Try selling something on the classifieds for way cheaper than what they're worth... worked for me

Hmmm seems to me that someone thinks they are only builder of "Big T4's". Sorry but I cant control your inflated ego. I wasn't referring to you Jake. Re-read my post if you like. No mention of you or Massive T4 's at all. Actually if I was inclined to build a big T4 you would be on the short list. Dude take a chill pill!

I own a T4 motor and I'm working on a project as we speak. I just dont think big bore T4's are cost effective or a viable motor for regular use when compared to many of the well proven alternatives. Plain and simple no emotion, no T4 or Jake hate. Get over it.

My opinions on big T4's have been confirmed by years of practical experience around these motors at the street and on the track. I was running big bore T4's in my 71 VW Bus when I was in high school in the 1970's Jake, Were you even born yet? Yes you have done tons to improve these motors with lots of help from great suppliers, but a reliable 2.8 T4 budget motor isnt what this person wants.

I dont hate these motors - I just see someone who wants 200 plus HP on a budget who wants some objective input. A Massive T4 is not the solution plain and simple.

Are you in politics? If you aren't perhaps you should be.

Gotta go. Gotta go work on a twin plug engine for a 550 Spyder.. It belongs to Herbie Blash

http://www.xserve2.com/gpe/cref-blaher.htm
Since December 1995 he has acted as the FIA's Deputy Race Director at all Grands Prix.

I wonder why he chose a 4 cylinder??
Oh well, he must be just another one of those brainwashed kool-aid drinking dumb asses.. I wonder why he chose a "Barnyard Bandit" to create the engine for him?? Looks like one of those FIA wrenchs could have handled his "VW Motor".

Instead it'll be getting shipped across the Atlantic.

I think the real question comes when you ask, when is it still a type IV, and when is it something else?

How much less originality is present with a chopped up and modified to hell engine, versus just replacing it with something else similar? Where do you draw the line?

Do I still have a type IV when I've cut large amounts out of the case to fit my huge cylinders? How about if I weld up the heads to move the exhaust ports? What if I replace the heads entirely with aftermarket ones?

If you follow this road to it's logical conclusion, you end up at http://www.pauter.com, making over 900 horsepower for drag racing 4-cylinder cars.

Their shit is expensive, but it's only money right? You'll always make more.

That's the way i look at, the government is busy making more money all the time. The supply of Massive type 4s are limited. better get one now while the waiting list is short.

Thats why we have been referring to our engines for years as "MassIVe 4s"


A Subaru isn't similar. A Porsche 6 cylinder only shares it's cooling medium and the fact that it is horizontally opposed with the "MassIVe 4" or the Type 4.



Thats why we don't do that. Most all our engines make their power with a 96mm bore that slides right into the stock, non machined case.


We don't do that either, in most instances..


Don't do that either..


You said it "Drag Racing". How many teeners drag race?



Thats right.. And thats why my Wife's twin plug 2.9 Liter street car makes more power from less displacement than Don Pauter's Ghia street car that uses one of his "Big Block" engines of greater displacement (3140cc Vs 2866cc). Her engine also gets better MPG (even using 52mm Weber carbs Vs EFI on the Pauter engine) and utilizes STOCK TIV head castings with the only welding being done for the second plug modification. The Pauter engine uses an aftermarket head with much bigger valves and ports.

The stock TIV case is a great foundation. We'll be making over 1,000 HP from a Porkies head equipped, boosted twin plug roller cam engine by years end- if all goes as expected.

Jake my "Barnyard Bandit" comment wasnt directed at you at all. Again youre injecting your ego into the thread uneccessarily. My Barnyard bandit comment was directed at somone who is selling a $7000 2.8 T4. WTF dude? Too much caffine today?

You now damn well there is no way somone has built a 2.8 T4 turn key that will hold together for any period of time? I'm sure you could buld one but we'd be talking $20K plus for a 2.8 Raby turn key that could compete with a 300 HP subie right?

