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 )

> Engine Options, Build 2.3 or pursue other options
Mblizzard
post Dec 15 2017, 05:27 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,688
Joined: 28-January 13
From: Knoxville Tn
Member No.: 15,438
Region Association: South East States



I currently have a 2056 with a great top half. Big valve heads, Micro Squirt, and 96mm P/Cs. But I want more HP. I have set myself a $4K budget for building the bottom half, potentially going to 2.3 with a stroker crank, adding cam, balancing, and making some valve train improvements. But I started thinking, you know how dangerous that is, are there any other engine options in the $4K range that would provide reasonable HP increase. Not looking for 250 HP but just enough to keep it interesting.

Anyone got thoughts or suggestions? Open to most options but not sure that converting to water cooled is even remotely possible with the budget limit. Engine swap for proven HP increase seems the easiest option but thought I would see what the brain trust could come up with.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies(1 - 19)
Racer
post Dec 15 2017, 06:44 PM
Post #2


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 496
Joined: 25-August 03
From: Northern Virginia
Member No.: 1,073
Region Association: MidAtlantic Region



a 2056 is roughly 120hp? A nice 2.3 would be 150-170hp? Depending on use, at that much hp, its time to consider peripherals like suspension, brakes and possible chassis strenghtening, external oil cooler etc.

I've been away from prices, but going anything other than a Type 4 will laugh at your budget. not sure what the $$$$ runs for the mods you mentioned to begin with.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mark Henry
post Dec 15 2017, 06:53 PM
Post #3


that's what I do!
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 17,031
Joined: 27-December 02
From: Port Hope, Ontario
Member No.: 26
Region Association: Canada



Since you have already done all the hard work for a T4 I'd stick with it.

A stroker would fall in that range if DYI and using the goodies you have.
Pistons are a no go...
78mm crank with T1 rods journals, clearanced CB rods and KB pistons. You need a reduced circle cam.

I think all the WC options start around $5K minimum unless you are super handy in the fab department.

Also are you totally sorted in the handling dept? I'd take care of that first.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thelogo
post Dec 15 2017, 09:24 PM
Post #4


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 924
Joined: 6-April 10
From: monrovaia ca
Member No.: 11,572
Region Association: Southern California



I always thought you would drive your 2056
Until it needed a rebuild then go bigger

Not tear apart a healthy running engine for no reason

But as my mechanic told me when i told him to
Pry out the 1.7 and drop in the 2366

If you want to have fun then you should have fun (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sheeplove.gif)



Edit :

A 2.3 is not very subtle
ALL it wants to do is go really fast

Where as your 2056 , you can still drive like cruiser

And if you want to pump water honda s2000
Motor with rad as the gt oil cooler cutout ???
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mblizzard
post Dec 16 2017, 07:45 AM
Post #5


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,688
Joined: 28-January 13
From: Knoxville Tn
Member No.: 15,438
Region Association: South East States



Should be sorted in the handling suspension part. Finishing installing Koni Adjstables on front. Have all new ball joints, A-arm bushing, and turbo tie rods on front. Adding the new 914 Rubber strut bushings. Stock sway bar With adjustable drop links.

Koni coil overs on rear and replacing trailing arm bushings with the 914 Rubber stainless kit and changing wheel bearings. Have rear sway bar to install but have not convinced myself i need it. Not much else left there.

I understand on the thought on taking apart a running engine but there has alway been a knock in this engine and I think the cam is worn. The case is stamped 0.25 over so it has been redone and likely had some major concerns when it was built.

So even if the 2.3 is not done I will still have the bottom done and replace the stock cam.

I have built several engines in the past and had access to my fathers machine shop. The DIY route on the floor of the garage is not as fun as it use to be!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mark Henry
post Dec 16 2017, 09:15 AM
Post #6


that's what I do!
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 17,031
Joined: 27-December 02
From: Port Hope, Ontario
Member No.: 26
Region Association: Canada



QUOTE(thelogo @ Dec 15 2017, 10:24 PM) *


A 2.3 is not very subtle
ALL it wants to do is go really fast

Where as your 2056 , you can still drive like cruiser



Wrong, sure if you over cam it and drive it like a 17yr/old, but the long stroke T4 with a sensible cam drives quite nice.
My 2.6 goes like stink if I'm heavy on the go pedal, but it's totally tame for normal driving.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thelogo
post Dec 16 2017, 09:35 AM
Post #7


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 924
Joined: 6-April 10
From: monrovaia ca
Member No.: 11,572
Region Association: Southern California



[quote name='Mark Henry' date='Dec 16 2017, 07:15 AM' post='2558247']
[quote name='thelogo' post='2558164' date='Dec 15 2017, 10:24 PM']

A 2.3 is not very subtle
ALL it wants to do is go really fast

Where as your 2056 , you can still drive like cruiser

[/quote]

Wrong, sure if you over cam it









I have no idea what it means but
The guy who had the motor built and sold it to me says

Its got the. (C25 / C35 ) grind cam ?


