Maybe my car is fast enough for most, but those who would know we have not heard from. Come on guys with your 3.2 and 3.6's in your teeners, Why did you feel you need more than a 2.7 or 3.0? Was it so you could keep up with the performance of the newer cars of today?
I'm sure an extra 50 or 75 horsepower on my car would make a huge difference.

I wouldnt know how fast my 914 is.. I havent driven in it for more than 5 mins.. (im rebuilding it right now)
I would think that a 914 should be able to get very near fast with 150 hp.. and about 150-170 would be needed to be able to stay with a stock 951 or a stock 986.. About 210-250 would be needed to stay with a modifyed 951, or a very modifyed 986 S.

Having driven my dads 944 turbo track car many times, I would say that that car is getting close to scary fast.. with 320hp and 350+ tq, its getting 4.8 0-60.. and top speeds, well lets just say it never ends :D. I have ridden in it at 140+ and the time it takes to get to that speed is suprizingly very small.. It just keeps pulling. Personally I wouldnt mind 50-100 more hp.. just for the bragging rights.. (all needed for that is a turbo.. and $$ to buy it with.)

A 914 is for auto x
A 951 is for track
SmileWavy

I've driven a carb'd 3.0 in an early 914 and it was a blast....plenty of power to get in or out of trouble........a motor bigger than a 3.0 has got to be scary...just 20 minutes ago or so I just layed down 30+ feet of melted rubber from beating on my 3.6 powered 911 and it's a heavy pig compared to a 914

(I had to get it sideways in our large big parking lot to show off to my co-worker whos everyday ride is an early 80's Toyota Corolla, LOL)

So back to your post, I think your 3.0 should be plenty quick, if not, something is wrong with it.


Most people that have 3.2's or bigger in thier 914 have spun the car at least once from what I've heard...they can have "that" much power :)

chappy,
you're the only one I've ever heard 'complain' about performance
on a big -6. As an owner of a stock -6, which is not extremely
fast, I think you either underestimate your car, have a motor
problem, have completely wrong gears, or you weigh 400 lbs:p

If you find us all the gear ratios, the weight, and the torque
curve we could probably see what the result 'should' be. Charlie
Davis I think had a program that would estimate things.

Gearing and the ancient shifter setup are very important on
silly things like 0-60 numbers. Here is a test I ran earlier this
year (before carbs were sorted). 914-6 0-60mph

Mark S.
'70 914-6

The 3.2 I have driven with about 240hp and modified gears was "scary fast". You could go really fast (100mph) in 3rd gear and it was still pulling hard. I could see how you could spin it really easy! Try changing you gears if you want more down low accelleration.

Geoff

Humph...........

Ok guys beat me up for telling it like it is, my car runs great and has very drivable power, my good friend drove my car the other night ( he has a stock 6 ) he didnt jump on it but he felt that my car didnt feel much different than his, when I took over I did jump on it and he wasn't impressed.
I think I was expecting scary fast out of a 3.0 but part of my decision on going with the 3.0 was the bomb proof reputation it has. Still I would like to hear more from the 3.2 and 3.6 owners I bet they started with 2.7's and 3.0's.
I have been waiting to have my local porsche mechanic give the car a test drive to get his impression. I will let everyone know what he thinks when that time comes.
I will try to dig up the gearing and post it.

When I need scary fast I climb on my KZ1000

My 901 tranny gears are M,S,Z

Here are the specs on my cars improvements:
79 SC 3.0 CIS
Factory 914-6 oil tank
Factory 914-6 engine mount
Factory 914-6 rear stub axles
Front mounted oil cooler
911 front end with aluminum crossmember
944 Turbo brakes front and rear
23MM master cylinder
Adjustable front swaybar
7,8X16 phone dial wheels
Yokohama es100 225/50/16 , 245/45/16
916 fiberglass fenders and rocker panels
Adjustable Koni shocks in front
911 gauges
901 side shift trans with Quaife and short gears (M,S,Z)
Short shifter kit
914-6 headers
914-6 muffler
Rear end has been reinforced
Bilstien shocks in rear
180 springs
Turbo tie rods
Steering rack has been lowered for bump steer
camber truss front and rear

Why don't you find a dyno shop so you can see what your car is putting out in h.p. and an air / fuel mixture. They'll print it out for you and you can post it for some feedback.
I have a 2.7 twin plug that is putting about 200 h.p. to the pavement according to the dyno. The car has been lightened a bit. The car has real good pull and at 5k turns into a demon. I think your 3.0 could use some massaging and do the same.