I will also add that it is irresponsible to direct somone new to T4's to a mega big bore motor. Jake, You yourself told me that most of the motor failures you have seen have been from people not realizing they have lean setup etc. Why not startout wih a less expensive starter motor to make sure he gets everything right? He has stated he is on a budget.

I still think a 2056 T4, Porsche six or a subie are better options.

OK, looks like Grant has taken his Prozac and all is well.. At least for another 12hours or so :-)

I would agree that the 7K 2.8 more than likely isn't what it should be and there is no evidence that it was ever one of my engines.

Yes, most all engine failures associated with the MassIVe 4 or the Type 4 are related to tuning or improper sub systems.
With today's 2056 capable of 165 HP as a single plug flat tappet 9:1 arrangement, it is certainly gaining popularity. I expect to break 200HP with the 2056 as a roller cammed twin plug engine by the end of the summer.

Thats an engine thats easy to assemble, simple and not very expensive at all.

And remember where the first Porsche was built.. In a shed, on a FARM..

Gonna have to agree with Grant on this one Jake. He never mentioned you and I have heard a lot of backyard guys trying to build their own version of what you do and fail. We know that what you do is proven and good but is not cheap. I do someday hope to do a monster of a TIV of your design after I have my six all sorted out the way I want.

I think that a lot of people get hung up on displacement and HP. I have done it many times . I think the 2270 is really a sweet spot (IMHO they seem to realy fly)

However, if I was going to drop big coin it would be for a porsche 6.

I really think that there is a point where if you need say 300 hp you should just buy a 3.6 porsche engine. You can find 964 engines for somewhere around 6.5K if you take your time and you get to benefit from great resale with a 3.6 combo. 993 engines from 8000-12000 (non turbo). My 3.6 can still scare the crap out of me even after almost 3 years.

The 2270 provides plenty of power though and would provide all the reliability you need.

Just my 2 cents.

I agree that above the 220 HP level "other" engines may be a more suitable choice for the 914...

At that level an engine making 55 HP/ cylinder is on the ragged edge N/A..

Perhaps in a couple of years, after we have fully developed the 2.8 and 2.9L engines that have already made 250 HP N/A things might change..

The "Mighty Spyder" engine I built in 2006 made 265 HP as only a 2.4L engine using our dated twin plug arrangement.. That engine revved past 8,500 RPM as a street engine and I am working to apply roller cam technology to that combo as well.. Its one of my favorite combos at 69mm stroke and 105.7mm bore with a 235 CFM twin plug head.

We'll see what the future holds..

One thing is for sure- bigger isn't better.

I figured I'd chime in as a person who has owned a Raby engine and one who has a V8 in his 914. I sold my Raby engine because I wanted a little more umph and knew at the time I could not justify buying a bigger engine and I was getting a killer deal on the V8. Did I like Jake's engine? Sure did... Would I buy one at a later time when my kids are out of college? Hell yes...especially for my kit car. I have also seen the customer loyalty that Jake fosters and the way over the top "tech support" he gives. So I would pick the 4 (2056 or larger) from Jake over the Subie due to that type of support. Am I a "Jake supporter"? Yep..reckon I am... In fact if he keeps working on the boxster type engine I may go to that...

Michael

Your 2270 probably gets pretty close to that? 220? I know I was extremely impressed by the one running around here.

I would also like to just add one more thing about adding a 3.6 since I may have added the illusion that you could have a 3.6 for 6500. The answer is yes you can have the engine for that but then look at the conversion costs:

915 trans 1500
wevo kit 2000
linkage 620
eng tin 420
oil tank 1000
oil cooler 1500 (with lines)
mounts 500
flywheel 500
clutch pkg 1000


so 8640 and that is the short list there is another couple of grand I am forgetting. Then big brakes, suspension etc...

Mike, thanks for the post..

The Boxster and 996 engines are our future... But you can trust that the funds they;l generate will go right back into aircooled development :-)

Glad I was able to please you and exceed your expectations.

As a newbie here, I probably don't add much weight to this discussion, however I'm an ME in training and a big part of that is understanding the trade offs. In my 914 I ended up going for as low mass as possible (also low polar moment), so I was torn between a built Type I and a Type IV. I ended up going with the Type IV because of cost and because of classing.

