Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> 1.8 verses 2.0 performance oreinted rebuild
grantsfo
post Apr 13 2005, 10:08 PM
Post #1


Arrrrhhhh!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 16-March 03
Member No.: 433
Region Association: None



I have started to research rebuild options for a project that I want to take on later this year. I currently have a fairly clean bone stock fuel injected 1.8 engine with 50,00 miles.

I want to build an engine that puts out around 120-30 hp and has good middle to top end power. I mostly do AX and an occasional track run. I'm not terribly concerned about classifications etc. I just want an engine that keeps me out of the way of faster cars during track days and can put me into the running for top ten times in autocrosses

It seems to be that most think I should buy a 2.0 engine and build a 2056. Are there options with my 1.8 case and heads? What are disadvantages of using a 1.8 and increasing displacement?

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trekkor
post Apr 13 2005, 10:18 PM
Post #2


I do things...
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 7,809
Joined: 2-December 03
From: Napa, Ca
Member No.: 1,413
Region Association: Northern California



Rich Bontempi knows how to make a 1.8 perform. Call him.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jake Raby
post Apr 13 2005, 11:15 PM
Post #3


Engine Surgeon
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 9,394
Joined: 31-August 03
From: Lost
Member No.: 1,095
Region Association: South East States



There is nothing magic with the 2.0 engine. The heads are the best performers as is, but the 1.8 heads can be made to work very well, especially with a plug relocation to the 2.0 position. The 1.8 heads are much stronger in the chambers than the 2 liters.

1.8 base heads comprise the majority of my engine combos. You can build a solid 1911cc engine from the base of a 1.8 and have a stronger rod journal and crank at the same time.

It's all in the combo.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
grantsfo
post Apr 14 2005, 12:10 AM
Post #4


Arrrrhhhh!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 16-March 03
Member No.: 433
Region Association: None



QUOTE (Jake Raby @ Apr 13 2005, 09:15 PM)
There is nothing magic with the 2.0 engine. The heads are the best performers as is, but the 1.8 heads can be made to work very well, especially with a plug relocation to the 2.0 position. The 1.8 heads are much stronger in the chambers than the 2 liters.

1.8 base heads comprise the majority of my engine combos. You can build a solid 1911cc engine from the base of a 1.8 and have a stronger rod journal and crank at the same time.

It's all in the combo.

So a 1911cc with a cam etc could be a good option compared to dumping my current 1.8 engine and buying a 2.0 if I'm not caught up in classing? What type of reliable hp could I expect using the stock fuel injection on a 1911cc combo with a hot cam? Is 1911cc the biggest I can safely go starting with a 1.8 and using stock fuel injection?

Seems to me that this may be most economical route for me since I know my current engine is fairly sound.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ChrisFoley
post Apr 14 2005, 07:06 AM
Post #5


I am Tangerine Racing
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 7,934
Joined: 29-January 03
From: Bolton, CT
Member No.: 209
Region Association: None



IMO, the stock FI is a poor choice if you want 130hp performance from a 1.8-1.9L.
On the other hand, it isn't too hard to find 140hp from a carbed 1832 (94x66), as I did with my current back-up race engine.
The engine is very reliable and I don't need to rev it past 6500rpm.
Best of all, except for some of the head work I built it myself. (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/smile.gif)
Since you aren't restricted by rules the way I am you could use 96mm pistons and slightly oversize ss valves. With some good head work, 11:1 compression, a nice cam like the Web 86a, hd single valve springs, Weber 44IDFs with 34-36mm venturis, and a proper exhaust system, you would have at least 140hp.
It would be very driveable with power coming on around 4500 and good to 6500rpm.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
grantsfo
post Apr 14 2005, 08:21 AM
Post #6


Arrrrhhhh!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 16-March 03
Member No.: 433
Region Association: None



QUOTE (Racer Chris @ Apr 14 2005, 05:06 AM)
IMO, the stock FI is a poor choice if you want 130hp performance from a 1.8-1.9L.
On the other hand, it isn't too hard to find 140hp from a carbed 1832 (94x66), as I did with my current back-up race engine.
The engine is very reliable and I don't need to rev it past 6500rpm.
Best of all, except for some of the head work I built it myself. (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/smile.gif)
Since you aren't restricted by rules the way I am you could use 96mm pistons and slightly oversize ss valves. With some good head work, 11:1 compression, a nice cam like the Web 86a, hd single valve springs, Weber 44IDFs with 34-36mm venturis, and a proper exhaust system, you would have at least 140hp.
It would be very driveable with power coming on around 4500 and good to 6500rpm.

I'm not wedded to the idea of keeping FI. So it sounds like I could accompish my goal of around 130 hp or even more by doing a 1911 with carbs. Where is a good source for webbers these days? I figure I should pick up a set since I hear remaining supply may be thin.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 9th June 2024 - 11:20 AM