A valve grind is less than 500 bucks ( springs and intake valves are fairly inexpensive should they be required....exhaust valves....aren't)
More wear would include pistons, 1K & cylinders replated, 600 bucks(last I looked).
I'm a DYI kinda guy so best to worst case is 1200 to 2800 bucks.
Tack on 80-100 hours of "drop the car off at the shop" time and you're up in Jake territory
I put about 6500 bucks in my 2.7 and got a reliable 200 hp including intake & ignition.
Posted by: anthony Nov 2 2006, 08:51 PM
The original poster mentioned 200hp. Actually I think a 914 with a 160 foot pounds of torque 2270 would be a pretty nice ride. I'll actually tell you guys how it is after I get my kit installed this winter.
What convinced me about big fours was when I took a ride in McMark's car. He has a 2056 with a mild cam and EFI. I think it dynoed at 95hp at the wheels which is around 110hp at the crank. His car was a little screamer. It moved so much better than my stock 2L. It was like night and day.
I agree that over 250, even over 200, that one should think about a big six. So how do you get 350hp in a six? 3.8L? turbo? On the other hand I think the small sixes are a waste of money unless you get the engine super cheap and it is at least an E or S engine making over 160hp.
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 2 2006, 09:44 PM
Lets be real T4 fans. A 200 HP T4 is a handfull and very expensive. It does cost a mint to build a reliable 200 HP T4. Youre looking at Nickies, trick heads, cams, fuel injection, special machine work, tons of dyno work, etc. Then you have all sorts of costs associated with clutch, fuel delivery, oil cooler, etc that you would have with a six conversion. Once you get that 200 HP T4 all sorted youre looking at a hefty bill and then youre not assured of an engine that will be reliable long term. You run lean by mistake and that crackling T4 beast is toast. We have also heard more than our share of home built T4 horror stories. I think its time for some to stop drinking the Georgia Kool Aid.
It is easy to find a 3.0 six for $3K to $5K. Those motors will make 200 HP all day long and purr like a kitten on the street for years.
If you want a 200 HP 4 do a Subi conversion. After seeing a turbo Subi conversion this past weekend they are truly impressive! ...and you have Japanese reliability! Nothing cooler than a 914 with a blow off valve poping away as you smoke the tires with 250 HP.
I'd say T4 is a viable motor up to about 175 HP for a dedicated autocross car. If you are a risk taker you could do a kit and come close to that 175 HP number. You'll hear lots of talk about that mythical reliable monster 200 hp T4, but you wont see many - I beliieve they are like Bigfoot ...Some Hillbillie putting on some big feet and claiming to see a big fury monster. Reliable 200 HP T4's belong in the Bigfoot museum space.
Let me qualify this post by saying if I had unlimited funds I would have a wicked lightweight Raby T4 powered AX car and a 3.6 liter six track car. Both are good and serve different purposes. 
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 2 2006, 10:00 PM
Grant, There you go again..
Getting out of line and creating a post that gets off topic and ends up with yelling..
I don't appreciate your indirect slams, not a damn bit....
BTW- Georgia Kool Aid doesn't have an "E".. That must be a California thing..
Oh yeah, if Type 4 engines suck so bad why the hell is your IP logged on most of my radio show downloads and why did you bother becoming a member of my new forums???
Just wondering which side you are really on??? Please explain yourself...
Posted by: trekkor Nov 2 2006, 10:13 PM
It's not about sides.
He said if he had "unlimited funds" he'd have the baddest motor you could build.
KT
Posted by: trekkor Nov 2 2006, 10:15 PM
that's weird...
freaky internet spying...
Wow...
KT
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 12:15 AM
There are some cool deals on E-bay right now.
Like this one:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Porsche-911-SC-3-0-engine-complete-4-early-911-T-E- S_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ33615QQhashZitem170044347358QQihZ007QQitemZ17004434
7358QQrdZ1
KT
Posted by: iamchappy Nov 3 2006, 07:54 AM
I like the six's better.. This ones going in mine.
Attached image(s)
Posted by: Bleyseng Nov 3 2006, 09:04 AM
Comparing a used six cost to a rebuilt custom four isn't fair. There have been several BBS members who installed used sixes that didn't last long. A six rebuild isn't cheap-$10k+.
The 200hp kit 4 motors will fill the need for guys who want to stay witha four and not convert everything over to run a six.
Post this price list of the new parts to convert to a six. Brad posted 4 years ago a list that was $4.5k and prices have gone up since then. Not Swapmeet Louie prices, new.
I just think its great that there is this option now as 10 years ago a big 4 130hp that lasted 20k miles was big news.
Posted by: Matt Romanowski Nov 3 2006, 09:51 AM
I've been watching this thread since the beginning and have had about 4 different post written up before I deleted them....
I wonder how many people have really driven both big fours and sixes......
They are both really cool cars. I have a 2270 in my stock looking 914 that I love. It's faster than any 911 up to a C2, pulls 944 Turbos on the straights, corners with almost anything. It's really fun. Did I mention that I love it.....
I've driven the blue car Martin Baker just bought with a 2.4S motor, cage, all the goodies. Fun car too. Very different. Much easier to drive fast, but I don't think it's ulimately as fast.... Feels heavier, but with the S cams it's fun to drive.
I have a race car that was just sold on these pages. It's now got a stock 2.7 in it (motor and rebuild for under $6k by one of the best mechanics in the Northest to end everyone's speculation). It's again a very different car. We've only had it out for two days, but it's much easier to drive up to about 75% of the speed of my street car. Overall, I think it will be much easier to drive. It's got about twice the torque, has a broad powerband, and is never really off cam.
Both a high horsepower four and six are great motors. Overall, the sixes are much more reliable. You can take a stock 6, do a top end, increase the compressoin, change cams and still get over 200k miles on the bottom end. Can't do that with a four. Horsepower and torque are never issues with sixes.
Still, I built a big four for my car. Why - It's fun. I enjoyed building it, tuning it, driving it, passing 911s with it.....You really have to drive and ride in cars with both motors and pick what's right for you. Someone said it right before that you just have to enjoy your car. Stock, Modified, four, six, Chevy, Subi, whatever. Drive it and enjoy it.
Posted by: DNHunt Nov 3 2006, 09:57 AM
So what new info is there? The /4's are making a bit more power. Maybe there are a few more affordable /6's out there. The truth is this issue will never be settled and very few people change their minds.
At some point, you have to take a jump into one camp or the other and live with it. The only really good advice is look at your deal very carefully and get as much info about that specific engine as you can be it a /6 or /4. People have had sucess both ways and people have been burned both ways.
Dave
Posted by: Lavanaut Nov 3 2006, 11:03 AM
"Better" when talking about 914 engines at this performance/price point is clearly a subjective topic, and obviously one that cannot have a "correct" answer. It's clear that everyone on this board has an opinion on which engine they prefer (including me), and opinions have their place. But as someone who is going to face this dilema at some point down the road (how am I going to upgrade my 2.0 4?), it would be great if people could save their opinions about which is better for another thread, and only post to this one if they have experience driving cars with both engine types. If you only have experience with one or the other, posting your opinion of that one engine type really isn't too helpful because you're not in a position to make an informed comparison.
Not to
buuuut....while the original post was asking about 200 HP, it seems to me that number could be flexible when doing a comparison. If you've got experience driving both a 4 and a 6 in *any* HP range, that info seems appropriate for this thread. Hopefully 914fan, the starter of this thread, would agree. And now back to
...
Posted by: kenschipper Nov 3 2006, 11:15 AM
Of course the best solution is to have 1 of each. Oh if life were so good. Not sure but, I might have to move to Utah to pull that off.
Dave
I actually have one of each. a '74 2.0 four and a 1970 2.0 six. Both completely stock engines.
I purchased the 4 first for around $3,000 and could not believe the grin I had on my face after each drive. Three years late (3 months ago) I bought a beautiful 6 for around $20,000. The grin is even bigger, especially between 4,000k and 6,200k. The difference in sound and smoothness is amazing. Worth the $17,000 difference. Depends on how you look at it. I will keep the six forever. The kids only have permission to sell it when I'm senile and can no longer drive. We were going to sell the 4 when we bought the 6 but my wife likes the color (orange) so we are now keeping it for the kids to drive with dad when he goes autocrossing. (And they always beat me)
Add horsepower to either and I think the characteristics will remain pretty much the same.
Ken
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 3 2006, 11:17 AM
Comparing a used six cost to a rebuilt custom four isn't fair. There have been several BBS members who installed used sixes that didn't last long. A six rebuild isn't cheap-$10k+.
The 200hp kit 4 motors will fill the need for guys who want to stay witha four and not convert everything over to run a six.
Post this price list of the new parts to convert to a six. Brad posted 4 years ago a list that was $4.5k and prices have gone up since then. Not Swapmeet Louie prices, new.
I just think its great that there is this option now as 10 years ago a big 4 130hp that lasted 20k miles was big news.
Life isnt fair typically. And some of us use that to our advantage. Given the market glut of used sixes there is a market for cheap "Swap Meet Louie" six conversion parts. The same cant be said for big bore T4 parts. Six conversion parts dont come close to $4,500 if you shop around. ..and you might as well exclude upgraded clutch, fuel management systems, headers, oil coolers and linkages if your comparing cost of a big T4 conversion as you need to do those things when you convert from a stock T4 to a big T4 as well. So six conversion costs start to look very very attractive. Funny thing is you will never see somone post all the costs associated with a 200 HP T4 conversion.
When we get back to the original question of this post I just couldnt imagine a streetable 200 HP T4 option that would come close to cost effeciency or reliability of a 200 HP six. Asking how those engines would compare in terms of feel is tough to answer as each could be built with different charateristics. I know my 2341cc 911 E six is much differnt than other small bores - mine feels more like a torquey 4 than a high reving six. It makes gobs of power and torque from 2500 rpm to 6000 RPM and then it runs out of steam.
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 11:27 AM
Good point about comparing Big FOUR to a Mid SIX. ( BIG SIXES make more than 200hp )
I've never driven in a big FOUR powered 914.
I'm not about to pay $15k to find out, either.
I think we have all driven stock FOURs...And we liked it...We loved it!!
I run a small SIX. Many people said it was a waste of time and money.
This is by far the car that has brought me the most enjoyment.
When I can afford it, I will spend $3-6k for a 2.7-3.2 long block, move over all my intake, exhaust and other.
How can that be wrong?
KT
Posted by: Matt Romanowski Nov 3 2006, 11:37 AM
Trekkor - Nobody is saying it's wrong. There are lots of motor configurations that people can run. From the sounds of it you really like what you have built and that's great. However, realize it's not for everyone. I didn't go that route becuase I viewed it as too easy. Not everyone can build a motor like mine. I enjoyed the entire project.
You have to remember that every car / motor is different and on the track everyone's driving skills change the picture. I've outrun 914's with 3.6s in them in a little 2270 four cyclinder. Was it becuase of horsepower or driving?
What's important is for everyone who spends whatever amount of money on a motor to be happy with it. Whether it's a little or big four, little or big six. As long as they enjoy it, who cares?
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 11:39 AM
There is one way to settle this..
Someone offer up a car...
I build a 200HP TIV for it and then some dedicated souls can install it and the swap it out with a six of similar output..
