911 or Subaru WRX

If money was not a challenge .... Porsche 911 of course, with the mating transaxel

Bob that is a hard one.  A 911 Powered IM will likely cost you 15-20K more unless you skimp on options. It will give you Porsche Power, Sound & Cachet.  It will likely also cost more to maintain.  WRX power is almost limitless  and can be dyno tuned to 300HP with only minor mods.  I emailed the guy that Henry did the WRX for a little over a year ago and his car is running great.  He has it tuned to almost 300 RW HP.   You must be reading my mind because a little birdie in my head is saying "WRX Marty, WRX".  I already have the transmission to support the power but can't decide because my car is running so well.  

 

That said, If you have the money and have a little mechanical background I say 911 power over WRX.  Henry made a comment that stuck with me at Carlisle.    Someone asked him about a 911 3.6 car he did.  the questions was "how does it drive?"  Henry's answer was this "Drive? You don't have to drive it, you just start the Focker up and listen to it idle, its that bad ass"

 

So I guess Marty and Henry have answered your question;

 

If you want to park your 911-powered car in your garage and just listen to it, go with the Porsche aircooled engine (and hope you can find someone locally to work on it without ransoming your retirement when it needs attention).

 

If you want the same (or more) power and torque for less than half the money and a lot more reliability, have something that you can get  bunch of people to work on locally without breaking the bank AND still have a boxer engine sound, and have the ability to tailor available power to what you want simply with a laptop, then go WRX.

For 90% of the world, the WRX is the answer, hands down.

 

For the other 10%: there is no substitute.

Gordon sometime that engineer brain of yours is just too smart.  I was being facetiuos.  Bob knows what I mean and there is a lot more going on in the 911 car.  It gets almost he whole 911 including the suspension, the trans, 911 brakes, a fuel cell, special gauges, frame enhancements, a deep trunk and more.  BTW, I did mention the cost thing in my post.  

 

My car is kick but but its not Howard's 911 powered car (which I drove) and its more than the engine that makes it all work.  The sound you talk about in the Japanese boxer 4 in turbo guise is not the same as the Porsche.  Some guys don't care, but its a huge part of the experience on the 911 powered car.  Since Howard's car circa 2007 the IM 911 cars have only gotten better. IMHO they are not for everyone but they are the still the best even if the Subaru WRX may have more appeal as times goes by.  I write this thinking about a WRX upgrade myself.  Bob, its not easy to answer this one unless the cost were the same.      

Stan, Isn't Dave Mitchell selling his IM 911 powered Speedster?

Bob,jump on it if your considering a 911 powered speedy!

Al-

 

Yep, Dave's car is still for sale. Somebody needs to jump on it, as it's the deal of the day.

 

Marty-

 

You're overthinking this. I've driven a couple of IM/6s.

 

You want one.

Yeah and I believe Dave just had the tranny rebuilt too.  I bet that thing is freakin scary quick!  He had a video of it running somewhere on here or Facebook...sounds wicked!

I appreciate the replies. 

 

It's a debatable decision, to be sure.  With the 911, you do get a modified chassis and all 911 suspension and brakes.  Of course, for the money (or much less) you could buy a real 911, and I've certainly thought of that option.  But I just don't like the 911 design that much, and there's something about an IM that appeals to me.

 

Simple, basic, and unencumbered by add-ons that too often detract from driving a bare bones automobile.  Unfortunately, I can't think of a 'modern' car that gives me the same feeling.  Guess I can't get away from my roots here.  To me, they are the modern bug eye Sprite - but with a lot more power, style, and handling.

 

The WRX means water cooled, and I don't know how that configuration will 'stand the test of time'.  That's a lot of extra doodads built into a very small body and chassis.  I'm not into engine tuning, so whatever h.p. I end up with is probably what the car will stay with.

 

As for Dave's car, I seriously considered it when he first advertised it, but bringing a U.S. registered IM into Canada (newer that fifteen years old) would not be easy.

 

Oh well, time to do some more thinking.

 

I wonder what George Brown would have to say about this.

 

 

 

That got me wondering.  You hear of 912/911 with VW T4 and even V8 transplants.  What about a H6 Subbie - taking advantage of the 5 speed transmission and great suspension and a cheap to own engine.  Found this link - http://www.clublexus.com/forum...h-subaru-engine.html

 

 

Bob, the magic as Henry says is to stay stock.  Control the heat and you should have years of happy motoring.  I have clocked 10,500 miles on my water-cooled EJ22.  Drove it from Chicago to Carlisle and back 3 years in a row.   If its done right I think both applications will work great.  

Now, that's an interesting engine swap (as illustrated above).  The Subie engines are very reliable.  They do have some potential issues, and the cooling system is one of them.  You must use conditioner for the anti-freeze, and trapped bubbles are a danger.  I believe cam gaskets are another potential issue.

