For My Next Trick, Minimum Cost /6 Converion, An experiment to show low cost done well. Options

[no1uno]

I'll be watching this one closely. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sunglasses.gif)

[JmuRiz]

Wow, that tank is kind of cool.

I was hoping to do some out-of-the-box thinking but went with a PMS tank. Does that tank go in the engine bay? (edit: I just saw that it goes under the trunk) Does it have baffling, what material is it made of...very interesting....

BTW I think $5k is do-able.
If I end up using my Bursch and the CIS on my 2.7 instead of the carbs my price list is $5200 total with mostly NEW fancy parts!!!

Oh yeah, that's before selling off my 2.0 /4 engine and all the goodies too.

[r_towle]

I did find out a little more regarding the DMEs for the 1984-86 and 1987-89 3.2 engines. The essential difference is the 84-86 and nonprogrammable with 24 pins and programs burned into the chip; 87-89 is programmable with 28 pins. I am still unsure about the o2 sensor being just on the 87-89 and not on the 84-86.

Both DME's are upgraded with new chips.
The older DME's can be changed from the 2k format to the 4k format with a small amount of soldering...so you can use the later chips.
See Steve Wongs 911 chip site.

The largest difference between the two is the idle circuit sucks on the earlier DME's and the later ones smooth that out quite a bit.

Either one will be smoothed out very nicely with the Steve Wong chip.
He enriches the idle circuit and the lower RPM curve so street driving is more pleasant.

Both the early and later versions use narrow band O2 sensors.
These only kick in when hot, but if you delete that sensor, your MPG will suffer dearly (50%)

Euro DME's have no O2 sensor and they have different A/F maps.

Call Steve Wong...he can lead you in the right direction.

Rich

[Woody]

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/

[JmuRiz]

Bigtime loss of trunk space is why I didn't go that route. Other than that, it's a good option.

[brant]

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

[Dave_Darling]

Brad converted a white 914 (early?) into a Six for $5K. He did some pretty careful shopping around, and the conversion was very mild. I think it used a 69 911T motor (which came with the carbs, for not a lot of money) and he kept the stock four-lug setup and such.

That's probably about as cheap as it can reasonably be done, unless you're really into fabrication like Dan Root did.

--DD

[Dave_Darling]

Rats, double post...

[racerbvd]

Well, you start off looking for a deal like this;

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=137220

Then you look for a deal like this;

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=137220

Sell off the extra tub & other extra bits and you should be able to do it, that is if you are doing it your self & bribing buddies with beer & pizza..

[Twise]

I think it can be done for that. But, would you want to? The lure of better parts for more money is pretty un-avoidable. Once you get the car tore apart and you are "planning" it is easy to be distracted by "shiny things".... I had a 10k budget for my car, and I am way past that. Way, way past that. I started out with a frugle mindset and then got distracted by, you know, "shiny things"....

[SLITS]

O'Brien has been into the Opaloca Wacky Gold again I see.

I can name that note for $3K Wink.

[J P Stein]

Lay the stock T-4 cross bar up against any of those POS "quick six" type bars......Ayuppers, that 4 bar is one stout puppy......forged steel, IIRC. A piece of tubing (or bar stock) of half the weight is not and most of em' break along the substandard gusset welds due to flexing. Just raise your budget to $5200 & blame it on me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[jimkelly]

isn't finding a good 6 with good leak down - the true obstacle - the unknown.

the rest of the parts are off the shelf and easy to source.

jim

[Series9]

isn't finding a good 6 with good leak down - the true obstacle - the unknown.

the rest of the parts are off the shelf and easy to source.

jim

Very true. I've been offered a 2.2T long block for $300. Now the challenge will be to get the engine delivered and in running condition for less than $3200.

For those who have said it's difficult to resist the upgrades, I understand. I've already priced a bunch of engine upgrades, but I'm going to resist for now.

[Series9]

Megasquirt II with distributorless EDIS6.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/sunglasses.gif)

[Series9]

I'm not positive this will fit, but it was cheap so I bought it on spec.

3.2L intake manifold for $200!
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/piratenanner.gif)

[Series9]

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/

This arrangement lurks under the front deck on my car:

[Woody]

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/

This arrangement lurks under the front deck on my car:

Yeah that's very similar to what I had in mind especially since ill be running a cooler. Didnt mean to thread Jack but that tank is substantially less than a fender mount.

[Series9]

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/

This arrangement lurks under the front deck on my car:

Yeah that's very similar to what I had in mind especially since ill be running a cooler. Didnt mean to thread Jack but that tank is substantially less than a fender mount.

The oil system on the RS has nothing to do with saving money. The budget on that car came to 10x the budget of this conversion thread.

In the final analysis, that tank won't save you anything.

[brant]

Agreed
the fender tank is just as cheap when you add the line cost
even with the front mounted cooler, the cost difference of AN16 line in comparison to AN12 line is substantial and the fittings are VERY substantial

the fender tank can actually be cheaper
The RS is not built on a budget that is for sure!

brant