Opinions on big six drivability, 3.0, 3.2, 3.3T, and 3.6 Options

[Eric_Shea]

The nice thing is that a 914 chassis is a great starting point for whatever moves you.

OK... I'll bite and play Mr. Contrair in a pool full of 3.0+ guys (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I've seen quite a few 914 chassis literally torn apart. Granted most were rode hard and put away wet but the chassis has it's limitations. So, while it can be a great "starting point" it should be strengthened and modified if you plan on utilizing all that torque.

To the original question; drivability? How could you go wrong with (almost) any of them. Quite simply, the more torque, the better it is in the drivability department. That's said, it's hard to beat a bigger motor.

I just don't think a 914 is very well suited for anything over a 2.7 (long term) Matt (hasaramat) was over today and we were discussing just that. For a driver, a 2.7 with E-Cams would be a dream to drive.

So... I'd say a street driven car with any motor you desire would be great. The 3.2's or the 3.6 would be tops on my list becaue of the "turn the key... go pick-up a gallon of milk" usability of the later fuel injection. Just keep in mind, if you get crazy with the right foot, all that torque will eventually cause some rips and tears unless you're fortified (and even then, it's questionable whether you can tame the beast).

Bottom line for me; I doubt if "I'll" ever put anything bigger than a 2.7 in a teener but... I could very well eat those words with a big happy smile on my face some day.

[ConeDodger]

Ah but Mr. Contrair, while I have seen the 914 chassis torn apart it hasn't been from the torque of the motor in most cases. We have a local 914 4 cylinder with big racing slicks that probably has a whopping 130hp, maybe. It was the slicks that tore this chassis. And when Mr. Contrair says "tears the chassis" he does mean tears. It literally rips it back by the suspension in the rear. Not from rust but from those big ass tires...

Just another viewpoint...

[Eric_Shea]

Torque occurs when a force is applied perpendicular to the an object's axis of rotation. Slick's = Torque on the chassis. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[ChrisFoley]

It was the slicks that tore this chassis.

It just happens quicker with a big six (or other hi-torque engine) installed.
If one takes meaningful steps to minimize flex of the rear suspension pickups and twisting of the chassis the cracks will never appear.

[SLITS]

I'll take my CIS 2.7L .... starts everytime, anywhere (unless the fuel pump gives up) and has enough power to get in trouble. About as close to plug and play as you can get.

I may build a 3.0L 'cause I have one ... but I'm in no hurry to take it off the shelf.

And yes, I use a "T" for the rear brakes (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)

[computers4kids]

One of the questions asked was the weight difference adding a larger six and it's impact on drivability. I really don't have any first hand experience driving a big hp six so I'm trying to compare only what I know, which is a v8 teener. My mild conversion added 250 lbs to my car, including the AC and I know how it handles with its hp.

300 hp seems to be a nice fit for a daily driver, but I must admit I don't AX and don't drive it like some of you do...just enjoy the power and windy roads.

I would like to do another conversion and the LS1 automatic is at the top of my list. A big six sounds great as well, but I'm not to sure I want to spend that kind of money in a 914.


Not to get off track, but does a big six really need to have the extra tire width thus the flares? I'm probably one of the only people on this planet that prefers a narrow body teener but with the extra power. I don't seem to have a traction problem, it just goes. Is that because of my extra weight? ...and my little old lady right foot.

[pcar916]

How wide are 245 rubber, not the wheels alone?

245mm / 25.4mm per inch ~ 9.6in. Then a little for the sidewalls.

As for the question about a wide tire requirement... I think so. Although relatively skinny tires are better in the rain, there's a price you'll pay for them. You'll spin the car on wet pavement eventually.

If you are going to use skinny ones, even if it's strictly a street car, then only use very sticky compounds. In any case, only the best tires will do. The rest is up to your and your driving skills. On dry pavement they will be ok but the negative camber you'll need may wear them out sooner.

[Steve]

One of the questions asked was the weight difference adding a larger six and it's impact on drivability. I really don't have any first hand experience driving a big hp six so I'm trying to compare only what I know, which is a v8 teener. My mild conversion added 250 lbs to my car, including the AC and I know how it handles with its hp.

300 hp seems to be a nice fit for a daily driver, but I must admit I don't AX and don't drive it like some of you do...just enjoy the power and windy roads.

I would like to do another conversion and the LS1 automatic is at the top of my list. A big six sounds great as well, but I'm not to sure I want to spend that kind of money in a 914.


Not to get off track, but does a big six really need to have the extra tire width thus the flares? I'm probably one of the only people on this planet that prefers a narrow body teener but with the extra power. I don't seem to have a traction problem, it just goes. Is that because of my extra weight? ...and my little old lady right foot.

You would think the added HP would help you in Autocross. I should of learned the art of autocross with the 4 banger before going to a six. I spend too much time power sliding in the corners, which is a lot of fun!! It might also be the weight and lack of driving skills, but the 4 bangers kick my ass in a tight corner autocross. They can't touch me at streets of willow due to the long straights though. Lots of other variables, including street tires versus soft rubber racing tires and how often you autocross.

