Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Racer Nov 26 2007, 03:08 PM

I am facing a suprising dilemma.

I have come across a pristine '76 2.0 with many of the track car trimmings I desire for my future DE/AX/Weekend car. It has accusump, safety devises cage, Chassis stiffening kit, front oilcooler and aux guages. Turbo Tie rods. 140lb rear springs. 19mm master cylinder, Larger (21mm?) Torsion bars, lowered, solid battery box and longitudinals. Stock seats. Red over black. Emissions equipment removed. Stock FI. Stock 4bolt wheels/brakes. Absolutely no rust. 2 owner car with 95K miles

The other one? a '74.. completely "rotissoried" and rebuilt with 80's SC 3.0 liter converted to webbers. 911S front brakes. 914 Six rear brakes. Stiffening kit. No Cage. No fAux oil Cooler. 6/7x16s with 205s. Beautiful black over black. No rust here either. Stock interior, Sideshifter conversion. Headers that are "heat" capable.

I know its not a bad dilemma to have For your consideration, my last 914 was a '70 1.7 that i added a cage, 5 bolt conversion (Carrera brakes), stiffer TBs and rear springs; 2056 motor, oil cooler and tracked and DEd for a number of years, only selling to get a 911, which has since been sold.

Any feedback as to which you might choose and why would be appreciated.

Posted by: TeenerTim Nov 26 2007, 03:19 PM

No brainer.
6

Edit: OK, you asked why. Probably the main reason you were looking to buy a 911 was the engine. This way you get the best of both worlds. As long as you own a four you'll always want a six. Go big or go home!

Posted by: 911quest Nov 26 2007, 03:28 PM

I know the arugment has been beaten to death.....

No push rods....I can go on and on....

Go with a six and don't look back

Posted by: jhadler Nov 26 2007, 03:55 PM

I think it really depends on what you want to do with the car. You are mentioning things like "track" in your listing. So I take it you intend for the car to see track time. Will it be strictly DE's or do you plan on competition (autox or otherwise)?

If competition with this car is in your future, read the rules carefully before buying. In general a car with a 3.0L six transplant will find itself classed in with the trailer-riding-fire-breathing-monsters, and you'll find yourself outclassed with a street car. So, rear the rules for whatever club you plan on driving in.

-Josh2

Posted by: Rand Nov 26 2007, 03:55 PM

Just to play a little devil's advocate here....

No mention of cost? Is that a factor at all?

Hold out for answers that apply to what you want to do. Don't base a decision like this on answers like "as long as you own a four you'll want a six" or "no push rods." No offense to anyone, but make your decision on factors that really have teeth and apply to your application. The last thing you want is to make a decision based on answers like that and then go get your ass handed to you by a four on the AX course.

I would probably choose the six too, just because I love them, it seems you can go either way, and you mentioned track time. But too many variables are yet undefined. Do you want to be truly competitive at racing events? If so, which ones are most important to you?

Posted by: Racer Nov 26 2007, 04:25 PM

I have thought about PCA Club racing. As such, the 2.0L would run in a stock class. As I looked thru all the results from 2007band 2006, I see very few "J" class cars even entered. Which makes Club Racing less appealing and well, leaves me with just a slow (but nice) car for DE events.

The "6" would run as a GT class car for PCA CR and yes, would be completely outclassed as it is still as "street" car. It would weigh between 200-400lbs too much and be down about 80-100hp. Not too conducive to victory

For AX, the 2.0 would run stock.. with maybe only 1 other car locally at PCA events. Not sure if SCCA C/D classes would be competitive either.

For AX the "6" would run PCA Modified.. Our local region hotshoe runs a '73 "RSR" wannabe with a 993 based 3.6. I came close a couple times against him with my 220hp 911SC, but a 200hp 914 with 2200lbs (400lbs lighter than my SC) wouldn't be a bad start either. For SCCA I am sure it is not competitive without shedding weight and growing flares and running in say, XP class.

The reason I did sell my 914 was it was time to either put in a 911 motor or simply buy a 911. I bought the 911 and built it up over the years. Fun car.. but I think I prefer the 914 "twitch" at the limit vs the 911s "pendulum" predictability.

As for price? The advertised prices were close.. and the "selling" prices are close. Not deal breakers, but yes, the "6" is a little bit more.

Posted by: TeenerTim Nov 26 2007, 04:26 PM

Ouch! I sold my last 914 to buy a 911 and never regretted it. The sound of the Porsche flat six is a symphony. If you want a 911 for the styling, hold out for a 911. If you want one for the engine, get the 914/6. If you're tired of the NARP syndrome, wait for the 911. If you want to compete, get out the rule book.