And yes the car will go tame for normal driving, but its always ready to go war emergency power at the snap of a finger
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mark Henry
post Dec 16 2017, 10:01 AM
Post #8


that's what I do!
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 17,031
Joined: 27-December 02
From: Port Hope, Ontario
Member No.: 26
Region Association: Canada



The Scat C-25 and C-35 are carb cam designs from the late 70's, on a 2056 a C-25 doesn't give you any more performance than a stock D-jet IMHO.

On a stroker engine my favorite is the WEB 163/86a, hair lumpy,good idle and gobs of torque, but still drivable for busy highways. Con is you need to run dual springs and manton pushrods and it has poor vacuum signal for ITB fuel injection. Can be worked around and IMO worth it.

For a bit better vacuum maybe try the Web 494, but all ITB intakes suffer from poor vacuum signal with cams that have greater than stock durations.
Note, I can't remember if a 494 is a reduced base circle cam, a stroker you have to have this because one lobe will interfere with the rod.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
whitetwinturbo
post Dec 20 2017, 09:09 PM
Post #9


Honey, does this wing make my ass look fat?
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,226
Joined: 22-October 11
From: Newport Beach/Kalefornya/USA
Member No.: 13,704
Region Association: Southern California



..................here's a bit more horsepower (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol-2.gif)

Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wndsrfr
post Dec 21 2017, 07:51 AM
Post #10


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 954
Joined: 30-April 09
From: Rescue, Virginia
Member No.: 10,318
Region Association: MidAtlantic Region



I had a failed DPR crank on my 2316....cracked where oil passage was too close to the journal/web junction. I then went with FAT who uses new forgings on the 80mm stroker and he also put in 5 dowels to my flywheel & balanced it.....bulletproof! Check them out.....also used forged pistons (JB) as I was using it for DE events.
Using TPS only since the ITB's screw up the MAP signal for the SDS controller. Cruises fine using closed loop, seeks 14:1 at steady state automatically, nice. Still on "old" Raby 9550 cam & dyno's at reasonable HP & torque. Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mblizzard
post Dec 21 2017, 08:13 AM
Post #11


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,688
Joined: 28-January 13
From: Knoxville Tn
Member No.: 15,438
Region Association: South East States



QUOTE(whitetwinturbo @ Dec 20 2017, 07:09 PM) *

..................here's a bit more horsepower (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol-2.gif)




May require some minor modification to install!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mblizzard
post Dec 21 2017, 08:16 AM
Post #12


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,688
Joined: 28-January 13
From: Knoxville Tn
Member No.: 15,438
Region Association: South East States



QUOTE(wndsrfr @ Dec 21 2017, 05:51 AM) *

I had a failed DPR crank on my 2316....cracked where oil passage was too close to the journal/web junction. I then went with FAT who uses new forgings on the 80mm stroker and he also put in 5 dowels to my flywheel & balanced it.....bulletproof! Check them out.....also used forged pistons (JB) as I was using it for DE events.
Using TPS only since the ITB's screw up the MAP signal for the SDS controller. Cruises fine using closed loop, seeks 14:1 at steady state automatically, nice. Still on "old" Raby 9550 cam & dyno's at reasonable HP & torque. Attached Image


I am looking at numerous options and certainly getting to this point would be a dream! Love that torque curve. Much better than the stock 6!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IronHillRestorations
post Dec 21 2017, 08:29 AM
Post #13


I. I. R. C.
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 5,117
Joined: 18-March 03
From: West TN
Member No.: 439
Region Association: None



I'd start putting together parts for a 6 conversion, or your dream big 4, and run your current engine until it pops, which will probably be a very long time. I'm always amazed how long these things will run.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mepstein
post Dec 21 2017, 09:59 AM
Post #14


914-6 GT in waiting
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,133
Joined: 19-September 09
From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE
Member No.: 10,825
Region Association: MidAtlantic Region



(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)
It can make a lot of sense to build a second engine instead of modifying a good running engine.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Robnxious
post Dec 21 2017, 10:11 AM
Post #15


RobnxiousOne
**

Group: Members
Posts: 177
Joined: 26-October 06
From: Sacramento
Member No.: 7,097
Region Association: Northern California



QUOTE(mepstein @ Dec 21 2017, 07:59 AM) *

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)
It can make a lot of sense to build a second engine instead of modifying a good running engine.


