Hi all,

I have been confused as to why people convert the 914 to gain better performance? I honestly cringe when I see them because to me it's ruining the originality of the Porsche. Ok to each his own fine, I am not a 914 owner yet and only rode in one 25 years ago as a teen-ager from my sister's boyfriend and it threw me back against the seat before the door closed and he took a corner I swear would have pitched it and I have wanted to get one just from that experience. Having owned hi-perf Type-1 bugs etc. the performance modifications were plenty to make the VW go plenty fast and cheap! Is the 914 engine that different or the performance market unavailable to keep them from becoming modified into anything but a Porsche? Thanks.

It's more personal preference & other reasons as to why they swap, since the original early 1.7 70-72, 2.0 /4 & -6 were all quick & fun cars, & even the non-CA 73 1.7 & 1.8s were still fun - although CA smog controls seriously detuned the 73 1.7 (down to just 69 HP from 80), & the same with the CA 75-76 2.0 down to 82-ish HP IIRC.

Others just wan more HP, or cannot deal with the original D-jet & L-jet EFI, want to tweak it a bit higher - which was even done back in the day of your 1st ride & from the 70's, & some just want crazy HP - while others of us appreciate & like the original ones.

Sometimes I get the impression that some of the more vocal big-engine guys are confused that its a substitute for the "little blue pills" - but others just like to hot rod 914s & other cars, & don't get in other folks faces when they want more stock 914s.

Even Porsche designed the 914 to handle much more HP & TQ than the street models, as seen in their 70's racing 914-6GTs, their 916 prototypes, & the two 914-8 prototypes built by the factory with their 908 flat-8 racing engine.

If stock or stockish is the goal - then you can always do mild tweaks - like build them to the slightly higher 8.0 CR & 100 HP Euro Specs' P&Cs, or a small upbuild to 2056 with D-jet or dual 2-bbl carbs, 2100+ cc w EFI, etc. - which will still look, sound & handle pretty much stock - but get closer to or more than 914-6 or 916 performance out of a flat-4.

So decide what you want to have in your own 914, then look for the right one for your goal.

Cheers!
Tom
///////

“I am not a 914 owner yet and only rode in one 25 years ago as a teen-ager” - maybe go for a ride in one to get a current feel for the car.

Remember sixes were a factory production car and I believe the first six that was introduced to the press had a bigger engine, brakes and suspension.

The 2 factory 8’s have between 275-325hp. Porsche has always built modified versions of their cars, not just 914’s.

40 years ago a 914 was considered quick. Today it's the slowest and loudest car on the road. Expectations changed with the times and so must powertrains

I put the biggest air-cooled production /6 engine Porsche ever made in mine.

The only time i have water in my 914 is when it rains ...


PS:

I love these cars any way I can get to see em! V8, Suby, type 4, and even no motor, Shiny, modded, rusty, crusty!

.............it's all about FREEDOM of choice.

Do what makes YOU happ

For some of us the conversion is about reliability and cost to operate. Ya'll had to know that was coming.

Why do I modify MY 914.

Because it's mine, and I can.

We have 3. One is a bone stock 70 factory six, one is a "mostly" stock 74 daily driver, and one is my Frankenstein monster 914. Each is a fun car, but in different ways.


I am a firm believer in "it's your car, do what you want with it".


And I will admire and enjoy all of them.

The car obviously needs more grunt then 89 horse

So getting there by using any /6 or big 4
Is still really almost still factory type setup
Retains all that factory air cooled character

When you pump water ... You get great power and ultimate reliability
Totally worth it if you ask me ( but does add complexity)

but you
Do lose a little character in the process

Never keep my cars 100% stock for long...my "6'' conversion is currently the least stock off all of them.
The last 20yrs I have upgraded older cars with bigger motors ,upgraded brakes and suspension ,changed out wheels and improved seating,always been happy with the results,however my daily driver cars are now getting newer so there is little to improve upon.
I don't really agree that upping the engine power is making it non original,who the hell would know you have 96mm barrels and pistons,71mm crank or say a better FI cam for example,IMO the 914 running gear if in good condition can handle it.

So the 914 was never a really fast car and by today's standards it is slow.
The type 4 engine is quite different from the type 1 engine and that are not a lot of cheap performance arts for them.
To build the performance of a say a 250 HP Subaru conversion with a type 4 engine cost a lot of money.
So many will chose to go with a modern engine/system and it may cost about the same or less to to the conversion than building the high HP type 4. They also get modern features and dependability. although without the air cooler character. It may also be cheaper latter to upgrade the performance of their modern engine or repair their modern engine.

A 911 engine conversion is probably even more money than any other conversion but is still air cooled and of course still Porsche.

Jim
(with a 2.0L type 4 in my 914)

KISS

No performance junky who ever had any kind of car every thought about improving performance.

I modified mine both out of curiosity and out of necessity.

The original 1.8L engine wasn't in the car when I bought mine, and the reason for that was because the engine had destroyed itself and the owner didn't even know/remember.

I took the money I would have spent on a replacement Type IV and instead put it towards a more worthwhile investment, a Subaru front clip and adapter plate.

Thanks for all the welcoming! I would still like to know if it's easy to keep it a flat four Porsche and it be a fun car? I know the handling and braking will be a major improvement over a VW, and would like to know if there is a big difference between a 1.7 or 2.0 and can bolt on performance like rocker arms ,carburetion, and exhaust give it the ability to merge on to the highway where I want, like in my old VW or will I have to submit to the mercy of traffic like in my Tacoma? It would aid me in my search for a car that may have had mods done to save me money in the long run. And yes I know Rust is the Number one priority! Thanks for the replies!

When you had your old VW, traffic was slower. Now minivans can do 0-60 as fast as an older Porsche and Teslas are as fast as modern Turbos. You need to compare apples to apples.

