Seems like a useful thing to have summarized somewhere. While you can build just about auybof these to be a monster compared to stock, how about if we list stock values for now as one reference point?

1.7 flat 4 - 79
1.8 flat 4 - 84
2.0 flat 4 - 99
2.0 flat 6 - 109
2.2 flat 6 -
2.4 flat 6 -
2.7 flat 6 - 150-200
3.0 flat 6 -
3.2 flat 6 - 213-240
3.6 flat 6 - 275-300

Look like the right list?

Sort of. Engine power varied by year and spec. For example, a 914-6 was about 110hp but a 69-911S was about 180-190hp. Both 2.0 engines. Even US vs ROW could vary 10-20 hp.

https://www.porsche.com/usa/accessoriesands...models/914/914/

My '87 3.2 was 217 stock I believe. I believe with the 964 cams, Steve Wong chip and Ben's full exhaust I should be at 240. At least that is what I am told.

I'd say my 2.4 S spec 7R cased, Solex cam'd, Weber carb'd, Clewett ignition'd engine is turning about 175 HP?

MSDS headers, GT muffler, ported heads with big valves. My car scoots.

I could be wrong +/- a bit, but that's how it feels.

It's guessing game until you dyno your car's motor.

Show and tell:Click to view attachment

My stock euro 3.2 is supposed to put out 231 hp with stock exhaust and catalytic converter. My car has no cat, but also has Steve Wong chip, MB heat exchangers and muffler. So at least 240 hp.

Plus, later model cars had more emission controls that reduced hp a bit.

My 2.7 Henry Schmidt built engine (RS P/C, S cams, Weber’s) dyno’d at 199.5 at the rear wheels. The torque advantages of the larger engines are nice however.

My 2.7 by Jay Kjoller dyno’d at 197 at the wheels. JE Pistons, Solex cam, DFI twin spark, PMO’s. The sound and the power are intoxicating

Those sound like especially healthy 2.7 builds gentlemen.

It’s a very nice choice for a -6 conversion without the DME complications of the 3.2 or 3.6. A carbed 3.0 SC motor would be great as well once you replace the pistons and cams with ones that are not so limiting (and also replace any Dilivar studs).

Supposed to be 207HP US Spec 3.2. Marty’s headers, no Cat, K&N, I’d guess 225HP?

Stock 3.6L aircooled, naturally aspirated, HP range from 272 - 285

With headers, Steve Wong chip and some other minor improvements you can get in the 305 range.

Mine is similar. 964 cams, euro compression, slightly stiffer springs to rev to 7K and a custom SW chip to run on 93 was dynoed at 244 by the PO.
Next engine will be 3.4 with Sal's custom MAF, injectors and chip to hopefully get to 280. A early 915 trans with 7:31 ring and pinion for a quick getaway.

Those cars must MOVE.

How about 2.2, 2.4 and 3.0?

I think 2.2 was around 125, and 2.4 about 140? 3.0 around 175-220?

1.7 flat 4 - 79
1.8 flat 4 - 84
2.0 flat 4 - 99
2.0 flat 6 - 109
2.2 flat 6 - 130, 155, 180 (T, E and S)
2.4 flat 6 - 140, 165, 190 (T, E and S)
2.7 flat 6 - 150-200 210, 230-245 2.7MFI 8.5:1 and 2.7MFI hi comp
3.0 flat 6 - 180 - 204hp
3.2 flat 6 - 213-240
3.6 flat 6 - 275-300

All of the hp's above can be improved upon if you stray away from factory setups/specs.

I'm getting 230hp out of a factory spec 2.7MFI with a great space cam and 310hp out of a 3.6Vram motor (ECU'd, sport cams) on a couple of my cars.

Larmo is likely a little light on hp numbers for his 2.4 setup and is exactly the same as mine.. Henry from supertec expected mine to be about 200.. And that is for a 2.4..

I'm a grow-er.................not a show-er.

Great discussion gentlemen, good to have this all in one place.

I think the next interesting thing to collectively have a chat about is the crossover point on horsepower versus cost building out a more powerful flat four versus swapping in a six.

I know that’s apples versus oranges and how the car feels, but I think it would still be useful.

For example, total cost to build 130 hp flat for versus total cost to get that same horsepower with a flat six.

My engine builder estimated HP for my 3.6 @ 320-325 engine is a 95 993 ROW engine (Canada) Cylinder heads massaged & milled to increase compression 1/2 point to 11.7 to 1. WebCam RS cams for 993 with hydraulic lifters. Fuel injectors blueprinted & match flowed. Patrick Motorsports intake & filter. MSDS 1 3/4" headers. B&B loud ass muffler. Steve Wong custom 993 chip. 7000 rpm red line. 11 lb flywheel. Yada yada.

Porsche factory HP numbers were minimum output, so an engine could make more but not less

Cost is a difficult way to compare. You can spend 10k on rebuilding a six and not add any hp. You can also spend $10k just to fit the six into the car. The big difference between the 4 and six is it’s possible to buy a stock six from 110-275hp. A stock 4 is maxed hp at the very lowest stock 6.

The stock 3.2 I just purchased is about 220. That’s a super exotic build for a 4 and would cost triple the purchase price of my 3.2.
So it’s tough to talk in absolutes.

Good points, so it sounds like there is BALLPARK a cut over point around a 2.2 or 2.4 for what the six gives you vs when you need to start to built a really expensive 4 to keep up?

