The LS swap for sure looks like the way to go if you want to exceed modded Turbo power (or perhaps achieve it for less money integrated over time, himprove reliability, etc.)

It's not a good option for people of modest means who want to get down the road in a 944 with less hassles under the hood and perhaps S2/968/stock turbo levels of power. There might not be a good solution to that problem, at present I say:

1 - Sell whatever you got
2 - Buy the car you want
3 - Trust me, it's better and cheaper than trying to convert something

There are a lot of people who feel invested in their 944 with nice cosmetics or some sentimental value [Joel says get over it] and would just like a bit more scoot and to not fret about the skinny 8v timing belt. If you could get a LeSabre engine in there for $2k and not a ton of fabrication and swap time and still have a nice car with power brakes, steering, AC, etc. that'd be great.

The LS swap is not cheap, the motors are getting expensive and the truck motors need some extra parts, the costs add up fast. The swap parts are not cheap and you need to engineer and fab a few things like power brakes, AC lines, etc.

I still want a V8 swap or similar. My supercharged 968 has great power and torque but with the top down the blower whine is a bit irritating and showy, and I fret about the short piston skirts and high compression. It is easy to scuff the bores with bad gas on a hot day and too much right foot. It's also not cheap to get a supercharged 968 on the road.

If I give up on open-air driving the 928 is a fine car for me, or I can just enjoy stock 968 power with the top down, which I have been doing lately up to a point.

-Joel.

the older 3.8 is a very heavy wide 90 deg motor
only the turbo versions make power
and they ain't cheap

the later 3800S3 with a blower is a better cheaper lighter motor but still wide at 90 deg
the 3.9 based on the 60deg v6 is a better newer motor with 240hp stock no boost
and has modern alloy heads so much less weight
there was a DOHC 3.4 4 valve v6 motor also in 60 deg that can be turboed by GM
they have alloy heads and some aftermarket bits too

the newer 4's eco-tec come in SC or turbo stock and are very lite

ford has the DI and/or eco-boost 4 or 6 motors

what about an audi 5 turbo the rally guys got real power out of them

If that is your driving reality with the 944 then as I said, go for it with whatever engine floats your boat.

I DD my car through open mountain roads and the worst traffic known to mankind (LA 405) and having to rev to 3000+ to get anywhere gets old after a while.

It is my DD because no other car "fits me" like this one does (in terms of physical space and driving enjoyment).

I'm saving my pennies for a stroker to give me more grunt when not boosting...

Whatever engine you do choose you have to consider if you have local smog regulations...in CA I can't do the 4.8 but would love to...

Dont know if they are available in the USa but the Renault 2 litre slant 4 cylinder turbo motor out of the Megane Sport makes 225 or 265 BHP from a compact light all aluminium motor with variable valve timing that was built by Mecachrome(they make the Renault Formula 1 engines so I think they know what they are doing).

Well... I respectfully disagree and not just because I'm in progress with the 1.8T. You have to look at the numbers to see why.

Side point: The 1.9L VW TDI engine puts out insane low rpm torque with mods. Stock turbo with a tune over 250lbs/ft by 2500RPM. Add ball bearing, sequential turbos, cams etc and the lid comes off those numbers.

Now, as for displacement theory for torque on gasoline engines... don't forget efficiency (FLOW) in the calculation. 2.5L of displacement doesn't automatically mean more torque than a 1.8L. Here's a 944 dyno from Lindsey on top and a 1.8T VW tuned below. The black overlay on the VW dyno is stock cam and the red is the Integrated Engineering IECVA1 street/strip profile on the same engine. Compare torque between Porsche and VW. Stock cam, you're not losing any torque to the Porsche tune at low RPM. Then you're at 400lbs/ft at 4000 RPM - goodbye Porsche.

With the street/strip aftermarket cam you lose a lot of torque to the Porsche tune until the turbo spools up. Another side note: The VW engine has stroker options (forged ABA crankshaft from the 2.0L engines from 93-95 are preferred) as well if torque under 3K RPM is at all important... you just have to pay for custom pistons that reposition the wrist pin.

http://www.lindseyracing.com/pics/LR-944-MAX-CHIPLL.gif

1.8T VW:
http://blog.intengineering.com/wp-co.../10/IECVA1.png

<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/l0Ieha6phsA" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" width="640"></iframe>

<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/JLEsAgGCkGU" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" width="640"></iframe>

Edit: Stock 1.8T dyno and a flash (chip tune) dyno below. Shows 1.8T has more torque than 2.5L in stock form:
http://www.goapr.com/includes/img/pr...8t_stage_i.gif

My 944 is my everyday ride. Best overall solution for that usage is, buy an S2.

The 1.8 is impressive with those numbers, but the thing about dynos is that they're done at WOT.
How much torque is a 1.8L putting out at the throttle position you typically leave a stop light at?

LOL. You choose throttle position for how you want to leave the light with any engine. Are you seriously arguing that you would need an extra 1/8th throttle potentially on a smaller engine that produces more torque? LOL.

The 1.8 isn't making more torque at 1000RPM than a 2.5L at the type of throttle coming off a light in a normal driving environment.

I'm talking about the gas you give it while slipping the clutch to get moving and accelerate from there. Maybe its not a big deal to you, but having to bury your foot into the carpet to get up a hill is not fun. The 2.5L struggles to get moving easily enough on a hill start as is...

You think you have to floor a 1.8L 20v turbo to move? Remember now, they were original equipment in far larger cars than the 944 is. The Audi A4 Quattro wagons came with this engine. It's a whole lot more car than the 944 weight-wise to move around. The argument doesn't work in your favor... the 1.8T produces more torque. Period.