I'll limit my engine to being built from an engine kit offering with a 6K budget for internals..
Then take it to the AX, 1/4 mile, skid pad and Road course with both engines installed.. I have a 32 channel data logger with accelerometer and GPS to monitor corner speeds, trap speeds and G forces exerted with both engines, as well as temps..
Same driver, same car the only variable will be the power plant..
I'm willing to build the engine and pay shipping to the install/test site. I will also pay my own way to come there and ensure the TIV is installed correctly and will assist with the work... At the end of the day I'll take my engine home with me..
Thats how much I believe in what I create... If anyone or a group of people combined feel the same about their six feelings, step the fuck up and make it happen..... This is not BS and I'm willing to go to any part of the country to make it happen.
Put up, or shut up... Lets do it mid summer 2007, I'm buried till then.
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 11:41 AM
Yes!!
KT
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 11:55 AM
Jake, that sounds like fun.
I seriously doubt anyone will actually make this happen.
If I end up with a 200hp SIX by then, I may be your guy. ( serious )
On the other hand:
I'm sure you could come up with the parts and build this.
But, isn't the 200hp TIV much higher than that, pricewise to the end user?
Are we talking a 2316 (?) . What does the machine work/balancing cost alone?
I'd love to see THE final cost breakdown listed item for item and the final pricetag for a reliable/streetable, turnkey, 200hp motor that could realistically live for 50-100k miles with some occasional DE and a/x use.
KT
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 3 2006, 11:56 AM
There is one way to settle this..
Someone offer up a car...
I build a 200HP TIV for it and then some dedicated souls can install it and the swap it out with a six of similar output..
I'll limit my engine to being built from an engine kit offering with a 6K budget for internals..
Then take it to the AX, 1/4 mile, skid pad and Road course with both engines installed.. I have a 32 channel data logger with accelerometer and GPS to monitor corner speeds, trap speeds and G forces exerted with both engines, as well as temps..
Same driver, same car the only variable will be the power plant..
I'm willing to build the engine and pay shipping to the install/test site. I will also pay my own way to come there and ensure the TIV is installed correctly and will assist with the work... At the end of the day I'll take my engine home with me..
Thats how much I believe in what I create... If anyone or a group of people combined feel the same about their six feelings, step the fuck up and make it happen..... This is not BS and I'm willing to go to any part of the country to make it happen.
Put up, or shut up... Lets do it mid summer 2007, I'm buried till then.
Thats really not the point here. Realistically no one is going to be able to make a 200 HP T4 conversion for $6000 after adding all the required conversion parts on a stock car. Then lets talk about whether a big T4 that makes 200 HP is going to last as long as a mild 200 HP six. No way no how.
I dont think anyone doubts whether a T4 built with more torque might make the car move a little faster due to weight advantage. Its kind of a silly premise to begin with. This kind of proposal belongs on "Pinks" rather than a rational discussion on a 914 enthusiast board.
Posted by: BMXerror Nov 3 2006, 12:05 PM
Woops... how'd that get in there?
Mark d.
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 3 2006, 12:06 PM
Are we talking a 2316 (?) . What does the machine work/balancing cost alone?
KT
Isnt that free?
Like I said you wont see anyone publishing full cost of a big T4 conversion (200 HP) as its embarrassingly expensive. Posted by: Dan (Almaden Valley) Nov 3 2006, 12:12 PM
Are we talking a 2316 (?) . What does the machine work/balancing cost alone?
KT
Isnt that free?
Like I said you wont see anyone publishing full cost of a big T4 conversion (200 HP) as its embarrassingly expensive.Ask Randal....he should have pretty good idea at this point
Posted by: Dan (Almaden Valley) Nov 3 2006, 12:13 PM
Are we talking a 2316 (?) . What does the machine work/balancing cost alone?
KT
Isnt that free?
Like I said you wont see anyone publishing full cost of a big T4 conversion (200 HP) as its embarrassingly expensive.Ask Randal....he should have pretty good idea at this point
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 12:23 PM
Posted by: Joe Ricard Nov 3 2006, 12:26 PM
Does it have to be the same car? how about similar cars that have suspension and tires ready to go. My 70 914 is getting close to 1800 pounds and is still streetable.
The problem is with a six I would gain significant wieght and that would slow down the car is braking and cornering..
With my buddy behind the wheel this could be a very exciting day.
So to keep it equal it would be tough. the same car with the same brakes and suspension would suffer with a 6 and get REAL fast with a 4 of equal HP.
Posted by: iamchappy Nov 3 2006, 12:42 PM
The topic of this thread is 6vs4 right.
I liked the 200hp - 4 over the 200 hp 3.0 - 6 "BUT"
Without getting into price or cost which wasn't part of the original topic, here is what I have done over the years.
Ive had both in search of the 914 car of my dreams
I had a 2.9 type 4 built for my first 914 it was very fun torquey as hell and blew up on an overrev when the tires spun after hitting some sand on the road during takeoff- 5000 miles of short lived fun but it wasn't my dream car.
Ive had a stock 3.0 sc 6 which was ok, but nothing to exciting, not the dream car.
Then a 8lb boosted turbocharged 3.0 which was more exciting than you could imagine, almost dream car.
Now I am almost ready to try out the new and improved 3.12 engine boosting 1bar
that has me actually worried on how scary it maybe until I get used to it.
Some guys get horsepower happy and go to extreme limits I think that now that my engine will be producing over 400hp, I hope I am done creating my 914 dream car and it had to have a monster six in it.
Posted by: McMark Nov 3 2006, 12:44 PM
Trekkor has a car with four cylinder mounts still in it and access to track events. We could dyno his existing motor to get a baseline. A four swap would take about 90 minutes. I'm willing to buy what I need to build a HP matched motor with no gimmicks or secret formulas. If Trek and Jake are into this, lets talk.
Posted by: Matt Romanowski Nov 3 2006, 12:45 PM
Joe,
The car should be the same. If the car is up to a true 200 hp motor, it's going to have all the brakes and basic chassis set up ready. The real difference is the spring rates would change.
This is starting to get nonsensical and emotional.
If we really want to start a debate on the motors longevity, etc, then lets talk real facts. I'm not a six expert, but a 911 has 6 main bearings (one for each cyclinder in effect)? A four has three that really support / counter the rod forces. Sixes have a much stronger case design. Sixes are drysumped and have better oiling. Sixes have pistons squirters. Sixes have better head designs, overhead cams, etc.
Again, it's really a personal preference. I understand that Jake has something to prove as it's how he makes his living, but the motors are vastly different.
Posted by: DNHunt Nov 3 2006, 12:45 PM
Seems like you caught me up on something similar. But wasn't this the point of the original question. Now when there's an offer to test the same car it's silly?
Dave
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 12:58 PM
My car would make a nice/perfect experiment platform.
The FOUR mounts, FOUR accellerator cable and set up for carbs and MSD equipped.
Drop engine/trans, swap motors, raise engine trans.
A four man crew could do this in 60 minutes.
Between run groups at Alameda.
SIX am, FOUR pm...Sounds crazy. I'd do it.
Of course it will never *actually* happen.
If it does...We'd need a real-time 914Club web cast with a host and music.
KT 
Posted by: anthony Nov 3 2006, 01:14 PM
The only issue I have with this debate is the misinformation campaign by the cheap six contingency. Those that ended up with a bum engine that needed a rebuild tend not to post in these threads.
A 2316 doesn't cost $15K. Sure a turnkey motor with all the goodies costs that much but for a fair comparision call Jerry Woods and ask how much a turnkey 911 six would cost from his shop. I bet it would easily be over $20K.
There is no secret on what the 2316 motor costs. All the prices are listed at Jake's store. $4800 for the kit, $200 for shipping, and you need a core motor. A decent header will cost you at least $600, $300 for a Mallory distributor, and $1100 for brand new Webers or about $1300 for an SDS fuel injection system or $500 for Megasquirt. I come up with $7,300 using SDS. Let's just say $8,000 with a few extras thrown in and that is for a brand new motor, brand new Webers or SDS injection, brand new clutch, and a brand new Mallory distributor.
If you go the six route, for $8K you get $4000 in conversion parts and you get a $4000 engine. $4000 buys a higher mileage 3.0L six with high mileage stock CIS injection. I think one would be pretty lucky to get out the door for $8K and not encouter any problems that cost extra.
Jake, if you want to upgrade my kit to a 200hp 2316 I'll be your 2316 west coast ambassador. I'll give every 914club member I meet at 914 breakfasts a ride to remember and I'll be at 10 autocrosses a year.
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 01:29 PM
But, isn't the 200hp TIV much higher than that, pricewise to the end user?
Thats according what they start with..
BUT generally carbs and exhaust are all thats needed, recently one of my kit customers got 170 ponies at the rear wheels with his 2316 kit in a 914 with a 1-3/4" header we have been working on in house for a while, for a 914.. That header is not 1K bucks.
What machine work? what balancing? All the machine work and balancing is done as part of the costs of the kit. The crank drops right into the case and you can hand clearance the material necessary in 45 minutes, or a machine shop will do it for 50 bucks in a mill.. With a kit I take alll the guesswork away.
But that always varys, based on what the person has to begin with and what corners they want to cut..
In todays world Nickies and exotic parts are no longer needed to make 200HP from a /4 reliable- we can do it with a 96mm bore and an 80mm stroke with a bitchin set of heads and less than 9.3:1 CR..
As I stated, if you want to get real time scientific data the only way to do that is with the same car and same driver with the logger in place and two different engines being swapped out as fast as possible. I am willing to take my time to contribute to this, is anyone truly dedicated to the six??
I'll also say if you want to compare the engines at a higher level output I'm up for that too.. I have a new 230HP offering that needs some press anyway and guess what, it's less than 2.4L, it does it all at less than 9.2:1 CR and makes 235 Lb/Ft of torque....
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 3 2006, 01:40 PM
The only issue I have with this debate is the misinformation campaign by the cheap six contingency. Those that ended up with a bum engine that needed a rebuild tend not to post in these threads.
How many 200 HP T4 owners do we have on the 914club forum aside from Jake? Nuf said. I'm brutally honest about my six conversion its certainly not wort free, but I didnt expect a $2000 engine to not have a few issues.
It would be interesting for you to track all your expenses in your mild 2270 T4 conversion project. My sense is you are underestimating your conversion costs. This has been billed as the cheap big bore and you got your kit on sale. When do you expect to have your motor built?
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 01:41 PM
I kinda like that.I knew I'd find my place in the world...
KT
Posted by: iamchappy Nov 3 2006, 01:47 PM
Again I would like to bring back to everyones attention that this thread as I interpret it is, "NOT ABOUT COST"(which is where these threads always go), but whats a more enjoyable engine in a 914 a 200hp 4 or a 200 hp 6
I have never had any experience with a souped up 200hp small 6 which I would think would be very fun only the 200 hp 4.
The engine characteristics of the 3.0 SC engine wouldn't be the same as a tweaked small 6.
I thought the 200hp 4 was more fun than the stock CIS SC 3 liter 200hp 6. But the six had way more potential.
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 02:15 PM
Grant,
WTF are you referring to the TIV at larger displacement being a conversion???
There is no altered cooling system needed, no ALTERED MOUNTS, NO GRINDING, NO WELDING or any of the things that would be considered "conversion"....
