How much power vs. displacement, 1.7-2.0 4s Options

[Gearhead1432]

How much power have people been able to get out of a stock displacment motor? Torqure and Hp?

I can recall reading about people getting 120hp from 1.7L type one motors years ago. That is on pump fuel.

With the technology available today I would think that volumetric efficiency could be pushed further than before while maintaining reliability on the street.

So is 130-160hp out of a 2.0 totaly (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/screwy.gif)

I know Porsche did it years ago with a couple diferant 2.0L motors like the 901/911 or 587 (street motors not track). However, they were radicaly diferant compared to the simple type 4. ....

-Rob

[lapuwali]

The key here is specific power: hp/liter.

In a two-valve engine, getting more than 70hp/liter is getting into race engine territory. The cam required to do better than this usually produces poor low-speed drivability. Four-valve engines do better, usually 80hp/liter before it gets too cammy for street use. Variable valve timing changes the picture completely, but we'll ignore that, for now.

A 70hp/liter 2.0 would indeed make 140hp. There are several street engines in this neighborhood. The Euro-tuned Alfa twincam makes 140-150hp in 2.0 street form. Even the smog-choked, low compression, very mild cammed US version did 115hp (58hp/liter). The '72-'73 911E made 165hp from a 2.4 Six, or 68hp/liter. The 911S of that year did 190hp (77hp/liter), but it's generally considered to be pretty wild for day to day street use.

The stock 2.0 Type 4 only does 48hp/liter, so there should be a lot of room for improvement here. The number Jake just threw out 155 from 2.27L is 68hp/liter, so you should (theoretically) be able to get 135hp or thereabouts from 2.0L. I suspect that since building a 155hp 2270 costs about the same as building a 135hp 2.0, that there's little point in doing the latter, unless you're operating under racing rules that limit you to 2.0 liters.