V8 owners and 3.2 owners!, Who has owned both? Or at least driven both? Options

[speed metal army]

I have an 8 in my car right now, looking at possibly doing a 3.2 six. I have a 3.2 in my Carerra and really enjoy it. The plan would be to use a regeared 901 with the 3.2,locked out 1st etc. Obviously this is a pricey undertaking, am I going to be disappointed power wise? The only complaint I really have with my 8cyl is the transaxle. Not geared ideally. But, putting a flat six in the car has always been a plan.The car is strictly my fun little hotrod, no track,no AX.
Opinions please! Thanks (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

[whitetwinturbo]

It may be easier to solve the "gearing" problem by sourcing a 930 4 speed trans.

[speed metal army]

It may be easier to solve the "gearing" problem by sourcing a 930 4 speed trans.

Yep, i'm aware of trans options for my current setup. The good ones are $$$ Mendeola boxster S etc..

[sean_v8_914]

biggest difference is v8 torque vs flat six sound and prestige

[Eddie914]

I only have one 914 ... 3.2 - 6 with 901 transaxle(s). Almost ten years now ...

My car is a street-able track car. Big tires, big brakes, lots of fiberglass. Driven 9/10th at HPDE and hill climb events.

For a street/fun car I think a stock 901 is a good choice. I just drive the gearbox as a 4-speed (with "Granny"). Good value and availability.

I am on my third 901 transaxle.

1 - the pinion gear wore out.
2 - speedo drive backed out - previous owner under torque
3 - Dr. Evil clinic rebuild - going strong
4 - Dr. Evil clinic rebuild - back-up
5 - 915LS - sold to pay kids college tuition (dumb move - should have sold kid instead)

[naro914]

I've driven a V8, and own a street 3.2. I would go with the 3.2 10 out of 10 times for many reasons....
1st is that I have this odd belief that if you're going to modify the drivetrain, at least use stuff from the same manufacturer as the original. That's just me, don't argue me on this because that's just what I like and believe...

Beyond that, the V8 seemed almost like it had TOO MUCH power for the car. I never felt I could use it...every time I hit the gas, the wheels wanted to break loose...and this was a GT style, fully track prepped car. I felt it was more 'point and shoot' than 'handle like on rails'. The 3.2 seems to me the perfect amount of power for the chassis. Its quick, and extremely reliable and allows you to power through turns without feeling that the back end will step out too much. Huey, our street car, has a fully stock 901 trans in it and it works just fine...no lock out of 1st, just bone stock. 1st is actually very necessary for parking lots, pulling in driveways, onto trailers, etc. There is no need to modify the stock box at all.

The 3.2 is considered a very bulletproof engine. Huey sits all winter sometimes...and after months of sitting, I just reach in, turn the key and it starts right up...no muss, no fuss. Don't even need to get IN the car, just reach in through the window. And yes...the engine sounds perfect. Put a set of headers and sport mufflers on....there's nothing like that flat six sound.

[mepstein]

I've driven both but the cars were set up different so not apples to apples. The v8 felt and sounded like an American muscle car while the P6 felt like a Porsche. It shouldn't feel so different but it was. I'm doing a 3.2 conversion. I have no interest in a v8 conversion even if it's an aluminum engine. It just didn't feel right to me. I'm not knocking anybody's v8 conversion. It's just me. I would do a Suby turbo 4 or na 6 before a v8

[shoguneagle]

I have owned and built both V-8 and 3.2 engines in the 914. I felt it was not necessary to convert either type to a 4-speed (eliminate first gear). There were times when I would not use low gear and there were times I would on both cars. It depended on what I was doing with the car.

The stock 901 handled the v-8 very easily and did not have to bad of mismatched gears. I was running 300-plus HP and 300-plus torque. I did not abuse the transmission so therefore I did not have any troubles.

The original transmission I used on the V-8 become the one I used when I did the 3.2 conversion. It held the 3.2 engine without any problems and again I did not eliminate first gear. This gearbox was replaced still running strong without any rebuild with Doc Evil's EvilWerks build. He used gears AFOXHflipped; 3.2 engines runs about 2700rpm at 70mph which is good for road fuel mileage and just enough for the spirited road driving. The flipped H is the best ratios for the 5th gear one can get. I am very happy with the Doc Evil EvilWorks build.