You guys also act like at 200 HP these engines are about to explode at any minute..
Keep in mind that even an F prod 1832cc engine that makes 180+ HP at sub 13:1 CR will last a full SCCA season of 12 races at 45 minutes of duration...
Keep in mind that the 200HP figures we are making are being done with the same OR LOWER CR than a factory six cylinder engine, the percentage of modification isn't that great as we are only increasing displacement by 15% to effectively double the factory power ouput..
Let me see a six that has that amunt of modification to DOUBLE its ouput... How much does that fucker cost???
I like how everyone ignores my offer- guess you girls don't like the six as much as ypu seem..
Or you are scared that I'll embarass all of you in front of your buddies... It would suck to have your "Porsche engine" spanked by a VW engine developed in the backwoods of Georgia- I don't blame you..
Posted by: anthony Nov 3 2006, 02:18 PM
How many 200 HP T4 owners do we have on the 914club forum aside from Jake? Nuf said. I'm brutally honest about my six conversion its certainly not wort free, but I didnt expect a $2000 engine to not have a few issues.
It would be interesting for you to track all your expenses in your mild 2270 T4 conversion project. My sense is you are underestimating your conversion costs. This has been billed as the cheap big bore and you got your kit on sale. When do you expect to have your motor built?
Grant, I'll gladly compare costs with you some day. I don't think I'm underestimating any costs. I only need to write 2-3 checks for everything I need which makes expenses pretty easy to track. I'll be in at under $6K with the 2270, new SDS EFI, and a new Mallory distributor. I'm using SSI HE's because I really want heat in my car. Jake tells me that SSIs are fine with the 2270. If I did Megasquirt my whole setup would come in at $5K but it's a lot of extra work and tinkering and I'd rather just be driving the car sooner. My plan is to have it all together for next spring. The actual kit should arrive in the next month or so.
For me, my car, and my wallet I thought this was a great solution to get more power and have a nice hot rod 914. I will have a new engine, new injection, new clutch, basically new everything.
Don't get me wrong. I wouldn't mind owning a big six conversion. I took a ride in a 240hp 3.2 914 with a hot cam and Webers. It was a monster. It was awesome. The guy also has like $30K in the car and it still really needs a 915 conversion (another $8K) to match the engine. If my funds were unlimited I'd love to do a 3.8L six/915 tranny monster of a 914 with flares and wide Fuchs and the whole enchilada.
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 02:24 PM
I think Grant was referring to the need for aftermarket intake, exhaust, dizzy, fuel delivery and additional cooling if you want it to last *ONE* 30 minute DE session in the summer.
If it doesn't plug'n'play, it's a conversion in my mind
KT
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 3 2006, 02:43 PM
Grant,
WTF are you referring to the TIV at larger displacement being a conversion???
There is no altered cooling system needed, no ALTERED MOUNTS, NO GRINDING, NO WELDING or any of the things that would be considered "conversion"....
You guys also act like at 200 HP these engines are about to explode at any minute..
Keep in mind that even an F prod 1832cc engine that makes 180+ HP at sub 13:1 CR will last a full SCCA season of 12 races at 45 minutes of duration...
Keep in mind that the 200HP figures we are making are being done with the same OR LOWER CR than a factory six cylinder engine, the percentage of modification isn't that great as we are only increasing displacement by 15% to effectively double the factory power ouput..
Let me see a six that has that amunt of modification to DOUBLE its ouput... How much does that fucker cost???
I like how everyone ignores my offer- guess you girls don't like the six as much as ypu seem..
Or you are scared that I'll embarass all of you in front of your buddies... It would suck to have your "Porsche engine" spanked by a VW engine developed in the backwoods of Georgia- I don't blame you..
Jake, Lets be honest now. A big 200 hp T4 is a conversion. You must convert stock fuel delivery system, you must convert stock exhaust system, oil cooling system, stock ignition system, you must upgrade to a clutch that can handle the extra torque. Its a conversion.
If I use your criteria of conversion my six isnt a conversion either. I didnt grind anything, weld anything or alter mounts.
FYI, I get my butt kicked by T4 engines much less capable than your Hillbilly 4's every AX I attend so I think I'm fairly secure in the fact that I wont be embarrassed too badly. I'd love to see one of your engines but all I ever hear is talk.
I'd definitely take you up on the motor swap CHALLENGE. Just beware that once that motor was in my car I'd never come back and you would be stuck with a greasy old six!
Posted by: Matt Romanowski Nov 3 2006, 02:48 PM
Trekkor, what size motor do you have? Where you serious in your offer?
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 03:03 PM
Trekkor, what size motor do you have? Where you serious in your offer?
2.0 S. The motor swap at the autocross, 6 vs. 4?
Sure, I'd do that. Why not?
It will never happen of course...But, I would do it.
KT
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 03:09 PM
I think Grant was referring to the need for aftermarket intake, exhaust, dizzy, fuel delivery and additional cooling if you want it to last *ONE* 30 minute DE session in the summer.
If it doesn't plug'n'play, it's a conversion in my mind
KT
Then you are confused..
Its not a conversion and YOU DO NOT NEED BETTER ENGINE COOLING THAN STOCK for todays 200 HP/4... OIL COOLING is not engine cooling, most STOCK -4 engines need an external oil cooler for a D/E event in the middle of the summer..
None of that is considered a conversion, they are UPDATES...
You guys that have never done this don't understand the fact that one of these engines can be installed in one weekend by ONE PERSON including the oil system... I have done it many times by myself..
The factory pressure plate will hold 200HP, all you need is a 85 dollar clutch disc- thats not a conversion unless you weld the pressure plate on!
The Mallory unilite drops in and installs in 1/2 hours, is that a conversion- nope, nit unless you are totally lost and have no clue as to what a 13mm wrench looks like..
Its very obvious that you guys are totally lost on the subject of what it really takes to install one of these engines, if you call the reinstall of an engine thats only had its displacement increased a "concversion" you need to do some more research..
So I guess if you have a 3.0 six and you pull it out and make it a 3.2 its a "conversion"?? By your standards it is..
Bullshit.
Anyone who wants to hear a testimonial from a 914 club member that has a 202 HP 2316 in his 914 can download this radio show from my archives
http://http://www.aircooledtechnology.com/radio/Sept212006.mp3
To me a six cylinder engine just means it has two more rod bearings to wear, 4 more rod bolts to break and 4 more valves to drop.. More parts = more chances for mechanical failure... Its all about doing more with LESS!
Oh yeah, where is that six cylinder that doubles its HP with 15% displacement gain... better yet where is the 2.4L six that can top this power on PUMP GAS N/A
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 03:13 PM
Trekkor, what size motor do you have? Where you serious in your offer?
2.0 S. The motor swap at the autocross, 6 vs. 4?
Sure, I'd do that. Why not?
It will never happen of course...But, I would do it.
KT
Absolutely... Take it to a Chassis dyno and post the results. I'll create a /4 that makes similar power and it's game on.. Like i said, I'll need till mid summer to make it happen, but its not a problem..
I'd like to use the 200HP realm for the comparison, since everyone thinks the engine won't last a day... They forget that I drove a 2270 cross country at an average speed of 76 MPH in 4.5 days and then pulled 94 MPH in the Qtr mile with it..
Posted by: Matt Romanowski Nov 3 2006, 03:15 PM
Jake, we have a taker. A 2 liter with S cams and compression should be around 180 horse. Close enough - we have to start somewhere.
Let's put this together. I'd even manage to find a flight out if I got to drive 
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 03:18 PM
OK, that will be close..
Like I said, we'd need a chassis dyno report so I could make sure the two engines were as similar as possible...
My 181 HP engine in my 914 made 157 RWHP...
But I'd REALLY like to make it over 200 ponies from each engine..
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 03:20 PM
:edit:
Wake me up next summer and I'll play.
I'll be doing the driving with a passenger who will verify "no lifting, braking, intentional bad lines or other cheating.
KT
Posted by: jim912928 Nov 3 2006, 03:23 PM
To the original question...my 1.8l 914 is quick and fun. I drove a 3.2l motronic conversion and it was FAST!!!!! That is the big difference to me. It was FAST....and SOUNDED like a race car with that great six sound. Nothing like a high revving porsche six!
Now, to add to the cost bandwagon...cost is based on each persons individual approach. For me (had time)..i found a great 2 owner (I knew the 2nd owner) 84 carrera with 74k miles on it. Bought it for 9k and parted it out. I made 1k over what I paid and kept:
1. engine
2. tranny (915)
3. axles/cv's
4. dme/harness
5. tach and speedo
6. carrera front end
7. all 4 carrera brakes
8. threw the body weltmeister front sway bar
Now..I get to sell my 71 911 front end currently on the 914 and my spaced out front/rear 914 brakes (vented all around)..which will add to my positive cash flow. Only thing yet to buy then is oil tank, lines, engine mount, exhaust and whatever I need for either using my 901 or upgrading my 915 (which I might just do when I blow up the 901). So, with my patience I'll have a very cheap conversion with some very good kick ass parts!
Point...each person does it based on what they like, and each persons costs are based on their approach. Can be expensive...can be cheap. In either case 200hp in a 914 is FUN!
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 03:27 PM
Oh and give me the option to buy the motor If I, "see the light"
KT
Posted by: Matt Romanowski Nov 3 2006, 03:27 PM
To me a six cylinder engine just means it has two more rod bearings to wear, 4 more rod bolts to break and 4 more valves to drop.. More parts = more chances for mechanical failure... Its all about doing more with LESS!
Jake, you might be saying that, but you know it's not entirely true. The six case is significantly stronger. More mains equals less load on the ones that are there and there is less crank flex.
When was the last time you heard people having major trouble with 911 heads dropping valves or seats?
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 03:44 PM
I'll say no more...
Anyone who wants to work on the planning and logistics of the challenge I came up with can find me via email.
FYI- I have done a six conversion in the mid 90s... Thats when i realized how heavy those bastards really are.
Posted by: J P Stein Nov 3 2006, 03:51 PM
Since this a shamless self promotion by Jake (not that there's anything wrong with that ), Id do it if there were something in for me. I'd have to reinstall 4 pooper engine mounts, do a couple engine swaps and a couple chassis dyno sessions....which is a fair amount of work.
The tests that Jake asks for are doable, but not easily scheduled....twice.
I got the stuff that seems to be needed.
Posted by: DNHunt Nov 3 2006, 05:03 PM
I hope this is happening. If it does why not make it an event at the WCC 07? that way there lots of witnesses. We can even have some wagering on the side.
We'll have stories to tell our grandkids about the day of the showdown.
I want to see this.
Dave
Posted by: Travis Neff Nov 3 2006, 05:20 PM
From the torque curve charts for an SC or a 2316, how much different would they be on the track? The torque curves are very similar. Now the 4 would be lighter than the six - What would be proven? that a Raby 4 can keep up and stay together as a 3.0 would on the track? I would think that a 1/2 day on the track each - for sure they will stay together an perform.
Posted by: anthony Nov 3 2006, 05:36 PM
I agree that something like this would be a great at a WCC event.
But, I don't see the merit of pitting a six against a four with the same hp/torque specs. The four that is 100 pounds lighter should always win.
