Facing a lot of choices...what would you do?, fianlly ready to reengage Options

[Type 47]

I had everything setup with a local guy that was well known...he wanted the car by May (yeah last May) completely apart; that came and he wasn't ready. So then it was get it media blasted by mid-June then he still wasn't ready...October came and went and he wasn't ready...he was fired I was stuck finding someone else.

I Found someone much better, expert on gen I Camaro's (I have a 69) but never did a 914. Anyway, he is going to do the car for a fixed price (car currently completely apart on a rotisserie) body work, straight, show quality paint job.

HERE IS THE ISSUE: I asked how much extra to do fender flares...response nothing, included.

2ND ISSUE: flares cost $1k, 5 lug conversion $850, tires wheels $3000...and do I put the 102 hp 2.0 back in it or the rebuilt LS1 I have sitting in the corner of the garage.

The LS conversion would cost $15k and I already have the LS1!

There is something to be said for just doing the 5 bolt conversion and putting a set of 5 bolt Fuchs on.

QUESTION...no flares, end up with 2.0 car with $18k invested...(invested, that's funny)...spent or $33k spent on the flared LS1?

Something tells me that I always wanted to be able to blow away 930's with my 914 but something else tells me I shouldn't blow away my bank account.

[Cracker]

Just for clarity sake...my trans blew 4th gear with a bone stock engine (400/400). I did not "drop" the clutch; didn't have to since you could just press the throttle to break the tires lose. This happened after 2200 miles of street driving.

My decision to step up to a 930 box allowed me to massage the engine for more power. Although I really like the GT/Flared look...I think I'd stick to the narrow body if I could "re-do" my build. The "sleeper" component was always fun...so was running 11" rears with 315's! There was no comparison in what handled better - narrow body all day long!

Regarding your other thread where "members" were offering values of stock vs. LS powered cars I'd have to greatly disagree with the advice. A well done LS car will always be worth well more than a clean stock car. It's the market, very few enthusiasts want a stuck-in-the-sand 2.0/4 that costs allot. For the record my car sold in the 40's. I own a 914/6 right now with a 911S 2.7 (I've driven original 2.0 that are far worse) - it is pathetic as a driver compared to anything with 400 ft lbs of tq. - absolutely incomparable. Value is all about the quality of the components and execution...don't be duped! Of course, I don't think you should really do it... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)

[Type 47]

Just for clarity sake...my trans blew 4th gear with a bone stock engine (400/400). I did not "drop" the clutch; didn't have to since you could just press the throttle to break the tires lose. This happened after 2200 miles of street driving.

My decision to step up to a 930 box allowed me to massage the engine for more power. Although I really like the GT/Flared look...I think I'd stick to the narrow body if I could "re-do" my build. The "sleeper" component was always fun...so was running 11" rears with 315's! There was no comparison in what handled better - narrow body all day long!

Regarding your other thread where "members" were offering values of stock vs. LS powered cars I'd have to greatly disagree with the advice. A well done LS car will always be worth well more than a clean stock car. It's the market, very few enthusiasts want a stuck-in-the-sand 2.0/4 that costs allot. For the record my car sold in the 40's. I own a 914/6 right now with a 911S 2.7 (I've driven original 2.0 that are far worse) - it is pathetic as a driver compared to anything with 400 ft lbs of tq. - absolutely incomparable. Value is all about the quality of the components and execution...don't be duped! Of course, I don't think you should really do it...

You sure make a compelling argument for the narrow body...that is one of the nicest looking 914's I've seen...don't take that lightly, i've owned a 914 since May of 1977.

How do you get 11" to work in the back...how wide can you do the fronts?