I have never driven a stock original 2.0 914-6. I have driven properly converted 914s with 2.7/3.0 transplants and my own stock 1.7Ls. Aside from the cache of a six in back, if you can have 200-250 h.p. from a four, why convert to a six? Is there a noticeable difference in torque and smoothness over a properly modified four? Can you feel it on the road? A serious question seeking the definitive answer that could save $10-20K later. Let's hear from both camps, pluses and minuses.

Are you asking about a stock 2.0/6 compared to a highly modified 200hp/4?

OR

Are you asking about any 6 versus a big/4?

Do a search.. This has been hashed over hundreds of times in previous threads.
Here's a good thread.
http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=15842

Exactly, because it takes a lot ( Raby) to get to that 200hp level out of a 4. A Stock -6 only has 110hp. I have raced a Raby 4 cyl motored car and it was Great, but, I prefer a 200+ HP Six. Torque, not as High-Strung.

A big four with lots of horsepower is a limited time engine normally due to the heat produced in making horsepower, the thinness of cylinders and a bunch of other considerations. The engine is highly stressed.

You can purchase one of Jake Raby's high horsepower engines that exhibit longevity, but you're going to be into it $11K probably. You can try building it yourself though.

The six will probably make more torque which is actually what propels the vehicle. High horesepower & no torque doesn't do crap. A six, treated well, will have much better longevity due to being less stressed.

Anyway, it's a mute question. Go whichever way you feel comfortable with ... It all costs big bucks.

There are many threads on 4 vs six ... do some searching and read.

All good points, but if you're comparing a stock 2L 6 with 110 HP - to a milder 2056-2270 4 with 110-165 HP - then you'll save about 270 lbs. in wt. over the 6, plus quite a bit in the wallet!

PS - IIRC the 2L stock 6 was only about 110-125 ft/lb TQ & the 6's TQ doesn't come in until pretty high in the revs., whereas the stock 2.0 4 had about the same TQ much earlier & with a flat plateau TQ curve all the way to redline pretty much at max., which is why the 73-74 2.0 GA's were a decent replacement for the 2L-6 ..... and the TQ curves that I'd seen on the Raby site for the 2056 & 2270 had the same early/flat with 140-180 ft/lb TQ IIRC - so the milder 4's have much better TQ than the stock -6!

If you're talking a conversion-6 with a later air or water boxer 6, then that's a whole different ballgame & price range - and the individual's preference.

PSS - Another built-4 option is FAT Performance here in Orange CA - especially if you're in CA or the west, since Raby is in GA back east. Google their website for T-IV motors. Ron the owner there can build you an engine to whatever you want (IIRC he does aircooled 6's too), & he's a super nice guy who will walk you thru his shop personally & spend time with you, which is nolonger an option with Raby due to their "insurance concerns" last I heard.

............ that was my logic during powerplant considerations ........... I decided on a semi modded 2056cc .......... I am expecting between 130-150 HP which should be plenty for a GT clone/replica ..... anything more than that would be icing on the cake!!

I further chose the 4 because of the simplicity and weight .......... and for extra cooling I will be running an oil filter 'sandwich' adapter with the extra cooler in the wheel well ............. it is currently twin carbed with 44 IDF Webers, Web #270 Camshaft, ported heads w/ 44IN &38 EX valves, counter weighted crank and H-Beam rods/ARP bolts .......... runs and sounds very nice ....... on the engine dyno so far ....... still need to finish the car though .......

Thank you, but the answers I was seeking are more of a hands-on personal nature, not just theory, power, and torque, and members have been kind enough to respond.

The sound!

What sounds better than a Porsche flat six?

Tom,
Where do you come up with these comparison numbers? My information comparing the stock 4 vs 6 isn't even close to your figures.
Lets look at some apples to apples comparisons:
From the R&T 2.0/6 test article June 1970, it states that the "curb" weight of the test vehicle was 2195 lbs.
From the Road Test 2.0 /4 test article July 1974, (curb) 2230 lbs.
From the Road Test 2.0 /4 test article May 1973, it states that the "weight as tested", 2139 lbs.

The factory brochures:
1970 2.0/6 - 2070 lbs (Dry weight DIN) (stock steel wheels standard?)
1973 2.0/4 - 2138 lbs (Dry weight DIN) (stock alloys standard?)

