Cross roads between a big /4 and a big/6, Share your experience Options

[Montreal914]

I am at a cross road in my narrow body restoration project. This is not an original build, but rather a sleeper 914 with nice elements. The chassis will be reinforced with an inner kit and outer RD clamshell.

The car will be converted to 5 lugs using the right 3" 911 struts/hubs and drilled rear hubs. The braking system is Alfa Brembo calipers in the front and 914-6 reproduction rears with appropriate 19mm MC. Sport Bilstein all around and 140 rear springs. Front 19mm and std rear sway bar.

Wheels will either be Fuchs 15" x 6" or 16" x 6". I have no intentions of shoehorning 7" wide wheels in the back, no fender stretching.

My engine options are as follow:

I have all the nice bits to build a 2.3 4 cylinder (HAM heads, Nickies, rods, crank, block with large studs, Tangerine headers, yadi yada...). I would setup a modern EFI to it and should conservatively get 150-160 HP out of it.

I have an opportunity to get a 3.2 Motronic 6 cylinder, 200+ HP.

I plan on using a 901 gearbox and I already have the Tarett heavy duty CV/shafts kit.


Although it may seem obvious that the desired option would be to go with the six, again, this is a narrow body with 6" wide wheels. My concern is the drastic amount of power and the additional mass on this car's configuration.

A while back I remember reading a comment from Pete Stout @horizontally-opposed , where I recall him saying somethnig like he felt the 914 has a better balance with a 4 cylinder engine, but he was willing to make that tradeoff to have the sound, smoothness and pleasure of a 6 cylinder. That being said, his beautiful car (reference narrow body in my book (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wub.gif) ) is equipped with a small 2.2 six.

I have some engine weight data that looks like this:

4 cylinder: ~321lbs
2.4 six cylinder: ~400
3.2 six cylinder: ~485lbs

I have never riden let alone driven a 6 cylinder powered 914, but I do have 10 years of daily California canyon driving mine (4 cylinder 2056). I know how the 4 cylinder car feels and I can probably picture how it would drive with a large /4.

I would like to hear what people have experience with their narrow bodied 3.2 conversion (I am sure there must be some), and what they prefer, their old 4 or their new six.

I appreciate and value all of your comments! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif)

Thank you,

Eric

[dr914@autoatlanta.com]

if you want a six, keep the stock fenders and install a 2.0-2.4 those do not need an external oil cooler. Yes the car will feel heavier, tail happy and the powerband will change. No longer will the car LEAP off the line like the fuel injected 2.0 cars do

I am at a cross road in my narrow body restoration project. This is not an original build, but rather a sleeper 914 with nice elements. The chassis will be reinforced with an inner kit and outer RD clamshell.

The car will be converted to 5 lugs using the right 3" 911 struts/hubs and drilled rear hubs. The braking system is Alfa Brembo calipers in the front and 914-6 reproduction rears with appropriate 19mm MC. Sport Bilstein all around and 140 rear springs. Front 19mm and std rear sway bar.

Wheels will either be Fuchs 15" x 6" or 16" x 6". I have no intentions of shoehorning 7" wide wheels in the back, no fender stretching.

My engine options are as follow:

I have all the nice bits to build a 2.3 4 cylinder (HAM heads, Nickies, rods, crank, block with large studs, Tangerine headers, yadi yada...). I would setup a modern EFI to it and should conservatively get 150-160 HP out of it.

I have an opportunity to get a 3.2 Motronic 6 cylinder, 200+ HP.

I plan on using a 901 gearbox and I already have the Tarett heavy duty CV/shafts kit.


Although it may seem obvious that the desired option would be to go with the six, again, this is a narrow body with 6" wide wheels. My concern is the drastic amount of power and the additional mass on this car's configuration.

A while back I remember reading a comment from Pete Stout @horizontally-opposed , where I recall him saying somethnig like he felt the 914 has a better balance with a 4 cylinder engine, but he was willing to make that tradeoff to have the sound, smoothness and pleasure of a 6 cylinder. That being said, his beautiful car (reference narrow body in my book (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wub.gif) ) is equipped with a small 2.2 six.