I've no experience with Jake's engines, but I am suspicious of someone promising those gains and using such language. Anyone who shadow boxes about the engines they build (2.8 type IV is good/ we don't build those often, so you can't use them against us) is kinda stringing you along. Promising two different things based on different engines is kinda a misleading way to do business.

Anyways, I don't mean to rip on Raby, double speak kinda irritates me ever since I read 1984 though. My planned set up is a 2.0 with slightly longer connecting rods, and nicer internals to produce a great deal more torque without sacrificing reliability.

I decided not to go with a 2.4 (not even a 2.8!) because of reliability issues, Andrew broke a 2.4 at an autocross, and I didn't want the slightest chance of that happening. That said, I would be nervous as hell with a 2.8....

Much less one built by someone with a God complex.

I'd be happy to give more details about what I'm building provided the people building it don't have a problem with that. I am very much of the opinion that the advantage in the 914 is being able to maintain velocity through corners, rather than putting a big flippin' engine in it. Ever seen a V8 conversion win an autox?

Just one PS, your response to Chris' comment is complete shit, the entire thread is about a big Type IV, and you comment "Thats why we don't do that. Most all our engines make their power with a 96mm bore that slides right into the stock, non machined case."

To me that's hugely misleading, again, the entire thread is "big IV vs other engine" and you're responding with how the small Type IV is great....

Yeah, most of your engines don't do that, but that's what he's talking about building; I could give a damn if your 1.8 produces infinity horses reliably; a 2.8(especially based on the same case) is an entirely different story.

Incidentally, my no holds barred 914 is a Pauter engine running on methanol, as far as I've read nothing Raby builds can come close. You have to design (or copy) mounts, but it's still better than paying a ton for snake oil that bolts to your stock mounts.



Lemme know how I'm wrong so I can fix myself.

You're picking some fights with some rather experienced 914 guys that DO know their stuff... This could prove to be interesting

I think that a couple of us introduced the idea of a smaller displacement type IV due to budget consciousness.

As for engine builders having uber confidence in their product I dont think I have ever met a really good one that didnt

As for the rest of that I think I'll just say no need for all that venom ... Not really the best way to introduce yourself by insulting the folks that have been around here the longest.

Cliffbraun,
If I were you I'd get a few more than 22 posts under my belt before making such a post. People might take you a little more seriously that have been on these boards since they were started... At this point you just seem like someone that hasn't done their homework on what we create and wants to throw more fuel on the fire with your opinion. You have zero first hand experience with my creations and your knowledge of who and what I am is probably limited to this post only.

As far as the "God" approach, well that type of attitude is what pisses off guys like Grant and thats why I like to employ it, when necessary. It really gets them going and it has obviously has worked with you as well. Meet me in person or talk to me on the phone and you'll never guess that the person you have read about here is actually me..

But with you being an ME in training, we aren't supposed to get along anyway. I look forward to future debates with you :-)

At any rate..

My post to Chris that was "pure shit" was meant to explain that an engine as large as a 2.8 is not necessary to make a broad power band with tons of useable power while tipping the scales at over 200HP from a 2316cc power plant, on pump gas.

One of the biggest issues we have to contend with from a consulting standpoint are guys that make the engines too large to be efficient. For years the idea was to build the engine as big as possible and it would make power, but thats just not the case. Those big engines are very difficult to equip with heads and exhaust that will be effective enough to create power or to put that power where it needs to be in the operating range. This is why 95% of my engine combinations utilize the 96mm bore as it provides the best mix of performance, reliability and cost when the sub system requirements are factored into the equation.

To me a "Big 4" is anything beyond a 2056, it doesn't have to use a huge 103 or 105mm bore to make big power.
Now as far as making big power on Alcohol:
We don't build drag race engines and no classes that the TIV competes in will allow the use of Alcohol. Most of the race engines we build are heavily impacted by rules that dictate displacement and the largest "race" engine we build is 2013cc for SCCA E Production. The range is pretty much 1500cc engines for Land Speed Racing (the current 1500cc record is held by RAT power) as well as 1832cc engine for SCCA F Production.