Trekkor or Grant, how about you guys throw some street tires on your cars and we all do some acceleration tests after I get my 2270 installed. Randal could bring his 2316 along for another data point. We could do 5-60mph, 5-100mph, 30-70mph rolling tests. Finding a spot to hit 100mph might be kind of hard though.
Posted by: SirAndy Nov 3 2006, 05:49 PM
so, have we decided which one is better yet? what did i miss?
i still would like to see someone weld two 1.7L motors together at the crank and make it a 3.4L flat /8 !!!
Andy
Posted by: McMark Nov 3 2006, 05:51 PM
I'm serious about trying to make this happen. Trekkor's setup would be great, except one thing... it's a one driver only car.
I'm going to start looking at 'cheap sixes' and see about buying one just for the challengeto run in my black car. We can have a morning session with multiple drivers (Randal, Nathan, Trekkor, Grant, Brad, etc) and then swap the motor for an afternoon session. Anyone have a six lying around they'll 'rent' for the challenge?
This would be great fun at the WCC. 
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 05:57 PM
Doing it at an event would be great...
Let me know what I need to build power wise and I'll ship the entire assembly ready to drop in..
Posted by: Randal Nov 3 2006, 06:05 PM
Are we talking a 2316 (?) . What does the machine work/balancing cost alone?
KT
Isnt that free?
Like I said you wont see anyone publishing full cost of a big T4 conversion (200 HP) as its embarrassingly expensive.Ask Randal....he should have pretty good idea at this point
is right. If you're going to build a full off T4 race motor then it's going to be expensive. You could buy a few 3.6's for the money in mine, but that's not the point.
Given that I will be taking this motor to the track - this one had to be built right. On a scale of 1-10 my best guess as to severity of motor use is that AutoX is below 5 and the track pushing 10, just simply from the viewpoint of time/load. .
As with any race motor, I could lose this one the first time out, but it won't be because we didn't use all the right stuff, as you can see by my sponsor list and put it together carefully and correctly. We’re also having the Link distributor, Performance Engineering, do the dyno work, given their familiarity with the Link injection setup.
FYI by Jake's standards my motor is a little one at 2.4 liters. In additional to an updated Raby Kit with a billet crank and LN Engineering cylinders, the motor will be running TWM throttle bodies, Link injection, a completely new wire harness together with all appropriate data access provisioning, all new electronics (Mallory) and Chris Foley headers and stub pipes (Yea Chris). And the head work on this motor is really pretty unbelievable, i.e., the nicest I’ve seen.
This is the little motor that could!
And of course there is substantial other stuff proprietary to the engine assembler that you’ll never see.
Again, building real race motors is not for the faint of heart. And if you seek independent confirmation go ask Rich Walton what it would cost to blue print a 3.6 for racing.
Next year should be fun with BPR running several different 914 / Boxster configurations. Who knows if everything works out maybe we’ll be able to answer the T4 vs. 6 question from our own stable.
Why did we build a T4? If you do the math and track results, one can come to the conclusion that a lightweight 914 with a strong 4 can be competitive.
Posted by: orange914 Nov 3 2006, 07:21 PM
interesting
Posted by: nebreitling Nov 3 2006, 07:38 PM
Randal is right on point: race motors are different. you guys want to spend some money? race 2.0 sixes. THERE is some serious money (engine programs at over $100k/season; serious money for "amateur" racing). hell, i do a top-end rebuild on my kart every 1.5 hours. with next year's engine, it will probably be more like 45 or 60 minutes for every top end... my costs are not unreasonable, but it sustains my point that race engines are.... different.
Everyone is talking from their own point of views -- the street thrashers have a different sense of power, reliability and maintainence than do the track drivers (where reliability is primary) and the AXers (weight) and the w2w racers (ragged-edge power within the confines of strict rules).... that's fine, but i think we should be clear about the metrics by which we judge these things. This is exactly why a 4 vs 6 'shoot-out' is inherently problematic.
jake is fighting an uphill battle here. hi-power T-IV's have a reputation of being grenades on the track. regardless of the facts, the research, or Jake's talents, it may take a couple generations to change that impression. I'd love to see someone abuse a 200hp 914-4 track car for 4 or 5 years with only oil changes and the ocassional valve-adjustment. I'd be a believer at that point.
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 07:43 PM
I'm used to it...
I prefer it that way...
I can build sixes, but they are no fun....
Posted by: 9146986 Nov 3 2006, 08:05 PM
There is one way to settle this..
Someone offer up a car...
I build a 200HP TIV for it and then some dedicated souls can install it and the swap it out with a six of similar output..
I suggested this the last time this subject got out of hand. With a displacement limitation of 2.2 liters or less, remember? So we have 2.2 liters or less with a budget of $5k? Normally aspirated. I have at least one six cylinder combination in mind
Obviously the type four is a great engine, and Jake is making it much, much better. I would think the limiting factor is utimately the valve train, isn't it? Isn't this one of the main reasons why Porsche went to the overhead cam engines?
The thought of doing A/B comparisons with a type four and flat six in the same car would be very cool.
Transmission gearing would be a factor though. I think it would be very difficult to have optimum gearing for the two different engines.
Posted by: Bleyseng Nov 3 2006, 08:08 PM
Thats really not the point here. Realistically no one is going to be able to make a 200 HP T4 conversion for $6000 after adding all the required conversion parts on a stock car. Then lets talk about whether a big T4 that makes 200 HP is going to last as long as a mild 200 HP six. No way no how.
[/quote]
Ok, I'll post the info again. The new breed of type4's has:
Nickasil cylinders just like a six
New freakin CNC heads
Will have ceramic roller lifters
Roller cams with new profiles
Modern EFI -SDS, Megasquirt etc...
better than stock rods
better bearings
Why won't these go 200k if its not raced? I am sure at 100k the heads should be looked at but where and what will go wrong?????
yeah, but a 2.2S six motor made about 160+hp all high revs. A 2.3L four built for 200hp can be done and a 2.4L six is hard pushed to get there unless I am missing something. You always have to add in the price of the six conversion too in the comparison.
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 08:27 PM
Game on boys!
I have 64 lifters in stock and 11 cams being groud as we speak.. In 2007 by mid year ALL my complete engines will be "Rollers"...
Someone mentionned the valvetrain being weak... These EXACT same components (sam Mfr of the lifters and same material for the cam blanks)make it 5-6, 500 mile NASCAR races, last weekend they were turning close to 10,000 RPM in Atlanta the whole race, most cars were not dropping below 7,500 in the corners..
Posted by: swood Nov 3 2006, 09:08 PM
Oh man...those deserve a 
2316 on the brain...
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 3 2006, 09:40 PM
Ok, I'll post the info again. The new breed of type4's has:
Nickasil cylinders just like a six
New freakin CNC heads
Will have ceramic roller lifters
Roller cams with new profiles
Modern EFI -SDS, Megasquirt etc...
better than stock rods
better bearings
Why won't these go 200k if its not raced? I am sure at 100k the heads should be looked at but where and what will go wrong?????
yeah, but a 2.2S six motor made about 160+hp all high revs. A 2.3L four built for 200hp can be done and a 2.4L six is hard pushed to get there unless I am missing something. You always have to add in the price of the six conversion too in the comparison.
Yes youre missing something. 2.4 S engine in stock trim made 190 HP. Hard pushed to get 200 HP? A set of headers or increasing lazy compression ratio of stock 2.4 engine would easily push output over 200 HP. The 2.4 responds very well to mods as outlined below.
A quote from PORSCHE Excellence was expected.
" With a new long stroke camshaft Porsche could build 911 S engines for GT racing that came right up to the 2.5 liter class limit, and it was not long before they had done so. In fact one such engine survived 7500 miles of flogging in a course car in the 1971 Monte Carlo Rally. New Biral cylinders and pistons with bore of 86.7 mm brought displacement up to 2494cc. With the Bosch injection it produced 275 bhp at 7900 RPM and 195 ft/lbs of torque at 6200 RPM."
Hmmm ....Stroker 2.4 six. I just might know somone who is doing that.
Posted by: Bleyseng Nov 3 2006, 09:40 PM
I wanna see a type4 turn 10 grand for a race.
Ok, if the 2.4S was so great at 200hp why is everybody going to 3.2 or 3.6's?
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 09:51 PM
Another friggin book reader...
Imagine that.
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 09:55 PM
Grant is stepping up. I can see this. 
KT
Posted by: quik914 Nov 3 2006, 09:55 PM
Well, I had a nice post written for this, and I hit one wrong button and it was gone. Gotta love it.
If you took the time to listen to the radio show Jake posted, you heard my testimonial. If you didn't, listen to it. What I said is the truth, and it comes from someone who has been driving these cars for over 20 years.
All I can say is that I agree with the statement that you have to build what you want. Having said that, I believe if they do the challenge, and the motors are equal in power (with similar torque and HP curves) the 6 does not stand a chance.
Porsche built over 100k of these cars, the most successfull Porsche of its day, and the vast majority of them were 4 bangers.
Yes, there is someone with a 200HP 4 on this forum (202 at 6K to be exact). Backwoods GA???? All I can say is ignorance is bliss. Brains are not confined to the big cities of the world. Air Cooled Heaven is an impressive place, and they do great work there. There is something to be said for the clean air that you breath up there.
I am going to take my 4 banger up to the mountains to see the turning leaves down here in Backwoods GA (without any reservations by the way, the motor is silky smooth, and I have no doubt it will provide a trouble free life for a long time).
If you are wondering, I have just over 13K in my motor setup. I pretty much went all out and that includes the most beautiful headers money can buy (Thanks Chris) 1-3/4" Foley customs with center exhaust muffler, ceramic coated and all. I got the a turnkey 2316 from Jake with the old ceramic lifters (no longer available I believe), some cool coatings, and lots of goodies including the JE Pistons. It uses 45mm Dels with the custom Mallory from Jake (you have to get him to set it up if you buy it so it is right on the money). That includes an Accusump and a remote cooler ($1000???? I have about $200 in my set up and it is a Mocal) with the stock cooling system. My temps run between 300 and 350 CHT and oil temp is way cool under normal conditions and was totally under control after 3 hard 1:30s autocross runs in the heat of the summer in the big city in GA.
Whatever you decide to do with your car, enjoy! I thought you might like this honest information from an experienced 4 banger owner.
Peace!
Posted by: iamchappy Nov 3 2006, 09:59 PM
Move on, I need over 400hp to get me going and there are others on board whose teeners are sporting 600. I am sorry but 200hp is not that exciting.
I hope this kills this thread. 
Posted by: quik914 Nov 3 2006, 10:05 PM
If you hate it so much, why are you monitoring it Chappy?
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 3 2006, 10:10 PM
I'd like to add that Mike has a stock 914 cooling system, not my DTM and attains those temps... They are near exacting those of a 100% stock 2.0 engine that makes 100HP less... Can anyone say efficiency???? Hell yeah, with a capital E!
Mike was standing right next to me when that 2316 pulled 202 ponies on my dyno with equal torque...
Mike did a great job on his install, the install is what makes or breaks the engine....
Mike, I heard that I was able to break a gearbox for you??? That a boy, those 2316s are HELL on 2nd gear- I broke mine 3 times!
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 10:27 PM
Do we have a thread turned infomercial smiley?