I think that makes sense. I'm not trying to say a six is better than a 4 or vise versa but I think the six has the advantage of "off the rack", stock horsepower compared to a 4 with the disadvantage, unless you already have a 914-6, of needing to do a conversion.

Some of the guys have asked what is in this Engine. Scott Kinder built it for me and this is what it has inside. 

1978 3.0 SC big-port base (case, crank, rods, oil pump)
Custom JE Pistons, replated Nikasil cylinders, 9.8:1
New valves, 38/37 ports (stock) in 3.2 heads
ARP head studs & rod bolts
GE40 "Mod-S" cams
. PMO 46 carbs & manifolds
J WE custom curve on SC distributor to match the carbs/cams
 - 930 tensioners, idler arms--all rebuilt
, Otherwise just everything new or refinished, redone, rebuilt


At this point we can only guess. 230-250? We will dyno it tater when it gets it finished tune at Sea level. It is at Sandy UT with E @ PMB



https://vimeo.com/337332800

Bob B

It's a very slippery slope. There are 4 cylinder engines making 1000hp. Not TIVs mind you. More cylinders are going to provide longer longevity in general. But times change and technology does faster.

My boss bought a machine shop and said the guys there are making 900hp from the Suby turbo fours.

The 962 at our shop uses an air cooled 3.0 with a single turbo to get 780hp. Mid 80’s tech.

Good discussion, and man you guys have some awesome cars.

@mepstein - that was the trade off I was trying to get to, but as you and others point out it isn’t an apples v apples thing.

Total power at the crank? Also the converted power is torque.

Torque is what you feel.

were they thinking

Tom, I'll take you for a ride in my /6.

You'll want a six.

Believe me.

It's just not worth it to build a four for real torque or horsepower unless you are keeping it stock or near stock. A 2056 is probably your best bet. Done right 15k. There is really is no comparison to a six.


Like Larwrence said....ride in one or drive in one...end of discussion.

Oh also want to point this out as some people get very confused from inaccurate advertising. K&N air filters add zero hp.. Don't buy into the hype it's complete b.s... I am not arm chair QB ing here this is from real data in my former life as an experimental aircraft engine builder.

Thanks for all the discussion. I’m definitely putting the 3.2 in. I’ve just been trying to educate myself on other engine options as well ( part of figuring out what to do with the spare 2.7 L ) and so forth and wished there was one place that had everything together, so I thought I’d start the thread.

Just do it.....but don’t forget about your Trans and Brakes.
Click to view attachment

Usually for just long enough for the dyno run before the engines scatter.

The BS my Suby brethren do to their engines (spending money they don't have on a very powerful and equally short lived motor) and then complaining bitterly about horrible Subaru reliability... Ring-land failure. Premature clutch failure. Asshats. "How do you have a WRX with over 100K miles and still on the original clutch? Mine failed in 20K miles..." There are not enough eyerolls.

Zach

They are race engines. The good thing is I now have machine shop availability at reasonable prices.

To educate myself on six cylinder engines I bought this book.

https://www.amazon.com/Porsche-911-Red-Book...s/dp/B015QNJUCE

It lists every engines spec, I've referred to it so many times my copy is starting to get a bit tired. A great reference book.

Click to view attachment

Okay guys....

Who has access to a Dyno here in SoCal?
Let's see some actual (rear wheel) figures.
I'm curious about my cars.

HP is great however I measure my 914 driving experience in

Oscar

THAT is a copy.


This is a Porsche flat six - 320 HP and 295 ft lbs of torque. 3.4 liters of pure fun.

Click to view attachment



Typical World thread....off the rails.

Pretty much guaranteed.

Basically what happened to me is back when I first got into the track stuff with a stock 73 2.0/4, nearly 20 years ago now, I was assigned a couple of POC instructors with well-prepped (but not extremely modded) factory -6's and those ride-alongs at Streets of Willow were the proverbial first couple hits of crack...

(Slightly OT) One of the culprits back in 2001 - Martin Jansen's six, a neighbor from Agoura Hills, now retired from racing. Last I spoke with him, he still had the car but had retired from racing.



My current engine dynos at 230-235hp at the wheels @ 7500rpm, a tick under 200lbs-ft torque; 7R case 2.7 with significant power and reliability mods. Deafening and chugs fuel like there's no tomorrow. Love it.

I would truly love something like an 3.0 RSR w/ MFI in this car, but at probably 50-100% more $$$ vs. the already spendy setup in there now...not happening.

Lets call 120 ( big /4)

If you’re talking about my post, I’m simply listing the modifications. I don’t mean to imply that the K&N increased HP. But a blanket statement that it doesn’t is incorrect as well. I’ve seen testing where it improved and also testing where it hurt HP. It depends on the car.

Rob,

I will respectfully disagree.. I did this as part of factory dyno tests and back to back it didn't help whatsoever.. It is pure marketing.. I was the one actually doing the testing along with factory engineers. The only advantage was it was reusable. We actually proved that it increased wear to the engine much faster..

Filters are all about filtration/Flow in CFM.

From what I read on them they flow no better than any other filter and their filtration is crap.

Sorry for hi jacking this everyone.. It was a nervous tick of mine.. Back to regular scheduled broadcast..

From what I understand, it’s all about finding the choke points on the engine. It’s usually not the air filter. I know that on a 3.2, it’s proven the be the AFM/flapper box.

I am not exactly sure, but lately I have been driving the six rather than the four. Such fun! Headers. Thinking about changing out the stock chip.