Posted by: Racer Nov 26 2007, 04:31 PM

I don't see much NARP syndrome out east here.. these cars are so old and so rare, not many folks know what they are.. Around here, 944s are the NARP cars

Posted by: markb Nov 26 2007, 04:33 PM

Personally I would go for the 6, but that's mostly because I'm in California, where the 76 would need smog every other year. I also like the fact that the 6 is a 3.0. Good motor, hard to kill.

Posted by: SirAndy Nov 26 2007, 04:49 PM

Posted by: rfuerst911sc Nov 26 2007, 04:54 PM

I am currently doing a /6 conversion useing a 3.0 so you know my vote. The 3.0 is a excellent motor.

Posted by: sww914 Nov 26 2007, 05:03 PM

6. 95% of your time in the car will be on the street, the 6 will be way more fun and more reliable.

Posted by: Michael N Nov 26 2007, 06:04 PM

I sold my 911 to get a 914/6 and never even thought about regretting it. Go with the 3.0 conversion.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2007, 06:09 PM

This isn't 1982.

The development of the /4 engine no longer makes it "unreliable" unless it is misconfigured or assembled by someone stick in "1982".

Posted by: ppickerell Nov 26 2007, 06:54 PM

Yea and it was just my luck to have both happen to me in 2004!

Posted by: 9146986 Nov 26 2007, 07:30 PM

I'm a 6'er kinda guy.

You are getting good advice here; if you are building a car for competition, you need to build it FOR the competition.

If you are new to competitive driving it could take you a couple years before the amount of power you've got will actually matter. So to that end a car more toward the momentum end of the spectrum may improve the learning curve.

Posted by: woobn8r Nov 26 2007, 07:35 PM

Posted by: Blood red 914-6gt Nov 26 2007, 07:38 PM

As said before... It really just depends on what you are wanting to do. I have a six, and I love it more than any other car I have had. I sold my 911 so I could do more to my car. I am about to buy a 2.5l 6 for my car, and I can't wait to do so. That being said. I am really looking forward to buying another 914 and getting a Jake Raby engine in it. He is getting a lot of hp out of the 4, it is reliable if it is one of his, and it is much lighter than a six. Then I would have two kick ass 914s in my garage.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2007, 07:56 PM

Thanks! For the kudos.. We have come a long way in the past decade for sure... We haven't taped into the full potential yet, even though most everything we build is now 180HP+... 2008 will be the biggest year yet with the roller lifters being completed, the porkies heads completed and etc..

Ppickerell, Yeah you had quite an experience! Did you ever get that straightened out?

Posted by: Eric Taylor Nov 26 2007, 08:07 PM

I was thinking about this dilemma as usuall and the question I kept asking for myself was why not get a 911 if I want the six. However, you've done that and now you're going back. What made you go towards the 911 and now look at going back to the 914? I haven't had a lot of time behind the wheel of a 911 just got to drive an sc for about and hr. I wasn't that impressed, but there is something about the styling of a 911, I don't know what's your opinion?

Oh and if I was in your place I would vote 6. I just can't help but admire the sophistication of the motor.

Posted by: BKLA Nov 26 2007, 08:35 PM

From someone who's had both a 4 (my first ) and a 6 conversion (as well as a 928, 911S, 356 S90 with Rudge knock-off's and a 356 SC) - the 914 6 (whether a conversion or not) is by far the most "experiential" of all. the sound of that six with webers or not - right behind your head is something else!

the 6 is almost better than sex..... almost

Posted by: 9146FAN Nov 26 2007, 10:15 PM

[b]
Go with the $ix

Posted by: LarryR Nov 26 2007, 10:32 PM

I think that for practicality of racing the 4 is actually a better engine unless you have unlimited resources. To build a 2.0 6 that will be competitive in say the 2.0 challenge or GT5s you are looking at some serious coin. The people that I have talked to running twin plug R spec engines in those classes have spent about 20K just building the engine.

Now figure you need to freshen it up once a year and OUCH!

If racing is DE / lapping then just build what ever suits you best but if racing is racing it would be far cheaper to build a competitive 2.0 4.

I love the sound of a 3.6 I have one in my 74 911 and one about to go into my SC. However, for my race car I made the decision to run the 2.0 IV due to economics, weight, and being able to perform just as well as a 2.0 6.

Lastly, as mentioned by someone else 3.0 is another animal for a race class. A street/race car would find the back of the pack a familiar spot.

Posted by: angerosa Nov 27 2007, 09:49 AM

944 gets the NARP designation here in the East. 914s are very rare.
I would go for the "4" and put a stronger engine in it. (notice I didn't say "6".) Maybe a built 4 would be fun.

Posted by: turboman808 Nov 27 2007, 03:07 PM

Something about the 2.8 rsr motor that I love. I hope to have one in the next 2 years. BUT I would also like to get a 550 replica with one of your motors Jake. One thing at a time though. I was really tempted to buy the 550 you guys had on your site awhile back. Did that ever sell?

Posted by: PRS914-6 Nov 27 2007, 04:42 PM

I refuse to comment on these threads so I won't.



Attached image(s)

Posted by: Root_Werks Nov 27 2007, 05:13 PM

I'm happy to have one that doesn't drop a cup-o-rust on the ground over every bump.

Posted by: Racer Nov 27 2007, 05:23 PM

I appreciate everyone's enthusiasm as I know this topic has been beaten to death.

I love the sound of an aircooled 911 motor.. I loved the torque of my 4. But, running in the Red/Black run groups, it's a lot of work keeping up with 964s, 996s and GT3s and Cup Cars. While a 914-6 will help, it is far from being the be all end all at a DE event.

Still though, I love the David and Goliath tails and the ego stroking of beating people with only 100hp as they learn they have been outdriven handily

If I had the patience to wait a year or two for one of Jake's very popular 2316s or hot 2056s I would buy a local rust free(ish) roller I know of with 5bolts, cage etc and go that route.

Posted by: Rand Nov 27 2007, 06:26 PM

Seems the consensus is pretty clearly leaning towards the six.

I think if AX was your primary focus, building a sub-1800lb 200hp four would be tough to beat. (Hmm.... Dang though... That would be tough to beat period! ) Pretty damn sweet cost-to-performance package! But aside from that, most will choose the six. (Just don't go talking to Jake about that sweet six symphony. )

Posted by: J P Stein Nov 27 2007, 06:44 PM

Rebuilding the 2.7L after 7 years of AX flogging. The only major upgrade is these 10.4:1 Mahles......total cost (DIY) bout 4k including the NOS P/Cs. If I was using Jake's dyno it would prolly get 300 hp.


Attached thumbnail(s)

Posted by: 911quest Nov 27 2007, 07:19 PM

I think it comes down to what the motors were designed for a Six was designed for a sports car and racing the type 4 was.......a station wagon and a bus.

Not knocking them I have had them all 914/4 buses 914/6's all were daily drivers except the 6 and they are great cars and all but when it comes down to dollar for dollar a six is the only clear choice.

Posted by: degreeoff Nov 27 2007, 07:47 PM

6

Posted by: iamchappy Nov 27 2007, 09:26 PM

There is just something special about a 6.


Attached image(s)

Posted by: LarryR Nov 27 2007, 10:44 PM

I think there are a whole lot of people running lola's with type IV vw engines that would disagree.

Posted by: LarryR Nov 27 2007, 11:36 PM

Please dont take this the wrong way but your 2.7 would have to be one serious engine to make 300 hp. If you are revving it to 8500 rpm and have the most incredible flowing heads and intake I still would have doubt about 300 hp. If you were twisting 8000 rpm there is no way the engine would live for 7 years. Factory racing 2.8 RSR engines made 308 HP at 8000 rpm. However, I am pretty sure they would not do that for 7 years.

Posted by: degreeoff Nov 27 2007, 11:39 PM

I think he was @ Jake with that statement....IMHO

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 28 2007, 06:47 AM

MY TURN!



Wonder which one makes more power per liter?

Wonder which one makes more power per pound of engine weight?

Posted by: iamchappy Nov 28 2007, 08:23 AM

Cute, I wonder which one is more reliable at 400 hp.

Posted by: 911quest Nov 28 2007, 09:12 AM

Looks impressive

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 28 2007, 09:40 AM

That one saw 27 hours in the lab under boost the whole time and didn't even have more tha 2% leak down hot... The highest oil temp it was was 217 and the highest head temp was 320 which is about 30 degrees cooler than a stock 2.0 makeing 1/3 the power..

It has dry sump oiling, billet rods, billet cam, Nickies cylinders, CNC heads and basically all the typical failure points for the TIV removed..