I have some engine weight data that looks like this:

4 cylinder: ~321lbs
2.4 six cylinder: ~400
3.2 six cylinder: ~485lbs

I have never riden let alone driven a 6 cylinder powered 914, but I do have 10 years of daily California canyon driving mine (4 cylinder 2056). I know how the 4 cylinder car feels and I can probably picture how it would drive with a large /4.

I would like to hear what people have experience with their narrow bodied 3.2 conversion (I am sure there must be some), and what they prefer, their old 4 or their new six.

I appreciate and value all of your comments! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif)

Thank you,

Eric

[technicalninja]

Get 16" wheels!
Way more options for tires.

I think the point the car really needs flares and bigger tires is 200+ RWHP.

Your 3.2 is the top of the narrow body limits IMO.

Don't overlook 7s for the rear. Some will fit ok, and some will require slight rear fender rolling.

I bought a set of fake 16X6s but I also scored a pair of used real 7s from Mepstein.

The "fakes" are very high quality, but their surface finish is slightly different than real.

I can tell fake from real at a glance...

With the extreme cost of a good 4 cylinder (Nickies and shit) I'd lean towards the Porsche engine over the VW.

It will ALWAYS be worth more in long run.
You have de-NARPED it properly.
It will sound 1000% better!

The rest of the car has been upgraded properly for a 6...
Just do it! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ninja.gif)

The Porsche engine STOCK will run circles around the fully modified VW.

Did you buy the MB911 tank/sheet metal deal?
You should have!
I'm not planning a Porsche 6 and I did anyway (might need that tank for what I'm planning).

[Chris914n6]

First, I'd go 16 for the better tire choices. A 205/55-16 is stock Boxster front and they make just about every tire for that.

Is a 3.2 really that heavy? That's near SBC and I can tell you that feels heavy in a 914.

Sounds like you would be happier with the -4. Your wallet would be too as you would still need the oil tank and exhaust and external oil cooler. That extra 50hp will cost a pretty penny.

I've driven a couple big 4s and non-turbo subarus, they are spunky.

[SirAndy]

I think the sweet spot for the 914 is a 3.2L /6 with FI, it just feels like they all should have come with one. It's a perfect fit to the car.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/driving.gif)


PS: And for a street driven 914, the 3.2L doesn't need a front mounted oil cooler, the stock oil cooler works just fine.

[sixnotfour]

I think the sweet spot for the 914 is a 3.2L /6 with FI, it just feels like they all should have come with one. It's a perfect fit to the car.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/driving.gif)


PS: And for a street driven 914, the 3.2L doesn't need a front mounted oil cooler, the stock oil cooler works just fine.

and modernish injection / ignition ,, easy diagnostics..

I had 7.5x16s on my narrow body 914..made from 16x6s ..205/55x16...

[Montreal914]

Very good inputs so far. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Although I prefer the looks of the 15x6, I am more inclined to use the 16x6 with 205/55 due to tire selection, as mentioned.

Squeezing a larger wheel in the rear is not a look I am after because the tire gets too close to the metal and doesn’t look right to me (taste is a personal thing). Same applies to pulled fender, I want to keep the line stock (sleeper). I understand these can be achieved but that is not what I am after.

So far the comments are leading towards the six, but are these based on flared car experience or narrow bodies sleepers? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif) I wouldn’t need to ask the question if I was building a GT clone (different animal). I guess the 3.2 extra mass could be considered as having a passenger on board all the time.

Yes this car will be street used while taking advantage of the road handling and agility the 914 offers. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/driving.gif) Good to know it may not require a front cooler. I was already planning on having one for my big 4 build, so that is not a huge concern.

Looking forward to reading more comments/inputs! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif)

[ClayPerrine]

I have had a 2.0L four, a 2.4L six and a 4.0L six in my 914. I am a self admitted horsepower addict, and in my opinion, every car needs more horsepower.

