Fact finding - - Engine Spec's - - HP/torque, What HP/torque can be expected for a given engine size??? Options

[nine14_6]

I have never driven a 914 but have always wanted one. I will be making a purchase in the next 5-8 months. I am trying to get a feel for how much power/torque a 914 might have in relation to what I have now. I am currently driving a BMW 328 (190hp) and am getting about 16 +/- pounds per HP with torque peak around 3-4K rpm.

My question is: For a given motor what could be expected. I guess that a 1.7 puts out about 70hp(31/lb), 1.8 - 80-85hp (27/lb), 2 - 95-100hp (22/lb). I am interested in the 6 conversions. What is typical or conservative for a 2.2, 2.4,2.7, 3 or even a 3.2 6 cyl? If I figure a 914 weights in at 2200lb, I am thinking I will need 150hp to get at least a similar weight to hp advantage.

Also, about how fast can be achieved per gear relative to these cars?
One more question... in the 6 conversions, what it could be expected in 0-60 times? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/driving.gif)

[HAM Inc]

Start with a 2.0 914-4 and upgrade to a 2270 or 2316 kit from Jake Raby. You'll end up with 200 reliable hp, at a fraction of the cost of a 6cyl. Then you'll have money leftover for the suspension mods you'll need to make to plant that power!

[nine14_6]

Okay. Dumb question then... Can I really get big HP out of a 4 cyl even Jaked out? can you tell I know nussing about this car. Heck I know little about this mark, let alone this car.

I really think I want the 911 engine. Such a sweet sound.... and with carbs... just plain beautiful.

[johannes]

Have a look at Jake's website for more information about conversions
http://www.aircooledtechnology.com/914.htm

and look at theese engines ...
http://www.aircooledtechnology.com/customers/theysay.html

[Bleyseng]

I suggest you drive some 914's before jumping in. Try a 2056 with a Raby cam and a 2270, a stock six and a 3.2L

Then decide (IMG:style_emoticons/default/chair.gif)

[byndbad914]

My question is: For a given motor what could be expected. I guess that a 1.7 puts out about 70hp(31/lb), 1.8 - 80-85hp (27/lb), 2 - 95-100hp (22/lb). I am interested in the 6 conversions. What is typical or conservative for a 2.2, 2.4,2.7, 3 or even a 3.2 6 cyl? If I figure a 914 weights in at 2200lb, I am thinking I will need 150hp to get at least a similar weight to hp advantage.

So this gets to be a pretty "loaded" question.

A few ways to look at it (same HP, stress to components, weight).

1. same HP = say you wanted 200HP, and it is a mostly street driven car so longevity and low stress is more desirable than less weight. You can build a 2.0L 4-cyl that makes that or a 3.2L 6 that makes that. The difference is that the 4 cyl has to generate 1.67HP/cube and the 3.2L only needs to produce 1.042HP/cube. So the 3.2L will be a very, very low stressed engine, with HP/cube numbers like that it will make more torque across a larger band than the 4cyl and just be an all around better street combo.

2. Lower stress = say you took a 2.0L-4 and compared to a 2.0L-6 (same exact volume engine) and they make the exact same HP and torque peak values. There is less stress on the 6cyl engine as six cylinders share the load to create the output v. four cylinders sharing the load to create the output.

3. weight - if you want to race it and be the fast guy, and set the HP the same, then build the high-strung 4 as it is clearly a smaller package, even if volume is the same. so you will have the lighter more nimble car.

Typically for the street crowd, the broader torque band and higher output values in general from the larger cube late-model sixes will persuade them to go conversion. The guys that want to race in a small bore category will prefer the 4 as they can get the same output as many of the small sixes, or at least close, but be competitive based on weight difference.

But keep in mind example one where the 4 cyl is making 1.67HP/cube. Take the 3.2L and make 1.67HP/cube and you will make 320HP instead of 200HP. Then you get into transaxle issues (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Bleyseng]

yes and no.....

old school 4's were pretty stressed but now with the modern nikasil cylinders, high quality pistons, cams, and better stroked rods 4's can produce 200hp, rev to 7000 rpms and not be a finiky, high strung, stressed engine.

remember 4's were 60/70's technology....most 911 sixes (3.2) were late 80's technology, big difference.

[Jake Raby]

It is all in the combo..

I can take the same engine and only change cam, heads and CR and effectively take the power from 130HP to 170HP on the same fuel...

Most every combo we have today makes 175HP and I now have 7 combos that are over 200HP on pump gas when supported by the proper sub components... The numbers on my site are REAL numbers, not just ratings. I work to exceed these numbers with each combo.

All of this with longevity and reliability of the stock/4 engine.

Here is the weird part, the way my program works a 145HP engine is only 750.00 less than the same displacement engine making 175HP....

Such a sweet sound

Those that have heard a true MassIVe engine agree that it has it's own sound. I consider that sound to be much more satisfying than that of the six... Thats probably because I created that sound, but.....

Also, never buy an engine based on a sound, thats like choosing a wife because she has big fake tits, generally those relationships don't last very long....

Yes, I can help. Yes- it is ALL in the combo.

I drive one and live it everyday.

[Racing916]

Such a sweet sound

Those that have heard a true MassIVe engine agree that it has it's own sound. I consider that sound to be much more satisfying than that of the six... Thats probably because I created that sound, but.....


