Type 4 rebuild questions |
|
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. |
|
Type 4 rebuild questions |
76-914 |
Nov 20 2018, 05:06 PM
Post
#21
|
Repeat Offender & Resident Subaru Antagonist Group: Members Posts: 13,494 Joined: 23-January 09 From: Temecula, CA Member No.: 9,964 Region Association: Southern California |
Leave it stock and keep the RPM's up. Those are sweet engines, bullet proof and often maligned. That HP bug is expensive once it bites you in the ass! You see where I ended up. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) Stay stock or get your billfold out.
|
Mark Henry |
Nov 20 2018, 05:16 PM
Post
#22
|
that's what I do! Group: Members Posts: 20,065 Joined: 27-December 02 From: Port Hope, Ontario Member No.: 26 Region Association: Canada |
Mark (E) I'm doing a similar build right now. 2056, webcam, Hoffman heads, and stock-djet. Not to contradict Mr. Henry (who has a world more experience than I will ever have), but I thought something like this was good for north of 110 hp. Maybe anything less than 200 to Mark (H) just looks like 100-ish (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I guess we shall see. No, I consider myself as a realist...I find hany HP claims to be exaggeration, or to be more PC let's say "overly optimistic". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) 1.7 djet FI cam with 96mm P&C's and headers, I very much doubt if you could break 100hp. I do have a set of nos mahle 94mm P&C's. Also have a 2.0 crank. I don't know if either of these will fit or work to improve power. I was hoping to see 100 but I realize the stock 1.7 d-jet has limitations. Weight reduction (of the car) will also help to increase performance. Mark the 2.0 piston have a different pin to deck height, by eyeball at least .200". You will find the 1.7/1.8 vs 2.0 rod length to be different a corresponding amount. Even 15% is a huge increase, factor in the weight reduction and it would make a fun 914. Just curious, has anyone built a motor with a 66mm crank and 100 or 101mm or larger pistons, like a short stroke 2.1. Is it possible? what would the characteristics of that set up be>? It could be done , but at the dollar level this engine will cost to make good HP on a stock motor it wouldn't give enough reward for the bucks. Again there's no replacement for displacement. |
jcd914 |
Nov 20 2018, 07:51 PM
Post
#23
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 2,081 Joined: 7-February 08 From: Sacramento, CA Member No.: 8,684 Region Association: Northern California |
Stock 1.7L at 8.2:1 compression ratio was 80HP (72 1.7 was 72HP)
Stock USA 2.0L at 7.6:1 compression ratio was 95HP Stock Euro 2.0L at 8.0:1 compression ratio was 100HP So stock 2.0 Euro spec is a 20% increase over a stock 1.7L 80HP engine. Get rods to go with your 2.0 crank and pistons. D-jet will have no problem with that size engine, many run D-jet on 2056 engines. 73 2.0L D-jet used the same ECU as 72-73 1.7 D-jet but has different injectors, head temp sensor and MPS. Jim |
mepstein |
Nov 20 2018, 08:06 PM
Post
#24
|
914-6 GT in waiting Group: Members Posts: 19,245 Joined: 19-September 09 From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE Member No.: 10,825 Region Association: MidAtlantic Region |
Stock 1.7L at 8.2:1 compression ratio was 80HP (72 1.7 was 72HP) Stock USA 2.0L at 7.6:1 compression ratio was 95HP Stock Euro 2.0L at 8.0:1 compression ratio was 100HP So stock 2.0 Euro spec is a 20% increase over a stock 1.7L 80HP engine. Get rods to go with your 2.0 crank and pistons. D-jet will have no problem with that size engine, many run D-jet on 2056 engines. 73 2.0L D-jet used the same ECU as 72-73 1.7 D-jet but has different injectors, head temp sensor and MPS. Jim That's beginning to sound like a plan. I do have 2.0 rods. If i only use premium grade fuel, can I move the compression to ~ 9.0. |
worn |
Nov 20 2018, 09:09 PM
Post
#25
|
can't remember Group: Members Posts: 3,149 Joined: 3-June 11 From: Madison, WI Member No.: 13,152 Region Association: Upper MidWest |
