Conversion Question, Motor Size Options

[EdwardBlume]

OK, I know its been discussed before.... so I'll ask again, for those of you who have done this....

What is the ideal engine for a /6 conversion?

The ABM came with a 901.101.101. 7R

From the Bruce Anderson book it would seem that normal engine HP for each possible engine is as follows:

2.4 w/ carbs - 130 ish
2.7 150 ish
3.0 170-180 ish
3.2 200

Before Andy jumps in, I don't want a 3.6 - too much power. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol-2.gif)

What is the best driving /6 with ridiculous power?

Is it worth it to build up the 2.4 to S spec? when you can get all the improvements of a 3.0?

Thx

[ConeDodger]

Isn't Shea running an S spec motor?

I like my 3.2 in stock trim but I wouldn't call the power ridiculous...

[SirAndy]

Before Andy jumps in, I don't want a 3.6 - too much power

Actually, if you look at my responses to that same question my answer has always been a 3.2 (with injection).

It is all around the best engine choice for a street 914.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[EdwardBlume]

Isn't Shea running an S spec motor?

I like my 3.2 in stock trim but I wouldn't call the power ridiculous...

Is it drivable with good power on the mid to upper range? I used to have a 95 993 as a DD, and off the line, it was nothing special.

I figure this is the only /6 I will ever have so I want to do it right.

[EdwardBlume]

Before Andy jumps in, I don't want a 3.6 - too much power

Actually, if you look at my responses to that same question my answer has always been a 3.2 (with injection).

It is all around the best engine choice for a street 914.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

So your 3.6 is for sale? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif) From specs and evolution, the 3.2 is a winner, if you can find one.

[rick 918-S]

From what I understand it's a fine line from the 2.7 to the 3.2. The 2.7 has fitment issues with the engine lid latch. The 3.2 will likely need oil cooling. 200 would be very nice though.

[campbellcj]

For a street car I say an injected 3.2 first choice, 3.0 second. I have a carbed 2.7 race engine in mine. Revs to 7800-8000, 230rwhp. I think it suits the character or the car better but is an expensive route and may not last as long despite the prep work and special parts.

[JStroud]

It was a no brainer for me, my 2.7 was going to cost $7k just for machine work, I bought a 3.2 for $6.5k.

[PanelBilly]

I think it's equally important to modify the tranny so you make use of the new power. Why have a first gear that you'll never use.

[EdwardBlume]

It was a no brainer for me, my 2.7 was going to cost $7k just for machine work, I bought a 3.2 for $6.5k.

What a good deal!

[JStroud]

Rob, I thought the ABM car came with a -6

[SLITS]

From what I understand it's a fine line from the 2.7 to the 3.2. The 2.7 has fitment issues with the engine lid latch. The 3.2 will likely need oil cooling. 200 would be very nice though.

Only if you run with a CIS motor. Engine lid latch assembly will interfere with fuel distributor.

Height of CIS engine is a problem with the engine lid if installed at the 7" height recommended by RJ and Maddog mounts. Drop it to 6.5" and it's no problem.

Anything above 2.7 will require a modified flywheel or clutch assembly to run the stock 901 tranny with. 2.7L crank is 6 bolt and can accept the early 901 flywheel with the 215 mm stock clutch.

You can run the stock 225 mm flywheel with a modified pressure plate and a 2 year only ('70-'71 911) friction disk. Has to do with the diameter and spline count required for the input shaft of the 901 tranny.

3.0 and above are 9 bolt flywheels.

Anything 2.4L and above more than likely requires additional oil cooling (additional oil cooler). Don't have experience with anything below 2.4L.

Anyway, that's a portion of my expeiences.

[mepstein]

I drove a 3.2. Started with one turn of the key after sitting for months. Had lots of power down low and near redline. Seller sold it out from under me to a euro who offered more money. so I bought a 3.2 engine on Pelican. Had extras like 964 cams, euro compression and custom SW chip. Can't wait to drive it.

[shoguneagle]

A lot depends on what you want to do with the car. If I were to build another, I would do the following:

Within Porsche - 3.2 for road traveling, dependability, conversion ease
- 2.4 for peppy, road driving and handling with carbs
- 2.7 ?????

Subaru Sixer with transmission - for road traveling, dependability

Chevrolet V8 - Downright right hot rodding, roadability, power,
hadling (special modifications and weight saving items),
specialized suspension, dry sump, aluminum heads,
etc. Mucho dinero!!

I have built both a V8 and Porsche Sixer (3.2). The V8 was built before Renegade and during Rod Simpson days. A lot of difference and parts/kits availability available then and now. Dry sump, suspension points raised, aluminum parts are available now and it could be a very expensive build to do it right.

My 914 is being converted to 3.2 which I like very much. The conversion is fairly easy and straightforward with high marks for availability. Good engines and available parts are getting to the point where they are obsolete, supply availability getting limited, quality and dependability affected supply source, etc. When I started, this was the right build for me.

The new Subaru Sixers are interesting and brings the conversion into a better supply source (present day and back). I do not know what the ease or costs are involved in this conversion but I would be looking at this combo with the transmission if I was building present day.

Remember to allow sufficient time to get the project done. There are continuing hinders such as wife, thefts, moving, daily obligations, wife, just do not want to work on it, money, wife, etc.

There have been conversions done here and one should do some research via the threads for better background info. It definitely is a fun project and will keep you "entertained". Best wishes and enjoy the project.

Steve Hurt

[EdwardBlume]

Rob, I thought the ABM car came with a -6

It did / it does. I'm liking the car a lot and want to finish it once and for all, exactly how I want it for the next 30 years.

[Mark Henry]

Many ways to skin a cat, personally I like the 3.0, 3.2, 3.6 due to the superior aluminum case.
New (rebuilt) vs. used...new is expensive, but used is used so you want a known leakdown tested engine.

3.0 has better rods, CIS works but not the best system.
3.2 way better FI, but weaker rods.

If you are changing the induction and rebuilding there are many options.

[Series9]

Without ANY doubt: 3.2 with the stock FI.

230hp, the transaxle can handle it (if you don't do burnouts in 1st), and the first edition of digital FI on a /6 by Porsche (it's almost perfect).

[EdwardBlume]

Without ANY doubt: 3.2 with the stock FI.

Great. Have one handy?

[Mueller]

I really liked Scott Yeamans 3.0 liter /6 when I drove it many moons ago, narrow bodied car and I didn't think it needed more tire or power.

I've driven a few non-Porsche powered conversions and I really liked Fiids turbo Suby setup, I'd say it has about same HP level as Scotts 3.0.

Just right for a street 914.

[billh1963]

I'll be going with a 2.4...since that's what I have! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)