Torquiness

[bowlsby]

I just stumbled upon some information that has me puzzled.

According to this table:

http://www.pelicanparts.com/914/technical_specs/914_chassis_info.htm

The stock 914/6 (2.0L) has more horsepower than the stock 73-74 2.0L/4 [110hp vs 95hp], yet the torque is the same [16.0mkg...whatever that means, measured at slightly different rpm points 4200rpm for the /6 and 3500rpm for the /4]

So is it fair to say that the 73-74 2.0L cars have the same 'power' as the /6, in terms of power to the wheels, or am I missing something?

I always thought the /6 was more powerful, am I wrong?

[DF]

The 6cyl cars actually had closer to 120hp from what I understand. (porsche did not want the 914 spec'd the same as a 911 even though the same motor in a 911 had 120) That being said the 2.0 four always had the edge in torque. I'ts the best thing going in these motors. But remember the 6 had 1000rpm more rev range.
The motor in mine is the same more torque than h.p. 2.1L 115-120h.p. 125-130torque.
The vwp 2.0 motor has the edge in torque (we four teeners have to have the edge somewhere)

[campbellcj]

You read it right....the early 2.0 and 2.2 911 motors are far "peakier" than the /4's. Where the 2.0 /4 has very usable torque around 2500rpm's, the small 911 engines don't really come alive until 4000 and beyond. A totally different driving experience!