Does anyone like the 1.8?

Jay Laifman · 09-28-2008, 04:37 PM

I test drove two 914s over the weekend. I posted these comments to another 914 focused site and no one has come up in defense of the 1.8. It's like it's 2.0 or nothing - yet there are 1.8 and 1.7 owners on the board.

So, here are the details on the cars: one was a '75 1.8, the other was a '73 2.0.

The '75 1.8 was stock, with no extras, no center counsole, no anti sway bars, stock plastic steering wheel, with a rebuilt 901 tranny. It had worn paint (dark red, brown interior). It did have real Minilites and Bursch exhaust. Asking around $6k.

The '73 had all the '73 standard options, Fuchs, pretty nice condition, bright yellow, nice stock leather steering wheel, and nice Webers. Asking around $13k.

The 73 clearly had more power. But, I have to say the 1.8 was a very sweet engine. The car actually seemed lighter actually, more chipper, a sweeter car. Why? Yes the 2.0 revved up and made a strong growl, but it didn't seem as rich of an engine as the injected 1.8. I don't know if it was the Bursch exhaust speaking or not.

The 75 tranny shifted better, but the return spring from R/1st was not nearly as strong as the one on the '73. Is that external to the tranny or inside?

The '73 also felt a bit more solid, with no rattles, none. Maybe that was the anti sway bars and nice attention to finding noises.

The '73 paint showed some small bubbles on the fender near the top corner of the hood. I looked at all the nooks and crannys that I could. I didn't see any cancer that jumped out at me.

So, why did I like the 1.8 FI one better? Maybe during autox or racing, the '73 would show more pedigree.

Does anyone here want to stand up for the 1.8 over the 2.0? Or is that just an absurdity?

Jared at Pelican Parts · 09-28-2008, 04:46 PM

The problem is the FI. Not many understand how the L-jet on the 1.8 works. if maintained correctly, they run just fine. One thing i would really reccommend is changing the exhaust on the 75 to the earlier style. You'll pick up a few horses and the car will spool up a bit better.

pnewman · pnewman's Garage

I have a 1.8 ltr and truth be told people who have problems with the EFI historically have pulled it and put dual carbs. I believe that the 75 or the 76 has the nice option of the Fuel pump located in the front trunk under the gas tank with access hatch via the trunk. This is a great set up to avoid vapor locking issues. relocation to that end is a bit of work. Oem sway bars are great! But you are talking about a huge price difference and that $7K can go very far on a 914!

Good luck

Clay Perrine · 09-28-2008, 05:36 PM

The 1.8L L-Jet injection is actually a generation newer than the D-Jet that is on the 2.0. The 912E had the 2.0L 914 engine with the L-Jet injection from the 1.8L 914. It is simply a better system, easier to work on, and more reliable. It is just that most 914 owners have never worked on them, so they don't know them.

That being said, the 2.0 is a better car for all around performance. The 1.8L is choked by the throttle body size, and the angle of the spark plugs. You can really wake up a 1.8L engine by just putting on a free flowing exhaust and a 912E throttle body.

I should know. I have been maintaining a 1.8L 914 for 23 years for my wife. It is far smoother and nicer to drive than any stock injected 2.0 that I have ever driven. Her car was really great when I had the 2.0 in it, but she wants the original engine in her car, so I rebuilt the 1.8 for her.

racer · 10-01-2008, 11:55 AM

The reason I don't like the 1.8 is HP. IIRC, the 1.8 started out with less than the 1.7 and only got more anemic by '75. Give me a 2.0 or a 1.7 for that reason alone.

In the end, depending on how you plan to use a 914, is to get the best structural car (rust is such a PITA) and worry about drivetrain later (since they can be swaped out easily).

Fidalgo911S · 10-01-2008, 12:42 PM

I have a '74 1.8 and the engine is a sweetheart. When I bought the car it had been in storage many years so I went through the motor a bit. I replaced all hoses and fuel lines and had the injectors rebuilt. Since then I have driven it for 6000 miles with only one issue: the coil came loose and fell on the block. The L-jet FI is really a nice system and returns 25-30+ MPH. It's quick too. I would recommend it any day. But I'm of the school that "it's better to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow". I believe the 75-76 1.8's had some extra anti-smog system that choke it up a bit.

I'm hesitant to jump on the 2.0 bandwagon. The issues with the heads and D-jet are a detractor. I know my '70 is a D-jet but I may swap to a '74 L-jet system in the future.

S. Frankiewich · 10-06-2008, 06:06 PM

I ran a 1975 version 1.8 with L-jet for many years in a salvaged 1972. I was very happy until I started having wiring harness issues as the heat hardened insulation started breaking and causing opens and shorts. Since I had a 2.0 D-jet on hand I decided to swap the engines for the additional power and regretted the decision as that particular engine had other problems. Jump forward a few years and I currently have a completely stock 1974 1.8 that runs incredibly sweet. I plan to eventually rebuild that engine to near-stock and keep the L-jet. I have to admit that I have a Raby 2270 that I will soon be putting in that car so I probably have time before starting the 1.8 rebuild. But I halfway expect California to reverse the no-smog law for pre-75 vehicles and want to have smooth running, easily tuned L-jet on the shelf for that day.