72 914 1.7

ZOO · 02-03-2008, 07:20 AM

What are the current thoughts about 914s? The one that has caught my eye is a 1.7 with a Weber carb set-up. It's a third the cost of any 911 I'd care to own, and around what an NA 944 is selling for.

I have a Miata for autox and track work, and I'm building a Locost. I want a fun project to tinker with, while still driving it through the summer.

I see the FAQs suggest one be wary of 1.7s to ensure that it is the Porsche motor, and not a VW bus motor. It also suggests being wary of carb'd conversions. Rust doesn't seem to be an issue from pics and seller's report.

speeder · speeder's Garage

"Porsche motor?" That's funny. I'm a big fan of 914s and owned both an early 1.8 and a '73 2.0, (best engine/year for 4 cyl.), but all 914s had VW type 4 engines, with the factory 914-6 being the obvious exception. They shared a lot of other parts w/ VWs as well, (switches and controls come to mind), while the 914-6 was nearly all Porsche. They were known as VW-Porsches outside of the U.S. distribution system.

None of this is bad. VWs still had phenomenal build-quality in those days and the 914 was a unique joint project between the companies with bodies built by Karmann. The '73/'74 914 2.0 is the only one to own, IMO, and as close to original as possible. They were a great sports car.

Tobra · Tobra's Garage

I like 914's, seems like having the motor in the middle is just the right way to go. If you look at one, all the weight is low and between the wheels, which would have to give it a bit of an edge. I have a '74 2 liter that I have autocrossed, it is a hoot, better than a 911 to me, and I will eventually put a bit more motor in it, keep it a 4 cylinder but make a built one, more displacement probably

The heads on the 2 liter are not by VW, it makes a pretty big difference. Didn't they do that on the 356 too? With a newer head with hardened seats, you can even improve that some

deathpunk dan · 02-03-2008, 08:08 AM

1.7 is insanely gutless BUT makes a great core for a cheap and easy 1911cc high rev hotrod. Dual webers, hot Webcam, 96mm KB pistons, cleaned up heads, header = ~125 hp which is plenty for fun in a 2000 lb car.

OR call jake raby...he's gettign 170 hp out of 2056cc motors now and 200 from 2270s...

bring your wallet for those.

Joeaksa · 02-03-2008, 08:15 AM

Be very careful of the battery area. They tend to rust out badly in this area and are not cheap to fix. Up where you live hopefully the car has not been driven in the winter, but would check the entire car over for rust.

The "brain box" area also has issues and since all the power (I seem to remember) goes through this area it needs to be in good condition. Its been 20 years since owning a 914 but loved mine but as well it needed a lot of work to keep up with the jury rigging the PO had done to it.

Put a good warmed over 4 banger in it and have fun!

Joe

jwhcars · 02-03-2008, 08:23 AM

A lot of fun,handles well but lacks power.Redo the engine and then you can keep up with a 911 on the hills

the · 02-03-2008, 08:55 AM

Yes, the 914-4 engine is of course a VW engine, but it is slightly different than a VW Bus engine. A 914 with a bus engine (you can tell by the engine code on it) is going to be worth less than one with a 914 engine in it.

The 1.7 and 1.8 are shared between the 914 and VW (the VW 411/412, but not the bus) directly. The 2.0 has different heads, which had some design input from Porsche, and was not used in any VW.

I'd agree with checking the engine code to know what you are getting. I'd also agree with avoiding carb conversions. These engines run pretty well with their fuel injection, which is a very simple system. Carbs on a stock 914 engine usually means the car has been worked on by someone who didn't really know what they were doing.

Like Denis said, the 73/74 2.0 is the one to own. However, following that would be the '72 1.7, IMO.

I'd avoid the 75/76, they have big huge bumpers, downgraded interior trim, a lot more weight and smog stuff that really clutters up the engine bay and saps the power out of already not-so-powerful engines.

The early cars (70 and 71) are a lot more primitive, like having a fixed passenger seat, non-retracting seatbelts (a pain!), less reliable window mechanisms, and other small interior differences. By 73/74, Porsche had the car as dialed in as it ever got during its production. The '72 is kind of in between.

Rust on the battery box isn't that big of a deal, because the battery box is easy to replace. The big issue is that battery acid and water weaken the paint in that area, eventually break through and go down into the longitudals (basically, the "frame" of the car). Then you have more problems than the car is worth.

Very cool cars, gaining in popularity over the past few years. There have been sales of nice 2.0s in the $20K range for really nice cars. That would have been unheard of 10 years ago.

ZOO · 02-03-2008, 10:11 AM

Quote:

"Porsche motor?"

I should have clarified that sentence to read the original 1.7 used in the Porsche, not a VW bus motor install. I'm well aware that all 4 cylinder 914s had Type 4 engines.

Wickd89 · 02-03-2008, 10:15 AM

I like it. If everything is in good shape and priced right, I think it would make a great project for a 2.7L transplant.
Theny you really have something!!!

rfuerst911sc · 02-03-2008, 02:42 PM

I'm in the process of building a 75 chassis with a 78 3.0 engine should be fun

. When looking at 914s or any car of the pre-galvanized metal era cars you have to look for rust. The area under the battery is called the "hell hole" for a reason

Also the longitudanals are prone to rust. If you find a clean chassis they are a great platform for a hot rod/autocross machine they just need more power.