KT
Posted by: Lou W Nov 3 2006, 10:33 PM
Well, I had a nice post written for this, and I hit one wrong button and it was gone. Gotta love it.
If you took the time to listen to the radio show Jake posted, you heard my testimonial. If you didn't, listen to it. What I said is the truth, and it comes from someone who has been driving these cars for over 20 years.
All I can say is that I agree with the statement that you have to build what you want. Having said that, I believe if they do the challenge, and the motors are equal in power (with similar torque and HP curves) the 6 does not stand a chance.
Porsche built over 100k of these cars, the most successfull Porsche of its day, and the vast majority of them were 4 bangers.
Yes, there is someone with a 200HP 4 on this forum (202 at 6K to be exact). Backwoods GA???? All I can say is ignorance is bliss. Brains are not confined to the big cities of the world. Air Cooled Heaven is an impressive place, and they do great work there. There is something to be said for the clean air that you breath up there.
I am going to take my 4 banger up to the mountains to see the turning leaves down here in Backwoods GA (without any reservations by the way, the motor is silky smooth, and I have no doubt it will provide a trouble free life for a long time).
If you are wondering, I have just over 13K in my motor setup. I pretty much went all out and that includes the most beautiful headers money can buy (Thanks Chris) 1-3/4" Foley customs with center exhaust muffler, ceramic coated and all. I got the a turnkey 2316 from Jake with the old ceramic lifters (no longer available I believe), some cool coatings, and lots of goodies including the JE Pistons. It uses 45mm Dels with the custom Mallory from Jake (you have to get him to set it up if you buy it so it is right on the money). That includes an Accusump and a remote cooler ($1000???? I have about $200 in my set up and it is a Mocal) with the stock cooling system. My temps run between 300 and 350 CHT and oil temp is way cool under normal conditions and was totally under control after 3 hard 1:30s autocross runs in the heat of the summer in the big city in GA.
Whatever you decide to do with your car, enjoy! I thought you might like this honest information from an experienced 4 banger owner.
Peace!
Do you have any pictures?
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 3 2006, 10:42 PM
Do we have a thread turned infomercial smiley?
KT
Posted by: iamchappy Nov 3 2006, 10:43 PM
Who said I hated it, but this debate could go on forever, there is no right or wrong, better or best.
Posted by: quik914 Nov 3 2006, 10:49 PM
It is not a debate. The guy asked for information, and I gave him honest information about my experience. Infomercial? You guys think what you want. What do you think 914fan asked for........INFORMATION.....
Posted by: quik914 Nov 3 2006, 10:57 PM
Here is the car, I have a picture of the motor at work I will post on Monday.
Attached image(s)
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 3 2006, 10:58 PM
It is not a debate. The guy asked for information, and I gave him honest information about my experience. Infomercial? You guys think what you want. What do you think 914fan asked for........INFORMATION.....
The local Georgia pitchman from the radio show? Clearly hints of infomercial to me. Based on price you quoted you got a deal on your motor in exchange for something. Even I would pitch Jake if I could get a turn key 200 hp motor with those headers, etc all in for $13K. Thats $5000 less than Jake quoted me for lesser setup once I figured in cost for carbs and headers.
Jake you want to sell me a 206 HP turn key motor all set up with coatings, ceramics, carbs, ignition, expensive headers and muffler for $13K? Wow!
Posted by: Travis Neff Nov 3 2006, 11:23 PM
Wow, this thread probably won't go anywhere. But, as we were speaking before for about 5-6 grand you can do a raby 4 at 200hp, or do a used 911 engine conversion - on a budget. You can also do a Suby or V8 in the same price range. So there is a lot of choices there that wasn't not too long ago.
Again, I am asking engines with simlar torque curves, 4 vs 6 - what's the difference?
And price ranges were never asked for in the first post, but if you want to make an apples to apples comparison - you have to factor the cost of admission to play.
The thing intriguing to me is the fact as the 914 is perceived as the underdog, change to a 6 and all of a sudden the perception changes. Add a hopped up 4 cyl and it adds to the underdog whupping ass on the majority perception. Jake has a tough argument here, there are thousands upon thousands of 911 engines making good power with longevity and power. With his engines, he has to wait for word of mouth on how they survive before the majority really believes in longevity. that's hard to do when most of the cars are pleasure cruisers or track weekend cars.
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 11:30 PM
And I believe the rarest thing would be for any of them to replace their SIX with a FOUR.
Anybody here with a 911 convert to a FOUR? ( crickets )
KT
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 11:33 PM
I think the reason that smaller SIXES are plentiful and cheap is because 911 guys are upgrading to bigger SIXES.
Pretty straight forward, really.
KT
Posted by: Travis Neff Nov 3 2006, 11:34 PM
Correct Trekkor. And if someone also invested in a Raby 4 would they decide then to go to a 6 cyl? I dunno. For the cost of the big ticket items (nickies, roller cams etc.) it would be hard to drop that investment and change rather than repair and move on. But with big 4's in the past they blew up quick and quite easily, those poeple pressed on or converted to a six. John Rogers is one of them. Like I said, if Jakes engines are all what he states - he has a long road ahead before the majority changes their minds.
Posted by: trekkor Nov 3 2006, 11:43 PM
And of course, for some, resale value is important.
KT
Posted by: 914fan Nov 3 2006, 11:50 PM
OK guys. We took a hard left. Lets bring it back to center.
"How do a 200hp 6 and a 200hp 4 drive compared to each other. I know there are several ways to get 200hp out or either. I am interested in a daily driver 200hp 6 or 4. Does anybody have any dyno charts of these? Is the 6 more peaky? is the 4 more torquE? Type IV and Porsche 6 please.
I am not trying to start a flame war. I am just looking for information cause I found an empty spot in my brain, and I need to fill it before something else goes in there."
I said nothing about cost, preference, or anything. I was just looking for info. This has been a good thread for the most part. I am not looking to get a 6 or 4. I will probably only ever end up with a 1911 or if I'm lucky a 2056 4. I just wanted to know how they drive in comparison. ONE person told of his story with factory 2.0s 4vs6. That was awesome. a couple people have told like stories. Thank you. I DO NOT CARE about the cost of either power plant. I can't afford either one. I'm poor. Ask slits. hes seen my car. If your in HB you have probably seen it also. Lets sop fighting about what is best and discuss the topic.
Have you driven a six? how does it drive? does it push? where is your power?
Have you driven a powerful four? how does it drive? does it push? where is your power?
as far as "Jake the infomercial" so what? He builds a great product and is proud of it. We all brag about what we are good at. You should hear me talk about fishing on a kayak. He has made getting four parts easier. If that was all he did we would all be happy. But he does more. You either like what he does or you dont. If you like it thats great. If not thats great to.
Lets try and bring this back to center.
If you have a six how long does it take to go from 1500rpm to 6000rpm in third gear? what are the indicated speeds? Same question for a powerful 4.
I do like the idea of 1 car that has the motor switched. If it could be done with a neutral driver it would answer the question exactly. Exacting documentation would show the differences between the two.
Remember I NEVER said anything about price, preference, or a need to get one or the other. I just asked how they drive. Be descriptive, I want to be able to imagine it.
Nick
Posted by: Travis Neff Nov 3 2006, 11:58 PM
Good points Nick. Did you see the torque curve chart for a 3.0 and a 2316 very similar along all RPM ranges. HP is a measurement of torque, so my thought is they perform very similar.
I've ridden in my 1.7 and 2.0 and a hotrod 2056 those were fun. I got to ride in trekkors car, and that was funner. Got a ride in a 3.6 teener in is downright scary TORQUE those 6cyl engines were far more fun than my stock and hotrodded small 4's.
Posted by: McMark Nov 4 2006, 12:01 AM
I'm surprise and embarrassed by the arrogance some six converts. 
If Jerry Woods was here promoting six cylinder technology I know at least three people who would be excited to hear every secret he would spout. I'm one.
Don't bash the people who share their knowledge just because it's not interesting to you. There are quite a few people on this board who have a financial interest related to this board. I'm glad that people like Jake and Brad and TimT and so many others are willing to share their knowledge. And if they make a buck or promote themselves, I consider it a valuable trade.
Posted by: McMark Nov 4 2006, 12:07 AM
Nick, I don't know how money doesn't enter into the equation. Without considering cost it becomes every combo of four cylinder vs every combo of six cylinder.
Six conversions cost money, but if you want huge power they're the way to go (3.0, 3.2, 3.6). If you're looking for bang for your buck, a 2056 four with carbs is probably the best bet. A 2056 with 125 hp is amazing and you can build one for around $2000.
Posted by: 914fan Nov 4 2006, 12:12 AM
Travis. I did see the 2 plots. That was great. thank you.
"Input. Need more input."
More driver and driven stories
I agree with McMark. Don't bash those who share their knowlede. If we were to bash everybody who shared their knowledge. NONE of US would not be bashed.
Cost does not need to enter the equation because I dont care. I will never have a high cost engine. I would consider myself lucky to ride in one. I just want to be able to close my eyes and imagine the drive. So how do they drive. Lets even take out the hp part of this question. Do you have a high power 4, or 6? Describe in detail how it drives.
Again thank you all for the info.
Nick
Posted by: quik914 Nov 4 2006, 12:20 AM
The local Georgia pitchman from the radio show? Clearly hints of infomercial to me. Based on price you quoted you got a deal on your motor in exchange for something. Even I would pitch Jake if I could get a turn key 200 hp motor with those headers, etc all in for $13K. Thats $5000 less than Jake quoted me for lesser setup once I figured in cost for carbs and headers.
Jake you want to sell me a 206 HP turn key motor all set up with coatings, ceramics, carbs, ignition, expensive headers and muffler for $13K? Wow!
Grant,
I had the carbs, ignition and a good core. I also delivered it and picked it up, so that saved me some money too. The rest was bought and paid in full, no credit cards. I did get a good deal, do you know why? I got on the list almost 2 years ago before everyone knew about Jake. I had faith in him after I talked to him about the motor I wanted. He said he could build it and I put up my money and waited....and waited. My car is nice. It is exactly what I always wanted, and I love it. That is all that matters. I am no pitch man for Jake. He is crazy for sure, but in a good way. And being in the service business, I deal with a lot of people who will try to scam you. That is one thing Jake will not do. You get what you pay for. If I had to do it again, I would pay the going rate for what I want. You sound like you like your 6 and that is fine, but don't judge someone because he speaks his mind. Have a little class.
914fan, the questions you asked are good. My car is more nimble than a six, no doubt. It changed direction better and is much more predictable as it starts to slide. Most of what you asked is based on set up. Weight distribution on the 4 cyl. is basically 50 50. The 6 adds some weight, but it is still well balanced. It is a mid engine car, so that is inherent in the design. Most of the things you asked are due to what the driver does when. Weight is shifted with your feet, and any car can be made to push if you transfer weight to the rear at the wrong time. As far as details go, the car is easy to drive and very forgiving, pulls very hard from 3500 to 6500 and will cruise along at 3000 without a problem. It revs very fast and in 3rd it runs through the gear like a stock one runs through second. I drove a stock 2.0 for a lot of years and this one puts it to shame. Its not as fast as a strong 6 cyl. on top end. But most of my driving is done between 30 and 80, and it will run with any 6 (minus the big ones with big power) at those speeds.