 

But, they have tremendous potential, and it's really easy to pick up a low mileage one.  Much, much cheaper than a good used 911 mill.

(*cough) IM/6 (*cough)

 

 

You're right, Marty.  I have 170 hp in my car now.  I asked Henry about an upgrade to my car, which could be done.  I would then have a water cooled 165-170 hp.  That would eliminate any need to do valves, carb. work, etc., and would give me a more 'modern' engine than any Subie mechanic could work on.

 

It's one possibility.  The problem is, in this situation, you just can't go into a showroom and test drive a couple of cars to help you decide.

 

You're so subtle, Stan.

 

 

Seriously, with a history of two Karmann Ghias, one Beetle, one Corvair, and three air-cooled IMs, I guess the decision should be easy for me.

Thats what Carlisle is for

But, can I wait until next Spring...

 

Stan, you are definitely my BRUTHA from anutha mutha!!  

 

I have a 1911 Harley Davidson and I really like its looks, sound and history. I think I'll put a V-Rod engine in it. Or maybe I'll just buy a Harley V-Rod motorcycle 

 

I have a B-25 Mitchell Bomber and really like its looks, sound and history. I think I'll put an F-111 engine in it. Or maybe I'll just buy an F-111 fighter jet 

 

I have a 1925 Chris Craft wooden boat and like its looks, sound and history. I think I'll put cigarette supercharged V-10 engine in it. Or maybe I'll just buy an off-shore racer super-charged V-10 cigarette boat 

 

I'm just saying...

Jim, are you using that child reverse psychology on us? Or, are you just trying to save us money:-)

Bob, are you having some problems with your air cooled engine?  Just wondering, if you were looking into having Henry switch your IM over to water cooled.

After all the crap I've gone through with my engine, I wish I'd gone the water cooled route when I first starting restoring my car.

Ron.

 

No problem at all.  The engine runs great, with lots of power.  I'm just looking at options.  I would prefer fuel injection and no valves to adjust, though.

 

I am also intrigued by what can be done to improve the already great handling, plus more power is always a nice thing.

 

After three used IMs, maybe it's time for a new one tailored to what I want in a car.

 

Time will tell. 

 

Jumped into thread late but if money is object its a no brainer.  3.6 L 911 power with 911 suspension and brakes all around.  Got a ride in a 911 speedster at Carlisle.  No way a Suby can match the torque and sounds rendered by that power plant.  Amazing!  That being said I'd probably save the 25-30 grand and get a Suby.

You want perfect?

 

IM/6 frame (full 911 suspension, with the rear wheels pushed further back), but with a big (2.5L+) dry-sumped Type 4, Tangerine Racing exhaust, and 915/Wevo. Porsche brakes. I'll take mine with the deep ("Dave Mitchell") trunk and "roadster" seats for my wife, please.

 

I'll take widened 944 Turbo spares (ala Rick Davis), zip-out rear window, color of your choice. My choice would be slate gray with deep red/brown seats/doors/dash, charcoal square-weave, and a black top.

 

This car would stay true to the "essence" of an air-cooled flat 4, but with enough suspension, etc. improvements to be a true sports car, and just enough accouterments to be comfortable driving across several time-zones. Moving the rear wheels back would give it better weight distribution than a "standard wheelbase" speedster, way better than a 6-cyl car, and better than a water pumper with a bunch of goo-gaws all over it.

 

If I were doing it again, that's what I would do.

Right, Stan!

 

Within a year you would find some major mod that would absolutely have to be done. You'd have the engine and/or transmission out every winter, cause that is what winter is for in central Illinois.

 

You don't fool me, big boy, there is no "perfect" in Stanistan (except for Jeannie).

Stan;

 

I searched and did not find a reference to "moving the rear wheels back"?  Is this only something that can be done on an IM?  Or does it apply to all/others, for a better balanced ride.

 

Thanks

Art-

 

It's an IM/6 thing Henry has done to bring better balance to the heavier engined 6-cylinder cars. I would seriously doubt anybody else is doing anything like it.

 

All tube-framed IMs are IRS, and all mount their engines and transaxles about 2" further forward than standard "pan" dimensions for better weight distribution, while still using the standard wheelbase and body configuration. Since there is no room to further move the engine and transaxle further forward on the 6 cyl cars, the wheels are pushed back a bit to futher balance out the weight of the bigger engine-- I'm not sure how much, but I think it's another couple of inches.

 

This (obviously) requires a different frame and body to accommodate the longer wheelbase. The transaxle mounts in the same place as the "standard" cars (which is to say, about 2" further forward), but the driveshafts "butterfly" rearward more, pretty much to the limit of what the CV joints would handle (I would think). The angle is quite pronounced.