"The Audi A4 Avant 1.8 T is one of the B6 model family from Audi.
The Audi A4 Avant 1.8 T's engine is a turbocharged petrol, 1.8 litre, double overhead camshaft 4 cylinder with 5 valves per cylinder. This powerplant develops 161 bhp (163 PS/120 kW) of power at 5700 rpm, and maximum torque of 225 N·m (166 lb·ft/22.9 kgm) at 1950-4700 rpm.
A 5 speed manual 'box transfers the power to the driven wheels.
Its stated kerb weight is 1430 kg.
It is claimed to attain a top speed of 225 km/h, or 140 mph, officially stated fuel consumption is 11.3/6.4/8.2 l/100km urban/extra-urban/combined, and carbon dioxide emissions are 197 g/km."

"The Porsche 944 is a rear wheel drive motor vehicle, with its engine placed in the front, and a 2 door coupé bodyshell.
The 2.5 litre engine is a naturally aspirated, single overhead camshaft, 4 cylinder that produces 161 bhp (163 PS/120 kW) of power at 5800 rpm, and maximum torque of 205 N·m (151 lb·ft/20.9 kgm) at 3000 rpm.
A 5 speed manual transmission supplies the power to the driven wheels.
Having a stated kerb weight of 1180 kg, the Porsche 944 covers the 0-100 km/h benchmark in 8.30 seconds and the standing kilometre in 29.1 seconds.
Maximum claimed speed is 222 km/h, or 138 mph, stated fuel consumption is 7.0/8.7/11.4 l/100km 90 km/h / 120 km/h / urban cycle per DIN 70030/1."

The reason those numbers seem impossible (max torque below 2000 RPM) for the 1.8T engine is because of the small turbo charger. Stock K03S turbo on the left, Garret GT3076R on the right. Turbo lag? Not with this little snail. Boost is nearly instantaneous and it builds gobs of torque.

http://podi.ca/winstontemp/blitzkrieg/IMG_2772.JPG

I figured this post would draw some trolls out from under their bridges...

The 1.8T may fit the bill - there's certainly plenty of upgrade potential and they are fairly plentiful. The core problem is that I don't know what I want, but I know that I'm tired of the nickel and dime problems. I don't mind taking the car deep under the knife if it'll come out better on the other side. The other side of the coin is that I could build a new custom wiring harness for the stock engine and freshen it up for boost for about the same money and less custom work. If I could pump the car up to 250 hp with a mild turbo setup that might change my whole perception of the car.

Best medicines for trolls are cold hard facts.

Personal choice if you want to try with the stock Porsche engine or not. You can tune any engine out there for more HP. How do you personally feel about the engine you choose to work with and do you value the reputation for how it performs? Choose one that makes sense to you. I also considered a turbo on the stock 2.5L early on. It makes sense on some levels.

If that's all your after, 968 swap your car, it will get you close and its hell of a lot fun to drive. The 1.8T nickels and dimes too, any core 1.8t motor you get should be gone through anyhow.

Lap, how much will you spend in total on your 1.8T swap when its done in your estimation?

I got a bit carried away and snowballed over budget so I admit I'm a bad example for economics of the swap. There is a better example in New Hampshire where the guys threw the engine in and went racing in Lemons for I think under $500. The donor vehicles are fairly common and cheap.

I have the folder in front of me here... burning gas, squashing bugs maybe $6g for my example. I could have found a younger engine to start with... the overbore starts the snowball and then the next thing you know you've spent $4500 making it 600HP+ capable. I had difficulty resisting with incremental upgrades that were within reach for a few bucks more.

If I had just dropped the engine in instead of going through it and forging/boring/modifying and also left the fuel system alone then I would have saved around $4400. The cap is then around 400hp (stock rods are the weak link) which isn't too shabby. I'm not sure if the aged, stock 944 fuel system would have kept up around that level. The cost slope is a little different depending on what your end goals are. 400hp on a 1.8T is a lot cheaper than 500hp+.

1JZ
320-330bhp right off
... then boost it!

How about a Toyota Supra Turbo's 2JZ-GTE? You can ditch the factory twin turbo setup with one giant turbo, tune the engine to about 700-1000 hp and your car will be unstoppable! :D

Here's a photo of an 1100 hp Supra's engine at Cars and Coffee. This would look great in a 944's engine bay :D

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1400544697.jpg

I've got a buddy with a mk3 supra that is 2j swapped with a big single. He putting a very conservative 600 hp to the wheels - its a monster, but it isn't any fun for the driving I like to do. Since starting this thread I've done a lot of soul searching about what it is that I want. The list is simple:

Light - preferably at or under 1000 lbs
150-300 hp but it must be small displacement and high revs
No top whatsoever

I'm leaning toward building a one off reverse trike. I really like the styling of the rayvolution EVO. I just need to get the 944 cleaned up and freshened up so I can get decent money out of it. http://s1.dmcdn.net/r2vB/x240-PDe.jpg

I'd look at an Exocet. Miata running gear and subframes so its reliable and has tons of aftermarket support not too mention being a known quantity. V8 swaps are already in progress using the Miata V8 swap parts.

A chassis that has been designed for safety and service, built by enthusiasts who are also mechanical engineers.

Look at the thread that was started by one of their engineers and has helped sell more cars than nearly any salesman has:

GRM Exclusive Reveal: Exocet Spec-A: Grassroots Motorsports forum: Grassroots Motorsports

http://exomotive.com/wp-content/uplo...MEV_Exocet.jpg

Exocet Turbo takes on Ariel Atom

I read this and thought: Hayabusa Turbo... would make a good trike.