Keep saving. I had mine sit for years while I was saving for the car I wanted to build. I am glad I stuck with the 4 cyl. If I wanted a 911, I certaily could have gotten one for the money I have in the car. I wanted a 914, and to me, a 914 is a 4 cyl. Good luck, I am not going to waste anymore of my time with this. Enjoy your car, and BTW, I love the boat on top.......they really do hold a lot of cargo for a little car too...... Cool.
Posted by: Mueller Nov 4 2006, 04:17 AM
Have you driven a six? how does it drive? does it push? where is your power?
Have you driven a powerful four? how does it drive? does it push? where is your power?
Nick
The questions are really still too vague....
Gearing, tire size, whether or not the car is stockish weight or not or extensively been put on a diet all have a huge effect on how it drives and where the power is and how it feels.
What you really need is the dyno charts to get a better feeling...you could have 2 /4 motors that both put out lets say 200HP, but one could be a dog on the street if it's designed for high rpms and if the other one is more of a torque monster it might be considered more fun to drive on street..geared incorrectly and neither one could be fun to drive but be more of a chore.....
considering that driving just a bone stock 914 is fun, anything putting down more power will be a blast if the rest of the car is up to the task of letting you use the additional power.....
generally speaking, no matter whether it's a /4 or a /6, the bore/stroke/cam(s) will dictate where the power is
whether or not the car "pushes" has nothing to do with the powerplant...
Posted by: Bleyseng Nov 4 2006, 09:06 AM
Have you driven a six? how does it drive? does it push? where is your power?
Have you driven a powerful four? how does it drive? does it push? where is your power?
Nick
The questions are really still too vague....
Gearing, tire size, whether or not the car is stockish weight or not or extensively been put on a diet all have a huge effect on how it drives and where the power is and how it feels.
What you really need is the dyno charts to get a better feeling...you could have 2 /4 motors that both put out lets say 200HP, but one could be a dog on the street if it's designed for high rpms and if the other one is more of a torque monster it might be considered more fun to drive on street..geared incorrectly and neither one could be fun to drive but be more of a chore.....
considering that driving just a bone stock 914 is fun, anything putting down more power will be a blast if the rest of the car is up to the task of letting you use the additional power.....
generally speaking, no matter whether it's a /4 or a /6, the bore/stroke/cam(s) will dictate where the power is
whether or not the car "pushes" has nothing to do with the powerplant...
I have just been trying to say that in the four world things have changed, you can get 200hp that lasts.
Can we stop the bashing
seems like its a personal thing.For a DD, I think the 2056 is the best for your money. 110-125hp, about the same as a stock six but 100lbs lighter.
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 4 2006, 09:08 AM
Grant,
I had the carbs, ignition and a good core. I also delivered it and picked it up, so that saved me some money too. The rest was bought and paid in full, no credit cards. I did get a good deal, do you know why? I got on the list almost 2 years ago before everyone knew about Jake. I had faith in him after I talked to him about the motor I wanted. He said he could build it and I put up my money and waited....and waited. My car is nice. It is exactly what I always wanted, and I love it. That is all that matters. I am no pitch man for Jake. He is crazy for sure, but in a good way. And being in the service business, I deal with a lot of people who will try to scam you. That is one thing Jake will not do. You get what you pay for. If I had to do it again, I would pay the going rate for what I want. You sound like you like your 6 and that is fine, but don't judge someone because he speaks his mind. Have a little class.
914fan, the questions you asked are good. My car is more nimble than a six, no doubt. It changed direction better and is much more predictable as it starts to slide. Most of what you asked is based on set up. Weight distribution on the 4 cyl. is basically 50 50. The 6 adds some weight, but it is still well balanced. It is a mid engine car, so that is inherent in the design. Most of the things you asked are due to what the driver does when. Weight is shifted with your feet, and any car can be made to push if you transfer weight to the rear at the wrong time. As far as details go, the car is easy to drive and very forgiving, pulls very hard from 3500 to 6500 and will cruise along at 3000 without a problem. It revs very fast and in 3rd it runs through the gear like a stock one runs through second. I drove a stock 2.0 for a lot of years and this one puts it to shame. Its not as fast as a strong 6 cyl. on top end. But most of my driving is done between 30 and 80, and it will run with any 6 (minus the big ones with big power) at those speeds.
Keep saving. I had mine sit for years while I was saving for the car I wanted to build. I am glad I stuck with the 4 cyl. If I wanted a 911, I certaily could have gotten one for the money I have in the car. I wanted a 914, and to me, a 914 is a 4 cyl. Good luck, I am not going to waste anymore of my time with this. Enjoy your car, and BTW, I love the boat on top.......they really do hold a lot of cargo for a little car too...... Cool.
So all in were talking something around $15 to $16K if you had to pay for fuel system and ignition. Dang thats still a little cheaper than price Jake quoted me even with my own core and building a mild 2270. Its nice for us to have an honest discussion about true costs of a Big 200 HP T4 for once.
So getting back on topic. Your engine's powerband sounds very similar to my 2.4 911 E engine. The 2.4 I had installed in my car pulls hard from 3000 to 6000 RPM. I can actually grab decent power as low as 2500 RPM. The motor has little top end above 6000 RPM. Biggest differnce is I spent a 1/3rd of that T4 cost on my turnkey six motor. Silly me, but I do think cost is a consideration for some of us. I respect both motors I just couldnt ignore the value in a used six. I also didnt have the patience to wait 2 years with Jake like you did. I wanted a motor and had it installed in under a month. No waiting just instant gratification. I have this thing about not waiting until tommrrow as I might get hit by a train.
Trying to answer the original post is almost impossible. You'd have to pick a specific big T4 build spec and a speific six build spec. My 911 E motor is tons differnt from most high reving sixes. It gives a pretty incredible punch starting at 3000 RPM that is amazing for a small displacement engine.
Jake , FAT and others have built motors with differnt specs. In general cars with big T4's I have been in have great throttle response and give intial trust just like a six. in the first couple of gears. In general it isnt until youre on the open road that a medium size six shows its advantage with top end power. For a street motor anyone would be well served by a T4 anywhere between 150 to 200 HP.
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 4 2006, 09:11 AM
I'm surprise and embarrassed by the arrogance some six converts.
If Jerry Woods was here promoting six cylinder technology I know at least three people who would be excited to hear every secret he would spout. I'm one.
Don't bash the people who share their knowledge just because it's not interesting to you. There are quite a few people on this board who have a financial interest related to this board. I'm glad that people like Jake and Brad and TimT and so many others are willing to share their knowledge. And if they make a buck or promote themselves, I consider it a valuable trade.
Please let me know when Jerry starts posting on the 914club board to drum up business. LOL! Hope I dont embarrass you too much with my arrogance. Its just a problem with us guys with six cylinder motors we feel like royalty when we drive real Porsches.
Posted by: 9146986 Nov 4 2006, 09:46 AM
Can we stop the bashing
seems like its a personal thing.Brother Geoff speaks the truth! Can I get an AMEN?!! I mean we all play on the same team, right? Except for those damn water cooled V8 guys, we can all gang up on them
Just because there are different engines that we get keyed up about doesn't mean we have to say stuff we wouldn't say face to face. I thought the original post was soliciting opinions on a four cylinder vrs a six cylinder, not all of the ad nauseum arguments that have ensued.
Since I got my first 914 in 1978, a 914-6 has always been a desireable car for me. Probably because of the rarity factor, and probably in part because it says "Porsche" on the valve covers. I just figured if it said Porsche on the car it should say Porsche on the engine.
In complete honesty, a stock 6'er (2.0 T engine) is pretty underwhelming compared to a good solid 2.0 four. Supposedly 30HP more than the 2.0 four? Doesn't feel much faster, just easier to rev over 4k rpm. Why do you think the majority of rebuilds on the stock 914-6 engine end up 2.2E spec?
15 years ago, there wasn't anyone who was spending the resources to develop the type four engine. Pretty much everything was 70's technology. That has changed significantly with all that Jake and Charles have done and continue to develop. I don't care what gives you more wood a four or a six, these improvemens are a good thing OK? More choices and better technology is good, right?
I like sixes because converting a four cylinder car to a flat six dry sump Porsche engine, is something I know how to do, and have developed a reputation for supplying the stuff to put it together. When I built my first conversion car twelve years ago, the way to go for 200 reliable hp was a six, and that's the path I've taken. We all have our own path, and the reasons that have led us that way, it doesn't make it better than one or the other.
Can't we move on to something we can really argue about, like which is better Coke or Pepsi, blondes, redheads, or brunettes??!
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 4 2006, 10:01 AM
Yep, until you open the front trunk and find "Volkswagenwerk A.G" stamped on the ID plate... What you end up like is a snotty nosed 911 Prick with a capital "P" that still gets an allowance from daddy...
Mike didn't get a deal at all. He paid the going rate for the engine that he wanted at the time we initiated the build, I didn't jack the price up at the end, he paid exactly what I had stated in my proposal a full year before he received the engine..
Since then my labor prices have went up, a few parts have as well, but not very much because other parts prices had dropped eveningt hat out a bit.. Last year I spent about 9,000 bucks in Dyno fuel alone to test my engines and developments so just like everything else prices went up... Now they are dropping back down a bit because of the HUGE volumes of parts we are moving at the Type 4 Store..
Grant, did it ever occur to you that I could probably tell that you were a "P"rick on the phone based on your questions and statements, I can read'm like a book and don't EVER want one of "Them" to end up with an engine with my name on it..
You just might have received a "Go away" price.... It worked!
BTW_ I don't come here with the infomercial, I come here because I believe in what I create enough not to let it be dragged through the mud by those who have no experience with it. Generally these people have no first hand knowledge with the engine, but they don't let that stop them from being experts in the field of Type 4 deflation... I have worked for the past 15 years to promote this engine because I love it and believe in it, and I intend to make these jackasses that intend to spout their mouths off have to work really friggin hard... I'll always be right here, just like a stone wall ready to fend off their invasions and like I said earlier, I am pretty used to it.. I deal with these engines everyday, all day and also build a few sixes and a few 356 engines as well, most guys that jump into these debates don't even have a tool box, but they are freakin experts!!
So, where does this leave us???
It still leaves me offering to be the "Underdog" in a 4 Vs 6 comparison and hoping that we can get the logistics worked out... I work really well under pressure, must be the Marine in me..
Posted by: jim912928 Nov 4 2006, 10:22 AM
you know..this is why I don't post in here as much (lurk more now then anything). When it get's to name calling..what are we doing? This forum is about our cars, the technology, how to fix them, modify them and have fun with them (4, 6 or 8).
Jake..I also own a 911 and I don't consider myself a prick and I never got an allowance from my dad (or my mom for that matter)...I hate stereotyping!
On topic again...914 with a 200hp six is fast and the engine when it's up there in the rev's just sounds and feels like you are in a racing porsche. Think of driving down that long straight..screaming six..and you head into the curves downshifting and keeping that engine high in the rev's...pure racing porsche sound. For me, the experience just brings in the feel and SOUND of pure racing porsche. Now, long time ago I had a built up 4 and the feeling was the same (fast screamer) but the sound wasn't "racing" porsche. Winding it out you just had a more throaty 4 sound...just didn't add much to my "experience" of pretending to be in that racing heritage sounding six.