My focus always has and always will be on street engines that are capable of being dual purpose competition engines when the driver wants to attend an AX or a DE event. We turn down competition engines on a near daily basis because they are both not our specialty and they also take up a ton of our time that can be used to develop new technology for the MassIVe 4 street engine or to help educate the following on the proper methods of manipulating or tuning their own engine.

That said, the 2.8 engine thats been the topic of this thread is more than likely mis-configured and makes less power than a properly enhanced 2.3L engine. Thats the way the ball generally bounces.

Yes please more details! I know we have some awesome T4 developers here on West Coast but they have profesionalism to stay off public 914 forums and focus on their work. I'd love to start hearing about other builders and what they are doing with the T4.

There certainly is the money and enthusiasm on the West Coast for a premier T4 builder to emerge. I'd go to a T4 if I could find somone I could trust to buid a motor for me in California. I have the T4 case I was going to use for a Raby motor a couple years ago sitting in my garage.

Now that I'm focusing primarily on AX I may go back to T4 again. But I want something that will put out 200 HP and rev to 7500 RPM.

He's getting a rabbit-rods 2.0 built by my dad. He had quite a bit of budget for the project, so we spent quite a while playing with various ideas. Type 1 engines, Type 4 engines, v8s, 6-cylinders, inline 4 cylinders, and the most cost effective solution ended up being the long-rods 2-liter. It uses the stock mounts ( obviously ), runs on pump gas, never leaks, never overheats, revs to 8,000 , and should last him a good 10-20 years of daily driving. The engine ends up being wider than a normal 2.0, but you can still adjust the valves with it in the car.

Have you had good luck with the rabbit rods?

I know in type 1 motors they are frown upon because they take so much material from the rod journal. This reduces the overlap on the journals and weakens the crank.

The rabbit rod is only 46mm compared to the stock 50mm size for a type 4 and 55 mm for a type 1

BTW, plenty of people are running the 2 inch ( 50.8mm) chevy ( actually Buick 215 ci) journal in both engines.

I bought my car with the express purpose of doing a suby conversion. I now have a 3.2 six in a crate that will complete the restoration of my GT clone. It is your car but I would list my personal choices as: 1)Porsche 6; 1a) Jake's IV; 2) subie; 3) everything else.

Nothing wrong with Rabbit rods at all... Some of the first big 4s I designed used them.
There are better rods on the market today that use different rod journals that are my choice.

I tend to like longer rods in a TIV as well, retaining a 1.75:1 rod ratio is typically my goal for engines living below 7500 Revs.

The 165 up 2056 uses a 5.325 length rod (Porsche 356 length) coupled to the stock 71mm stroke and a T1 journal for strength.

The Gen2 MassIVe engines larger than 2.8l use a Honda Fit rod journal.. The same for my RS 2100 356 based engine.

We all have different thoughts.. That's what makes an engine have its character.

What will you guys do for heads? Anything special to get 8000 RPM? Does the Hamilton Engineering AX car rev that high? Wow had no idea those motors were reving so high?

Is the current motor in the Hamilton car only a 2.0? If it is its damn impressive. It runs just as fast as the Raby 2.4 in our area and has way more top end. Its clear that the extra stroke is far better approach. That motor has great torque from what I have seen.

My six is a stroker as well and now that I have figured out exhaust issue just last month it makes great low end power. Hey you notice that my car is a little faster lately?

Creating an 8,000 RPM 2 liter is a lot easier than an 8,00 RPM 2.4 liter.

Our off the shelf LE 200 heads have enough flow for 8,000 RPM as they flow just a tad less than the E production heads on Kevin Groots engine that revs clear to 8,500 RPM and is stock stroke with a 95mm bore per the SCCA rule book. Thats a 207 HP engine from 2013cc.