Also would be good to know the weight, but I'd assume ~2200.
And do you use first gear? It is a 914/901 (second gear is
different from 911/901)? I can look it up but what is the
rev limit and torque curve for stock SC motor?

Mark S.
'70 914-6

To me, that says that something is pretty seriously wrong with your car. It should have about 80% more power than the stocker, and shouldn't weigh that much more. It ought to get up and move significantly faster than the stock Six.

News for ya--no car is ever gonna be that scary fast... Cars simply cannot match the power-to-weight ratio of a fast bike.

--DD

Sounds like it's still a differing view on what "fast" means. No offense, imchappy, but your "fast" sounds like straight-line to me. I'd suggest not screwing around with a 914 and going for some big Detroit iron if you're looking for that kind of "fast", it really can't be beat on four wheels.

I sure am taking a lot of heat from you guys on this one.
I have been a 914 owner for thirty years now, know one loves these cars more than I, as I watched the 911 evolve I always hoped that porsche would of treated the 914 with the same respect, why do they make turbos, twin turbos. 3.2 3.4 3.6's it is always to make a faster car if it is ok for a 911 why not a 914. I still want to hear from the 3.6 914 owner that wishes his car wasn't as fast.
The faster you can get to the corner the faster you'll get out.
Brad why do guys throw a big v8 in there 914? they love the car and they love to go scary fast in them.

914-6/3.0L
 

Just finished restoration on my 70 914-6 as a GT and it is fast....my last car was a '88 930 and my 914-6 is quicker! Am still working on suspension/handling. My motor is a '82 3.0L with cosworth 9.8/1 pistons and 46 webers. Trans has 904 main shaft /AL intermediate plate /airport like gearing with usable 1st. Robert in Ojai/CA.

iamchappy: I think we are all trying to figure out what's wrong w/ your 3.0, not really busting your chops. Head over to a dyno and get your HP and TQ figures at the wheels. Maybe all you need is a massage and maybe some 46 carbs like rich johnson (220-230HP) and dekman1 have. Might be something wrong w/ your CIS and/or you may need a hotter cam. If you want the reliability of FI, I'd look for 3.2 w/ factory FI (and maybe an autothroity chip and MAF) I've heard good things about them on the 911 board. Unfortunately I don't have any first hand experience on this. Good luck!

Nathan

I think everyone needs to be more open minded about it, I dont think most 78, or 79 911 SC owners would consider there cars to be real fast by todays standards, just because you put a stock 3.0 in a 914 that is a few pounds lighter doesn't make it super fast, and most guys have pumped there engines up via cams, or carbs to improve on the stock performance of the 3.0, I think if my engine had a few more ponies in it, I would probably consider my car fast, I dont plan on replacing the engine with something bigger, like Nathan says a little massaging on the engine to bring the horsepower up to around 230 which can be easily done, would be all it needs to give it that extra punch I am looking for down below 4000 rpms.

500 more pounds is quite a few.... My buddy's 80 SC is pretty fast, though it'll never be sport-bike fast. (No four-wheeled street vehicle will be.) If it were to shed 500 lbs (which would bring it to ~2250, a bit over the weight of a Six conversion) it would be quite fast.

If your 3.0 Six is slow, I would say something is wrong with it. As Nathan said, it would be good to dyno it and see. Or at least run it against a 911SC and see how it does in comparison!!