Jim
Posted by: KELTY360 Nov 4 2006, 10:25 AM
Please let me know when Jerry starts posting on the 914club board to drum up business. LOL! Hope I dont embarrass you too much with my arrogance. Its just a problem with us guys with six cylinder motors we feel like royalty when we drive real Porsches.
Care for some Merlot......we have a lovely '74 we've just dusted off. And the cheese! The Brie is to die for........but you might prefer the Velveeta.
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 4 2006, 10:27 AM
There are exceptions... BUT
Oh yeah, the sound thing:
Do you guys know who buys something automotive based on sound???
SIXTEEN YEAR OLDS!!! What a joke!!!
My 4's sound like a V8 when they have carbs and a Tangerine header.. With EFI there isn't a single hint of intake sound
I like them like that, it increases the stealth factor even more...
Posted by: trekkor Nov 4 2006, 10:32 AM
I'm surprise and embarrassed by the arrogance some six converts.
And then we have this last post from "your guy".
I guess we're all jerks.
KT
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 4 2006, 10:35 AM
Based on the way you and Grant act, I'd have to say so..
He is not "My guy"... He is my customer and is very pleased with what I created and is only upholding it the same as you and grant- don't get pissed at him for having pride in that....
Posted by: Cloudbuster Nov 4 2006, 10:48 AM
La dee da dee dum...
It doesn't appear Jenny or Meredith are monitoring this thread, so...
Attached image(s)
Posted by: trekkor Nov 4 2006, 10:50 AM
Sir, I think you missed the point of my post.
The "your guy" . You are McMark's Guy.
He said we we're arrogant .
I was pointing out that you OPENLY and PUBLICLY admitted to price hiking to close the door on clients you don't want to have one of you prized motors. ( in your post #153 )
I think that's wierd. Like the IP tracking and posting on this board when you show to be "offline"
If I meet the rare client that I do not want to work for, I just tell them.
KT
Posted by: jim912928 Nov 4 2006, 10:52 AM
Jake...I'm not 16 and I don't make automotive decisions based on sound....914fan asked about the experience and nobody can deny the heritage of a porsche flat six...it is their signature and just about everybody on this planet loves that sound...it IS part of the experience (which was asked). It is not what I base my decisions on.
But, feel free to bash away cause I also drive a 928 (oh god..a wasserpumper!...and a harley vrod (hey, porsche designed vtwin in that baby, 120hp, wasserpumper...oh, and it revs high and SOUNDS cool! lol)...i tend to go my own way.
914fan...see if there are any six conversions around you and ask for a ride...get a feel for the difference between your four and someone elses six...hey, try a v8 conversion too if somebody is close...different ride but if you like drag racing you'll love the straightline acceleration!
So, anybody close to Nick with any different engine combo's to give him a real taste?
Posted by: aircooledboy Nov 4 2006, 10:53 AM
![yellowsleep[1].gif](style_emoticons/default/yellowsleep[1].gif)
Man does this get old.
I am absolutely no fan of Jake's interpersonal skills. Truth is, I think they hurt his business, based on my own personal experience. BUT, the idea that some guys bust his balls for directly participating in a discussion about his life's work, and doing so with passion, hurts my brain. Agree with him or not, does it get any better than having direct input from an undisputed leader on the subject? You'd rather hear it from somebody who heard it from somebody? The constant cracks about "infomercials" and then shots at somebody who actually has an engine you accuse Raby of over-representing really make you look like an ass hat. And not in a good way.
For what it's worth.
Posted by: Lou W Nov 4 2006, 10:58 AM
Man does this get old.
BUT, the idea that some guys bust his balls for directly participating in a discussion about his life's work, and doing so with passion, hurts my brain. Agree with him or not, does it get any better than having direct input from an undisputed leader on the subject? You'd rather hear it from somebody who heard it from somebody? The constant cracks about "infomercials" and then shots at somebody who actually has an engine you accuse Raby of over-representing really make you look like an ass hat. And not in a good way.
For what it's worth.
Quik914, Nice looking car, yes I'd like to see pictures of the engine and exhaust.
Posted by: SirAndy Nov 4 2006, 11:07 AM
The constant cracks about "infomercials" and then shots at somebody who actually has an engine you accuse Raby of over-representing really make you look like an ass hat. And not in a good way.
riddle me this ...
- i *love* the big fours and all the hard work jake has put into them!
- i'm installing a (more or less) stock 3.6L /6 ...
- i still think, on equal footing, a /4 would spank a /6 on a tight AX course and a /6 would spank a /4 on the big track.
- i don't think you (you know who you are) can compare the economical feasibility of putting a *used* /6 into your car to a freshly build up /4 with similar HP output. yes, *you* got a great deal on your *used* /6. so what? how does that relate to the rest of us? T-Man is always quick to tell us that he did his /6 conversion for under $4k. yeah, he got the motor for what? $1k? and does that number include any of his time spent? i don't think so. how in the world can you compare that to a turnkey /4 (or even a kit that has all new and shiny parts but needs assembly) and keep a straight face?
you guys are nuts ...
Andy
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 4 2006, 11:17 AM
This thread went exactly where all of them have in the past.. I REALLY tried not to make it any worse than it normally is, hence my reservation in posting at the very beginning....
As stated in my bio on my site, I admittedly do have a condition that does make me VERY intense with what I believe in. Its something that makes me good at doing anything thats mechaincal, or in my realm. It also gives me a huge amount of drive and bullheadedness..
With that comes the fact that this condition, known as Asperger's syndrome also creates social bariers for those of us that have the "issue".. Part of those social barriers is the fact that I don't comprehend what makes people mad, or hurts their feelings very well- or at all....
This is not an excuse for the "Image thing" but it is an explanation for some of the things that I do that piss people off... I don't say I'm sorry too much because I don't think I need to- but I really do.
So when I say that the only thing that matters to me is the Type 4 engine, it isn't an exaggeration... Just ask my wife, she has to live with it- Thank goodness she understands!
Now, I am still willing to offer up an engine for a challenge as I think it would be an interesting bit of experimentation, to see the differences in the same car..
Oh yeah, I didn't hike the price up on Grant, and when we talked I didn't think he was a prick judging from my notes from the chat... When I don't want to build something for someone, I'm just like trekkor, I tell them.. Hell I sent back a 5K buck deposit check to a 356 guy last week, we were never going to get along!!
With that being said, I do APOLOGIZE for pissing you guys off, I get a little too involved and when that happens the only thing that matters is winning, not feelings, not anything...
Posted by: McMark Nov 4 2006, 11:19 AM
V for Vendetta 
Spreading misinformation is payback for Jake.... uh.... having high prices?
Go get him Grant! 
Posted by: nebreitling Nov 4 2006, 11:22 AM
i'm not afraid of some healthy conflict, but at this point, i only care about this thread insofar as i don't want any bad blood between my friends.
Posted by: race914 Nov 4 2006, 11:23 AM
Ok, back to the original topic.
Here is another perspective that I received from Rich Bontempi (http://www.highperformancehouse.com)
He has (among many cars) a 914-4 2.0 and a 914-6 3.0 (vette eater). He confided to me that he runs almost just as fast times with his 4 than he does with the 6, plus he enjoys driving the 4 more than the 6 because the lighter weight lets him outbrake and 'toss' the 4 around in the corners.
That is one of the reasons, along with my own experinces, that I've stuck with my 4.
To prove I'm not totally biased, we also own a 914-6 with an 86 3.2 (Tricia's car). Cool car, fantastic street car! Fun track car! But, boy can you feel that weight back there. It has 944 turbo brakes, but I can still go deeper into the corners with my 4 with M calipers.... And with the reduced weight in the 4, I can almost keep up on the straights with the 6 (3.2with a chip making around 230hp)
Can I pick one over the other? Tough question. All I can say is that after driving the 3.2 914, I still like my 4 and have no plans to abandon it and convert to a six... I enjoy the 4 too much.
Which one do I prefer on the track. The 4. Which one is a straight line rocketship on the street: the 6. Truely different beasts. I like them both for different reasons.
Also relavant to this thread. On the track, the 3.2 six is hardly breathing hard to make 230 hp. Never gets above 180. Can drive it hard all day. The 2.2 four is tweeked, running at the upper limit, gets hot and needs care and feeding between run sessions (emptying the catch can, etc.) But taking care of it is part of the 'love affair' I'm enjoying.
Here is some of the 'under dog' fun factor. At a recent event I outran a new lotus elise with my 4. The owner was confused on how I could beat his new high tech car with a 914-4. If I had been driving the 3.2 six, it would have been "of course you beat me, you have a big six". To be honest, that is part of the fun for my keeping the 4.
Future Plans. I'm thinking about putting the dual Phase 9 setup on the 6. I'm thinking about some of Jake's dual plug heads for the 4.
Just wanted to provide my experience with both cars for this thread.
Posted by: Headrage Nov 4 2006, 11:23 AM
The only issue I have with this debate is the misinformation campaign by the cheap six contingency. Those that ended up with a bum engine that needed a rebuild tend not to post in these threads.
I have no idea what the PO paid for the motor in my car so I don't have a comparison number for ya but, with only about 500 miles put on it after the conversion I ended up with 6k in repairs. I'm "GUESSING" that in my case, the number is gonna be close to 8k for a solid, leak-free 200 hp six. This isn't including the cost for the actual conversion.
I may be the exeption as the worst case end of the spectrum.
Posted by: anthony Nov 4 2006, 11:51 AM
I don't get why this discussion always ends up with Grant and Trekkor versus Jake.
Jake, you should actually consider it the highest honor that your name has become synonymous with "big four".
My advice is just to ignore Grant and Trekkor. It's obvious to me that just bait you just to push your buttons.
Posted by: Lavanaut Nov 4 2006, 01:12 PM
Just wanted to provide my experience with both cars for this thread.
That was excellent feedback, thanks for posting. At that start of this thread I was 95% certain that I wanted to go the 6 route. Now I'm not as sure based on some of the information I've read here. I'm driving around town (and it's a small town) 85% of the time. Am I really going to get out of a 6 what it has to offer?
Mud-slinging aside, there's some great information here!
Tell me more!!
PM me if this isn't the place...Posted by: anthony Nov 4 2006, 01:32 PM
Tell me more!!
PM me if this isn't the place...Listen to Jake's radio shows on:
9/7
9/14
10/26
9/7 is specifically the 120hp 2056 episode. Actually just listen to all the shows for great info.
http://www.aircooledtechnology.com/radio/
Posted by: Mueller Nov 4 2006, 01:51 PM
I don't get why this discussion always ends up with Grant and Trekkor versus Jake.
Basicly they are saying that anyone that spends more money on a /4 than what a "cheap" /6 conversion can be done for is stupid and ignorant and they just cannot see the logic of spending big bucks on a /4....so until someone can build a 200hp /4 for just a few grand they will always have to tell people that a /6 is a better choice...
Jake, you should actually consider it the highest honor that your name has become synonymous with "big four".
My advice is just to ignore Grant and Trekkor. It's obvious to me that just bait you just to push your buttons.
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 4 2006, 02:24 PM
A little bit of good comes from everything bad...
Thats what my dad always says and he's the wisest man I have ever known..
If one or two people gained even one sentence from this thread that helps them make a selection that will keep them involved in these cars and loving them- thats really all that matters..