The rules have changed in ECTA this year, allowing up to 2015cc from the 2.0 class. This will allow me to build a budget 71X95 bored engine for Land Speed Racing where RPM is everything. I plan on running a very small chambered LE 200 twin plug head, 51mm carbs and see if we can top 155 MPH. That will take 9,000 RPM sustained...

Big engines, especially those with stroke enhancements make their power lower and thats why the 2374 AX combo is so effective. With an 82mm stroke and a 96mm bore that combo really rips in AX.

The stock stroke has lots of benefits, especially since the right rod and piston combo can create an engine more narrow and lighter than stock.

There are many ways to design these engines..

LOL..."God complex" in my field we call that transference. You have a pretty opinionated post so I am going to watch this thread. ME in training? I assume that is mechanical engineer? I own a low cg V8 that weighs the same as a 4, its all aluminum and its pretty stout. I don't run autox but I believe the driver is the biggest asset there. Grant and Jake don't always agree but I like to read their posts to hear what they have to say on a technical level. Grants a great source of info and Jake is always trying to improve his product. You, on the other hand seems sort of angry and out of place here. ....just my 2 cents....

We're using custom ported 1.8 heads ( no welding or anything crazy ), a stock 2.0 camshaft, Nology ignition system. The rods are longer, but the stroke is still the same as the stock 2.0 ( I think the displacement comes out to 1971cc or so ). The highest we've taken it was once at Santa Rosa where the finish was that sort of off-camber turn right by the exit to the track, and andrew couldn't find any decent place to shift. We have a mallory tach with rev-limiter, and we ended up turning it up to about 8,250.

If you wanna feel it, come ride with me at the next autocross.

Did notice you've been closer to us lately. We thought it must have been our old tires ( we bought them to run the parade 07 ).

The Boxster & 996 engines are history. Porsche's new motor ain't gonna use that POS crank saddle that cause them so much trouble. Split case much like the old 9eleben engine with a wet sump from what I hear. WC of course.

Cliff, lets hear some more about the Paulter rodded beast?

IMHO dyno charts are better than words. Speculation is nice but it only takes you so for. A good ME knows that numbers are good tools when making comparisons .

Do you mean Pauter? As in the Pauter super pro engine?
They're into the 6-second 1/4 miles!

edit, I'm wrong, only 7.1 seconds: http://www.pauter.com/racing_news2.htm

Really Jim? This thread was about choosing between a 225hp Raby big four and a 325hp Subaru. If we're to go strictly by the numbers then that question's been settled, without even getting into the additional initial cost, maintenance, and shorter life of the big four. And more. If numbers and charts are really better than words then Jake should be quiet and just post dyno charts and price quotations, which we can then compare with the Subaru's. Is that what you meant?

That would be cool! I would defintely like to see what the motor feels like in the car!

Does your dad build motors for general public? He really has done an outstanding job with current motor in the Hamilton Engineering car. That motor pulls every bit as hard as that big Massive Raby powered car and has much much better top end. You guys have stomped some very high powered competition with those rabbit rod motors including the mongo 2.4 Raby motor car every event for the past two seasons. The Hamilton motors seem to be very tough as well. During the May AX Andrew was bumping off rev limiter on a couple sections every run. I'm just saying you guys should be supplying some of the hard core AX public with an option other than Raby motors. I think you guys are more realistic and certainly more humble.

I was on old tires from last year too! I like that we 914 guys are putting the hurt on everyone with old tires! I have never bought new tires and wont buy new tires until the Shoot out. I buy cheap used tires from people like Randal who had two year old tires and guy back East who had a set of take offs from last year for $80 each. I'm still learning Cantis as well I have only done 5 events on these tires so far.

I have an idea! Instead of a Subi or a Raby go for a Hamilton Engineering Rabiit Rod motor! That would make a crazy fast street car and provide perfect power plant for AX.

Well, he's supposed to be retired, but he just can't seem to kick the habit!

You should talk to him about the car at the next autocross.

I can also give you his phone number if you want to talk to him and maybe come by and check out some engines he's building right now.


edit: I also think that we need to give a lot of credit to Andrew for being a spectacular driver, and making our stuff look so good.

