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 )

5 Pages V  1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> What kind of Power Improvements did you see after Conversions?
9144me2enjoy
post Aug 24 2019, 05:21 PM
Post #1


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 310
Joined: 19-June 18
From: Oregon
Member No.: 22,240
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



There has been all kinds of engine swaps into the Base 914s (Porsche Aircooled 6 cyls-2.0L 2.2L 2.4L 2.7L 3.0L 3.2L 3.6L) along with a large range of Subaru Conversions and LS1 engines, SBC, any other conversions, along with 2056 builds etc. I’m sure a lot of people besides myself would like to see some performance specs after these conversions were completed (0-60mph 0-100mph, 1/4 mile, roll on performance) along with transmission changes and estimated cost for conversion.

Example: Upgraded to 2056cc build (Fats Performance), 125-130hp, dual 40 carbs, cam etc., headers, stock 901 side shift trans. With Rennshift Shifter, 911 suspension conversion. 0-60 6.5 seconds. 1/4 mile about 90 mph. Cost for drivetrain including trans rebuilt approx $10,000.00 in 2015.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thelogo
post Aug 24 2019, 06:08 PM
Post #2


Senior Member
***

Group: Retired Members
Posts: 1,510
Joined: 6-April 10
Member No.: 11,572
Region Association: None



Big /4

5k dollar engine (IMG:style_emoticons/default/piratenanner.gif)
Webbers headers super unleaded gas

Car is alot faster /fun 'er
Still just as light


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/beer3.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smoke.gif)


/6 guys are crazy $

I'll be saving for a 993 or nsx (IMG:style_emoticons/default/pray.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
80’s old school
post Aug 24 2019, 06:09 PM
Post #3


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 79
Joined: 26-March 19
From: California
Member No.: 22,994
Region Association: Southern California



(IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif) I’m interested too!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mepstein
post Aug 24 2019, 06:27 PM
Post #4


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

Group: Members
Posts: 19,142
Joined: 19-September 09
From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE
Member No.: 10,825
Region Association: MidAtlantic Region



2 - 3.2 conversions and one 3.3 suby conversion. Lots of time, money and fun. Faster than stock. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
9144me2enjoy
post Aug 24 2019, 07:45 PM
Post #5


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 310
Joined: 19-June 18
From: Oregon
Member No.: 22,240
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



Mepstein how do you compare the 3.2 vs the Suby 3.3 conversions?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
80’s old school
post Aug 24 2019, 08:09 PM
Post #6


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 79
Joined: 26-March 19
From: California
Member No.: 22,994
Region Association: Southern California



I took a 1.7 with Weber 40’s out.

Put in a 1.8 with 96mm AA flat top pistons (1911cc). No cylinder to case shims and no cylinder to head shims (to create max compression available without machining mods). Same 40 Weber’s. Then added MSDS header.

Difference was night and day! Very noticeable upgrade.

I don’t have any 0-60, 1/4 mile runs, etc., but a nice “shot in the arm”
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mepstein
post Aug 24 2019, 08:36 PM
Post #7


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

Group: Members
Posts: 19,142
Joined: 19-September 09
From: Landenberg, PA/Wilmington, DE
Member No.: 10,825
Region Association: MidAtlantic Region



QUOTE(9144me2enjoy @ Aug 24 2019, 09:45 PM) *

Mepstein how do you compare the 3.2 vs the Suby 3.3 conversions?

Suby conversion isn't running yet. Cost wise, the suby engine (eg33-220hp) was $500 and the 5mt trans $200. A decent 3.2 is $12K and a modified 915 trans ~$7-10K. So there's that to consider...

User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
9144me2enjoy
post Aug 24 2019, 08:52 PM
Post #8


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 310
Joined: 19-June 18
From: Oregon
Member No.: 22,240
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



Impressive builds
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirAndy
post Aug 24 2019, 09:09 PM
Post #9


Resident German
*************************

Group: Admin
Posts: 41,581
Joined: 21-January 03
From: Oakland, Kalifornia
Member No.: 179
Region Association: Northern California



0-60 < 4s ... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/burnout.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
worn
post Aug 24 2019, 09:25 PM
Post #10


can't remember
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,127
Joined: 3-June 11
From: Madison, WI
Member No.: 13,152
Region Association: Upper MidWest



QUOTE(mepstein @ Aug 24 2019, 04:27 PM) *

2 - 3.2 conversions and one 3.3 suby conversion. Lots of time, money and fun. Faster than stock. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Lots more fun with the 3.2. I mean, it is great. Better distance car too, cause i also went for taller gears in 4th and 5th. Estimate 0-60 in the 5 second range. Not bad, but not so stupid fast you have no place to use it off track. I also feel that my 2056 build, though a bit of a handful to tune left me with a bit more sparkle to the engine. But then, the comparison may have been a bit worn out.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Chris914n6
post Aug 24 2019, 09:35 PM
Post #11


Jackstands are my life.
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,287
Joined: 14-March 03
From: Las Vegas, NV
Member No.: 431
Region Association: Southwest Region



My Nissan 3.0L v6 is 190hp & 205tq stock, with a rebuilt 914 trans & tall 5th, does 0-60 in 5.x in just 2nd gear @6800rpm. Plus it makes more low end tq than a 3L Porsche -6. Plus it has a bolt on AC compressor (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Eng/harness/ecu was $1600 w/ 15k miles back in 97
Kennedy adapter, 300hp clutch $700
Cooling ~$400
Engine crossbar ~$100
Exhaust, cat, 911 banana muffler $200
Other stuff ~$200

Plus 180lb springs, 911 susp, Boxster 16" wheels.