That's what I did, for a variety of reasons. First and foremost is, the old engine runs fine, just it's the original 1.8, which didn't have enough get up and go. So I was able to drive my car the entire time that the engine was being built, which was great. Also, though it's not too big of a deal now, the original IS number matching for my car, so in 20 years, that will probably mean a bit more than it does now. Also, if the "worst" happens, while it's not the route I want to go, I will have a backup engine to throw back in it
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mblizzard
post Dec 21 2017, 10:47 AM
Post #16


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,688
Joined: 28-January 13
From: Knoxville Tn
Member No.: 15,438
Region Association: South East States



QUOTE(Robnxious @ Dec 21 2017, 08:11 AM) *

QUOTE(mepstein @ Dec 21 2017, 07:59 AM) *

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)
It can make a lot of sense to build a second engine instead of modifying a good running engine.


That's what I did, for a variety of reasons. First and foremost is, the old engine runs fine, just it's the original 1.8, which didn't have enough get up and go. So I was able to drive my car the entire time that the engine was being built, which was great. Also, though it's not too big of a deal now, the original IS number matching for my car, so in 20 years, that will probably mean a bit more than it does now. Also, if the "worst" happens, while it's not the route I want to go, I will have a backup engine to throw back in it


It comes down to a number of choices and cost. I have a good 1.8 case, crank, and rods in addition to the running 2056. If I go the 78mm crank route I will use the 1.8 case, but new P/Cs, and use my big valve heads off the 2.0.

If I stick with the 2056 then I will have to pull the running engine to get the crank and rods.

Just a lot of options to sort through.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DaveO90s4
post Dec 21 2017, 02:54 PM
Post #17


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 108
Joined: 26-April 16
From: Australia
Member No.: 19,935
Region Association: None



I have a full marching numbers 1956 356A. I think it likely that in 20 years time when my 914 is of the age my 356 is now, matching numbers might be important.

But I wanted more get up and go now.

So I removed the 1.8 engine and that will now never break a rod etc while tucked under my workshop bench.

And I installed a 140 HP air cooled chev Corvair reverse rotation engine. It fits with no body modifications what so ever. Front engine mount does not involve welding on firewall. So it is all 100% reversible back to stock - one day.

The acceleration is on par with my 3.2 L Carrera.

And engines and parts are cheap too - unlike a Porsche 6.

Worth thinking about maybe??

DaveO
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JOEPROPER
post Dec 21 2017, 03:33 PM
Post #18


The answer is "no" unless you ask...
**

Group: Members
Posts: 394
Joined: 21-November 15
From: White Plains New York
Member No.: 19,387
Region Association: North East States



I would slowly gather parts for a 6 conversion and drive it the way it is until you have all the parts, and you're finally ready to do the conversion. As a matter of fact this is exactly what I'm doing. For me, I don't see it as a good idea to take a part a fully functioning car until absolutely ready to complete the project. This is something that I've learned the hard way over the years. Good luck!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rhodyguy
post Dec 21 2017, 04:01 PM
Post #19


We're so screwed...
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 18,448
Joined: 2-March 03
From: Orion's Bell. The BELL!
Member No.: 378
Region Association: Galt's Gulch



What is the plan for cylinders?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mblizzard
post Dec 21 2017, 04:56 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,688
Joined: 28-January 13
From: Knoxville Tn
Member No.: 15,438
Region Association: South East States



QUOTE(JOEPROPER @ Dec 21 2017, 01:33 PM) *

I would slowly gather parts for a 6 conversion and drive it the way it is until you have all the parts, and you're finally ready to do the conversion. As a matter of fact this is exactly what I'm doing. For me, I don't see it as a good idea to take a part a fully functioning car until absolutely ready to complete the project. This is something that I've learned the hard way over the years. Good luck!


Would love that but I blew up many 4s in my youth so I have a special disfunction to build them. Makes much more sense to do the 6 but I want a 4 that will keep up with a 6.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
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: 21st September 2018 - 05:17 PM