 

You'd never notice the difference (in the space between the rear of the door and the front of the rear wheelwell) to look at an IM6, unless you had somebody point it out. It's a fantastic bit of engineering, which requires another frame jig and body mold for something that is probably built less than one time/ year. What Henry and his band of merry men are able to accomplish out of a standard-looking shop is nothing short of amazing. I really appreciate craftsmanship, and what that guy produces is even more beautiful under the skin than what is immediately visible, and what is visible is stunning.

 

Is it worth the extra money? That's something everybody's got to decide for themselves. I'm not trying to sell anything. But when guys start comparing "price-points" and acting like there's no difference because the bodies all looks the same, it's hard not to climb up on a soapbox. Knowing the difference empowers people to make better informed decisions.

This is from an older IM website:

 

Possibly the most innovative part of our frame is the rear suspension crossmember which uses stock VW IRS arm/spring plates in conjunction with short early VW torsion bars. The design allows us to move the engine and        transmission location 3" forward of the standard Porsche, and is combined with the relocated  trailing arm mounting points for some added negative camber. This results in very  neutral handling, quite dissimilar to the original unforgiving Porsche.

Stan;

 

Thanks, you always provide educational descriptions. I'll give this more thought when I have an IM.  Perhaps I and others, do not realize the engineering that goes into  cars like IM and SE,  Cheers,  Art

My mistake: 3" forward, not 2".

 

Couple that with pushing the wheels on the 6cyl car back a couple more inches, and the bulk of the mass in the car is effectively moved 5"- 6" forward in the wheelbase. That's substantial.

 

Art,

 

I made a lot of mistakes before I got what I wanted. Most of what I know, I know because I did it some other way that didn't work out first. I'd like to save other guys the trouble of heading down a bunch of dead-ends, unless they need to.

 

Thanks for the kind words, but the street runs both ways here-- I really appreciate your addition to the site. As a complete aside: I think your car is really cool as well. I especially appreciate guys like you and Terry Nuckels who have thought about how to make your 4-lug hubs work, without resorting to converting to a different bolt pattern. I sold my second car in 2005, in some part to get away from 4 lug hubs-- which was pretty ignorant in hindsight. I ended up with a car that was far better than what I had, but the wheel thing should have been about 20th on the list instead of near the top. You and Terry have proven that 4 lug wheels can be lightweight and beautiful.

For better weight distribution in my VS, I just move my seat forward a couple of inches! 

 

…er, well, I used to anyway (until my next build).

musbjim;

 

I actually had to push my whole drive train forward in my TD in order for the Suby 2.2 to fit behind the car's fake gas tank. By reversing the rear mount and cutting off and re-working the front mount I moved it just about 1.2 inches. 

 

No idea yet if it actually works (still trying to keep the coolant in the new cooling system & take the air out). But good to hear the company I'm in with this, no matter how remotely my hack job might resemble Henry's engineering.

none of the above if you ask me.  Since 2008 I have been the proud owner of a VW / Audi 1.8t engined IM with a 915 tranny, 911 front suspension and 944 rear suspension sitting on 15x8 rears and 15x6 front 911 C2 wheels with Bridgestone Potenzas all round.  Took delivery with about 150 whp, tuned it up to 170 whp with nothing more than a manual boost controller addon.  Since then I have added a much larger turbo and all the thermal management necessary and stripped out the stock ECU to be replaced by a Megasquirt IIe and now am running 300+ HP at the rear wheels.  This engine is low cost and almost bullet proof and is is well supported by a rabid community of tuners and aftermarket suppliers.  I would take a look at the 1.8t platform in addion to the others you are looking at.

 

Tomm

Although I still have serious differences with Specialty Auto-Sports, I have to give them a plug.  They engineered a mid-engine car with tube frame that handles superbly.  As neutral as you can find in a replica, the car doesn't wander or drift at speed and hugs corners like a formula 1.  The owner also desiged the car, and its handling gets an A+.  Weigh balance is about 45/55, just about right for accelleration, cornering, and braking. 

Tomm, how are your motor mounts holding up?

Ron,

So far, so good!  Biggest issue was finding CV boots which would not split.  Ended up with inner and outer boots from the Audi 5000 Quattro.  Perfect,  no more greasy undercoating

Tomm

Going with the 5 speed was a great choice.  Back in 2009 I drove a new IM which was very similar to yours,  except it had a 4 speed Beetle tranny.

The car was fun to drive, but it really needed a better tranny.

I also have the VW /Audi engine. The more sedate one from a base jetta. 2.0 SOHC 2 valve/cylinder pushing 117hp. Mine has the less desirable 4 speed unfortunately with a 3.88. Ron my car is a 2009. Maybe you drove mine. It interesting. Even with the lower HP setup I still have problems with motor mounts and CV boots. Must be inherent in this setup. When I bought the car used it had a bad rear motor mount and a hole on the left rear outer CV boot. Guess its just the downside of this setup but I still like the reliability of the water cooled crate engine.

Phil, the IM I drove had a turbo, and it really moved!  Henry said it had around 170 hp.