[PRS914-6]

Of the 914's I have owned they have had 2.0 four's and 2.0, 2.4, 2.8 and 3.6 engines.

The 3.6 is worth the time, money and energy in my opinion. Yes, you need to do some chassis reinforcing but in the $$ standpoint it really doesn't cost much to do, just time...but it's fun!

The 3.6 for all around enjoyment just can't be beat. Computer controlled, gobs of torque, Porsche's best improvements to the air cooled engines. Choose a 95 3.6 and you get hydraulic lifters and OBD-I where you can drop in a performance chip in minutes and never deal with a valve adjustment.

Driving a 3.6 is great! You can stop worrying about what gear you are in as it doesn't matter.... it just pulls everywhere! Drop it down a couple of gears and you can smoke most anyone on the road.

In closing, a 3.6 is a true sleeper. You can cruise around like grandma's buick with barely a sound or scare the piss out of your passenger with eye blurring performance....a wild range of abilities and the ultimate car in my opinion. Other than the $$ to build I see no downsides. I love it!

[J P Stein]

Here's a pic of Gary Chapman's sweet ride. Fully street legal, complete interor, with a chipped 3.2 & 915 box & yada....it ain't light. He made a huge jump at AX going to the flares & big stickey rubber (from small stickey rubber). He *will* blow your doors off at AX (and his wife Pam might also). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
He also uses it for track days & drives it to both types of local events.

[ChrisFoley]

Here's one way to add rear tire capacity without changing the overall appearance of the car too much. The rear flares are 2 1/2" wider than stock.
This car has a '95 3.6 with a chip, producing 250whp, and has excellent manners around town.
The owner has already suggested the engine isn't powerful enough. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

[campbellcj]

How wide are 245 rubber, not the wheels alone?

Rich

Nominally 245mm / 25.4 = 9.65" but in reality you have to check the specs for each particular tire as mounted on a certain size wheel. They vary a lot...

[pete-stevers]

The nice thing is that a 914 chassis is a great starting point for whatever moves you.

OK... I'll bite and play Mr. Contrair in a pool full of 3.0+ guys (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I've seen quite a few 914 chassis literally torn apart. Granted most were rode hard and put away wet but the chassis has it's limitations. So, while it can be a great "starting point" it should be strengthened and modified if you plan on utilizing all that torque.

To the original question; drivability? How could you go wrong with (almost) any of them. Quite simply, the more torque, the better it is in the drivability department. That's said, it's hard to beat a bigger motor.

I just don't think a 914 is very well suited for anything over a 2.7 (long term) Matt (hasaramat) was over today and we were discussing just that. For a driver, a 2.7 with E-Cams would be a dream to drive.

So... I'd say a street driven car with any motor you desire would be great. The 3.2's or the 3.6 would be tops on my list becaue of the "turn the key... go pick-up a gallon of milk" usability of the later fuel injection. Just keep in mind, if you get crazy with the right foot, all that torque will eventually cause some rips and tears unless you're fortified (and even then, it's questionable whether you can tame the beast).

Bottom line for me; I doubt if "I'll" ever put anything bigger than a 2.7 in a teener but... I could very well eat those words with a big happy smile on my face some day.

...............................
perhaps "mr contrair"
could explain the economic feasability of a build up of a 2.7 on a tired ole mag case that has seen more milage/streses as opposed to a tough alum block...

the job of supporting a chassis/rear suspension is really not that much work when a motor is out...be it on a four w big slicks, or a big six

but i do agree that even a early 3.0 has a lot of torque, and i cant see myself needing any more, torque helps streetablility, as opposed to a peaky small bore screamer. but the simplicity of the install of 3.2 with motronics, would be my pick for an install now over a 3.0 w cis, unless going with carbs (the cis clearance being the issue)

but then there are divlar studs......

[Steve]

There are tons of advantages with the 3.2. It uses an early fan shroud, so all the 914-6 heat exchanger plumbing bolts right up. Same thing with the engine sheet metal. The wiring is also a joke. Most of the colors match up with the stock wiring. You can even dump the relay board in the engine compartment. Just get a haynes manual for the 914 and a a haynes manual for the same 911 and your done or do a search in the archives. I am using stock 914-6 heat exchangers and everything bolted right up. Still have plenty of power and the engine runs great. However I agree with Paul, you can never have enought HP and not having to adjust the valves anymore would be a plus. The downside with a 3.6 is the aftermarket heat exchangers suck. Notice he went with heated seats instead. Probably fine for our wimpy winters in California anyway. There is also more initial work with the tin around the engine and with either a 3.2 or a 3.6 you are better off with a properly built 915 with a wevo versus a 901 used as a four speed and skipping first gear. I also agree with Paul's statement, do it once and do it right so you don't have buyer regret and want to touch it again later. When I bought my 3.2 back in 2000, it was only $5200.00. The 3.6 back then was around $12k. The 3.2 price is still around $5k and the 3.6 has dropped to around $8k. IMHO the 3.6 is a better deal right now, just a little more initial work and money over the 3.2, but you will be much more happier in the long run. Also since the economy sucks right now there is some nice 3.6 conversions selling for around $25k. It could cost up to twice this price to build one from scratch!!

