We have a 1981 VW Westfalia currently fitted with a 2.0 liter Type 4 motor rated at 67 horsepower. The motor is in need of a rebuild, and we are wondering what would be involved to install a 2.0 914 engine. We are thinking about increasing cylinder size to the 96 mm pistons and cylinders which should allow a mild state of tune that should yield somewhere around 110 horsepower, which is an almost double on the original engine.

My understanding is that the 914 Type 4 is slightly different in configuration from the VW Type 4 fitted to the Van. So, what needs to be changed and how difficult is the conversion? And, if anyone has done one, could they comment on the success of the install in correcting mediocre performance of the original power plant.

I have not done one but know of a few differences in the engines. The bus engines have the dip stick coming off the back of the block. Not sure if you have to change that. I think you have an access panel above the engine so you should be able to remove the dip stick. The flywheel and clutch are different diameters. You should be able to swap the tin and all the external parts. The vanagon had hydraulic liters. Not sure how hard it is to adjust the solid lifters of the 2.0 with the heat exchangers.

here is one - done well
Click to view attachment

.

Click to view attachment

wild bill has done several others - google 'em

the bus type 4 has square exh ports - the 914 has oval ports - so you have to figure that out - I have seen "adapters" for that in many yrs past

bus was L-jet - you have to figure out your options

if you do carbs & appropriate cam - no problem - you can't successfully use carbs with stock 914-2L cam

if you keep D-jet and all 914 stock - no problem

.

As an owner of an '81 also, I thought about installing a 914 engine in mine. I bought a couple to do that. Then I learned the similarities between the 2 engines and the parts they share. My suggestion would be to just rebuild your Vanagon engine using 96mm p's and c's. Keep the L-Jet and bump the compression ratio up a bit. Don't want to mess with the different exhaust ports, engine tin, hydraulic valves unless you change the cam and then would have the option of solid lifters with the new cam. Also depends on how much $$ you want to spend. With a large budget, you could buy large hp.

IMHO, the real differences are:

- Compression; the 914 had either 7.6:1 or 8:1, the Bus had less
- Cam; the Bus cam appears to be milder than the 914 one; the Bus cam was compatible with hydro lifters
- Heads; the 914 2.0 heads flow better and have a better plug angle, but are more fragile, plus the exhaust ports are very different

The rest (dipstick location, etc.) is not hard to deal with and doesn't make any difference to the power output.

IMHO, unless you go to solid lifters the cam will probably limit the power you can get out of the engine. There are more aggressive hydro cams, but I don't know how compatible they are with the Bus fuel injection. The folks at Web-Cam might... Note that more aggressive cams will usually move the power band up in the RPM range, often at the expense of low-end torque. Which could be a problem in a Bus.

Raising the compression will probably make more heat. If your setup can cool that adequately, then going higher compression can be a win.

Going with 914 2.0L heads means you have to change the exhaust, because the port shape is completely different. The 2.0 heads are also more fragile, and tend to crack and/or drop valve seats if overheated. Again, how's the cooling in the Bus?

Going with slightly larger displacement (the 96mm cylinders will give you 2056cc instead of the stock 1971cc) will also help, and shouldn't make much more heat.

--DD

going back to the shoptalk forum days i seem to remember using a cam that produces the power lower in the rpm range. torque would be the key not peak hp that happens high, 'rpm wise', in an engine for a 914. if you have to put your foot in it all the time your miles per gallon is going to suffer.

As an alternative, I had looked into building up a Jake Raby engine using his Type 4 kit. Since Raby no longer is in that business, LN Engineering now sources the engine kits which include completely new Raby engine internals which include the crank, heads, cam, P&C's, and rods.

Unfortunately, the cost of the Raby kit is $6000 which makes it impractical for my van If there is any experience on this forum with the Raby kit, are there items that I could purchase at a lower cost that would get me close to the performance of the Raby engine? I can't say anything negative about a Raby engine. They are bullet proof and give a nice power boost. But, the cost is just outside our budget.

The above responses reveal a lack of understanding between the Vanagon, the Bus, and the 914 engines. The Vanagon engine is based on a similar case, but there are a lot of differences. The fully dressed Vanagon version has a much lower overall profile and the alternator is mounted above the tin in the engine compartment. The oil filler is similar to the bus, but different. The breather assembly is a completely different design, and the case lacks the quasi-rectangular opening used on the 914.

Whatever you do, you'll have to deal with the height of the finished engine assembly, unless you want to raise the rear floor. Hey, no big deal, right? After all, the Porsche factory did it when they installed the 3.2 in their support vehicles ...................

IMO, you'd be much better off finding a nice water cooled Vanagon and be done with it.

The Cap'n

Disregard my post.

Which is why you keep the engine set up as in the factory configuration. L-Jet already there, oil filler and dipstick thru the license plate door... Bump up the displacement but don't go for/hope for double the hp. On the other hand, the water cooled suggestion is worth looking into. An inline 4 has plenty of configurations; N/A, turbo, diesel ... I saw a conversion in Latimore PA mid July. If interested, search for posts made by "kendalwoolf" on theSamba.com. He has a thread of an I-4 conversion. But then you'd lose the Westy ... maybe look for a water cooled Westy

The most important modification you can make is a change in expectation. Don't expect to spend significant time in the fast lane without risking public ridicule. Don't expect to climb speed bumps without downshifting. Don't expect that every vehicle that is behind you isn't obsessed with getting in front of you.

Intuitively you know that no Type4 or Waterboxer VW engine will supply what you consider adequate acceleration or climbing ability. There are two cures: a TDI or Subie conversion, or a profound attitude adjustment. Can you join the slow lane crowd and enjoy the roll?

I've been where you are. I've owned a '72 Type4 bus, an '87 2wd Wbx Westy and an '87 Wbx Syncro Westy. I finally went over to the dark side and converted the Syncro to a 6 cyl Subie. I know, I'm weak in spirit but it had to be done. I admire those who can embrace that minimalist mindset. Get the best rebuild you can afford that enhances HP and torque and then revel in the character flaws of all those impatient souls who go wizzing by.

First of all, thanks to everyone for your comments and input. We love the Westy Van, but cannot keep up on freeways that have speed limits over 70 mph, so we are looking for just that little "extra power" needed to get a few more mph out of the 5100 pound lead sled.

I had looked to do a Jake Raby conversion, but the cost for parts is $6000 which would probably meet my requirements. I'm just looking for options that can give me that little bit of extra power to make the criteria of being able to keep up on a modern freeway. Believe me that we enjoy the process of just poking along normally, but when your speed ends up being a hazard to your fellow motorists, you'd like to escape the moment!

And, we love our Vanagon. My son has put a lot of hours into sorting out all the equipment installed so that it works as new.....so, moving onto another Westy only having to sort through all the jury rigging that others have done, is not something we choose to do. We simply want to make our vehicle a little bit more peppy.

Someone had suggested that the 914 2.0 was the same configuration as the 2.0 in our van, so the idea of going from 67 hp to 90-100 hp seemed worth the hunt. Thanks to those of you who know the facts, I can now see that it is not a drop in motor to go from the Porsche config Type 4 to the VW version.

I would be interested in finding out more about the Subi conversions, though the idea of adding a radiator and miles of interconnecting plumbing is not something I would look forward to.

Perhaps $6000 for a Raby parts set up is not a bad deal after all. My research says that the installation has noticeably more power without a sacrifice in fuel consumption or reliability. But, frankly, I was hoping that any mods could be done for about $3000 or less.

So, please do keep the comments coming. How can I get the most bang for the buck on any work? We plan on doing all the work ourselves, as we have the capabilities.

My buddy has an 83 aircooled Westy, I just picked up an 85 1.9 Westy, he is able to catch me on the freeway(though neither one of us can get over 75), so I would say performance wise you dont gain anything just by jumping up to a watercooled (later 2.1s with 5 speeds might be an exception, i dont know)

That brings up another point though that everyone has overlooked, all the power in the world isnt going to make a difference as far as your freeway speeds go unless you make some changes to the tranny as well. Before I bought my 1.9 I test drove 85 with an automatic + ford Zetec motor. Despite having an auto trans, 0-55 was quicker then any Vanagon I have ever driven but it had the same problem of not going over 70MPH. Factory gearing is just way to low. Top gear, 70MPH in mine and I am spinning north of 4k RPM.

The way i see it, here are your 2 best options:

1. Sell your Van and buy an 83+ that is already watercooled so you can avoid having to plumb all that for the motor conversion. Convert that van to a Suby or Zetec motor and then get the trans (preferably the later 5 speed) re-geared for higher speeds. You will probably be well north of $20k out of pocket when all is said and done.

2. Keep your Van and accept the fact that going slow is part of its charm


Going fast in a Vanagon is not at all cheap, worse even then going fast in a 914.

65MPH on the freeway I can live with, now going up hills, that would be nice!

Well put James. And, you have a point there abut the tranny gearing. This thread has become worthwhile for me because I am hearing that lots of folks have addressed the same issue and determined that it is best to just park yourself in the right lane and poke along. I needed to hear that before I spend any real money on anything.

Thanks again for sharing your experience.

Put a 911 moter in it and pass fuching everyone!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWLFGPl1Kdk