Stock 1.7L at 8.2:1 compression ratio was 80HP (72 1.7 was 72HP) Stock USA 2.0L at 7.6:1 compression ratio was 95HP Stock Euro 2.0L at 8.0:1 compression ratio was 100HP So stock 2.0 Euro spec is a 20% increase over a stock 1.7L 80HP engine. Get rods to go with your 2.0 crank and pistons. D-jet will have no problem with that size engine, many run D-jet on 2056 engines. 73 2.0L D-jet used the same ECU as 72-73 1.7 D-jet but has different injectors, head temp sensor and MPS. Jim That's beginning to sound like a plan. I do have 2.0 rods. If i only use premium grade fuel, can I move the compression to ~ 9.0. No one told me no at the time, but said no after the fact when I had cooling issues. I expect your expertise would be greater than mine. Have to revisit my numbers, but I think I went 9:00 for the 2056 and have worried about head temps ever since. That led to rich A:F solutions. Would prefer stock. |
mepstein |
Nov 20 2018, 09:17 PM
Post
#26
|
914-6 GT in waiting Group: Members Posts: 19,245 Joined: 19-September 09 From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE Member No.: 10,825 Region Association: MidAtlantic Region |
Stock 1.7L at 8.2:1 compression ratio was 80HP (72 1.7 was 72HP) Stock USA 2.0L at 7.6:1 compression ratio was 95HP Stock Euro 2.0L at 8.0:1 compression ratio was 100HP So stock 2.0 Euro spec is a 20% increase over a stock 1.7L 80HP engine. Get rods to go with your 2.0 crank and pistons. D-jet will have no problem with that size engine, many run D-jet on 2056 engines. 73 2.0L D-jet used the same ECU as 72-73 1.7 D-jet but has different injectors, head temp sensor and MPS. Jim That's beginning to sound like a plan. I do have 2.0 rods. If i only use premium grade fuel, can I move the compression to ~ 9.0. No one told me no at the time, but said no after the fact when I had cooling issues. I expect your expertise would be greater than mine. Have to revisit my numbers, but I think I went 9:00 for the 2056 and have worried about head temps ever since. That led to rich A:F solutions. Would prefer stock. Makes sense. 9.0 is still pretty tame on a 911 engine but I guess the 4's are more sensitive. I'll let someone more knowledgeable than me figure it out. |
Valy |
Nov 21 2018, 01:14 AM
Post
#27
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1,671 Joined: 6-April 10 From: Sunnyvale, CA Member No.: 11,573 Region Association: Northern California |
The static CR doesn't say much without considering the cam as well.
The engine heats because of the dynamic CR that's influenced a lot by the cam profile. A longer duration for exhaust helps keeping the heads cooler. |
porschetub |
Nov 21 2018, 02:03 AM
Post
#28
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 4,697 Joined: 25-July 15 From: New Zealand Member No.: 18,995 Region Association: None |
Correct me if I am wrong, but the stock 1.7 made 88 hp in 70,71 according to brochure. They made it happen with domed pistons. i think that is incorrect. I believe my Stock early 1.7 was rated at 80hp. By 72 or maybe 73 they were down to approx 75hp. Really might depend if you are looking at DIN, SAE, Gross or Net too as all were popular Brochure horsepower tools (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) correct. |
JamesM |
Nov 21 2018, 03:18 AM
Post
#29
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1,891 Joined: 6-April 06 From: Kearns, UT Member No.: 5,834 Region Association: Intermountain Region |
I think you are starting in the wrong place. the goals you have are somewhat incompatible with each other. No matter what you do to the motor the 1.7 intake and tiny throttle body are going to choke any significant improvements. The d-jet system itself can be adapted (though you are limited on cam choices) but the intake is still going to choke the motor. I experienced this first hand when I hacked a Megasquirt system together using spare 1.7 d-jet parts I had on to my buddies stock 2.0 motor. While it turned out noticeably better than the progressive single carb he had, the results were still obviously sub optimal. Throttle response was awful and power was choked.
If you are set on keeping the 1.7 intake you can pretty much forget about anything else. If you are tearing into the motor anyways than maybe do the cam, if not than just headers and a good tune are probably your best bet. Personally I wouldn't waste the time and money for such little gain, stock 1.7 d-jet motors are great for what they are. The 1.8 intake is a whole different story, its what I am running with a 50mm 2.1 waterboxer throttle body on my 2056. I think the fact that the factory went significantly larger on the 1.8 intake components despite the motor being only ~100cc larger is a good indicator as well that the 1.7 parts didn't have any room to grow left in them. You could probably adapt the 1.8 plumbing to work with your 1.7 d-jet system but after that customization plus the motor upgrades you would probably just be better off starting with a stock 2.0, less hassle but probably comparable cost and power. If you are stuck on keeping the d-jet ECU you have to play within the d-jet boundaries. If your primary goals are stock-ish appearance and more power you should seriously consider a modern ECU. If your goals are keeping 1.7 d-jet + more power you may want to reconsider your goals. Ditch the d-jet and you could do something like this: Looks like a stock small displacement motor on the outside, but pulls hard to 7k RPM with HP calculated from acceleration datalogs showing in the 130+ range. |
mepstein |
Nov 21 2018, 07:29 AM
Post
#30
|
914-6 GT in waiting Group: Members Posts: 19,245 Joined: 19-September 09 From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE Member No.: 10,825 Region Association: MidAtlantic Region |
I think you are starting in the wrong place. the goals you have are somewhat incompatible with each other. No matter what you do to the motor the 1.7 intake and tiny throttle body are going to choke any significant improvements. The d-jet system itself can be adapted (though you are limited on cam choices) but the intake is still going to choke the motor. I experienced this first hand when I hacked a Megasquirt system together using spare 1.7 d-jet parts I had on to my buddies stock 2.0 motor. While it turned out noticeably better than the progressive single carb he had, the results were still obviously sub optimal. Throttle response was awful and power was choked. If you are set on keeping the 1.7 intake you can pretty much forget about anything else. If you are tearing into the motor anyways than maybe do the cam, if not than just headers and a good tune are probably your best bet. Personally I wouldn't waste the time and money for such little gain, stock 1.7 d-jet motors are great for what they are. The 1.8 intake is a whole different story, its what I am running with a 50mm 2.1 waterboxer throttle body on my 2056. I think the fact that the factory went significantly larger on the 1.8 intake components despite the motor being only ~100cc larger is a good indicator as well that the 1.7 parts didn't have any room to grow left in them. You could probably adapt the 1.8 plumbing to work with your 1.7 d-jet system but after that customization plus the motor upgrades you would probably just be better off starting with a stock 2.0, less hassle but probably comparable cost and power. If you are stuck on keeping the d-jet ECU you have to play within the d-jet boundaries. If your primary goals are stock-ish appearance and more power you should seriously consider a modern ECU. If your goals are keeping 1.7 d-jet + more power you may want to reconsider your goals. Ditch the d-jet and you could do something like this: Looks like a stock small displacement motor on the outside, but pulls hard to 7k RPM with HP calculated from acceleration datalogs showing in the 130+ range. I think you have a good point, it may be a combo that just doesn't work correctly. The other option is to build out a second engine and make it a 2 liter from the start. Put my 1.7 in a corner. |
Front yard mechanic |
Nov 21 2018, 08:28 AM
Post
#31
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1,155 Joined: 23-July 15 From: New Mexico Member No.: 18,984 Region Association: None |
You could always turbo
|
scott_in_nh |
Nov 21 2018, 11:21 AM
Post
#32
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 808 Joined: 10-December 10 From: Hampton, NH Member No.: 12,471 Region Association: North East States |
Ditch the d-jet and you could do something like this: Looks like a stock small displacement motor on the outside, but pulls hard to 7k RPM with HP calculated from acceleration datalogs showing in the 130+ range. very interested in the specs/performance of this motor - is there a build thread link you can share? Scott |
ClayPerrine |
Nov 21 2018, 01:13 PM
Post
#33
|
Life's been good to me so far..... Group: Admin Posts: 15,416 Joined: 11-September 03 From: Hurst, TX. Member No.: 1,143 Region Association: NineFourteenerVille |
You could always turbo OK.. I have to say it.... "You can't turbo a 914!!!" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) |
914forme |
Nov 21 2018, 04:31 PM
Post
#34
|
Times a wastin', get wrenchin'! Group: Members Posts: 3,896 Joined: 24-July 04 From: Dayton, Ohio Member No.: 2,388 Region Association: None |
Source a 2.0L bus intake and that keeps the D-Jet it flows more evenly that the stock 2.0L Porsche stuff did according the Jake. Bigger injectors, and change fuel pressure and get it dialed in. Jake was getting 2056s to pull what?