The 2.0L four was a great engine. It was light, nimble, and handled very well on 205/50-15s.

The 2.4L six was a good choice to move up. It was powerful enough with the MFI to make it fun to drive, and it didn't require any custom mods to make it fit. And contrary to the good Doctor's comment, if you are in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, or any of the southwest states, you need an external oil cooler. Oil temps with the 2.4 were excessive in the Texas heat.

The 4.0L six is another beast entirely. It is like calling the engine room and asking Scotty for warp 9. Nothing beats how it pulls hard from 2,000 to redline. It is heavier than a 4 cylinder or a factory six, so while it handles good, it doesn't match the nimble feeling it had with a four.

If I were going to build another 914, it would get a 3.2 with Motronic. The power is reasonable, it will fit in a 914 chassis with no mods, and the DME makes it a joy to drive. Personally, I don't like a 915 transmission, but the Martin-Bott kit is really nicely made and the 915 will handle the 3.2 with no worries about breaking it.

But remember, this is YOUR car. Take the advise of everyone, and think about it. Then put in it what YOU want. I can tell you all about my 914, but it will not be your 914, even if you duplicate what I did.

[JamesJ]

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=370908

[mepstein]

I’ll agree with sir Andy about a 3.2 being the perfect choice for a six but my experience is that all the 3.2’s need a front cooler. We do 3.2’s into 911 all the time and the engine needs the cooling. Maybe not all the time but who wants to baby the car or get stuck in traffic on a hot day.

Putting a 6 in a 914 is much more costly and labor intensive than a four but I don’t hear many regrets from people who have done it. It really transforms the car for the better. Weight wise, it’s the same as adding a passenger. If you already have the parts to build a four, that would make the decision harder.

I drove Oscar’s flared car with a Raby engine for a couple days at WCR. It was a hoot! Lots of power and it made the car really fun. It really balanced out the car with the extra power. That said, a good running 3.2 is my favorite Porsche engine. Something else to note, you can’t just compare HP numbers between 4’s and 6’s. A lot gets made about a 2.0 four being within 10hp of a 914-6. In reality, the engines are totally different. While I’m not putting down anyone’s 914-4 ( I had a stock 70 and loved it), there are many reasons why the Porsche six cylinder engine has been so iconic for its ~30 year production.

The 3.2 exhaust is quite heavy. You can save a lot of weight with a carefully selected exhaust.

The good thing is that whatever you choose, you’ll have a great car to drive.

[mepstein]

One more thing. There’s nothing wrong with using 6’s on a strong four or six. It’s a different driving experience than fat tires and flares but certainly not bad.

[Root_Werks]

I would vote for the 3.2 for reasons already stated. Running a 2.7CIS in my otherwise stock looking 914 with no issues. No front oil cooler, but I'm also PNW and rarely see 90+ degree days.

Also running stock 16x6 Fuchs with stock size tires 205/55/16 and like how they fit under the fenders.

[Cairo94507]

I have had a few original 914-6's. I had a stock 6 with the stock 2.0 911T motor. It was fun to drive but really no power and low torque at low RPM's.

I had 2 with 3.0 6's, one with Webers and 1 with FI. Both were fun drivers and sounded great and had all-around good power.

In my current 6, I had a reasonably stock 3.2 with Motronic injection, 964 cams, Steve Wong custom chip and Ben's heat exchangers with sport and stock muffler set-ups. The 3.2 ran great and pulled like a small-block Chevy. That motor would still be in my car but Chris posted an ad for a 3.6 I could not resist...

I now have a stock 3.6 with stock injection and a Steve Wong chip and of course, Ben's heat exchangers and a sport Dansk 2-in and 1-out muffler in my 6; I love it. Effortless power and greatly reduced motor noise due to the hydraulic lifters. More torque than you would ever need.