The main fault that the TIV has had that leads to failure has been misconfiguration and corners being cut in design and application. We haven't had a catastrophic engine failure in almost 4 years on the street, on the track or in the lab.. It might happen tomorrow, but it's been 60 engines since it happened last.

Posted by: sww914 Nov 28 2007, 10:02 AM

Wow! that's about 1500 miles at 60 MPH! No 6 Cyl could last 1500 miles.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 28 2007, 10:12 AM

Hell, according to the common thoughts displayed by most members here the /4 couldn't last 5 minutes at 300+HP.... No way it could last 27 hours under boost!

My point was that after that amount of time under boost none of the symptoms of a failure or wear existed.

Posted by: effutuo101 Nov 28 2007, 10:23 AM

There are + and - to both sides. Figure out the cost and the maintenance and what you can afford and go with that. Which ever way you go, you will have fun.
Do the brakes and suspension to what you want first. It is great to go fast, but you have to turn and stop.

Posted by: DNHunt Nov 28 2007, 10:49 AM

I've been there when Jake has a motor on the dyno. He Flogs the sh*t out of em. No way I could emulate it on the road. I can guarantee you, you would wear out first unless you were in incredible shape. He's on em all the time, finishes a pull and then, blips the throttle about 3 times to bring down the head temps and then he's all over it again.

There are breaks to change things like jets or stuff, but when it's running it is abused.

I would say that would be more like 700 miles of hot lapped 1/4 miles. 20 passes at a time with 1/2 an hour or less in between.

Mine saw pulls to 7500 rpms, blips the throttle and then it started over with loads at 3500 and on up again. I tell you I was proud my engine held together for a day on Jake's dyno.

Posted by: iamchappy Nov 28 2007, 11:01 AM

Jake thats amazing, and i do appreciate what your doing, please keep taking it to the limit. But there are limitations to the type 4 and you and i well know that your not gone to be able to build one that will match a big turbo six engine. 930 engines can support over 700hp you show me a type 4 thats not built like a grenade with the pin pulled that can do that.

My engine at around 420 hp will be a dependable daily driver and should hold up for many years and as many miles as a stock type 4.

Posted by: Twise Nov 28 2007, 12:30 PM

Six - Six - Six

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 28 2007, 12:38 PM

700HP is possible with these on a 2.8L engine and moderate boost.... It should be running by this time next year IF things continue to go well.

You forget that the TIV has the same metallurgy as the 911 aluminum crankcases and that it has a shorter crankshaft.

With the same parts that are used in the six making 700HP the same longevity should be a capability with a roller cammed, billet headed, Nickies equipped TIV.

Of course at this level it's not a Type 4 engine any longer- it's just plain MassIVe.

I do know of a 2366cc TIV from Europe that has been drag racing for 7 years making over 500HP and it survives..

So what do you feel is so weak about the engine that makes it unable to support the power it can generate?

Longevity is something we have never had a problem with, the only time things break is when the wrong jackass with a wrench in his hand become a catalyst. That jackass is the biggest enemy that the TIV has.

Posted by: Blood red 914-6gt Nov 28 2007, 01:00 PM

ooooooo...car porn.

Posted by: iamchappy Nov 28 2007, 02:10 PM

It's time you sponsor a 24 Lemans car. WOW!, If you can get a 2.8- 4 to crank out 700 hp with mild boost and run full boost all day long, you have my vote for the Nobel.

Posted by: 911quest Nov 28 2007, 03:08 PM

I helped build and prep a 2.0 type 4 that was racing at Rennsport III it is cool car but we are at the point to be more competive we need more grunt do you spend 5-8000.00 on a type 4 or do you go with 2.0-2.5 Six it's a no brainer.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 28 2007, 03:13 PM

You could keep the prize.. If i could do that I'd be plenty satisfied with the ability to make the six following frown at the accomplishment ;-)

Hell, maybe we should start playing with sixes.

Posted by: Blood red 914-6gt Nov 28 2007, 03:18 PM

Yes please .

Posted by: degreeoff Nov 28 2007, 04:48 PM

OK so here is my question.....You say these type IV motors are as strong as the sixes Jake. What about (my idea of a failure point) the fact that there are only 3 main bearings in the 4 as opposed to the 7 in the six? I would think this to be the main failure point or area of 'twist' which leads to other 'misalignments'

Posted by: ConeDodger Nov 28 2007, 05:01 PM

I have about 700 miles on my newly built Raby Kit 2270. The motor actually exhibits better numbers as far as temps and such so I can honestly say it isn't working as hard to make 170+ HP as the stock motor was to make 90 HP. It has amazing torque. I can be on the freeway in 5th gear at 70 and just accelerate without downshifting to pass. When you go through the gears it pulls like a raped ape. I am so pleased with this motor that I have my eye on his turbo project. Of course that would be a Jake built motor as I don't think he will make kits for it.
I have no concerns about longevity at all. As I said, it seems to be less stressed than the stock 2.0 liter.
I would actually have to disagree with those who think the 6 is an obvious choice. The application of modern testing and technology makes that choice less obvious every day. It is a good choice, certainly but not the only one.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 28 2007, 06:17 PM

I counter this with;

The reason the six needs more mains is because it is LONGER to support two extra cylinders, the longer span creates MORE flex over the span of the crank. This means that more support is needed to keep flex down.

We keep flex down by using stiffer cranks and also by using the largest rod bearing journals possible, this reduces "overlap" between the crank throws and makes for a stronger crank as well. This is why my rod journal of choice is .100 larger in diameter than the stock 2.0 journal size.

With our 4340 chromoly billet cranks flex is also greatly reduced, but not even the stock German cranks had flex issues, we turn these to 9,000 RPM with up to FOUR POUNDS removed from them, one of these has four seasons of peoduction racing under it's belt and still passes magnaflux every time.
Here is a picture of that particular crank


Here are the rod bearings out of that engine after 12 45 minute races, one season of use @ near 180HP from 1832cc


And here are the main bearings


I don't see any signs of wear, do you???? Want a few hundred more examples of reality? I have them because I keep logs on EVERYTHING, nothing like data and proof.

BTW- The TIV actually has 4 main bearings.

The 547 4 Cam Carrera engine also used "only 3" main bearings as illustrated in this pic I took while working on one last month(This is actually a 592 from a 904). The 547 engine could sustain 8,000 RPM at Le Man for 24 hours without failure and that was with metallurgy from 1955.


That being said I have seen TWO broken TIV cranks in my life, both came from 5,000 pound VW buses after being driven across mountains... I have never personally experienced one of these failures and lord knows I have broken at least one of everything else over the years.

The key is proper dynamic balance and combustuion balance, all 4 cylinders firing evenly with little variance in CR and mixture quality is key to eliminating failures.

Posted by: Chuck Nov 28 2007, 08:38 PM

My .02 and it is worth precisely that . . . .

I REALLY struggled with this as I had to make the decision what to put into my '73 restoration project. I bought the car with the intent of doing a turbo Subie swap. I then decided to keep the car stock. That decision led me to look at Jake's offerings. With the 4, especially one of Jake's 4s, you've got a very nimble, reliable package. With the 6, especially a larger 6 (3.0 plus), you gain some weight, you gain some complexity, you gain some additional maintenance expenses due to the price of Porsche parts and you gain horsepower and torque. I found a really nice 3.2 6 and that will be going into my car. With the MSDS headers and a Steve Wong chip, I should be making ~250hp in my teener with the stock injection.

My 1.7 TIV will be crated and stored. When the 914 is complete and my bank account recovers, I will begin a 550 Spyder kit (another wanted car). When the time comes, I will call Jake again, order one of his engine kits, rebuild my 1.7, and put a lightweight, reliable, fire-breathing TIV making ~200 or so hp into my lightweight, tube-framed Spyder.

Posted by: Racer Dec 10 2007, 08:51 PM

I've decided to go with a 2.0L 4!

Picking it up this weekend

Posted by: Gint Dec 10 2007, 09:24 PM

Excellent choice.

I've had, what... 7 914's over the years. I have had both and currently own a 74 2056/4 and my /6 is still in resto state with a proposed 2.7.

With that experience, I think what I would really like to have is a very nice 914 with a Raby 2270. I'll have to drive Rob's one day if I ever get the chance.

Posted by: Jake Raby Dec 10 2007, 09:39 PM

Great choice..
I am working on the finalities of the 2008-2009 engine kit program as we speak..
You'll like what we have cooked up! More power and less cost with some kits as much as 600 bucks LESS than last year!

Posted by: LarryR Dec 10 2007, 11:11 PM

WOHOO!!! sounds good. I will have to go back to your site to check out the new prices.

Posted by: Jake Raby Dec 11 2007, 08:16 AM

They will be up, along with detailed presentations by the time we close down for our Christmas break...

It is taking tons of time to get all the descriptions changed, presentations made and items functioning in the store.

I update the kit program every two years, add new combos and revitalize the old ones and it SUCKS when I have to do it!

