914-6 vs. 914-4...Your opinion Options

[Bleyseng]

No matter what you do to a four its still just a bus motor. Now a six is a piece of art!

Geoff (nomex on) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/happy11.gif)

[Brett W]

OK so YOU scored a couple of engines, what do you do about the oil tank, new carbs, exhaust, motor mounts, clutch, , etc. Most other conversions cost substantually more. If you are doing a six conversion for 1000k please keep it up but don't expect me to recommend such a cheap swap to any of my customers. I do things right (usually not cheap) and not half way otherwise my customers can find someone else to do their work.

I could probably build a bottom end 140hp 2056 for 2500$ My 130hp four will run circle around your 130 hp six because of the wieght differential. I spent 3000$ to make the power out of my engine through some shitty stock HE. I don't build sixes, don't have a lot of interest in building sixes. I will probably get into the late water cooled motors because the have more potential, but that is another arguement.

Cost
P&Cs 4cyl. 550$ 6cyl 1600$ 2.0L
Gaskets 50$ 289.99
Rings 60$ 85$
Camshafts 150$ 500$ea
Valves 130$ 200$
Chain tensioners N/A 160
OIl hoses N/A A lot
Oil pump 60$ 800$


HHHHMMMM don't see lots of value there. Now is the six inherently more durable, in most cases. Is the six more desireable, Yes in most cases. Is a six conversion worth as much as a real six with a better motor? No. Can they be done for the same money? NO. The 6 will always cost more up front. The four may not last as long but I can build 3 140hp fours for the price of one correct 6 conversion.


Sammy is right. The six is a distinct upgrade for the 914. I always like a well done conversion, but not for me. I am interested in V8s and fours. I could get intersted in playing with a 10 or twelve though if I happened on one for cheap.


These are my opinions, you have yours and the fellow that ask the original question needs to form his.

[morph]

research....research .....research.
when i went in search of more power.i came to one conclusion,(for what i want)6 cyl porsche power was just the way to go.i went over cost.and drove a few sixes,fours, bigs fours,and v8 conversions(yick).i even have drivin a rotery coversion.( too many problems).
and i dont pull ideas out of my ass.i look at all sides of the choice.the six will last you longer and be more reliable.as far as cost goes,ive seen the cost of big fours that reach the cost of just doing a stock rebuild of a six myself.but this is only my opinion.the power of a six felt right(3.0)and the car still handled great.v8 conversion had great power,but when you started to turn the car all the traditional feel of the 914 was gone.even more so when you went to stop even with brake upgrades on the cars i was driving.but to each his own

[Sammy]

I drove a stock 1.7 liter 71 914 all through the end of high schoole and through college (until someone offered me way too big a paycheck) and thought it was the best car in the world.
My next 914 turned into a turbo 2 liter, I was sure it was the best car in the world.
Then I built a V8 914. Fun but untyimately disapointing,. I grew tired of it quickly.
Mike Zois took me for a ride in his euro 3 liter 911SC, I was hooked. the sound, the feel, the way it just pulled harder and harder the more it revved, and it got smoother the higher it revved.
i was hooked and decided that was what i needed right then and there.
I got one but soon saw a drawback, no torque to speak of below 4000 rpm, I had to rev it up all the time or keep it in a lower gear to have throttle response. I imagine smaller sixes are worse, never drove one. granted my SC has AC, sunroof, power everything so it is prolly close to 2700 lubs, that might have something to do with it. now with pressurized intake all is well. I have the smoothness, reliability, sound, and power.

I dream of a big six 914 and soon I will build one, but it may be a track only car.
Sounde like one of you guys with a powerfull 4 needs to take me for a ride and bring me back to my senses.

[Joe Bob]

What REALLY bugged his eyes out was the 110mph brake down to 20 mph......guy about snotballed his pants.....of course he b!itched the whole time.....what a whiner.....

[Trekkor]

I'm with Root on this one. Deals are everywhere, and they always find me.

Got my running SIX with webers for $1500.

My goal is to convert by the end of November for under $4k. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool_shades.gif)

it will happen.

As far as which is better...don't know. We'll see.

