What a Better eng ? 1.7 or 2.0

[Beakster]

Sorry Guys ... On the Chalon 914's ..Theres one with a 1.7 eng that been rebuilt and the other 914 chalon 914 has a 2.0 but it's been setting for a few years and the guy thinks it's seized .. I been told that the 1.7's were a dog eng .. But again I'm not had any of these engines to know .. Need your Guys feedback .. Thanks again ..

[beatnavy]

I have driven a 1.7L for a year and 2056 for the last couple of months. Hands down I enjoy the performance of the 2056 more. Having said that, I did like my 1.7L a lot after I got it properly tuned (and got all the FI pieces sorted out). It was peppier than I would have thought. Curt (CabinetMaker) will also tell you it's the most bulletproof of the type IV's (at least I think he will, don't want to put words in his mouth). So I don't think the 1.7L is a "dog" (but I'm not giving up my 2056, either).

Question for you is: do you have the money/time/patience to rebuild the 2.0, or do you want to get on the road now with a fresh engine?

[Tobra]

2.0 has far superior heads

[Kraftwerk]

My 1.7 in stock form with it's original FI system is surprisingly peppy, w/ Great ThRottle response. though lacks power in some Mountain situations. Keep in mind it's only 8 Hp less than a stock 2.0 engine. If you want to drive right away go with the working motor if you have time and cAsh well there is lots of info out there. I think i read its best to COMBINE A 1.7 cAsE w/ 2.0 hEADS AND BUILD A 2056 .. but it will cost ya!

[Dave at Pelican Parts]

The 1.7 was rated at 80 HP DIN spec, the 73-74 2.0 is rated at 95 HP. It's the 75-76 2.0 that is only rated at 88 HP.

The 1.7 is a high-compression motor, and requires premium fuel. It does have a good amount of zip for what it is; it makes more power than the 1.8 does, certainly.

All of the 914 engines are torquey; they make rather more peak torque than peak power, and make 95% of their peak torque from 2500-4500 RPM.

Rebuilding a 2.0 can run several thousand dollars, depending on what is wrong and what you can do yourself. The 2.0 heads flow better, of course, and promote a better burn. They are more fragile than the 1.7 heads, though, and tend to crack across the spark plug bosses and under the exhaust valve seats. It can cost a fair bit to repair those cracks.

It is awfully nice to have a running engine, so you can drive the car while you work on it. But if the car is going on jack-stands right away, a seized engine isn't necessarily a big impediment...

--DD

[Beakster]

Hey Dave, Would I be better with just to go with a 2.2 or 2.4 instead of the seized 2.0 ?

[Dave at Pelican Parts]

Depends on what you want. It's not that hard to build a 2.2 or 2.4 engine that makes a decent amount of power. The difficulty comes in taking that from a "decent" amount to a "good" amount or a "large" amount, and also from making it last a while.

If I'm spending your money, I say go for the big motor. It will take time and effort and $$ to tune it once it's built, of course.

If it were me and my own money, I would look for a running 2.0 motor to swap in. But those aren't super common, so I might consider a running 1.7 motor as well. But I may have constraints that you don't.

--DD

[Beakster]

Hey Dave .. I have a chance to buy a 70 914 with a chalon kit on it .. the guy has told me that the 2.0 eng was rebuilt at one time but because the car has sat for two years he thinks it has seized the eng .. that why I thought of going with a 6 cyl then trying to mess with the 2.0 .. the body of the car is in great condition and I think I can get it for under $4000.00 too .. what your thoughts ... Thanks

[Dave at Pelican Parts]

My thoughts are that I hate Chalon kits. I find it hard to get around that. There's also the notion that often the "whole body kit" thing is done when a 914 takes a hard enough hit that it isn't economically feasible to fix it. And often that approach leads to shoddy repair work under the kit.

The Six engine is big bucks. Even if someone gives you an engine for free, you can easily spend $10K rebuilding it yourself and another $5K+ installing it in the 914. (If you're paying someone else to do the work, double those figures.)

If the structural bits of the car all check out and all the bits are there, it could be a reasonable project for the money. But my own inclination would be to walk away, or offer an insultingly low amount like $500. In large part that's because I don't like the Chalons, though.

--DD

[Beakster]

Thanks for the feedback Dave ..