4 sounds better than 6???? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

[nine14_6]

bvndbad914... you make some really good points that I was thinking as well. Why enter the 914 word with a 4 albeit beefed up... it would have to work harder for the equivalent in a 6. High hp, high torque low band is mostly what I am after. I care little to race. I just want a hot little scooter. this will likely make me want to race, but I would rather make that mind up when I get the chance.

[Bleyseng]

then a hot 2056 FI 914 is the cheapest route for a hot little scooter.
a 3.2L is nice but soo hard to not stomp the gas petal all the time...

2.0-2.4L sixes aren't that fast anymore

[Jake Raby]

Such a sweet sound

Those that have heard a true MassIVe engine agree that it has it's own sound. I consider that sound to be much more satisfying than that of the six... Thats probably because I created that sound, but.....


4 sounds better than 6???? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

Ever heard one of my creations??? At full song it has none of the characteristics of the VW engine it was derived from.

Yes, it has it's own sound.

[ConeDodger]

I have been driving my Raby kit 2270 quite a lot lately. There are some pretty amazing things about this motor. One of them is how it causes guys with sixes to go wow! Yes you can wind this thing up to just over 7K but the cool thing is the car is much more driveable. I can be on the freeway doing 75 in 5th and I have so much torque that I don't even downshift to pass. Just a little bit more loud pedal. I would have thought that my HP was around 170 or so but a local engine builder says he thinks it feels like a 200HP at the crank motor. He expects that we will see 170 at the wheels when we take it to the dyno after I finish break in.

I don't quite know how to respond to the sound thing. I have two other Porsches, both with sixes. I love the sound but I love the sound of the 2270 less that Dellorto whistle. (Jake did you send that gasket yet?)
My 2270 feels very nimble and precise. The Bumblebee six feels very powerful and brutish. Both get the job done but in different ways. Personally, I like precise.. YMMV

[byndbad914]

My 2270 feels very nimble and precise. The Bumblebee six feels very powerful and brutish. Both get the job done but in different ways. Personally, I like precise.. YMMV

Taking this a step further, I was thinking about this after my first post. I have not driven a massIVe motor car or a 3.2L six, but bear with me here...

there is also a feel issue with different engines, which is what I believe CondDodger is saying as well. So, for an example I have personal experience with, I have built well over 500 V8 engines from "mild to wild". So when I built my engine for my car, I wanted VISCERAL. I wanted to hit the key and feel the engine jump up, grab me by the throat and slam me back in the seat. So I built a crazy destroked 400 Chevy with a monster cam and so forth to make 525HP. That said, I could have also built a 434 cube small block and made 525HP with a hyd tappet cam. Both would be just as fast, but the 434 with the hydraulic cam wouldn't jump up and grab me by the throat. It would punch me in the chest (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) but seriously, I hope you get what I mean.

And trust me, a lot of guys asked me why I would have such a crazy engine to make 525HP when I could have built one "tamer" and had the same power. It is all just preference.

So some guys will prefer the 4 and argue all day why it is better cuz they like the more visceral feel of it. Others want a "tamer" feel, so they will go with a mild six for the same power and acceleration.

For a street car, I would put the biggest 6 in there I could with modern f.i. and so forth and enjoy a smooth, fast car. And absolutely nothing against Jake or his engines, he clearly has a solid type 4 program, I just like lots of power. So for the street I like lots of smooth power. If I were only going for 200HP, I would honestly go with a built 4 to get "feel" and keep the weight down. But in reality, if I were going to go 4 or 6, I would go biggest, gnarliest 6 I could and get the 330HP.

'Course, keep in mind, I went with a 525HP V8 for "feel" hahahaha (IMG:style_emoticons/default/aktion035.gif) I am already thinking of selling my car to build an AWD 70 Mustang with a toned down Pro Stock motor around 850HP with around 700 ft-lbs... I have too many ideas and unfortunately wish I were born rich instead of so damn good looking (IMG:style_emoticons/default/w00t.gif)

[Jake Raby]

That "feel" is what metters most... What the feel is comprised of it torque more than anything else and this is where the TIV shines above most every other engine IMHO. If you look at power ratings and dyno charts from other 4 cylinders and even some sixes you won't find the low down torque and midrange torque that the TIV prooduces being paralleled very often- even with modern engines.

My entire program has been based on ffectiveness, this comes from engine recipes that are very efficient and promote mixture quality and that enhances drivability while creating a very usable powerband.

It has been my goal to create engine packages that when coupled to proper gearing offer a powerband that can be fully experienced EVERY TIME the car is driven, whether this is a trip to the gas station or on the track. The power band of a six or other higher peak HP engines that are similar can't be used every time the car is driven unless you like to hit redline continually and that gets old.

Most of my engines don't need more than 6,000 RPM to make all their power and thats something that can be compared on paper because dyno charts don't measure acceleration.

But here is a good example of what a MassIVe engine can do when being shifted at only 5,500 RPM.
Bluebonic Plague

The experience that Cone Dodger is having is what can be expected when a vehicle stays on a diet in the engine bay, retaining its nimble characteristics while effectively doubling the stock HP..

And it only took me a 10% displacement increase to create a 100% increase in power output.. Don't think I have ever seen that from a six on pump gas-