I am developing my strategy for restoring my 1975 1.8. I am thinking I will have it repainted to match so not thinking of doing the trunks or door jams. Will I regret this?

Instead of rebuilding the 1.8, I am thinking of keeping the stock 1.8 with FI and having a new big bore 2.6 built. Thus when/if I sell I will have the original engine with a stock car.

Will use the car for weekends and some ax

Thoughts??

Regards

James

Do it

You can always do the trunks later, but I'd recommend doing the door jambs or you'll notice the differences. As far as the engine, keeping the original is probably a good idea.

You will want to paint the door jambs. Trunks and stuff can pass, but the door jambs will bug you if you don't paint them.

2.6 type 4? Bring money and lots of it.

to do it right, plan on around $12K for the motor...good luck!

That won't really even buy all the components these days.

Its a good starting point, though.

You might be right, but that's about what I got in mine...in 2003 $$ though..

Nothing is the same today.... Back then good parts existed off the shelf.

Would this be just bigger bores or a combination of longer stroke to get the 2.6 liters?...

mine is 103mm cylinders by 80mm stroke.

see picture on the left

So I am being told now that I should go with a 2.4 as it will be a much more stable platform than the 2.6. Is this a distinction without a difference??

2.4 is 103MM pistons and stock crank of 71mm

Not sure who might be advising you, but for a while welded and recut cranks were a problem due to the oil galley becoming too close to the journal...and it would crack and break.

We now can buy new cranks from DPR crankshafts....so that issue seems to be less troublesome.

Rich

forget heat. in all likelihood, you need to plan which header and muffler system you intend to run. what's your fuel supply system plan? carbs, dual throat throttle body f.i.? ignition? what's the cylinder budget? it's a whole lot more than just displacement.

I am planning carbs. I really want heat. I want the car to be drivable e.g. Drive from San Francisco to Los Angels.

Best bet is a 2056. Then just driv3 it. Best bang for the $.

Not to hijack this thread, but I'm seriously thinking 2270. Seems to be a lot of write-up on this displacement, and it matches what I would like to get in terms of H.P. I'm making an assumption here but the larger the displacement the more critical the components needed to equal reliability.

Yeah but looking for more power. It's hard to go from a boxster to the 914. I am keeping the 1.8 for originality. This engine is all about power and fun :-)

So a 2.4 with heat exchangers

I assume that's what you would do... Other options??

Doesn't Tangerine Racing have proper headers with heat?

What year boxster? For a 2015 Boxster S (2900lbs/315hp) you need around 200hp to match the power/weight in a 914. A 2000 Boxster S (2800lbs/250hp) only needs 180hp for a 2100lbs 914.

200hp from a Type 4 is a hard number to reach. You better have some well designed heads, a cam that's specially designed to take advantage, and and intake and exhaust system that's up to the task. Take all that, and then consider the torque curve of the Boxster motor with VarioCam. You're easily getting into 3.6 transplant territory.

If you need 200+ hp in your car, there are three viable options: 3.6, Subaru, V8. All of which will be a hell of a lot more reliable in the long run.

But all that nay-saying aside, if you want to pursue a Type 4, I wouldn't use the 103 cylinders. I think a stoker with 96mm pistons that's well designed will surpass the additional displacement. The old adage, "There's no replacement for displacement," is basically the shotgun approach the making power. Make everything bigger and you make more power. But for our motors there is a practial limit to how big you can go. So instead of jumping into unreliable parts (103s), use proven 96s and gain power through efficiency.

Proper headers, heat-ish.

Stock heat exchangers may not support a 2.4. 2056, heat exchangers, stock fi components, or carbs set up correctly for your application. No need for real expensive cylinders. Now you make your cam choise. Do the math. Seriously.

I would do a 3.2 conversion.

To quote the Cowardly Lion from Oz, "Not no way, not no how!" Take McMark's advice. Especially if you want reliability.

I Disagree.
I think you are using a shotgun approach with your statement.
How are 103's unreliable? If you are referring to old tech cast iron cyl's then I understand, but a properly prepped case & heads mated with forged pistons & Billet alum. cylinders should be no less reliable (and likely more reliable) than a stock motor.

Who sells 'forged' aluminum cylinders for a t-4 and at what cost? What are those same cylinders coated with?

ln engineering
EMW in California.

Coated the same way /6 aluminum cylinders are coated.

LN makes his own, and they are not cheap.
They are really nice pieces.

EMW sells imported units that I have not heard any bad things about (except from Jake and LN) and I have heard nothing good either....I just know they are available, people buy them and they are cheap.

I suspect one reason people dont come out and talk about using the lower costs units are they may get flamed here and at the end of the day its a hassle .....so they just keep it to themselves.

I have 103mm Cast iron cylinder and forged pistons.
The motor needs new rings about every 10k, but that is OK by me.

rich

Corrected. Happy now?

Happy? Sure, if you are. Are YOU happy? I looked around EMW. I see no "forged"cylinders. Pistons? Yes. Forged cyl? No. The EMW cylinders are $735 a set. Pistons, rings are extra. The required machine work is prob pretty cheap.

Build it as big as you can afford the headwork to support.

Its easy to build a huge misconfiguration.

Do a turbo and call it good

THAT is some sage advice.

Headwork costs lots....

If you dont have decent heads, I would certainly suggest you buy heads from Jake/LN/Len that are based upon new castings, tested, fully setup, port matched....all of it....
Its THE easiest way to go and probably comparable to building a large set of heads properly...especially the port matching.

And now you are back in the 12k plus area. 2056 is the best bang for the buck.

That is also the Rub....
According to past posts by Jake to make 103's burn efficiently you need dual plug.
Ive spoken to Len somewhat recently (well, email..) and he no longer offers Dual plugging on his heads.

He's too busy doing them for me :-)

Its hard to beat a 2270...

What is that bore/stroke wise?

I think it is 78.4 X 96 (stroke/bore)

Duplicate post

To me once you hit 2270 that is the wall were it's time to seriously think of doing a /6 or a water cooled engine. Although admittedly the /6 will likely be the most expensive solution.
Any bigger bore T4, done right (nickies), quickly starts into /6 money.
If you want heat exchangers it's foolish to waste your money on anything bigger than a 2056 IMHO.


I have a T4 2.6 nickies engine in my bug it's a lot of fun and pooploads of torque, but my kid says it sounds like a diesel truck tractor at WOT.
If I had a do-over i likely would stick to a 2270 in the bug.

My 914 is getting 3.0 /6 (if I ever get it done ) and if I had to pay today's /6 prices I wouldn't do it again.

2270 was my sweet spot for 1\5 years. Today the 2,432 is my new favorite and it costs the same money since we went to Nickies on all engines as standard.