Where does the /6 270 lbs extra come from?

HP & Torque;
/6 110 @ 5800 & 131 @ 4200 (DIN)
/4 95 @ 4900 & 108 @ 3500 (DIN)

To answer the original question........My experience is with various stock /6's and stock /4's. Never driven a big custom /4. For me, it's /6's hands down. Dido what SLITS says.
Don

I'll assume you know something about engines and show you the big difference.
Had to steal a pic of the T-4 off the forum.

There is nothing like the sound of a six.

the -6 motor is 250lbs heavier

but early cars weighed less
most original 6ers' were early cars

add a 6 to a conversion late car and most of them are around 2300 - 2400 at street weight

I was under the assumption that the 2.0 six engine was only 200lbs more than a 4 and a 3.2 was ~ 250lbs more. I was also told that Porsche used to under estimate the hp of their engines so the 6's actually felt stronger than their numbers implied. I think it was the cost of the 914-6's vs 911's that led to their demise, not their performance.

Porsche discontinued the -6 as they were not making any money on them, and it was too tough to sell with a 911T costing only a bit more. The 914 2.0 was their answer to their dilemma.

As far as the difference, the sound of the -6 is worth every extra $$ spent on it! I love mine and wouldn't want to trade it for a big -4 regardless of the horsepower and torque numbers.

The six will run all day long at 6,000+ RPM. For 20 years. Rebuild and repeat. If anyone has done that with a T-4 they are probably on this board and we'll hear from them.

Porsche Type 912 4.5L flat 12! My next door neighbor's buddy has a 917!

Are you asking about any 6 versus a big/4?
[/quote]
Any Porsche flat 6 over a "big/4."

The 6 would be my cost/trouble 'is no object' choice! .......... but since this GT clone is not my main project ........ the cost/trouble/weight savings of the modded 4 ........ more than makes up for the loss of sound and potential HP of the 6 ....... in my opinion ...

Sixes were built as early cars so the whole damn car was lighter with no door bars, no bumper stuff, sound deadening etc.

A 2056 (120hp) four has more torque down low so it feels quicker compared to a stock 110hp six. Cost? you can build a 2056 with 120hp for fairly cheap ($4000) compared to rebuilding a six! plus you get FI, heat, great mpg etc...
Now if you want a high hp setup, a 3.2 six is the way to go and no comparison although a Raby 2270 is quite fun to drive!

A 200-250hp 4 is a specialized exotic beast. A 3.2-3.6 six with 210-260 hp is an off the shelf engine. But you really should drive one before you make a decision on paper.

That thread does have my personal experience in it. In my first 914, I installed a 2.4 liter four banger. It lasted 10k miles before sucking a valve. Then it lasted about 12k miles before a ring gave out. I had about $8k in the motor and overhauls before I gave up and installed a six. My six has never left me stranded. I also have the same comments as other six drivers. I have over 150k miles on my 3.2 with no leaks and still has high compression. After my bad experience with the big four I am somewhat jaded and would never waste my money on one again. I have heard good things about Jakes motors, but I have not heard from anyone that has had one with over 100k miles on it.

For me its all about long term durability. Im getting to old to be tearing into an engine every couple of years. Not that I dont like to, i just want to worry about the destination and the radio station.

Back in the day i was always pulling the type 1 and redoing heads or changing cams. Even the little 1.6 diesel got a hot rod motor that only lasted 2 years.


I am in process of putting a svx engine back together. It had 196,000 miles on it and i did not find one thing out of factory spec on the tear down ! Even the pistons have no scuff marks on them. 250 hp - 200k miles and the same firing order as a 911 SWEET im in.


jcl

When the SVX was new, I recall one magazine road test, by Automobile, in which they uniquely declared that they would not change a thing. If it had stayed in production and been refined like a 911, it would be one absolutely amazing car today, turbocharged with a 6-speed or CVT.

overhead cams, the sound of MFI at 7000+ RPM, the fan, the sound, because it's a Porsche

This is very telling and extremely helpful, exactly what I was seeking. I have read the other threads and almost all of the builds. The cost of a 6 conversion seems crazy, considering a non-original 914-6 will never have the ultimate historical value of the original. Maybe the thing is to find an original 6 and store the motor while transplanting a newer 3.2, the engine everyone raves about. I know someone with an original orange 6 that has been correctly stored well over 30 years, but he is a Ferrari guy and probably figures it will one day bring six figures, and he might be right.