I am narrow-bodied, (stock) running 15" x 6" Deep Sixes with 195x65x15 tires. I am also running a 901 with tall gears. So at 75 MPH, I am spinning about 2700 RPM. I rarely use 1st gear as the 3.6 pulls well from idle. I did have Elephant Racing raise my spindles so I could easily lower my car a bit and not ruin the suspension geometry. If I were to revisit wheels, I would like go with a new set of Fuchs in 16" for the better tire selection. I also think I would do the RS finish; I really love that look.

I believe any CA car running a 3.0 or bigger needs an auxiliary oil cooler. I believe the best solution is the factory styled front cooler setup. All you need to do is get stuck in commute traffic (24 hours a day it seems) once, watch your temps quickly climb and you will add a cooler. Nothing kills air-cooled motors faster than excessive temps.

As for suspension, I have the Bilstein Sports all around with Elephant Racing rubber bushings all around with stock (later) 914 sway bars and 140 pound rear springs and my car rides nice and comfortable. No kidney belt needed.

All I did for chassis stiffening was the MadDog inner long kit. I detect no flexing in my chassis as a street driven car.

I love my 3.6 and believe my set-up is perfect for me. However, I do not race or autocross my car. I hope the above helps you decide your path forward.

[burton73]

As far as the engines go I have a six and I went through the building process on Mark's big 4 Jake Raby build engine that died after 20 or so years. If I was to build a car over, I would go with the Big 4 with FI and save the weight and the money

As far as the wheels go, these are the wheels my life long bud Mark Sonners is runny on his stock body 914 (the blue one that was mine for the last 20 years) with just the rear lips flatted (roiled). The wheels are deep 6s sixes and 7Rs nice copies. On the 7Rs the extra 1 inch is on the inside so the outer face is just like a deep 6. I can not find the tire size right now in my postings.

I love the way these came out. Wheels were supplied by PMB Performance (Eric) can make you a fair deal on the wheels. As my grandfather used say, (a phone call starts a deal)

Car runs Carrera front suspension and a 85 Carrera steering ZF rack, Rears are 914-6 reproduction rear calipers

Best my 914 brothers,

Bob B

[Eric_Shea]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) with Bob.

The "Deep Six" and "7R" is "the" wheel fitment for a narrow body super car. the offset on the face is identical so the 7 in the back looks just like the 6 up front. We have the same tires on the above car that I have on my RS pictured below. 205 up front and 215 in the back.



The stroker 2258 builds have amazing hp. All with modern EFI. The new intake is wrapping up. We'll begin testing next week. Sneak Peek here first.




All this coming from a dye-d in the wool flared six guy. I'm looking forward to my 2.3 Narrow Build (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif)

[gereed75]

There are great replies here. Between this thread and the one linked above there is not that much more to say.

Love my narrow car with a 2.4 S six and 15 deep sixes. sort of a sweet spot in my eyes but I am sure a 3.0 or 3.2 with some fast response induction would be a hoot without completely over powering the character of the car.

For me that is what it is all about - the character of the car. Think true, boy racer responsive grins. Had a nice 2.0 four and loved it for many reasons but the six for me reflects the sporting heart of Porsche.

[rhodyguy]

Swell looking ‘new’ intake configuration. Is it cast all metal or plastic? What sort of throttle body bolts on?

[rjames]

No longer will the car LEAP off the line like the fuel injected 2.0 cars do

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

[930cabman]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif) Great discussion here everyone (IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif)

Did my /6 conversion in about a year, but many, many details and did we mention $$


thanks for chiming in

[JmuRiz]

If you have the 2.3 /4 parts, go for it. Brother has a PMB 2.3i and it was started and finished in a year or so, while my /6 conversion project is going on 12 years. Lots of mods for the 6 conversion so that adds to the time/budget (along with the rebuilding of a /6...might as well rebuild before it goes in).

I have 16x6 all around. The dream would be to have 16x7 with 7R offset made but that's even more money to have custom fuchs made. Day-dreaming of no-budget is always fun. Then again my tires from the /4 days have aged out and the wheels need refinishing anyway...