[Eric_Shea]

perhaps "mr contrair"
could explain the economic feasability of a build up of a 2.7 on a tired ole mag case that has seen more milage/streses as opposed to a tough alum block...

Sure... they're cheap. Done properly, it should cost any more than a 3.0 or 3.6

I didn't say "I" would do it... I just said I probably wouldn't go any bigger than that. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Mine's a 2.5 built on a tired ole sand cast AL case.

Again, torque is cool... I just have my opinions, right or wrong.

[mepstein]

Mine was 4K. I still need a DME and harness ~500. But it did come with a Steve Wong custom chip since PO built it with euro compression. and 964 cams. He told me it was shy of 3.6 power but more kick than stock. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[pete-stevers]

perhaps "mr contrair"
could explain the economic feasability of a build up of a 2.7 on a tired ole mag case that has seen more milage/streses as opposed to a tough alum block...

Sure... they're cheap. Done properly, it should cost any more than a 3.0 or 3.6

I didn't say "I" would do it... I just said I probably wouldn't go any bigger than that. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Mine's a 2.5 built on a tired ole sand cast AL case.

Again, torque is cool... I just have my opinions, right or wrong.

i just remeber somewhere long ago, someone talking about a 2.5 with s cams...saying driveablity on the street was an issue
peaky high reving lil screamers might be good for the track..
but a dual porpose, or straight street car, i think that "grunt" puts a bit of a smile on ones face at stop lights
yet i tend to agree with your thought process and hope to build a a 3.2ss with 964s on cis...

[Eric_Shea]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) It can be a pain in the ass to drive on the street. That's why I opted for the "Airport" torque multipliers (and that's why I mentioned E-Cams above). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Sure does sound good though... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[ConeDodger]

Steve,
I have experienced those seat heaters first hand in Paul's car. HEAVENLY!
I am not sure I would want to drive a 914 in anything worse than a wimpy California winter though...

There are tons of advantages with the 3.2. It uses an early fan shroud, so all the 914-6 heat exchanger plumbing bolts right up. Same thing with the engine sheet metal. The wiring is also a joke. Most of the colors match up with the stock wiring. You can even dump the relay board in the engine compartment. Just get a haynes manual for the 914 and a a haynes manual for the same 911 and your done or do a search in the archives. I am using stock 914-6 heat exchangers and everything bolted right up. Still have plenty of power and the engine runs great. However I agree with Paul, you can never have enought HP and not having to adjust the valves anymore would be a plus. The downside with a 3.6 is the aftermarket heat exchangers suck. Notice he went with heated seats instead. Probably fine for our wimpy winters in California anyway. There is also more initial work with the tin around the engine and with either a 3.2 or a 3.6 you are better off with a properly built 915 with a wevo versus a 901 used as a four speed and skipping first gear. I also agree with Paul's statement, do it once and do it right so you don't have buyer regret and want to touch it again later. When I bought my 3.2 back in 2000, it was only $5200.00. The 3.6 back then was around $12k. The 3.2 price is still around $5k and the 3.6 has dropped to around $8k. IMHO the 3.6 is a better deal right now, just a little more initial work and money over the 3.2, but you will be much more happier in the long run. Also since the economy sucks right now there is some nice 3.6 conversions selling for around $25k. It could cost up to twice this price to build one from scratch!!

[PRS914-6]

As you price compare the differences keep in mind that if you get a complete 3.6 from a dismantler demand EVERYTHING!!! Things like the exhaust, flywheel, cruise module, air box, starter etc gets good prices on eBay. I made back almost $1000.00 by selling off the items I didn't need. You should be able to buy a 95 3.6 for around $75-$7800. Sell off $1k and you are now at $6800 or less.

Heat on a 6? If you want the stock heat exchanger for a 6 you'll pay dearly for them and the diameter is too small for a 3.2 or 3.6 and I would question their use on even a stock 2.7. That leaves aftermarket.....or just regular headers and the cost is not much different on any size you want.....

The tin for a 3.6 is not tough to fabricate but takes an afternoon of patience

Oil cooling.....A 3.6 will need more cooling than a 3.2 as there is no engine mounted cooler. On the other hand unless you live in Alaska, anything above a 2.4 will need a cooler. While those might argue they have no cooler on their 2.7, the magnesium cases warp like butter when hot and it only takes once to ruin it! Bottom line.....Most 6's need a cooler and require one in a state like California.....Yeah, Yeah there will be those that say they have no cooler and you don't need one but any power producing 6 needs one in a 914. To upgrade from a cheap cooler to a larger cooler is only a couple of hundred. The other expenses are there anyway.

One of the big expenses is the clutch and flywheel. A 3.6 conversion flywheel and clutch will add $500.

So what am I trying to say? A 3.6 will cost a few grand more to build but gives you a better engine, no valves to adjust, more fun to drive, a killer torque monster, less oil leaks, factory twin plug and less interest in modification when finished. If you later spent that $2k on a smaller engine what would you get? Perhaps the performance of a stock 3.6 but without the factory engineering? Get the point?

Bottom line....save more and pay it up front and be done with it, the benefits are worth it. However, that's just my opinion......