200HP...

Beware a big six or any other 220+ hp engine in a 914 is an expensive slippery slope. This is from my personal experience others may vary. After the big four blew up twice, i bought a used 1974 2.7 with a top end overhaul and 40mm webers. What's nice about the 2.7 is that you can use a 2.0 six flywheel and clutch. I also thought the motor matched the stock tranny and gearing quite nicely, but the throttle induced oversteer made the car dangerous in a corner (I wonder if an LSD would of helped?). So i cut off the rear fenders and riveted on GT fiberglass flairs. I now had 205's in the front and 245's in the rear. Problem solved but the car looked like franken porsche. I also installed bigger brakes, 21mm front torsion bars, 22mm front sway bar and 140lb rear springs. I loved the 2.7 but beware of pulled head stud issues if the engine is original and was never overhauled properly. I have also driven a 3.0 and thought it matched the stock gearing quite well, but i am not a fan of the required flywheel adapter and special clutch. You can purchase a 70-71 911 trans and swap the guts with your trans. This will give you a pull clutch versus the stock push clutch and has a much better clutch pedal feel. IMHO these are both nice motors for the 914 gear box. After 10 years my 2.7 started pulling head studs. You will hear popping and have loss of compression. Instead of overhauling the 2.7 I bought a 3.2 from a wrecking yard. That's the motor I have now. I thought the stock trans was nice for autocross and the track, but on the street I think it sucks. First gear is to low now and there is the paranoia of the 3.2 breaking it off the line. 2nd gear is slightly to tall to start out in, so now I either start off in first (if on a hill) and baby it off the line or I start off in second (if I am on flat ground). To solve this problem I now just spent $3k on a 916 kit plus the cost of the 915 trans and LSD and getting it overhauled. I will probably have around 10k in the trans if you include all the other parts and labor in the process. A subi conversion with subi trans would be allot cheaper or a V8 and convert the 914 trans into a four speed (don't use first) would also be a better lower cost option. Or be happy with the hp from a 2.7 or 3.0 motor. A big engine also puts allot of stress on a 914 chassis, so you will also need to strengthen the body with a cage or Engman kit, etc....

Let's throw this challenge up to the big 4 aficionados

Here's a chassis dyno chart from the 2.7L 6 in my old car. Now in all the years I've been on this forum I've never seen a T-4 chassis dyno chart in a 914....lots of pretty designs on paper from hero t-4 builders on their own dyno tho but never through the wheels from an independent source. The first one is the 10.5:1 and the other is 9.7:1. Different dynos.

Whatcha got?

4 is lighter, 6 lasts longer

If all you want is <200hp, and you want the most nimble AXer, seems like a 4 is the way to go.

If you want bigger power that isn't a grenade, and/or you want a track car, and/or you want a crazy street car with a sound that is music to your ears...Then you have to go six if you want to stay Porsche air cooled. (I like it wet... LS1 for less $ and even more hp )

For panache, 3.2 or 3.6.

The reponse from the T-4 crowd was as I expected.
Randal B. has the only T-4 I've ever seen that lives up the hype thrown around here.
He just drives & enjoys it. By comparison my motor and conversion was cheap.

BTW, proper spelling of the word as used is cachet: A mark or quality, as of distinction, individuality, or authenticity....I write this as the world's worst speeler.

Its a no brainer. The only thing to consider is how much money you have to spend.

Do I love my Raby inspired djet cammed 2056? Hell yes!
Is it twice as fun as a stock 2L? Hell yes!
Is it still a 4? does it sound like a 4? Hell yes!
Would I do a six conversion if I had the bucks? HELL YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See? Simple.





BTW JP, I still drive my car everyday. 12K on the engine in 8 months. Not a problem one.

You'll get no argument from me about the reliability of a 125 hp (or so) T-4.
A good set-up for a 914. My old stocker 2.0 went nearly 100k miles before a rebuild ....according to the records. After 140kish it was toast.....2 cracked heads.....but the bottom end was still good.

Bought my used '73 914 in 1988 and drove it for a year in Seattle, then drove
it across country, from Washington state to Indiana. Moved wife and kids to
Brandon, Florida, while I stayed in on the job in Indiana. Every three months
I would drive from Indiana to Brandon. Best time, 12:15 minutes (door to door).
Calculate that and you will see that I averaged 85 mph. I did this over a two
year period. Plus being a daily driver.
The four is fun, and can get you tickets just as easily as a Porsche 6.
The 2.4 MFI '72 911 that I had was ...simply Porsche.
I miss the uncapped intakes and overhead chain driven cams topped off with
the sport muffler. My radio never worked and I didn't care. I made my own
music.
I just want to get my '74 off the jack stands ! I've done so much to the chassis
and suspension, I can't wait to feel the changes !

If I had my way I'd do this !!!!!
Click to view attachment

Now a v-8 is the way to go for reliable, inexpensive, HUGE power.

but the real fun in a 914 is the way they can handle. Even a lowley 1.7 is a blast if set up to handle.

BTDT, schlippery schlope indeed ...

Closer to 12-13K in reality these days.. I just updated all the pricing, dyno graphs and etc for my 3 standardized 914 engines a few weeks ago. You can see all of these here
Aircooled Technology 914 Engine Offerings

Here is a good comparison that one of my engine purchasers came up with who was trying to understand exactly what the differences were in stock TIV power and my two engines two most popular 914 engines was and he threw in stock /6 power as well. He ended up purchasing and we'll be testing his engine in two weeks.



You will find a few on my forums.. The majority of my purchasers for turnkey engines are not the social media/ forum type so actual buyers that post are few and far between. If you want to talk to a buyer, just email us and we'll give you a list of folks that are willing to share their experiences with you.
Here is a link with a full post-mortem of a Raby engine with 160,000 miles and 8 solid years of hell under its belt. It includes pics and the story and the entire history of this engine can be searched at the STF from the day that I first dyno tuned it.
160,000 Mile Raby Engine



Not true. I have since added two more buildings to our compound to include one area for admin and reception. I welcome any serious engine purchaser (by appointment, set up one week prior to arrival) who wants to meet us and see how we create our engines to come spend a few hours with us for a taste of what its like at Aircooled Heaven. I will I am happy to take anyone through the facilities and will show you every part of each building as long as work currently isn't underway in that room/ area. I have potential purchasers from all over the country and world come see us, the farthest to date flew from Australia and left with his name on three engines. Heck, we even teach classes here now and have our own training area, so we certainly allow visitors, but only by appointment or when we have the RAT Reunion every couple of years.. We are a technology company; not a tour company and our work can't get done if we let anyone walk into the door at random~

The /4 built our way isn't for everyone and our way of doing things isn't either. We have provided engines to a certain group of discerning purchasers for the past 15 years and have created an engine program that has met the expectations of those purchasers. The /6 and /4 can't be compared on any level.

Its all expensive and its supposed to be.

Hey, a thread I can actually opine on! In '73, I roomed with a guy that had a 914-6, and I had a '73 2.0L 914-4; both cars were stock. The -6 clearly outran my -4 in all respects, no question. I drove his -6 enough times to get a good feel for it. And yes, the sound was wonderful.

Andys

Touché on "cachet"! My wireless keyboard sometimes sticks or misses an entry. I should have caught that as I am an editor!

Now you're talking, that'd be the best engine I would say...but the $$ is just too much

I miss my -4. It was so nimble compared to my 3.2/915. You could toss the -4 around with ridiculous abandon. But if you're gonna do a -4 on the cheap, be prepared for: blown galley plugs, cracked heads, dropped valve seats, disappearing cores, disappearing djet parts, and an accumulation of damage from ham-fisted repairs over the years from knuckle dragging, mouth breathing troglodytes. I have an otherwise great 2L head laying around on which PO used split ring lock washers under the head nuts. Hmmm, mo' tight mo' gud. Totally gouged and destroyed the recesses. Can't quite bring myself to throwing it away.

Put a big block of wood under the loud pedal and you can toss it with abandon.

BTW, you forgot broken cranks.....not that has happened to anyone around here.