I do remember someone said, "no one converts from a SIX to a FOUR". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

KT

[davidcalvin]

I _love_ my 76 2.0L. It runs really well, is totally stock and easy to get serviced, and anything faster would just get me into trouble.

If its fast enough to get a ticket in, its fast enough for me. I'm keeping this one furever.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wavey.gif)

[krk]

My bits to add -- they are small ones tho.

I drove a 73 2.0 as my daily driver here in SJ for probably 4 years. Loved the car. GT flares. Silver. Never planned to sell it. Oops -- bought other cars. Seems if you continually buy cars, at some point there are space issues. Who knew. (duh)

I now split time between a fairly stock /6 and a 76 911 turbo. Both silver of course.

The 73 was nimbler than the /6 -- yeh, the flares an wider stance make it hard to compare -- but part of it is also likely the response or pedal feel difference betweeen the FI 2.0 and the carb'd 2.0. The FI version seemed to make better torque off the line, and was lighter in the accel linkage, so in the normal driving, it probably was more responsive. (I sold the car a couple of years ago, so age related memory fade is kicking in)

The stock /6 is slightly weaker in bottem end torque, but after that, it is noticeably stronger -- it doesn't feel like it's maxing out even when you push it hard through the rpm range. And if you like the sound, the webers on a /6 at the howling stage are musical. I've never heard MFI in one of these, but that has to be a blast as well. (but who's kidding who -- the stock /6 doesn't exactly push you into your seat) I am a bit of a "stock junkie" so at this moment, I don't have changes planned, but....

I love the idea of a turbo /6 -- the 911 turbo is a blast to drive, but it is heavier and a bit tail happy. Personally, I don't care that much (I feel lucky to have one to drive! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif), but my current thinking is a M471 look, with a turbo /6 would be my current 914 pick.

kim.

[Jake Raby]

I have assisted with two six conversions and done one 100% myself.... I do have experience with the conversion.

The cost to rebuild a 150 or 180HP four cylinder isn't much at all. I offer the service to any of my customers that still are the original owners of my engines for 1/2 labor!

The parts to do the job are as limited as a full set of bearings, cam and lifter set (maybe if you have conventional lifters- not needed if you have ceramics) a set of rings, set of valves and a few incidental items..

I just did one of these jobs 3 weeks ago for a 115,000 mile 2270. It was an early version of mine and only made 135BHP in its original state. I was even suprised with the engine's wear and integrity. The customer is a neat freak and kept the engine in perfect tune, with oil changes every 2K.
I did the service mentioned above and replaced his cam and lifters with a more developed set with ceramics and his bill was still only 1800.00- the engine made 153BHP on the dyno this time around with no other changes.

Rebuild a six for that and get dyno tuning to boot!- I dare ya.....

I will never try to convince anyone that I talk to that has strong feelings about a six to go with one of my engines, or any other four. If you want it- go get it but the day when that MassIVe sticker is looked you in the face, on the back of the 4 cylinder car that just passed you remember just how shitty you are going to feel! Don't worry though, you won't be alone, its happeneing more and more day after day! The only thing that feels better than passing a six with a four is the Camaro that I killed at the drag strip last Friday night with my 66 Beetle and just 200HP! He went home shortly therafter.....

Some people have an attitude of "There is no replacement for displacement."

My attitude is " The only replacement for displacement is weight reduction."

[Eric_Shea]

Gint and I just took my bone stock puny six for a jaunt up Little Cottonwood Canyon last weekend (Z, when you wake up you're still in Kalifornia (IMG:style_emoticons/default/w00t.gif) ). We were both euphorically bouncing off redline with a six-cylinder chorus playing behind our ears. Banging the freshly rebuilt stock brakes upon occasion.

I've had the occasion to get it out on a few striaght and empty roads. It tops out around 130mph. Stunning? Nope. Awe inspiring? Nope. More in line with Jim's (PorscheRescue) vintage thread. To pilot a 34 year old 2000lb car around at redline and enjoy the sound of the engine and the balance of the drivetrain and brakes working in perfect harmony is enough to put a smile even on the Capt'n's face.

T'ain't nothing like a six.

All that being said, a nice 4 rocks!

T'ain't nothing like a 914.

[mskala]

I can't say anything about all the conversions, rebuilds,
and exciting stuff that some of the guys here are experts
of.

But I've have a stock '73 2.0, a stock '73 1.7, and then
the current stock (engine) '70 914-6.

The -6 is faster. By the time '73 rolled around, enough
weight was added that I think it's about the same or
heavier than the -6, whose engine was about 90 pounds
heavier than the -4. I find that gearing can be better or
worse at autocross depending on the setup, second
and third gear plus the different rev range are very
different.

Now, I think a stock -6 is not hugely faster than the -4,
but I do like the sound a lot better, and at least for me
I like the idea of having the stock 911 2.0T because it
seems very reliable and I'm not worried that it's pushed
to the limit by the factory, and the trans and the chassis
can more than handle it, stock.

[Jake Raby]

So what about this sound is so different than a TIV??

I just don't understand! Hell I have guys that complain that they are too loud and drown out the radio (4 cylinders that is)

I have driven alot of -6 cars and never noted a sound much different than a -4..... Now if the sound was like a Turboshaft or something spooling up I might understand!

[TimT]

So what about this sound is so different than a TIV??

The sound is quite distinct...

[jeff]

4,6,8,10,Rotary,Ford flathead??Hampster on wheel ??I wish mine would just run!Just stick something in and have fun theres always someone faster or more reliable (like one of those fast hondas with the big beautiful wings and huge tailpipes!Sstick something in and post pics so we c (IMG:style_emoticons/default/mueba.gif) an all go oooo!

[Trekkor]

It's funny, in the game Need for Speed, Porsche Unleashed, you can even hear the difference between the the Four and the SIX...Like that really means something (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol2.gif)

Seriously, the sound I've been hearing out of the SIX cars at Sears over the last few months has been awesome.

I even have video footage of a 2.0 vintage racer 911 twin plug, revving for me at 3 feet on dual Supertrapps. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

If the the SIX is bogus, i'll do something else.
It's all for fun. Has no real effect on my actual life (IMG:style_emoticons/default/givemebeer.gif)

KT

[bob91403]

As I understand it, a stock 2.0L 4 has an advantage over a stock 2.0L 6. In that it has almost as much horsepower, but less weight (better handling). The advantage the six would have is acceleration from like, 60 to 90, where the extra torque shows up. When you start talking about bigger fours and sixes, it's the same thing. As long as the horsepower is comparable the lighter four will handle a bit better, but, the extra torque from the six will give you better high end acceleration. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Oh, FI is less troublesome than carbs. So, if I were going to put in a six, it would be a FI one.

[Trekkor]

If i remember correctly, the stock 2.0 FOUR makes 95hp while the SIX cranks out 110hp. Some books have 'em at 130hp I think.

Most conversions will not be a 914-6 2.0 motor, BTW. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

People are going with 2.2, 2.4, 2.7, 3.0, and (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif) BIGGER.

Thats HUGE to me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

Dependending on the year model you are comparing it to, the wieght difference is only 100-200#'s.

It's like have me in the the passenger seat full time.
Again, no biggie.

Imagine 130-250hp for a 200# trade off.

Hmmm. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

Oh, and why spend huge bucks on a rebuild, when you can find another used motor for cheap?

KT

[Aaron Cox]

Oh, and why spend huge bucks on a rebuild, when you can find another used motor for cheap?

KT

no. only you find motors for cheap!

i hate you ™

[Trekkor]

Brad was right, 914club is better than TV. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/w00t.gif)

KT

[VegasRacer]

my 2 ¢ worth

My first teener was a stock 1.8. I thoroughly enjoyed it for 5 years. I then decided I wanted more oomph. I seriously considered a stock 914-6. I didn't think it offered enough 'more' to justify double the price for not much more than a VIN that started with 914xxx. I bought another 4 and 'improved' it. It was nice, but not prefect. I decided some sort of a conversion was what I needed. I checked out some V-8's. They do have their benefits but they were not right for me. I finally decided on a 3.0+ conversion. For my taste it seems to be the best of both worlds.

There is no 'right answer' to this question. That is why there are so many options and so much variety out there. I can appreciate any teener from a stock 1.7 to a tube frame, twin plug, turbo monster.