Posted by: porschecb Nov 4 2006, 02:46 PM
Well said! Can we all go out and play now?
Posted by: KELTY360 Nov 4 2006, 03:14 PM
Just wanted to provide my experience with both cars for this thread.
That was excellent feedback, thanks for posting. At that start of this thread I was 95% certain that I wanted to go the 6 route. Now I'm not as sure based on some of the information I've read here. I'm driving around town (and it's a small town) 85% of the time. Am I really going to get out of a 6 what it has to offer?
Not being in the Bay Area or SoCal, cheap sixes aren't exactly low hanging fruit. Hearing feedback on the weight differential is instructive. I've always appreciated the underdog status of the 914/4 and anything that can enhance the advantages of that platform is positive.
I for one am glad that Jake is doing the heavy lifting on the TIV and remains willing to share his passion despite the attacks. He's certainly willing to let you know where he stands.
Posted by: Bleyseng Nov 4 2006, 03:27 PM
I feel its best to try to give both sides of the story.
Yeah some guys have done cheap six conversion for under $5k. Thats the SwapMeet Louie way and it does work and fine if you go that route.
Yeah, its been tried in the big four world tooo and they don't last too long either.
Driving experiences? I have driven a stockish six (2.2L), 1.7's,1.8's,2.0L and 2056's and a 3.2L 914 set up for the track.
The stockish six was nice but didn't even have the feel of power my 2056 does.
1.7,1.8 and 2.0L are fun in their own way depending on how the car is setup.
The 3.2l six conversion was really fast and since it was caged stiff and handled amazingly. A really fun nice car.
All bets aside money no object-I would install a 3.6 in a 914, but I really like the idea of a modern 4 with all the goodies and 200hp which is where I am leaning. It also keeps my car so I can "turn it back to stock" if I want.
For the money, a 125hp 2056 is the ticket after that is just up to how much you want to spend.$$$
Posted by: trekkor Nov 4 2006, 03:48 PM
I'm going to go back and review every post I have made on this thread.
I will not edit.
I don't believe I have dished any insults or direspect, nor called anyone anything for the choices they make.
I said why I like the "cheap SIX" route.
Careful about putting words in my mouth. I never called anyone stupid or ignorant.
Like I said, I will make a full review, yet I believe I have remained civil.
KT
Posted by: trekkor Nov 4 2006, 04:26 PM
Done...You got nothing on me!!
I posted #s:
16,25,31,32,34,39,40,42,48,59,60,61,70,73,74,
80,86,90,94,97,102,104,125,130,138,139,141,157,161,179...
Some of my favorites:
Last time we heard, I thought 200HP FOUR's are over $15k plus and need constant care or they will suffer. ( explode )
I haven't heard of any bargain hunting happy endings on any high output FOURS.
Oh and, why didn't the 914 GT entries at LeMans run FOURs?
I may be out on a limb on this one, but I think the reason they ran SIXES at LeMans was because they were interested in winning or at least finishing the race.
The one thing that is always missing in these 4 vs 6 debates, is the PRICE of a new built 200hp FOUR. Delivered turn key. *everything*
For me, I just won't spend that kind of money on a FOUR.
That's who I am
I've never driven in a big FOUR powered 914.
I'm not about to pay $15k to find out, either.
If it does...We'd need a real-time 914Club web cast with a host and music.
Do we have a thread turned infomercial smiley?
Anybody here with a 911 convert to a FOUR? ( crickets )
I guess we're all jerks.
I was on my usual good behavior.
Nice try though...
KT
Posted by: Dan (Almaden Valley) Nov 4 2006, 04:33 PM
with all that has come before....
I have had a stock 1.7L, 2.0L a 914-6 2.7L RS, and again a 2.0L.
I have loved them all for various reasons....
When I got my current car I had the opportunity to do a 6 conversion with either a 2.0L 6 from a 1965 911, or a 2.7L 6. I chose to stay with the 4 cylinder because of weight, cost of a thorough conversion, and keeping the car the way it came The 914-6 was best on the track and the 4 cylinders were best at AX for all the reasons that have been stated in previous posts to this thread.
With that said, I feel there is noting wrong with a nice 6 conversion (I prefer a carbed 2.7L over some of the bigger motors)
This season in GGR AX I competed directly (in my class, don't ask why) with a 964 with wider wheels and engine upgrades, 996s, Boxsters and Boxster Ss, and various other 911s and 944S2s. I won every event I competed in this season with my little well balanced 2.0L. The motor is completely stock other than the Euro headers. It also has `160K miles on it, so it is very tired and in need of a rebuild...but it still held up it's end of the bargain....
I plan on rebuilding using either Euro 2.0L P/Cs with slightly bumped c/r or a 2056 with cam etc....
I am doing this because I like the lite and tossable feel you get with the 4 cylinder car.
I am in with Greg (race914) on that one.. I like looking and feeling like the underdog with my little 4 cylinder car, I have even went with the billet front hubs so I could stay with the sleeper look of the 4 bolt wheels, and still have vented front rotors and bigger cailipers (Ms).
Give me a nicely tuned and set up 4 cylinder and I will happily kick butt on lots of 911s 996s Boxsters and whatever else shows up in my class or overall next season...
And I plan on going to the track with my little putput next season....
OK....now I feel better 
Posted by: Flycut Nov 4 2006, 04:37 PM
After reading this thread It seems Obvious having both the 4 and 6 would be the best option available. Thank you Race914 for your posting, I am rethinking my decision about doing a 6 conversion after reading your posting. Jake raby I am hoping to someday be able to write you a check for a turnkey with all the goodies.
I have enjoyed this thread from the start and definetly learned alot, Thanks.
Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 4 2006, 04:55 PM
A little bit of good comes from everything bad...
Thats what my dad always says and he's the wisest man I have ever known..
If one or two people gained even one sentence from this thread that helps them make a selection that will keep them involved in these cars and loving them- thats really all that matters..
Posted by: trekkor Nov 4 2006, 05:28 PM
I think we should go back to arguing which is better:
Carbs or Fuel Injection.
KT
Posted by: Bleyseng Nov 4 2006, 05:33 PM
I think we should go back to arguing which is better:
Carbs or Fuel Injection.
KT
Start a new thread so we can have some fun with that! Always a heated debate with that one!
I like the line"The one thing that is always missing in these 4 vs 6 debates, is the PRICE of a new built 200hp FOUR. Delivered turn key. *everything*"
I would like to see the pricetag for a brand new turn key 3.2 six!
Posted by: J P Stein Nov 4 2006, 06:07 PM
I would like to see the pricetag for a brand new turn key 3.2 six!
The last air cooled "crate motor" I saw was about 5 years ago.. 3.0Ls, they were selling 6-8 of them for 8K.
Happy?... or, as usual, will you ignore anything that doesn't agree with your drivel?
Posted by: Heeltoe914 Nov 4 2006, 07:05 PM
From Jake; It still leaves me offering to be the "Underdog" in a 4 Vs 6 comparison and hoping that we can get the logistics worked out... I work really well under pressure, must be the Marine in me..
Lets see this 4 vs 6 thing at WCC 07.
I'am in for hands on help and whatever. I have a 3.2 6 and love it. But I will be the first to say on the track a well built 4 from Jake will kick my A----. I have had it done by guys from POC with killer 4 bangers before Jake came along.
Posted by: 914fan Nov 4 2006, 10:14 PM
race914
Awesome.
That is what I'm looking for.
Tell me about what it feels like to drive in your car. Pretend I have never been in a 914. Pretend I am blind. describe what it is like.
Overall this has been great. There have been some faces slapped, but we are MOSTLY being nice.
When I started this I didn't really know what I wanted to know. all the info has been great. keep it comming 
Heck what ever you have in your 914, tell us exactly how it drives
Posted by: trekkor Nov 4 2006, 10:40 PM
Watch some of my "on-track" video.
KT
Posted by: Brett W Nov 4 2006, 11:27 PM
Wow this would have really been a cool argument if we were all sitting in the same room.
Posted by: Air_Cooled_Nut Nov 5 2006, 12:06 AM
...This season in GGR AX I competed directly (in my class, don't ask why) with a 964 with wider wheels and engine upgrades, 996s, Boxsters and Boxster Ss, and various other 911s and 944S2s. I won every event I competed in this season with my little well balanced 2.0L. The motor is completely stock other than the Euro headers. It also has `160K miles on it, so it is very tired and in need of a rebuild...but it still held up it's end of the bargain....
All this tells me is that you were the better driver of the bunch. (That's not a bad thing, BTW)
Posted by: Bleyseng Nov 5 2006, 09:18 AM
I would like to see the pricetag for a brand new turn key 3.2 six!
The last air cooled "crate motor" I saw was about 5 years ago.. 3.0Ls, they were selling 6-8 of them for 8K.
Happy?... or, as usual, will you ignore anything that doesn't agree with your drivel?
8k is not bad...
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 5 2006, 09:33 AM
Actually here is an interesting comparo of big FAT T4 and a similar displacement six lapping Laguna Seca.
Big Bore 2.2 FAT T4 - very nice little car with proper short ratio gearbox
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4691758296819443654&q=914+laguna
2341cc Six - my cheap bag-o-bolts six conversion with a stock gearbox
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQIeGJDK490&mode=related&search=
Get both of the video windows up and then synchronize them at the start finish line. The six has a standard 901 gearbox and I lost 2nd gear so coming out of slow turns I was doing about 2500 to 3000 RPM in 3rd gear. Not perfect but it gives you a sense of the two engine platforms. Both do a great job of moving our beloved 914's around the track.
Posted by: Thomas J Bliznik Nov 5 2006, 10:23 AM
I just have to add my 2-cents worth.
Good info for everyone planning 914 budget's & how he will drive his 914. I don't believe it's 4 against 6. It's about personal taste & how much money to spend. I resent cheap shots against Jake's Type-4's. I would rather face (Jake) a person with honesty & integrity telling the truth than some snake oil salesman telling me what I want to hear about price.
Good post & very informative.
Tom
Posted by: grantsfo Nov 5 2006, 10:34 AM
I just have to add my 2-cents worth.
Good info for everyone planning 914 budget's & how he will drive his 914. I don't believe it's 4 against 6. It's about personal taste & how much money to spend. I resent cheap shots against Jake's Type-4's. I would rather face (Jake) a person with honesty & integrity telling the truth than some snake oil salesman telling me what I want to hear about price.
Good post & very informative.
Tom
I agree its not about 4 verses 6. Its a silly premise. Some T4 fanatics do make it sound like a WWF wrestling match of the underdog 4 against the mighty 6. I have never seen it that way, both are excellent platforms if you have the money to spend. Both platforms have issues too. For me a used six was most economical way to achieve 165 HP for my track car. If I was rich I would have loved to go with a big four. Used six is like getting champagne on a beer budget.
Posted by: thesey914 Nov 5 2006, 10:42 AM
2341cc Six - my cheap bag-o-bolts six conversion with a stock gearbox
Is that Trekkors car -the one parked up whilst you pass?
Posted by: JPB Nov 5 2006, 10:44 AM
You can get 200HPs from almost any modern four anymore and a Suby almost has the same weight as a stock four. For social status and racing, six is the way to go and the sound is cool.
I'd get the biggest six there was but then theres this think called reality 
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)