Sometimes you can have the best car in the world and still lose. A good driver is worth his weight in gold In our class the last AX a guy that has a stock 2.0l with, exception to a bigger front anti-sway, came within 1.5 seconds of me and beat a 914-6, a full suspension 914 Eurospec, a well setup 2.0l, and a well set up 924. He is amazing to watch as he just flows through the course.

So I guess sometimes you need to make sure you have the same driver when judging what engine is better in a car.

Back to the original question: Big 4 or Subi; It depends on what you want to do with your car as many have already mentioned.

If you want as much HP as possible AND you like to fabricate stuff, then go Subi or V8.

If you're ok with excellent HP (~200) for your 914, then go Big 4. This could be a drop in replacement and then back to I prefer this route because:
A) I want to drive my 914 more than work on it
I don't have oodles of time to do the fab work required for a Subi.

About racing Mustangs off the line, I think you'll also need a different tranny that was designed for quick shifting. The 901 doesn't seem to be that good for quick shifts especially from 1st to 2nd.

O.K. if those are the criteria then:

B. Since Renegade sells a kit for those two options they're both pretty much bolt-in, no "fabrication" required. And in any case since the Raby motor costs so much more you could have someone else put either one in and still be thousands ahead.
A. If engine maintenance is done according to the factory schedule you'd be driving the Soob a lot more than you'd be driving any big four, and could get it fixed at most any dealership. Or just bolt in another one, they're cheap. The Raby motor, on the other hand, would get fixed in Georgia.

You'd be driving the Soob a lot longer too, since even their turbo motors go 200,000 miles. That motor will probably outlast your car. With 100 more horsepower the whole time. I don't know the average life expectancy of a 2.8, but it's going to be a fraction of that.

Let me repeat that: with 100 more horsepower the whole time.

But some of what's said about big fours is not technically correct. They aren't just bolt-in. Any big increase in HP requires improvements in suspension and brakes AS WELL as chassis reinforcement. That means cutting and welding on your car, and that's going to be the same for whatever big engine is chosen, the Raby, Sooby, or 911. So for any dramatic horsepower increase you're giving up your car's concours future. If it ever actually had one.

all i can say is that we are very lucky to be able to face this dilema - thanks to renegade hybrids out west and jake down south : ))

i wanted a v8 ever since seeing a piece about rod simpson back when i was a kid. my car was a $1500 ebay buy with some rust and other needs. probably best to stick with jake for the more original cars - but feel free to cut that baby up if it has no chance ever of winning a concours event : ))

hey - who the hell stuffed that v8 into my ride : ))

PS - either way - start by bringing your suspension and brakes at least up to properly functioning stock.

Never mentioned is the sound of a V8 car. People do double-takes. Everybody recognizes that sound and it should NOT be coming out of that little car.

the sound - absolutley - just last week i used my v8 914 to check on some of my real estate listings - to see if any of my signs had fallen/etc - as i was driving away from one property a guy flagged me down about two propeties away - we started talking and he repeated - i saw you drive by and the sound did not match the car. he - at one time had a buick v6 in a triumph stag. i stepped on it a bit as i left him and shifted one gear - then let off - as i began to slow down, i looked to my left down the street and there were about 6 cop cars dealing with a situation -whoa - glad i did not upshift one more time : ))

Sixes are pretty sweet sounding too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVG7EqVPK1w

i doubt anyone disagrees with you that six-es sound sweet too.

my v8 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9viaGK6NA7M

shit - if no one would see me - i might even drive one around town : ))

jim

v8 kit renegade=$2000
radiator kit renegade=$1000
v8 sbc crate engine and goodies $3000
brake parts eric shea=$1000
suspension bits=$1000
beer for buddies to help install=priceless (aka: $8k + beer)
--

A good running smallblock chevy v8 with a nice set of headers and mufflers accelerating around 6800rpm is a sound like no other car makes. Anyone considering a v8 needs to check out the edelbrock pro-flo EFI system also.