911 engine vs 912 vs 914

I've tried to search around a bit and (may be largely due to me missing it, so I apologize if such is the case), but what is the main reason people have leaned away from using a rebuilt 911 engine?
I've also seen mention of a 912 or 914 being able to be used...I don't really know the in's and out's of each and why one would choose one over the other and why with such out there, most still go with the VW Type I's. I would assume cost (though with the amount of money continually being poured into the project, I'd doubt that being the primary reason) and remaining closest to original as possible being the main answers to my own question. Still, I'm wanting to get something that has the porsche sound/feel and does not require constant maintenance (really don't have the time, unfortunately).

Reasons NOT to use a 911 engine:
1. Even used, they are expensive. A sound used 3.0 is 4-5000
easily. The 2.7 is almost a giveaway at 2-3000 used. The 2.0
2.2 and 2.4 engines are becoming very difficult to find in sound
condition. The really good ones are beginning to be used for
restorations as early P-cars are appreciating in value.
2. They are very expensive to rebuild. Not unusual to drop 8-10,000
on a magnesium case rebuild. The 3.0 and later engines are often
less to rebuild (but cost more to buy used). Good rebuilds with
no special parts begin around $4,000 on a running 3.0. Ask me
about my 911 engine rebuild nightmare...
3. The 911 engine does not fit in the car. A couple of us have MADE
them fit, but it requires alterations to the fire wall.
4. 911 engine needs to go to a 914 or a very modified 915 transaxle.
Those are about $700-800 for a useable core and easily two to
three times that much rebuilt. Add $1500 for limited slip.
5. Flywheel can be a little tricky and guaranteed will be expensive.
Spend $300 new from Kennedy Engineering and be done with it.
6. Clutch is more money. My car is using an early 911 S clutch.
That part retails complete for about $600 dollars.
7. Sound 3 barrel weber carbs are fetching a premium these days.
Expect $1000 plus in usable condition. There are no new ones.
PMO 3 barrels are $2600 plus per set. Plus manifolds, plus
linkage.
8. The dry sump system requires significant fabricating for the
tank and lines. More $$ here. I believe we spent about $300
on the tank that Steve had to design and around another $300 for
braided lines and fittings.

My rough estimate, based on my signficantly dwindled checkbook, is that the whole drive-train to the axles in rebuilt condition done nicely, all freshened 3.0, limited slip and new PMO carbs would be close to $20,000.

I'll let everyone else chime in on the Type 1 and Type IV (of which I am clueless), but I can guarantee that both of those options would be less money. As would a Subie - which makes a ton of power.
angela

Reasons TO use a 911 engine:

1. #1 reason, that you are deeply, passionately in love with german air cooled 6-cylinder engines. The sound, the throttle response, the big strong push against your back on acceleration are intoxicating. If you dream about fast cars, and in your dreams they sound like 911's, then put one in your car.

2. You have serious horse power issues. Okay, that's me.

3. Even though it is the wrong engine, you think that you should at least use SOME german air cooled engine and as long as it makes lots of power, then you are at least in the right spirit.

THe 911 engine is not anywhere near original for the spyder. Some of the early spyders were push rod flat 4's (if the info I've gathered from this site is accurate) and the rest were quad came flat fours. Those are exquisite jewels of engines more like watches than combustion engines. They are big big bucks. The last rebuildable running core I saw went for $25,000 and the fresh rebuild was a six figure motor. And that was several years ago...
angela

The 912 motor is actually a "left over" from the 356s, same basic design. But seriously, better and improved-stock about 100hp-not bad for 1600ccs.
The '76 912E and the 914 utilized the VW based type IV, my personnal favorite. The final evolution of the aircooled flat 4, originally designed to push what has to be one of the most un-aerodynamic vehicles ever, the VW bus. When performance-tweeked they make awesome power and are reliable to boot. I think that the engineering enhancements definitely make it superior to the type I- IMHO. It has been discussed in these forums ad nauseum.

Regarding the cost of a Type I new build...I am in the early stages of building a larger engine using "good" quality stuff. I am looking at spending $10k in parts and services, and put it together myself. And this is only "good quality" as far as the case, crank, rods, heads, and the like.

To use the "best" one can pretty readily spend $20-30k in parts alone...that might be a Pauter case, rods, crank, flywheel, or a 3 piece Scat case with all their top of the line stuff like individual heads, titanium valves, titanium rods etc etc....dry sump...etc....a quote from Scat on what I would really like is about $38K turnkey ......

But I don't have room for a Suby, a Type IV, or a 911/6, so Type I it is.....if I were to do it again I would go with Suby power in a car (like Vintage) that has no rear torsion bar.....

Jim, I noticed you said you don't have room for anything but a Type I and you have a TR...which if I'm not mistaken is the same as a Beck frame, correct? Without serious modifications (which is always an answer, depending on one's desire to put the square peg in the round hole so-to-speak), is the Beck frame only designed to fit the Type I?

Given the (very thorough and educational..thank you much) response from angela on the 911's...I'm now thinking maybe type IV or suby may be more practical. Are certain frames more liberal than others to accomodate different types of engines (well, I *know* they are...but wondering where (in regard to makers) should I focus my sights when looking to purchase)?

mike

Vintage uses a coil over shock set up that eliminates the rear torsion tube, as their standard configuration. That gives 4" or 5" more space at the front of the engine to use a longer engine, like a Suby or a type IV.

Thunder Ranch will build to your requirements, but their "standard" was the Beck style torsion tube. I have been told by others a Type IV can be shoe horned into either a Beck or a TR, but I do not think I could use one in mine unless I pulled and installed the engine and transmission togther. Not a plesant task in my car....for what ever reason my car is tighter between the torsion tube and the oil pump by more that 1.5" than some others I have measured. Why that is, I have not a clue, but it is a real problem....

Hello,

I'm a newbie to this forum and about to purchase a Thunderranch version of the Beck 550 Spyder equipped with an older 356 motor nicely rebuilt but as originally spec'd only making 40 HP. My concern is it will grow old on me having so little horsepower and have thought much of putting in a Porsche 6 a 2.2 or 2.4 liter motor which I'm quite fond of. Does anyone know if it will fit in this chassis without extensive modifications?

Thanks!

Franklin:

Angela (see her post above) should be able to supply you with the information you seek. She and her husband built a Thunder Ranch with a Porsche 6 in it.

Putting a six in spyder that was built for a four cylinder can be done. Just as making a single story home into a two story can be done. Its hard but possible.

Most (not all) of the 4 cylinder cars are swing axle. Start with modifying the frame and rear suspension to lose the swing axle and accept a 914 transaxle.

Remove the cove in the firewall (which is pretty much the whole firewall) to accomodate the extra length in the drive train. As the axle placement remains the same, all of the additional length of the engine is toward the front.

Fab appropriate motor mounts to the frame - the old ones won't work. Fab the oil tank reservoir. Plenty of other small things - but that's the big ones.

As enamored as I am with the six, if I had a 4 cylinder car I'd give one of our hotrod T4 builers a call/$$ or go nuts and put a subie in it. Either one of those would be less work and the subie will make as much and in turbo form MORE power than the 911 six.

angela's 2 cents.

My recommendation is to think in terms of $$$ cost per horse power delivered. Subie will win that equation everytime for anything more than about 150 hp. Also, it will be more reliable and long lived than most of the other options.... a Subie can deliver 200-400 hp depending upon model, turbo, and boost pressures, or no turbo, and do it for a long time, and there are some sand rail Subies pushing 475 hp or more, not that we need that in our cars...don't think it would transfer to the ground very well.

Down side includes radiator, computer, FI, having to eliminate torque tube suspension, and the like. If I were to build a new car it would have a Subie....