The stock 4 absolutely is fun to drive. Especially in the twisties where they can dominate. But the first time someone passes you you'll be looking for more horsepower.

While a 914 may not be fast, it's quick. You can easily find holes in traffic that others can't even think about. I tend to drive for open spaces and try not to get crowded in. IMHO there is a distinct difference in torque between a 1.7 and a 2.0. It shows up in acceleration off the apex and the ability to merge or move easily in traffic. I think everyone would like more grunt, but at what cost? I owned a 1.7 new in 1973 and even then it was 'slow', but still a blast to drive. Now, every time I drive my stock 2.0 there will be a point in time when I say, 'gawd I love this car'! Best advice I can give is get a good example and live with it for awhile before you make decisions on enhanced performance. Good luck

Oh boy ...

Best bolt on for a 1.7 (stock crank) would be 1.8 heads and 96's for jugs- 1911cc.

L-jet (injection). Spins up quickly and will spin the tires.

Merge and pass like my old VW? No flat 4 under 2.0 will do that.

If you want to pass up traffic and merge where ever you want....I'm with Andy.

A 3.4 six air-cooled or a used 987. 20k either way and 300 HP with a torque curve that won't let up.

Hell yes!!! For me the 2.0L four is the sweet spot. I love the overall balance of fun and economy. I agree there is a noticeable difference from a 1.7L, but hey, a 1.7L is still fun. I have no first hand experience, but I've heard some who would know argue that the /4 is the best handling of the bunch because it is light and nimble. Of course it doesn't have the grunt of larger or more modern engines, so if being smashed into your seat on acceleration is necessary to have a fun car to you, a four probably isn't going to cut it. But that's not where I get my thrills. When I rebuilt my 2L, I added only the extra "oomph" that euro spec 8:1 compression pistons buy. I did add a carb cam and carbs - not for performance (that's a myth), but because I lacked the knowledge and means to refurbish my aging DJet at the time. Restoring the original EFI will be a later project.

The "bolt-on" performance is mostly in higher compression and larger pistons, cams, and head work. Not cheap, as others have said.

Personally, I think it's pretty funny that our 2006 Honda CRV grocery getter would easily spank our 914 in a straight line drag, but it would never beat it in a race with curves involved. Nor will the Honda ever be as much fun to drive. I think maybe the best term to describe the performance of a four is "nimble."

It's easy to get lost in the weeds on this topic. Everyone has a personal preference for what they do.

The reality of modern production automobiles is that they are faster, quieter, and have better reliability than our beloved 914's.

The physics of Electric Vehicles (EV's)with max torque at 0 RPM is hard to beat if you just want to go fast in a straight line. The problem is EV's don't make those glorious air cooled engine noises. Most are very heavy due to batteries and don't handle so well.

A 2.0L engine is plenty to keep up with traffic. Not to say that more HP isn't nice but the reality is chasing HP quickly turns into a game of spending lots of dollars for diminishing returns and usually diminishing reliability. Sure there are workarounds like a 915 transmission and driveline but that is just more money spent. I say if you have it, spend it and have fun.

If you're on a limited budget like many of us, you haven't been cheated with a stock 2.0L by any stretch of the imagination. Rather, it is an opportunity to learn how to drive properly by thinking ahead, using the power you have, and using conservation of momentum and the incredible handling a 914 is endowed with to get though the curves.

914's were never meant to be drag cars.

You can have fun in a 914 with a tired clapped-out 1.8 liter motor that makes 60% of the original power.

You can have fun with a twin-turbo V8 monster that makes 10x the original power of the 1.8 motor.

They are vastly different experiences, but they can both be quite a bit of fun.

--DD

Is this considered bolt on?

Click to view attachment

It’s a 2165cc type 4 with 911 fan and lightened flywheel. I row through the stock gears very quickly, the light weight of the car gets it out in front whenever I push the go pedal. Last 914 I drove before this one was my old heavy bumper 1.8. It was fun to drive, but nothing like what I have now.

Just one more opinion among the others here.

I bought my first 914 in 2009. I knew enough to pounce on a well-priced 2.0L available nearby.

When I took possession, it was a stock 2.0 but someone prior to me had ditched the Fuel Injection and installed a single carb. In that form, it was plenty fun and reliable. Over time, I've tried to avoid gratuitous modification. I switched to dual carbs, which improved throttle response and allowed the engine to run a more precise mixture. Eventually, the engine needed a rebuild, and I changed the cam and built it to 2056cc (for reference, stock 2.0 is 1970cc).

I'm still running stock suspension, stock brakes, interior 100% stock, even bought a set of vintage-style tires in the original size. I have no idea what HP I'm making now, probably 120 or so, but that's plenty for me in a 2000lb car. It doesn't press you back in your seat, but it's such a nimble car that I never feel underpowered in local driving.

Having said all that -- if my 914 had still been running F.I. when I bought it, I'd much rather have kept it that way. Carbs are a compromise. IMO.

Attending a Route 66 meet or a West Coast Ramble and driving with higher HP 914s will cure you of the "I love my stock motor" blues. At least it did for me.

Getting passed by much more powerful cars and/or having them slow down so you can keep up is hard on the fragile male psyche.

Overcompensation is gud.
If I could afford this, I would.

Not alot of flat /8 out there


Make your 914 fast
But not full on race motor imho

My Subaru STI converted 914 will have the same power to weight ratio as a 911 GT3. Trying to get those numbers with genuine Porsche bits would be too cost prohibitive.

PPloco,..what is your HP/ TQ rating,. Thanks

With the turbo and upgrades I've got, I expect to be around 380 whp/379 torque.

I'm a performance junkie, if I couldn't hop up these cars i'd likely be into a different car.