I have to agree with Mepstein about the V-8 and with his reasoning; the car handles like an old Corvette. To make it handle much better requires relocating the perches on all four corners, using aluminum heads and other methods to lighten the engine.

I had my V-8 version (done in the late '70s); put 300 miles on the chassis; and it then sat for 15 years. I eventually did a 3.2 conversion and have not looked back. The only bad thing was the rebuilding the car after it was stolen. Attitude does affect one's willingness to work on such a project in rebuilding and making it roadworthy again.

I am very happy with the 3.2 configuration and will never look at doing another car except 3.2 engine conversion. Makes the 914 suddenly competitive, road driving enjoyment and dependable.

[whitetwinturbo]

I think the v8 experience is "all about the torque". If that is the desired "feeling" you want then it's necessary to stop ALL hooligan driving or spend the $$ to get a box that can handle it.

[EdwardBlume]

I've driven both and watched both race and handle. Too much weight on a 914 if not balanced changes it. Still a low lighter than average car, but IMHO worth noting a V8 adds a lot of weight you have to manage.

[sb914]

It all boils down to your budget, if can do the 3.2 I say go for it. If not, v8 sure is a lot of fun for (street) driving.

[speed metal army]

I've driven a V8, and own a street 3.2. I would go with the 3.2 10 out of 10 times for many reasons....
1st is that I have this odd belief that if you're going to modify the drivetrain, at least use stuff from the same manufacturer as the original. That's just me, don't argue me on this because that's just what I like and believe...

Beyond that, the V8 seemed almost like it had TOO MUCH power for the car. I never felt I could use it...every time I hit the gas, the wheels wanted to break loose...and this was a GT style, fully track prepped car. I felt it was more 'point and shoot' than 'handle like on rails'. The 3.2 seems to me the perfect amount of power for the chassis. Its quick, and extremely reliable and allows you to power through turns without feeling that the back end will step out too much. Huey, our street car, has a fully stock 901 trans in it and it works just fine...no lock out of 1st, just bone stock. 1st is actually very necessary for parking lots, pulling in driveways, onto trailers, etc. There is no need to modify the stock box at all.

The 3.2 is considered a very bulletproof engine. Huey sits all winter sometimes...and after months of sitting, I just reach in, turn the key and it starts right up...no muss, no fuss. Don't even need to get IN the car, just reach in through the window. And yes...the engine sounds perfect. Put a set of headers and sport mufflers on....there's nothing like that flat six sound.

Any ratio changes to the stock box?

I have owned and built both V-8 and 3.2 engines in the 914. I felt it was not necessary to convert either type to a 4-speed (eliminate first gear). There were times when I would not use low gear and there were times I would on both cars. It depended on what I was doing with the car.

The stock 901 handled the v-8 very easily and did not have to bad of mismatched gears. I was running 300-plus HP and 300-plus torque. I did not abuse the transmission so therefore I did not have any troubles.

The original transmission I used on the V-8 become the one I used when I did the 3.2 conversion. It held the 3.2 engine without any problems and again I did not eliminate first gear. This gearbox was replaced still running strong without any rebuild with Doc Evil's EvilWerks build. He used gears AFOXHflipped; 3.2 engines runs about 2700rpm at 70mph which is good for road fuel mileage and just enough for the spirited road driving. The flipped H is the best ratios for the 5th gear one can get. I am very happy with the Doc Evil EvilWorks build.

I have to agree with Mepstein about the V-8 and with his reasoning; the car handles like an old Corvette. To make it handle much better requires relocating the perches on all four corners, using aluminum heads and other methods to lighten the engine.

I had my V-8 version (done in the late '70s); put 300 miles on the chassis; and it then sat for 15 years. I eventually did a 3.2 conversion and have not looked back. The only bad thing was the rebuilding the car after it was stolen. Attitude does affect one's willingness to work on such a project in rebuilding and making it roadworthy again.

I am very happy with the 3.2 configuration and will never look at doing another car except 3.2 engine conversion. Makes the 914 suddenly competitive, road driving enjoyment and dependable.