Posted by: HAM Inc Dec 11 2007, 08:28 AM

The last two years have seen some incredible advancements. More than the previous two years. I imagine that adds quite a bit of time to the catalog update process!
I'm looking forward to seeing the finished site.

Posted by: Jake Raby Dec 11 2007, 04:34 PM

Yep.. It took me all day just to finish the 2056cc offering details!

After this there won't be many questions to answer!

2008 is the year of application, we'll only be developing the Porkies heads and finishing up the roller cams while spending a ton of time on the Boxster program...

Posted by: Randal Feb 21 2008, 09:23 PM

Yup. If you want to compete on a national autoxing level then go with a big 4.

A 6 on the track is wonderful, although I can't wait to take "222" out there to see how it does against our 2.7- 6.

Posted by: J P Stein Feb 22 2008, 07:12 AM

If you're talking SCCA "national autoxing level", you can be the first in recent memory. Big fours land in the big dog classing also.

Posted by: J P Stein Feb 22 2008, 07:13 AM

oops

Posted by: Slider Feb 22 2008, 06:50 PM

It is amazing how much the type4's have advanced in the last 10 years i dont know Jake directly but he has spent numerous hours with my brother on the phone or with email over the last 10 years. and i have learned alot about the motors between him and Jake. I will have a Raby motor in my 72 one day. the sixes are great too. i like the t4 because its always the underdog its the motor that goes against to others. i remember telling my brother 15 years ago that i wanted to hot rod a type 4 motor and he thought i was crazy. he was snowballed with the t1 (VW Scene)

A Raby 6..??? sounds good to me..

Posted by: Jake Raby Feb 23 2008, 11:49 AM

I did this on Thursday.



Pump gas, TIV non aftermarket head castings twin plugged with LE 225 treatment. The intake ports are NOT WELDED!!

The engine ran for 3 days on 4 gallons of fuel in the dyno cell while I searched for the proper tune.. It had BSFC numbers as low as a 2270 engine and wouldn't get to 350F head temp no matter how hard I tried.

It idles at 700 RPM smoother than stock and doesn't need more than 5,500 RPM to make it's power.

Yeah, we have advanced to the next level.... Again.


The same base engine made only 235 HP with big aftermarket single plug heads in 2005 with 2.5mm MORE bore and 80 CFM more port flow and the SAME cam..

Bigger is not better-

Posted by: JPB Feb 23 2008, 12:21 PM

I know of one local bro who hates it when Raby engined cars pass his 3.2L on the track.

Posted by: Jake Raby Feb 23 2008, 01:06 PM

Thats the whole reason why I do the things I do!

More with less!

Posted by: grantsfo Feb 23 2008, 01:21 PM

In my opinion six is best choice as there are still hundreds of well repected suppliers and shops supporting the Porsche Six. Big VW T4 and youre stuck with what? One or two suppliers? Thats a problem in my book when you talking about a track motor. Porsche pedigree six is far more reliable and better supported than a big VW T4 for track use. The six is still actively raced very competitively. Aside from FP 1.8 liter VW T4's (throw away motors) I havent seen too many Big VW T4's successfully campaigned in a real race series. There might be a handful of examples. Track driving/racing is more than a silly dyno sheets and HP/liter.

Big T4 is still pretty much a special application motor - decent for AX and bragging rights on the street. If your gig is all about showing people what a bad ass T4 you have by all means go for a Big VW T4. If you want a practical track car motor that will be very reliable and has tons of support go with a six. Going with a six over a big T4 was one of the best decisions I have made for a track car.

Nice thing about more 6 cylinder conversions being done is that aftermarket support for 914-6 actually becomes viable. I have seen some great stuff come out over the past few years due to all the conversions that are happening.

I do like Jakes big VW motors. Eventually I can see having a limited use street car with a big VW motor with lots of chrome and shiny stuff that would be cool.

JP, You made me laugh with that dyno post! I'm sure that my 2.5 six on Jakes engine dyno would be close to your motor. What? ...Probably about 275 HP?

Posted by: Jake Raby Feb 23 2008, 02:42 PM

Grant,

Glad to see you are back from Hibernation. We all thought you had been subject to an alien abduction.

Posted by: So.Cal.914 Feb 23 2008, 05:41 PM

Posted by: degreeoff Feb 23 2008, 06:23 PM

AW come on man! There should be at least 2 in there!!

Just Kidding Jake you do great work...I'd love to spar with one of your engines on a track.