I would build it to a 2.0L and eurospec or even a slightly higher bump in compression. And if you feel like spending the coin, Tangerine makes a great header. taking weight out of the car is a lot easier way to do it. Now if you're going to take every part and replace it or remake it to be lighter I'll subscribe to that build thread. Did I hear Titanium |
rgalla9146 |
Nov 21 2018, 04:58 PM
Post
#35
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 4,545 Joined: 23-November 05 From: Paramus NJ Member No.: 5,176 Region Association: None |
I already have 94mm Mahle P&C's, 2.0 crank and a FI cam kit. I'm wondering if any of those things will make a difference if I rebuild the engine. If it's little to none, or not a combo that will work, I won't bother. If I could get another 15hp, well that's a 20% increase on that engine so It would be worth it to me. I have a 250lb weight reduction planned (on paper) so a little boost with a much lighter car would make it fun. What year chassis are you using ? Where will the -250 lb come from ? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif) |
mepstein |
Nov 21 2018, 05:15 PM
Post
#36
|
914-6 GT in waiting Group: Members Posts: 19,245 Joined: 19-September 09 From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE Member No.: 10,825 Region Association: MidAtlantic Region |
I already have 94mm Mahle P&C's, 2.0 crank and a FI cam kit. I'm wondering if any of those things will make a difference if I rebuild the engine. If it's little to none, or not a combo that will work, I won't bother. If I could get another 15hp, well that's a 20% increase on that engine so It would be worth it to me. I have a 250lb weight reduction planned (on paper) so a little boost with a much lighter car would make it fun. What year chassis are you using ? Where will the -250 lb come from ? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif) A ‘71 Here are some of the things I came up with to remove 250-300 lbs. not all of the items are practical, reasonable or cost effective but it was just spitballing while waiting on a flight home. A 300lb / 15% weight reduction would make a pretty good difference in acceleration, braking and handling without changing the brakes, engine or suspension. 10 - Firewall pad 10 - floor tar 60 - lids 10 - engine lid 5 - rockers 20 - glass bumpers 20 - targa top 5 - carpet 15 - exhaust 10 - Backpad 20 - air control 5 - door hardware 185 10 - Seat sliders 5 - interior padding 20 - headlights 10 - steel crossbar 10 - Heat flappers & lever 30 - battery and 5 - battery tray 265 20- Headers 310 Additional items- Pedal board Targa latches Vent window & trim Shortened sub dash Sun visors Glove box & ashtray Trunk locks F & R Glove box lock Windshield wipers Windshield washer Trunk heat shield ? Brake caliper shields Radio & speakers Engine lid latch & cable Front trunk latch & cable Front carpet board Spare tire Center tunnel covers Shift knob Antenna |
rgalla9146 |
Nov 21 2018, 06:02 PM
Post
#37
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 4,545 Joined: 23-November 05 From: Paramus NJ Member No.: 5,176 Region Association: None |
I already have 94mm Mahle P&C's, 2.0 crank and a FI cam kit. I'm wondering if any of those things will make a difference if I rebuild the engine. If it's little to none, or not a combo that will work, I won't bother. If I could get another 15hp, well that's a 20% increase on that engine so It would be worth it to me. I have a 250lb weight reduction planned (on paper) so a little boost with a much lighter car would make it fun. What year chassis are you using ? Where will the -250 lb come from ? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif) A ‘71 Here are some of the things I came up with to remove 250-300 lbs. not all of the items are practical, reasonable or cost effective but it was just spitballing while waiting on a flight home. A 300lb / 15% weight reduction would make a pretty good difference in acceleration, braking and handling without changing the brakes, engine or suspension. 10 - Firewall pad 10 - floor tar 60 - lids 10 - engine lid 5 - rockers 20 - glass bumpers 20 - targa top 5 - carpet 15 - exhaust 10 - Backpad 20 - air control 5 - door hardware 185 10 - Seat sliders 5 - interior padding 20 - headlights 10 - steel crossbar 10 - Heat flappers & lever 30 - battery and 5 - battery tray 265 20- Headers 310 Additional items- Pedal board Targa latches Vent window & trim Shortened sub dash Sun visors Glove box & ashtray Trunk locks F & R Glove box lock Windshield wipers Windshield washer Trunk heat shield ? Brake caliper shields Radio & speakers Engine lid latch & cable Front trunk latch & cable Front carpet board Spare tire Center tunnel covers Shift knob Antenna Yeah, that'll do it. |
worn |
Nov 21 2018, 06:10 PM
Post
#38
|
can't remember Group: Members Posts: 3,149 Joined: 3-June 11 From: Madison, WI Member No.: 13,152 Region Association: Upper MidWest |
You could always turbo OK.. I have to say it.... "You can't turbo a 914!!!" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) No, you can’t. No one can. Save those engineers in the mist. |
worn |
Nov 21 2018, 06:14 PM
Post
#39
|
can't remember Group: Members Posts: 3,149 Joined: 3-June 11 From: Madison, WI Member No.: 13,152 Region Association: Upper MidWest |
I already have 94mm Mahle P&C's, 2.0 crank and a FI cam kit. I'm wondering if any of those things will make a difference if I rebuild the engine. If it's little to none, or not a combo that will work, I won't bother. If I could get another 15hp, well that's a 20% increase on that engine so It would be worth it to me. I have a 250lb weight reduction planned (on paper) so a little boost with a much lighter car would make it fun. What year chassis are you using ? Where will the -250 lb come from ? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif) A ‘71 Here are some of the things I came up with to remove 250-300 lbs. not all of the items are practical, reasonable or cost effective but it was just spitballing while waiting on a flight home. A 300lb / 15% weight reduction would make a pretty good difference in acceleration, braking and handling without changing the brakes, engine or suspension. 10 - Firewall pad 10 - floor tar 60 - lids 10 - engine lid 5 - rockers 20 - glass bumpers 20 - targa top 5 - carpet 15 - exhaust 10 - Backpad 20 - air control 5 - door hardware 185 10 - Seat sliders 5 - interior padding 20 - headlights 10 - steel crossbar 10 - Heat flappers & lever 30 - battery and 5 - battery tray 265 20- Headers 310 Additional items- Pedal board Targa latches Vent window & trim Shortened sub dash Sun visors Glove box & ashtray Trunk locks F & R Glove box lock Windshield wipers Windshield washer Trunk heat shield ? Brake caliper shields Radio & speakers Engine lid latch & cable Front trunk latch & cable Front carpet board Spare tire Center tunnel covers Shift knob Antenna Funny. I made a couple of pedal boards out of alu honeycomb. No one was interested. But they weigh like a feather. A cheap router bit and the honeycomb. |
mepstein |
Nov 21 2018, 06:16 PM
Post
#40
|
914-6 GT in waiting Group: Members Posts: 19,245 Joined: 19-September 09 From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE Member No.: 10,825 Region Association: MidAtlantic Region |
I already have 94mm Mahle P&C's, 2.0 crank and a FI cam kit. I'm wondering if any of those things will make a difference if I rebuild the engine. If it's little to none, or not a combo that will work, I won't bother. If I could get another 15hp, well that's a 20% increase on that engine so It would be worth it to me. I have a 250lb weight reduction planned (on paper) so a little boost with a much lighter car would make it fun. What year chassis are you using ? Where will the -250 lb come from ? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif) A ‘71 Here are some of the things I came up with to remove 250-300 lbs. not all of the items are practical, reasonable or cost effective but it was just spitballing while waiting on a flight home. A 300lb / 15% weight reduction would make a pretty good difference in acceleration, braking and handling without changing the brakes, engine or suspension. 10 - Firewall pad 10 - floor tar 60 - lids 10 - engine lid 5 - rockers 20 - glass bumpers 20 - targa top 5 - carpet 15 - exhaust 10 - Backpad 20 - air control 5 - door hardware 185 10 - Seat sliders 5 - interior padding 20 - headlights 10 - steel crossbar 10 - Heat flappers & lever 30 - battery and 5 - battery tray 265 20- Headers 310 Additional items- Pedal board Targa latches Vent window & trim Shortened sub dash Sun visors Glove box & ashtray Trunk locks F & R Glove box lock Windshield wipers Windshield washer Trunk heat shield ? Brake caliper shields Radio & speakers Engine lid latch & cable Front trunk latch & cable Front carpet board Spare tire Center tunnel covers Shift knob Antenna Yeah, that'll do it. Trying to think about everything that doesn’t make it stop or go but easily reversible mods. |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 29th April 2024 - 01:51 PM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |