mtn flyr
May 5 2013, 02:52 PM
Like the title says, any reasons to not put a 3.0 in my 914? I know of a 78 3.0 SC engine with good leak down #s all 6 and 7's. Good compression across the board at 150 to 159, sounds great is super clean, doesn't show signs of oil leaks,, has turbo valve covers, updated chain tensioners. Currently running CIS. I know the CIS is more difficult to fit but has been done. Any thoughts?
Dr Evil
May 5 2013, 02:57 PM
CIS is not hard. Dont forget an oil cooler in the front of the car and you might want to regear your gear box (depends on how you like the stock gearing). Other than that, not a big deal.
rfuerst911sc
May 5 2013, 03:15 PM
I have a 3.0 in mine love it but I'm running Webers.
Jeffs9146
May 5 2013, 03:23 PM
I love my sc powered car!
I modified the stock fi to fit without cutting anything!
a914guy
May 5 2013, 04:59 PM
QUOTE(mtn flyr @ May 5 2013, 12:52 PM)
Like the title says, any reasons to not put a 3.0 in my 914? I know of a 78 3.0 SC engine with good leak down #s all 6 and 7's. Good compression across the board at 150 to 159, sounds great is super clean, doesn't show signs of oil leaks,, has turbo valve covers, updated chain tensioners. Currently running CIS. I know the CIS is more difficult to fit but has been done. Any thoughts?
Many of us have or a variation of the six. The SC has fuel injection considerations but it's a great candidate for a conversion. I have an SC powered six and although it's carburated it's a great combination with the 910 gearbox. Secondary oil cooler options to the front mounted cooler are available if you want to keep the trunk and plumbing simple.
Good luck!
Rich
'71 3.0L - Ole Yeller
sixnotfour
May 5 2013, 05:06 PM
Sounds Great...how much $$$ 3.2 is better..all around..mainly the injection..
Steve
May 5 2013, 07:29 PM
I have owned a 2.7 and driven a stock 3.0 and I felt they both matched the stock gearing quite well. With my 3.2 I was not happy with the gearing and I am now upgrading to a 915. The 3.2 with a 901 was fine for the track, but for the street 1st is too low and second is too high to start out in without slipping the clutch.. With a 3.6 and v8's they have enough power to start out in second and don't use first at all.
Dr Evil
May 5 2013, 08:09 PM
I love my 2.7 with CIS. Does good with the stock 901, but next time I may increase 5th.
IronHillRestorations
May 5 2013, 08:14 PM
A 3.0 is a great engine for your 914. ......(faint whisper) go the distance.... Depending on what you are doing with the car, you may not need an external oil cooler, but I'd plan on it. CIS isn't the most optimal system, but if it's right it's good, I like carbs or Motronic.
moparrob
May 5 2013, 09:00 PM
The CIS injection sits a bit high for our car's engine bay. If you use the Rich Johnson mount to install the engine (recommended) you will need to mount it one inch lower than if you use Webers.
Some eye candy of my 3.0:
DO IT!!
iamchappy
May 5 2013, 09:10 PM
The 3.0 is a great engine almost bullet proof, it is a good up grade, and the engine can be modified into anything.
moparrob
May 5 2013, 09:16 PM
QUOTE(iamchappy @ May 5 2013, 08:10 PM)
The 3.0 is a great engine almost bullet proof, it is a good up grade, and the engine can be modified into anything.
Chappy's engine rocks....
Van914
May 6 2013, 03:42 AM
3.0 is a great motor for a 914. I put PMO 40mm carbs on mine and recurved the distrubitor.. The stock gears are fine. I had a short geared box and went back to stock, with 195/65X15 tires. A front cooler is a must if you do any spirited driving. Trouble free and fast.
Good luck and enjoy
Van
Jeffs9146
May 6 2013, 10:35 AM
QUOTE
The CIS injection sits a bit high for our car's engine bay. If you use the Rich Johnson mount to install the engine (recommended) you will need to mount it one inch lower than if you use Webers.
If you modify your FI the way I did everything fits normal without having to lower the engine mount or cut the trunk!
moparrob
May 6 2013, 10:37 AM
QUOTE(Jeffs9146 @ May 6 2013, 09:35 AM)
QUOTE
The CIS injection sits a bit high for our car's engine bay. If you use the Rich Johnson mount to install the engine (recommended) you will need to mount it one inch lower than if you use Webers.
If you modify your FI the way I did everything fits normal without having to lower the engine mount or cut the trunk!
Details, please!
Jeffs9146
May 6 2013, 10:54 AM
QUOTE(moparrob @ May 6 2013, 09:37 AM)
QUOTE(Jeffs9146 @ May 6 2013, 09:35 AM)
QUOTE
The CIS injection sits a bit high for our car's engine bay. If you use the Rich Johnson mount to install the engine (recommended) you will need to mount it one inch lower than if you use Webers.
If you modify your FI the way I did everything fits normal without having to lower the engine mount or cut the trunk!
Details, please!
It is your stock FI with a replacement air box mounted sideways and down with a custom intake hose from the AFR to the throttle body!
Here is a photo of the early Volvo 242 AFR mount that I used!
Click to view attachmentYou can see the mounts I welded in here. I tapped the intake runners to add the mounting bolts!
Click to view attachmentClick to view attachmentHere is a photo of the intake I welded up with the vacuume hole!
Click to view attachmentHere is the cut out intake
Click to view attachment
SirAndy
May 6 2013, 11:54 AM
QUOTE(Jeffs9146 @ May 6 2013, 09:54 AM)
You can see the mounts I welded in here. I tapped the intake runners to add the mounting bolts!
That looks familiar.
I really like the way this all turned out. You have to give me a ride one of these days.
Jeffs9146
May 6 2013, 11:57 AM
Yea, thanks for all the help Andy!!
Compaired to your car mine is a slugggggggg but it is plenty fun for me!!!
montoya 73 2.0
May 7 2013, 01:14 AM
I agree, looks good!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.