In my experience, most of the 3.2 Six guys jump directly to a 3.2 without installing the smaller motors first. They generally pick up a 3.2 to start with. Either they like the rated 217 HP (vs. 180 from the 3.0) or they like having Motronic DME rather than CIS. Or they just happen to run into a 3.2 that they can afford when they're engine-shopping.

One of the local 3.2 crowd used that motor to replace his original 2.0 Six, but kept the carbs instead of going DME.

I only know a couple of 3.6 914s off the top of my head. One was an original Six with a very half-***ed 3.3 motor in it that never ran right and burned itself up in a few months. That one now sports a 3.6L 993 Vario-Ram motor with full fuel injection. The other was a four-cylinder, and the owner went straight to the 3.6 "964" motor. Why? Because it was the biggest street motor from Porsche at the time.

Frankly, most people I know who have converted to six-cylinder power have been happy with the power. From stock 2.7s to modified 3 liters to the Vario-Ram 993 Six, they've all been "enough". At least, for a while... ;) I don't think I've heard anyone complain about the power before, except for the guys who put 2.0 911T motors in--or start with original Sixes.

To me, this all says one of two things are happening. Either your car is not running correctly, or your expectations are a whole lot higher than most other peoples'. Going to the dyno or at least running against an SC should help you figure out which of the two it is.

If the motor is not running right, you should get it fixed. If you burn up the motor, you are looking at a minimum of $6000 to repair it. And that assumes nothing catastrophic happens--and you do all the non-machine work yourself!!

--DD

Dave, I believe my expectations were higher but then again I did talk to a few guys with 3.0's before I bought one, neither were overwhelmed by the 3.0 and both were building or looking bigger. I know my engine runs and sounds good and it is performing as it should, and the drivability excellant, my brother had a 80 sc years ago and I gave him a ride in it today, he thought my car ran great and was simular to the performance of his car as he remembered it. And again would like to stress that my car is fast, just not as fast as the everyday sports cars there building today. I think 914 owners who drive stock 4's would probably get a huge rush over the improvement. I had a 2.0 - 4 built into a 2.9 liter years ago that screamed until I blew it up after 5000 miles. I blew it up because it had so much torque I spun the tires and buried the needle on the tach. The same guy who drove my six the other night had a ride in that car and he was impressed. I ran it against his stock six and I ran away from him like he was standing still. I do have some experience with these cars but the six is a new adventure for me. I am just trying to keep my car up to the performance standards of these times when every new car on the road now a days is very quick. My car is sporting all the attention getting styling of a 914 6 GT so if it looks the part it should also act the part. Is there anything wrong with wanting just a little more punch. Isn't that what it's all about for some of us.

Almost all 3.0 liter engines that are installed in 914s will have more than hte advertised 180 hp due to better exhaust, I've never seen a 3 liter 914 with factory heat exchangers, cat convertor, and a two into one muffler.
Changing to headers and a good flowing muffler should net another 15 or so hp putting the 3 liter close to 200 hp if it is tuned right.

The only thing I have to add is to make darn sure you have full throttle. Nothing takes away hp like having the throttle only open 60%.

I think my 914-6 is pretty quick (vs. all out fast).
I opted to retain the original 2.0 case and build it to a 2.5 (2.455).
9.8:1, 86mm JE pistons in bored 2.4S cylinders, 70.4 crank, 2.2 heads, E cams, OE Webers with 32mm venturies and required mods. Dyno numbers: 190bhp@6400rpm / 179lb/ft@4300rpm.
OE gearbox rebuilt with short gears. 205/55s.
Pulls past 7000 very smoothly AND has a nice fat torque curve from 3000-5500.
I have a 73 911 with a 2.7RS spec.motor and stock gears with 50 series tires.It would be a close call in a straight line drag.

The RS touring, which weighed a tad more than my 911, was clocked by some at 5.8 0-60.
On the scales during a corner balance with 165lb balast (for driver) and a full tank of gas, spare tire, jack, tool kit, etc. it weighed 2320lbs.

Tom Wilkinson