I actually have a FOXH box being built for my V* setup. Its nice to hear that it may work well.
I think I read an old post of Andy's saying he uses a 901 and just starts in 2nd with a 3.6..Possible with a 3.2? Clutch frying?

[Steve]

I have not had a v8, but going from a 2.7 six to a Euro 3.2 six I was no longer happy with the 914 gear box. First was too low and worthless and I had to slip the clutch a bit to start off in second. The rest of the gears on the street were horrible. I felt like I was always shifting. The stock gear box was great on the track. The power and close ratio gears were a blast. Since my car is a street car I upgraded to an 86 915 gear box. The gears match the motor and I am a happy camper. This is my experience your mileage may vary....

[Mueller]

Never owned either one, have driven a few of each (I lied , it was a 3.0 and not a 3.2)

I could always feel the V8 behind me and one of them had a hot ZZ4 aluminum head motor in it, I didn't feel that comfortable in it due to the weight and power potential.

The 3.0 was in a narrow bodied car and I thought that was the perfect combo.

If I was spending your money I would vote for 3.2 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[naro914]

no ratio changes...stock gears, stock box. At 70 mph on the highway, its running 3000 rpm in 5th. And I've never thought 1st was any more useless in this car than any other cars, including our GT3... no need to slip the clutch, just keep it stock.

[JRust]

The LS1 is a completely different beast than your old 350. All aluminum for one thing so the weight is really not an issue. If he is pushing more then 2300lbs I'd be surprised. While the LS1 can put down a ton of power. It can also be driven as tame as you want. I have driven both. I loved the feel of Jerry Mahoney's LS1 car. You can feel the power there definitely but I was very impressed with it's drivability. I would sure consider getting a Boxster S tranny. It will be cheaper then doing a 3.2 conversion by a longshot.

Having said all that the 3.2 is a killer motor. I can't fault anyone for putting one of them in your car. It will have a better resale value than the LS will. At the same time the one time you need to rebuild your 3.2. Your going to spend 10k plus (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) & need the right shop to do it.

The LS1 can be done at most local shops. Has tons of aftermarket parts for it cheap. Also can be found at your local shop. If you completely blew the motor. You'd spend a lot less just getting a new crate motor than rebuilding it.

[Chris914n6]

I've driven several V8 cars (RH). I've got a 3.0 with AFRZH. It really needs an X 3rd. I like first for stop & go traffic. I start in 2nd for normal driving, stay in 3rd around town, and 5th highway 86mph @ 3k on 225/50-16.

[andys]

The LS1 is a completely different beast than your old 350. All aluminum for one thing so the weight is really not an issue. If he is pushing more then 2300lbs I'd be surprised. While the LS1 can put down a ton of power. It can also be driven as tame as you want. I have driven both. I loved the feel of Jerry Mahoney's LS1 car. You can feel the power there definitely but I was very impressed with it's drivability. I would sure consider getting a Boxster S tranny. It will be cheaper then doing a 3.2 conversion by a longshot.

Having said all that the 3.2 is a killer motor. I can't fault anyone for putting one of them in your car. It will have a better resale value than the LS will. At the same time the one time you need to rebuild your 3.2. Your going to spend 10k plus (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) & need the right shop to do it.

The LS1 can be done at most local shops. Has tons of aftermarket parts for it cheap. Also can be found at your local shop. If you completely blew the motor. You'd spend a lot less just getting a new crate motor than rebuilding it.

Jamie makes sense here, IMO. I have an LS1 with all the electronic controls, and a 6 speed Audi transaxle. Drives like a modern car, and starts instantly. I've driven a stock -6, and a 2.7 conversion car. Liked them both real well; they feel nicely balanced. I can only imagine how well a 3.2 car would run!

Andys

[drive-ability]

Never driven a normal 914, I have driven two V8 cars one a old style SBC and now a LSx type of motor. The SBC felt heavy, while I don't feel the LSX at all. I do have an odd setup using the 996 suspension.
Mostly about how much you spend !!! A simple answer would be a Porsche 6, spending time and money the LS.

[Elliot Cannon]

A V8 is fine, as long as it's horizontally opposed. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)