For My Next Trick, Minimum Cost /6 Converion, An experiment to show low cost done well. |
|
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.
This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way. Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. |
|
For My Next Trick, Minimum Cost /6 Converion, An experiment to show low cost done well. |
Series9 |
Jul 29 2011, 09:27 AM
Post
#1
|
Lesbians taste like chicken. Group: Members Posts: 5,444 Joined: 22-August 04 From: DeLand, FL Member No.: 2,602 Region Association: South East States |
It occurs to me that we've been throwing around some pretty big numbers in my 3.2 exploits of late.
I want to see how little I can spend converting Luckie's 914, but still do the job correctly. Here are the parameters: The engine has to be no larger than 2.4. This will save us the major expense of having to provide external cooling. The oil system will only be tank and lines. The 2.4 will use an early 901 911 flywheel, which I should be able to find used. It will also use a stock clutch. The goal on this one will be finished for $5k. I sourced a core 2.2T engine for $300. Since it was so little, I have quite a bit of room to fix whatever it needs, but 911 parts get expensive fast. I'm going with Megasquirt II fuel injection possibly on a custom-built intake manifold. This arrangement will not use the expensive 914/6 bellcrank conversion, but rather a simple 914/4 stock throttle cable. Current expenditures listed below: Engine mount: $90 2.2T engine (long block, delivered): $195 (cost adjusted for unneeded parts sold off) Megasquirt II ECU: $85 FI components (relay board cables and wiring): $219.25 Intake: $55 Headers: $168 Crank-fire pulley kit: $175 Blast headers: $10 POR-20 for the headers: $37.02 Current total $1034.27 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sunglasses.gif) |
Woody |
Jul 29 2011, 04:15 PM
Post
#2
|
Sandbox Rabblerouser and head toilet scrubber Group: Members Posts: 3,858 Joined: 28-December 10 From: San Antonio Texas Member No.: 12,530 Region Association: Southwest Region |
Are there any disadvantages to using a front tank setup like this? The reason I ask is this may be the route I choose so I can get a little bit better weight distribution.
http://www.patrickmotorsports.com/part/401/ |
brant |
Jul 29 2011, 04:25 PM
Post
#3
|
914 Wizard Group: Members Posts: 11,739 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Colorado Member No.: 47 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
Are there any disadvantages to using a front tank setup like this? The reason I ask is this may be the route I choose so I can get a little bit better weight distribution. http://www.patrickmotorsports.com/part/401/ a lot of people do it successfully. but it is recommended that your return line (feeding the oil to the bearings directly) be AN16 all of those feet of AN16 add up, plus the fittings.... so you could have 400+ worth of oil line and fittings (I think the line is going for $1 an inch these days) on the con side, there is some concern (especially in racing) that all of the dips and curves, plus the 13+ foot of length could lead to oil starvation of the bearings during cornering its a gravity feed system, which is why the factory put the tank above the motor inlet (remember this is a manufacturer who understand and cares about how high weight is in the chassis, yet they did it anyways) It may also be the reason the factory tank is shapped in a funnel overall, to assure the gravity feed and reduce the ability for the oil to slosh away from the drain into the engine. brant |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 27th September 2024 - 06:26 AM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |