Four to Six Conversion: Which Engine?

[ptravnic]

With the different types of sixes available for "the conversion", which will provide maximum power? ease of swapping? least costly? There seems to be a decent supply of 2.4's and 2.7's. Anyone know of swaps w/the 84-89 Carerra 3.2? As there is not any one answer which will cover all these q's, all opinions/answers are appreciated.

I'm at the beginning of my project, in fact I'm driving from NYC to San Diego just to pick up the project car and tow it back. I know, I musta been dropped as a child but my father encourages this type of behavior!

Pete T

[JmuRiz]

I was wondering the same thing, the 2.7 and the 3.0 look very tempting to me. But I'm not sure which is better. Perhaps those who have done "the conversion" would like to elaborate on their decisions.

Nathan

------------------
'73 2.0 914

[campbellcj]

I haven't done one (yet), but from what I hear anything up to a 3.2 is about the same effort. Of course the later engines tend to cost more, esp the 3.2 vs. the 2.7 or 3.0. But the stuff you have to do to the car is basically the same (oil tank, clutch adaptor, engine mount, exhaust system, etc.)

The best "bang for the buck" is probably a strong 3.0 SC motor. You can keep the CIS and end up with 200-220bhp with a few mods and still have a car that starts up w/ no hassles and stays in tune without constant tweaking.

[This message has been edited by campbellcj (edited 02-12-2001).]

[DDS]

http://www.pelicanparts.com/911/technical_specs/911_guthrie_faq.htm

Above describes the various motors available, and the pitfalls of each.

I have the opportunity to purchase a weber carbed 2.2litre six for next to nothing. I have no idea of the motor's condition. The problem is that the (completely insane) cost of rebuild of this 130hp beast isn't much different than a bigger motor, and is WAY more than building a lighter, more powerful big four. If the six is in decent shape I may do it, but I'll keep my fresh 2 litre four, just in case...
I agree with campbellcj that the conversion 'price of admission' is the same regardless, again suggesting the bigger motor. (my car is prepped already except for the oil tank and cooler)
I do hope that those who've done the conversion, or a 'big 4' will comment on their experiences. I'm tempted but...

Dave

[scg]

Well, you could check out a previous conversation on this: http://www.pelicanparts.com/ultimate/Forum2/HTML/000576.html

FWIW: My 914 is currently undergoing conversion this winter and I'm installing a 2.7. This project has been in the making ever since the purchase of my first 914 back in 1977. Over the years, I've collected zillions of $$$ in parts (S front struts, SC brakes, sway bars, tie rods, mount, engine, etc.) and I'm still spending away (about another $2k to go, all from PP: I'm sure they're spying on my project parts page ). You've got to remember that you're doing the whole car and not just the engine (you'll need more "stop" for one thing ) and that the total cost is not going to be cheap -- unless you do it over the span of years.

If I'd come across a 3.0 at the time I had the cash, I probably would've gotten it instead of the 2.7, but the motor I found already had many of the "extras" installed (pressure fed tensioners, turbo valve covers, 11-bladed fan, etc.)

I plan to do a full service (as mentioned in Wayne's _excellent_ article on converting to a six) and checking/renewing the wiring and alternator brushes. I also have to machine the valve covers for clearance (how much and where I don't yet know -- I'll post my question here when I'm ready to do the work).

I've been staring at many of the parts to do this conversion for years and I'm _very_ happy to be doing this now (and so has my 914 -- she pouted about not being upgraded almost as long, usually when going over the mountain passes and straining for more power).

Then there's the rear 5-lug conversion, the rear suspension set up . . .

In short, it's a lot of work, BUT it'll all be worth it when it's done!

Besides, sitting in a cold garage, communing with my 914 every weekend this winter keeps me sane(?)

I sure wish that Warren Guthrie was a relative -- he might have a spare motor or car he'd be willing to share with "family."

Scott Guthrie
74 914 1.8 in cocoon undergoing metamorphosis to 914-6 2.7

[Jim Smolka]

I have converted my 914 to a 3.0 CIS motor.

I suggest using a 3.0 or 3.2 motor. Mainly due to the FI and 200 + HP and they bolt up to 901 gear box. Sure, you will pay more for a 3.0 or 3.2, but it is worth it especially when you are passing VTECHs, 911s, Mustangs etc. The other day, I had to educate a late model Camero. Also, the 3.0 and 3.2 liter motors have Al case instead of Magnesium cases.

I cannot wait to install the 3.2 I recently purchased. Just sent the cams off to ground to the C2 specs. I am hoping for 250 to 270 HP when complete.

[JTB]

I think the bottom line is speed equals money.

I did a 2.7 conversion a couple of years ago. I got the running donor engine for almost nothing ($400) and then spent a fortune on parts and machine work. The 2.7's have a magnesium case that needs extra machine work to be able to handle high horsepower. The case halves can move, or shuffle, relative to each other. This can lead to all sorts of bearing problems. My original budget for the rebuild was $6k, but I blew way past that. I did build a race engine with close to 300 hp, so I replaced a lot of components that would have been ok (crank, rods, pistons, cylinders, 2 heads, different cooling fan, etc) if I was just rebuilding the engine.

I think your choice depends on your budget and your goals. Unbelievably, my budget grew as the project progressed, so I was able to expand as I went. Primarily I drive my car on the track, but sometimes I drive it on the streets. The engine is too loud and torquie to be comfortable though. However it is a lot of fun. A later engine would give a lot of what I have, but stay much closer to stock and be more drivable on the roads. It would also require a lot less upkeep. I am always tinkering with something. Not because of problems, I just don't want to have any.

Remeber, as Dave said, it costs basically the same to rebuild any one of the sixes mentioned. I personally think that if you are going to keep the engine essentially stock, a few extra bucks for a bigger engine will be well worth it in the long run. If you are going to build a race engine, I guess it comes down to what class do you want to be in.

Hope this helps.

[Dave at Pelican Parts]

There are extra complications with the 3.0+ motors, though. 2.0 through 2.7 motors can simply use the 2.0 flywheel to bolt up to the 901 tranny. The 3.0 has a different bolt pattern mating the flywheel to the crank, so you need a special-made flywheel to install it with a 901.

The 3.2 has the same bolt pattern, I believe, but if you want to use the very nice FI system on the 3.2 with a 901 tranny, you have to have an even less-common flywheel made with teeth for the TDC/CYL sensor.

There are other problems, such as the torque that is put out by a well-done 3.0+ motor will tend to make the 901 transmission's life a little bit difficult. Tony Inae, I think, has gone through three 901s so far with his FI'd 3.6 liter C-2 motor. I bet it was sure fun, though!!

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any free lunch. I would personally some time like to have an 2.4 MFI 911S motor in a 914--but only if I didn't have to maintain it myself! Still, 190 HP with less weight than a 3.0 motor... Yum, yum...

--DD

[DDS]

Interesting discussions. That 2.2 doesn't get a lot of press, Especially the "T" variant. (130hp...) IIRC the 2.2 is a bored (out)2.0, the 2.4 is a stroked 2.2, the 2.7 is a bored 2.4. (essentially) Didn't know about the magnesium vs aluminum cases.
I should find out today whether I get the engine.
Dave

[JmuRiz]

What do you guys think about "ready to install" kits rather than piecing together an engine and the parts needed to install it (cost, ease of install)? Thanks.

Nathan

------------------
'73 2.0 914

[ptravnic]

An impressive array of replies!! Some details about my conversion: I have no intent on racing the car, rather I want a fun weekend driver. I'm purchasing a 2.0 within the next month which is near complete (are'nt they all) but needs some engine work = perfect for a 6 conversion... I have a 72 1.7 now but I'm less than happy w/the power. My father has a 1.7 and another 2.0 and I am impressed by the 2.0 but as all youngsters I have the yearning for more power! I figured on a budget of about $10k but that will be spent over about 2yrs with an accumulation of parts building up to the purchase of the engine unless I can find a deal I can't pass up in the meantime... Time is not the most important aspect of this project.

DDS - Thanks for the link to the other post, I looked before I posted and musta just missed it.

Pete

[DonNewton]

I used the MotorMeister kit to convert my car to a 2.7 (race engine). The pieces-parts were all there (used a Vellios tank for extra oil capacity). Went together smoothly, no issues. Already had all other performance mods (5 bolts, et al). Car is WAY fast! Gearing up for new race season, although it'll be truncated somewhat as I just put myself back into college to complete an architectural degree. Guess that's what happens when you get tired of being an engineer. . .

[ptravnic]

Jim / Don,

Jim - Not to be rude, but how much was the 3.2L, what was the range you were quoted in your shopping experience? I saw a couple on the net for around $6500.

Don - How much was the kit from motormeister? I did not see it on their web site.

Thx,
Pete

[Joe Bob]

The best thing to do is to take your time....the 3.0 ans 3.2 engine work well with the Kennedy conversion flywheel...
http://www.kennedyeng.com/

I used the larger 225mm clutch kit with Kevlar disc....

Rich Johnson
a914guy@aol.com
has good deals on oil tanks and mounts....
I like the bulkhead mount as it does not break. Oil lines can be fabricated with braided s/s and use conversion fittings...saves a lot of bucks...fittings are available at JEGS and other race places...

I used a euro 3.0 (204hp) and redid the top end with 964 cams. The headers, cams and other work I did bumped it to about 250 hp when I was done.....

Be advised, you will NEVER get back what you put into the car. But it is fun and you can have bragging rights....mine is now residing in Santa Clarita and still running strong...
http://members.home.net/mtz1/index.html
click on the link and see what it looked like.

Good Luck.


[This message has been edited by mikez (edited 02-13-2001).]

[Jim Smolka]

To answer a previous add, I bought a wrecked 86 911 and took the 3.2 out (PO combined too much HP with too much alcohol. Now to replace my 3.0 motor. Also, any one need a set of almost new set of vented Carrera brake rotors and brake calipers from an 86 911???

It is true, that mating a 3.0 or bigger motor is more work to bolt up to the 901 gear box, but there is no substitute for displacement Since I am not into drag racing, I have been lucky so far with the gear box.

Most of the stuff to convert to a 6 is available from Pelican. I strongly suggest using the Rich Johnson Bulkhead mount.

[ptravnic]

From the sounds of it, the 3.0 or 3.2 are the way to go if a couple thousand $'s extra on the engine is feasible. I do plan on modifying the front suspension/breaks, etc. but my next item for debate/venting is the heat exchangers for the 6. I refuse to spend more on the heat exchangers than I spent on the car...

[DDS]

Well! With that attitude, you'll never convert to a six.

Dave

[scg]

I'll second that! I'm at @ $6k over 10 years with @ $2k to go!

But I'm so close to being done I can taste it

Scott

[ptravnic]

You guys are tough! All jokes aside, the heat exchangers are selling for $1,800 (each side) on Pelican. I think I'll worry about the heat last and focus more on the engine / breaks, etc. I will finish my six within 2 years (famous last words as the wifey may have an opinion on the money suckage )

[scg]

"Clean that stuff out of the garage right now!"

'Now' has taken a *few* years . . . .

Heat? I don' need no stinkin' heat! Air friction 'll keep me warm enough!

Scott