If were to do it today... 290hp & 270tq, 0-60 in 4.0s
Nissan 3.5L v6 mutt ~$600+
MS3pro & related $1400
Cooling ~$300
Crossbar ~$100
Dual exhaust, headers ~ $300
Fuel pump $90

And I'm working on a WRX trans adapter.

If that ever gets boring, +turbo = 400whp (IMG:style_emoticons/default/bye1.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pploco
post Aug 24 2019, 09:40 PM
Post #12


Chief Toilet Flusher
**

Group: Members
Posts: 105
Joined: 15-June 18
From: boise, idaho
Member No.: 22,225
Region Association: Rocky Mountains



It’s not quite the same, but I had a 2.0 legacy turbo in a 63 baja bug that was about 300hp to the wheels. I ran a 1/4 mile in the low 12s. And that was with truck tires and a bus transmission. The car weighed about 1900 lbs. I bet with a well sorted turbo suby conversion and a modern trans in the 914, a decent driver could get down into the low 11s.

Doing a bit of napkin math, I figure my 914 will have the same power to weight ratio as a modern GT3.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
9144me2enjoy
post Aug 24 2019, 09:52 PM
Post #13


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 310
Joined: 19-June 18
From: Oregon
Member No.: 22,240
Region Association: Pacific Northwest



This is great feedback, especially for forum members who have had a dream to build their 914s to obtain more power on or off the track! This gives us all hope to rekindle the fire within these amazing machines! Thanks
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ConeDodger
post Aug 24 2019, 10:06 PM
Post #14


Apex killer!
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 23,543
Joined: 31-December 04
From: Tahoe Area
Member No.: 3,380
Region Association: Northern California



Hasn’t been mentioned but I’d drive my 3.2 conversion anywhere. I never had that confidence with the 4 cylinder.


Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Andyrew
post Aug 24 2019, 11:25 PM
Post #15


Spooling.... Please wait
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,376
Joined: 20-January 03
From: Riverbank, Ca
Member No.: 172
Region Association: Northern California



Well I have two conversions under my belt so let me throw my input out there..

Base engine was a 2.0 with FI that ran poorly. I had 75whp.


Next I did a $3k rebuild and SBC V8 conversion. This was done on a 16 year olds budget working at Taco Bell....
Mild build, made 240whp and 290wtq. Too much torque for the chassis in relationship to the power. Biggest issue was keeping it cool. I loved the V8 sound and played around with the V8 for about 10 years. I never made it reliable enough for me to really drive it. So that lead to my next conversion.


After daily driving an Audi A4 that I modified with a big turbo I really liked the engine a Lot. It had great MPG and a fantastic powerband. So after doing some research I decided to make the 914 something it wasn't. A potential daily car. And with that I wanted all the comforts as well as an engine that could be driven easily as well as something that could be driven both in spirit and anger. That led me to do an Audi 1.8turbo swap. I've never fully built a motor so I said let's do it and out way more money into the build than I needed. I could have done this for about 4k comfortably but I spent about 10k. You can read more about it in my signature.
Anyways numbers. On low boost it's 250whp. On medium low boost it's 285whp. Keep in mind the setup is about 150lbs lighter than the V8. I will say that I still haven't pumped it up yet as I've been going through a lot of teething issues, but over the next few years I'll keep pumping the boost up, I should be able to get 400whp as is with good gas. If I put cams and an intake manifold on it that number should be able to grow to 500whp.

Is it fast? You bet. Faster than the V8? Yes, but only over 4k. But probably the biggest thing is it feels really analog. The turbo noises and engine sounds are extremely apparent and so distinct. The turbo and associated bits itself has about 10 district sounds that I can pick up. One of the reasons for me to go with such a small motor and big turbo was so that I can run low boost and it be quick, take it in the canyons and be pretty comfortable and safe. Then when I really wanted to GO I can turn up the boost and be right there with the big boys.

No drag times or whatnot. I do have an autox vid. Traction is a big issue on a dirty low speed autox, so I'm constantly on and off the throttle. This is boost on the lowest setting. 7psi. Note, prepare for turbo noises..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXLC59RiHe8
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mb911
post Aug 25 2019, 07:22 AM
Post #16


914 Guru
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 6,748
Joined: 2-January 09
From: Burlington wi
Member No.: 9,892
Region Association: Upper MidWest



Sound and feel is one of the biggest things that most people notice 1st about a -6 conversion.. And of course power..
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Coondog
post Aug 25 2019, 07:52 AM
Post #17


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,089
Joined: 24-September 15
From: Apple Valley Calif
Member No.: 19,195
Region Association: Southern California



Here’s the best comparison of a 2.0 vs a 3.2
Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cairo94507
post Aug 25 2019, 09:34 AM
Post #18


Michael
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 9,650
Joined: 1-November 08
From: Auburn, CA
Member No.: 9,712
Region Association: Northern California



Andrew - That was a great video. Your car sounded and performed quite nicely. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Carl La Fong
post Aug 25 2019, 10:29 AM
Post #19


Member
**

Group: Retired Members
Posts: 137
Joined: 27-March 19
From: west
Member No.: 23,000
Region Association: None



I currently drive a 2.2 liter type IV that produced 147hp on the dyno. A really fun car to drive.$ I used to have a 3.2 liter that produced 235hp. A really REALLY fun car to drive. $$$$
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
80’s old school
post Aug 25 2019, 10:39 AM
Post #20


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 79
Joined: 26-March 19
From: California
Member No.: 22,994
Region Association: Southern California



QUOTE(Coondog @ Aug 25 2019, 06:52 AM) *

Here’s the best comparison of a 2.0 vs a 3.2
Attached Image


That 2.0 would still work!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  1 2 3 > » 
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: 28th March 2024 - 06:50 PM