TheSamba.com :: View topic

Tue Sep 30, 2025 2:10 pm

I've read a few posts on a bunch of different forums about using Bus pistons and barrels to increase the size of the 1.7 and 1.8 914 type 4 motors.

I've also seen what Jake Raby offers for 20K, and what LN Engineering, DR. 914 and AutoAtlanta offer.

Plus I've read about machine kits, and non-machine kits...

But at the end of the day, I'm trying to wrap my head around what is possible, and what is inexpensive...

I've been looking at 914s all summer - and have a few more lined up to view here in the next week or so.

And aside from looking at all the rusty spots I'd rather not fuss with and ruling those cars out... when I do find one, it will likely need a motor refresh (I'm guessing)

That said, I'd like to know my options for some shade tree hot rodding. IU attempted to be a purist on my 70 Beetle, not really looking for a 'stock' example on this one.

I'm going to drive the car mostly on weekends, Cars and Coffee, and AutoX. I'm not looking for a monster motor, but just a lot of zip and torque for twisty roads, and decent fuel economy.

Tips, tricks, articles, all welcome.

Tue Sep 30, 2025 4:10 pm

Also, If anyone can profide feedback on why LN Engineering says they are selling "most everything needed and include the same parts used in all Aircooled Technology engine builds as we are Aircooled Technology’s exclusive parts supplier for everything Type 4!" and there is such a variation in description between what they offer and What is on Jake's page - I'd appreciate the history lesson here.

Tue Sep 30, 2025 6:21 pm

The history:

Jake Raby developed all of the engine combinations, camshaft profiles, valve sizes, head work done by Len Hoffman at Ham Inc., assembly techniques (outside of stock) and many if not most combos were based around using Charles Navarro's Nikisil cylinder and piston sets. He had for a while, complete build it yourself kits based around all of that.

Jake did all the dyno work and testing. Jake sold all of this through "The type 4 store".

Jake got tired of dealing with the public and sold the Type 4 Store (not his aircooled technology busines) and the license to sell the combo kits using all of the same parts to Charles Navarro of L&N engineering including (I think..do not quote me on that) heads still done by HAM inc on new castings.

When you buy the "KIT" from L&N/Type 4 store....you have to do all of the measureing, all of the case machine work and probably the crank machine work unles you pay them to do it. You have to do all of the assembly....and if you want it to run like its capable of ...you need to use all of the best techniques just like Jake Raby would.

This is not a stock type 1 you are building. There WILL be costs far and above the kit. If you want it to run to capability you need better than stock ignition, better than stock exhaust (not cheap for type 4) and then what are you going to feed it with?

If Jake builds it....he does all of that. Runs it...breaks it in, dynos it...and warrants it.
Very skilled labor is expensive. However, he might say he is selling a RESULT and not a SERVICE.

So...improvements:

Do you have a 1.7L or a 1.8L? Big differences. Is what you have stock?

What do you want to do with the car? How much HP do you think you need?

There is quite a bit that can be done on a 1.7L (best out of all of them in my opinion) and the 1.8L.

I will get into it when you tell me what you have and want. Ray

Wed Oct 01, 2025 10:49 am

Sorry, I someohow missed the tail end of your post.

There are many levels that can be done with the 1.7 and 1.8...short of just scrapping everything but the crank and building something BIG and expensive...which is what the Type 4 store and Raby solution does. Not takig ANYTHING away from those two solutions but you really need to to figure out what you NEED. Stock alone will not be cheap.

Auto cross...does not require a lot of HP. It requires great throttle response and VERY good brakes and suspension.
If you are just "fun" auto crossing and willing to do it with stock engine or slightly hotter than stock...even good stock suspension and or one notch up will be fun.

Unless you are serious about auto cross or want to take the car to the track....you really do not need more HP than the stock US or Euro 2.0L brought to the table.

The weight of a 914 is about the same as a beetle or less. You can make a very zippy beetle with a 110 hp 1776 type 1 engine.

You can do the same with a 1.7L or 1.8L.

One thing you need to think about, if you get much above 125hp....EVERYTHING on your suspension and brakes will be "not enough".

With the gearing and light weight of these cars, 110hp is a good fun street car if its tuned well. Even 95-100 is a big difference. You can do 95+ with a 1.7L. 100hp+ with a 1.8L.

Ray

So, think about your budget.

Thu Oct 02, 2025 8:09 am

Ray - you rock.
Thank you for the history on T4Store and Jake.
I remember coming across Jake's stuff back in 2005-ish. Not sure where that lines up with his timeline, but it makes perfect sense.
And yes, totally makes sense that, for the price/ value, what Jake is doing with building it out vs selling parts.

As for me, I don't yet have a 914.
I've been looking for the better part of a year here in the Puget Sound area.

Doesn't seem to matter the price point; they all seem to have HellHole Rust and questionable rust in the passenger side bulkhead, floor pan, and likely the longs.
I haven't found a good way to inspect the longs, as no one seems to want to remove the rocker panels.

That said - I'm always looking and trying ot make heads or tails of something.
my goal is to find one that I can tell for sure isn't suffering from 'hip dysplasia.' That seems like a good way to describe what truly ails these cars.

From everything I've read - fixing the hellhole, and rust - since the unibody construction makes everything structural - is the biggest cost killer of getting a good, decent driving car, and the motor work is relatively cheap in comparison.

I don't need a monster.
I'm looking for a solid driver, good interior, fun auto X, and weekend car. Just something clean and tidy, but patina, and surface rust dont bother me - Just want to be water tight.

Right now I've got a 70 Beetle with a basically stock 1600 - only real difference is it's an aftermarket AS41 universal case, and has been fullflowed for longevity.

Paint is ugly, interior, ugly - But I had the suspension done, brakes done, Put in new 18 gauge pans, and the motor full-flowed and sealed up nice [no leaks in 3 years]. Plus all the wiring and lights work.
Basically, I did all the stuff that makes it a real driver.
I don't hesitate to take my beetle on road trips, camping or drive over 450 miles or more on a single outing

The same goal would be with the 914. + autoX, + maybe a nicer interior, ha!

Thu Oct 02, 2025 2:33 pm

The reason I ask what you want to do and what you need will govern whether you want to stay stock, stock-ish like modified stock or really need to build something hot and nothing is stock.

In my experience you have these types of 914 owners:
1. The average Porsche owner (not being ugly here). This person may be a busy professional with the money to have anything done. Does not work on their own car, takes it to a Porsche shop. It is bone stock for preservation sake and runs well…or runs as well as his budget and his mechanic’s mechanical abilities allow.

If his mechanic has basic factory level skills with D-jet injection, the 1.7L equipped car will have about 70-75 hp instead of the factory rated 80-82hp and is a fun little grocery getter and coffee shop car. That’s about it.

If his mechanic is EXCELLENT with D-jet and its bone stock and very tightly tuned, it probably has its advertised hp of 80-82 hp and is a better car out on the road for playing on the back roads but is not spectacular. It still has that 0-60 at 13 seconds issue.
The 1.8L has a few LESS hp and has about the same behavior because it has a little more lower end grunt at lower rpm.

2. The Porsche 914 owner who wants a little more than that but still does not work on his own car or does and wants it bone stock. This type of owner will typically opt ONLY for the 2.0L and swear it’s the only TRUE Porsche 914 outside of the 914-6.

IMPORTANT NOTE AT THIS POINT: The US version of the 2.0 made 91hp with 7.6: compression and that 0-60 time went down to 10.3 seconds from the 13 seconds of the 1,7L. Notice that it took roughly 3/10’s of a liter at LOWER compression to get 9hp more than the 1.7L w2ith higher compression.

But, the European version made about 100 hp and was again strictly a combination of a slightly different cam and higher compression at 8.0:1. So yes, displacement works, cam is also critical but the biggest gain in that 18hp increase from the 1.7L to 2.0L in the Euro version is from compression.

My takeaway from all of that and my experience, is that if you can get that same 91hp from a 1.7L (and you can) you have a very light car that now has 0-60 times approaching a whole lot of more modern 4 cylinder cars.

And, unless you are drag racing, 0-60 is not the most critical part. Once you are up close to modern car range in hp, your 30-60 mph and 40-70 mph times are MUCH quicker because your rpm is already up into the best torque band. In reality it is more about torque than hp.

That is where a lot of the fun driving comes from.

3. The 914 driver who works on his own car, wants to stay as stock as possible but is willing to put in certain improvements that are still within the stock or just hotter than stock range and is willing to learn to work on D-jet.
This is like, they are doing their own engine rebuild. They are willing to go to bigger valves if necessary, a better cam and a better ignition with all else stock. They are willing to experiment with tuning and better brakes. A LOT can be done in this realm.

Anything beyond this is not inexpensive. You are talking about changes to everything on the suspension and to engine displacement.

So, to speak about improvements that can be done to produce noticeable results, lets first lay out just how responsive the type 4 engine is to compression changes.So, to speak about details that are INEXPENSIVE for the 1.7L (to start with)

Understand that the 1.7L and 1.8L with injection in the 914 are 100% down to the last part # (except for the sheet metal and heat exchangers that change it from rear engine to mid-engine) , the exact same engines in every way to what came in the 411 and 412 cars, which were THE type 4 cars.

What came out in the 1.7L of the first 411 in 1968-1969 was twin 32mm Solex carbs, flat top pistons with maybe 6.8;1 compression and about 66hp. The cam, the carbs, compression and timing killed this one.

The next iteration of the 1.7L came in several configurations:
With dished pistons and 7.3:1 compression, smog pump and weaker cam and ignition timing (California) with injection, in the 411/412 made about 69hp. Without it, with carbs, it made less hp just like the bus 1.7L below
Then the bus 1.7L with twin 40 Solexes and 7.3:1 and dished pistons with yet a different cam at 66hp.
Then the 1.7L with 8.2:1 compression in the late 411, 412 and 914 with 80-82 hp.

Most of this improvement from the early 66hp to the late 82 hp was partly wrapped around a cam improvement but mostly a combined increase in compression of 1.4:1 (from 6.8:1 to 8.2:1). One could also easily say that probably 5-7% of that power and a lot of the throttle response was the fuel injection but I have seen GOOD carbs make just as much hp as the early injection (with a little less throttle response).

So, an increase of 1.4:1 compression from early 1.7L to late 1.7L produced an extra 16 hp. That is 1.14hp extra for every 1/10th of a compression point. Yes, the cam, ignition and everything else helps but it also works out that way STILL. That improvement was made with the same weak ignition and same restrictive exhaust and only modest cam improvements.

A quick 1.7L upgrade if you are keeping the domed pistons if you have them and reduce the inherent deck height by these methods:

1. get rid of the 0.023” thick head gasket. The factory recommended this anyway. This will increase compression by about ~0.2:1.

2. Then dump the 0.009” shim between cylinder and case. This adds about ~0.1: compression.

With these two simple mods you are now right at 8.4:1 or 8.5:1 compression.

3. This one is more advanced. The stock domed pistons really help. But, they have an inherent deck around the edge of the dome of ~0.065 to 0.070”. By having the tops of the cylinder cut down about 0.030” and give you a tighter deck around the edge you get a solid 8.6:1 to 8.7:1 along with the two mods above.
These three things alone will net you just under 6hp. While this does not sound like much, it is a 7.3% increase over the 82hp it already has.

This increase also increases the efficiency of the engine. It makes tuning sharper and more accurate. You change the cam, get a better ignition and even a better more freer flowing version of even the factory exhaust like an Ernst muffler or a Vintage speed muffler and really tune even the stock injection (though aftermarket would be far easier)….and you can easily add another 5-6 hp to that. So now you are at 90hp or a little over. That is nearly a 10% increase.

A little work on the valves, better fuel tuning and a good exhaust and the 1.7L can turn ~95 hp. That is just under a 14% increase.

The key problem with D-jet injection is that if you want to make it run very well you need to be very good at working on it. It is not complex….but it IS “complicated”. It has five sensors (TS-1, TS-2, TVS, MPS and trigger points) and 23-25 wires in the whole system. It is simple but tedious to adjust and unforgiving. Its “conditions” must be met or it will not deliver.

An alternative is….the intake manifold and TB system is competent. The 1.7L has the best worked out manifold and its only really properly sized for a 1.7L or 1.8L with the use of the 1.8L TB on the 1.7L plenum or with 1.8L plenum.

Its max ability is 2.0L with larger injectors and TB. After that you need to go up to the 2.0 914 runners and plenum.

So, you can keep all of that intake system and put on something aftermarket like Megasquirt and you can REALLY tune it in.

There are some limitations in the ignition system as well. The stock VW coils put out about 18kv. This is enough for “basic” ignition….but is really bare minimum for ionization. As the compression goes up, low voltage ignites less reliably at moderate to higher rpms.
Mods as simple as a Pertronix 42Kv coil (or many other coils) with either a magnetic pickup ignition or even still with points is a LARGE tuning upgrade to an injected, higher compression type 4 engine.

Even better if you plan to keep and work on the D-jet, go to a 123-distributor which replaces the injection trigger points with a digital version and allows spark tuning maps.

In short if you can work with an engine in a light car with 90-100hp then you can affordably do it with a 1.7L or 1.8L. Outside of that you are building something custom.

What I am suggesting with either a 1.7L or 1.8L is simply keeping it stock but IMPROVING all the little details.

• Higher compression out to the max whatever cam you choose can handle. You are probably looking at about 8.7:1

• Details of that are keeping the domed pistons if you can or if you can find new ones or flat tops with a tight deck. You may need to have the cylinders cut down
BUT….since a used 50 year old case probably needs to be decked anyway, you can have the cylinder deck set at the same time without machining cylinders.

• You will likely need new heads on a 1.8 or 2.0L. The 1.7L heads on a well cared for engine usually survive. Get new seats installed with 0.006” interference fit. Get new valve guides and the best valve size that is recommended by your cam maker.
Suggest 41 X 35 or 42 x 36 max.

The 1.7L heads are worth keeping if you are keeping the domed pistons of the 1.7L. The dimple in the quench area is made to work with the dome of the piston.

• Cam….if you are keeping factory injection (either D or L) a Web #73 is minimum and works between 8.2:1 and about 8.7:1. A Raby 9590 is probably better. If you are going carbs or aftermarket injection there are several other cams all with a lobe center around 108°.

• Ignition….you need a 40-50 kv coil for the better compression. There are a whole range of ignitions you can use. If you end up keeping the D-jet, a 42KV Pertronix plus and ignitor module and good plugs.
If you can do a bit of you own work, install a hall effect ignition module in the stock D-jet distributor with a high voltage coil (similar to early Rabbit or Vanagon). If you have the money, high voltage coil with a 123-distributor so you have real ignition timing control.

• Once you upgrade compression, cam and ignition….do the very best you can for an exhaust. Even a stainless empi version of the thunderbird header…say with a round Ford F150 shorty muffler…will add another 3% (Jake Raby noted this even works).
Having a 1.7L or 1.8L “massaged” up to 95-100 hp in a 2200 lb car is a lot of fun and far less expensive….but just as detail oriented…than building something bigger.

Ray

Fri Oct 03, 2025 3:02 am

List of not so complicated performance mods :
Light weight race battery,
Plexi rear window,
Full synthetic engine oil,
NGK BPR 5eix iridium plugs gapped to 0.8mm combined with increased fuel pressure increased (on the 1.8 slacken the spring on the AFM a few notches instead) add a variable resistor onto the CHT sensor and adjust with added timing advance (play it by ear for both but you can advance it to 10° @1500 RPM or 24°@3000 rpm which ever brings the other above it's max advance and you will still be within factory spec. but right on the perf. edge of it. Use high octane pump gas and you can get away with a few degrees more

Removing the air intake box fully with a large intake trumpet and fine mesh to replace it and a rain cap( make sure that engine lid rain cover is still in place) that or the K'N kit from Autoatlanta combined with a performance exhaust kit.
Once you have got to where you feel right going by ear put it on a rolling road and adjust it some more.
Remove the spare wheel, jack and carpeted board.
Go with original 155 spec width tyres with eco tread and tyre pressures up ever so slightly .

The handling of the 914 is so good in corners that wider tyres on the 1.7 and 1.8 will actually decrease overall performance with these small engines.
A slightly reduced 155 tyre profile will give for a slightly lower ratio final drive that will definitely make it perkier.

Check the link for 914 tyre info:

https://www.longstonetyres.co.uk/classic-car-tyres/porsche/914.html

If there are light weight wheels out there for the 155 original spec tyre set up they will help with inertia induced acceleration lag.
Add slick 50 to the gearbox oil.
Remove the headlight motors ( fit GT pull up kits or a DIY manual system)
Run half full tank only(a fuel stick advisable)
Replace the side steel longeron covers with lightweight ones..
Remove the rear boot and seat carpets.
Remove radio speakers and electric aerial.
You could fit light weight front and rear boot lids but not very cost effective.

Fri Oct 03, 2025 10:02 am

All very good ideas, so far.
But as long as there is no car in garage, why not search and start with a 1973 or newer model (better shifting) with 2,0 GA 95 hp, GC 88hp or german GB engine with 100 HP if possible. (With stabis) The engine can be overhauled and evtl. upgraded with 103 mm pistons and 40 or 44 Carbs. A rather mild cam makes good torque at low revs. Not a killer, but sovereign.
The body is the risk! Find a good one!

Fri Oct 03, 2025 1:48 pm

wagen19 wrote: All very good ideas, so far.
But as long as there is no car in garage, why not search and start with a 1973 or newer model (better shifting) with 2,0 GA 95 hp, GC 88hp or german GB engine with 100 HP if possible. (With stabis) The engine can be overhauled and evtl. upgraded with 103 mm pistons and 40 or 44 Carbs. A rather mild cam makes good torque at low revs. Not a killer, but sovereign.
The body is the risk! Find a good one! OK!

While I agree that getting a 2.0L 914 engine would the the simplest thing.....its not really affordable here in the US.

The 2.0L engine is hard to find here. Expensive here and not simple to overhaul here anymore. Very few shops here work on VW heads and even less on type 4.

All type 4's at this point in time need new valve seats. The 2.0L heads are notorious for both cracks and needing new seats. Unless you have connections at skilled shops, virtually no one....affordable....will do that level of work without brand new 914 2.0 castings which are available but you are looking at ~$2000 for heads.

That also said, if the result is only 95-100hp and spending the premium money...you can do that for less with a 1.8L or even a 1.7L with a bit more finesse and work.

Ray

Sat Oct 04, 2025 1:58 am

Aha, OK, next ideas and questions:

The way to an unexpensive and solid 2,0 l type 4 engine, goes along good used 1,8 l type 4 heads. 021 101 371 S >> top edition!

How about unexpensive engine parts from 2,0 l bus, bay or vanagon and 1,8 l type 4 heads? Imo the 1,8 l type 4 heads have rather seldom cracks, the GB heads nearly allways.
Imo, idea, question, there can be some damaged engines around, uncomplete with damaged heads, but hopefully good or usable 71 mm cranks and 94,0 mm cylinders.
Are there still new 94,5 pistons for 914 to get there?

Heads:
all 1,8 l heads fit 2,0 l cylinders, just bolt on and even make a slightly higher compression ratio. I like the 1,8 l 412 heads very best. Valves 41 and 34 mm. With luck you can find sodium filled 34 mm exhaust valves. (early german 1,8 l "AP" bus engines)
021 101 371 S heads are the most interesting ones, imo.
A combination of 2,0 l bus engine parts with 1,8 l type 4 heads with a type 4 or aftermarket cam and 40 PDSIT, PII-4 or 40 IDF should not be too expensive, I assume.

For me, just only a theoretical idea (but maybe not the worst):
Type 1 or type 3 based engine in 914. Well, the flywheel, starter, clutch is tricky, but with a wbx crank in type 1 or 3 case, the 914 flywheel should fit as is.
With some 2,1 l wbx cranks and rods, you can go in that direction.
Case must be machined for big wbx seal and maybe for your cylinders.
Porsche style axial cooling system for type 1 makes a look in direction of 914-6.

Find a unexpensive or uncomplete 2,1 l wbx engine, somehow damaged, but with good crank and rods.
The type 1 / 3 parts as you have or like.

For the type 4 based engine for 914:
Find a low mile 1,8 l type 4 engine from 412 limousin (dipstick) with good case and good heads (from automatic) or a 914 1,8 l.
Find a 2,0 l crank and rods from bus, bay, vanagon or 914 and a 914 flywheel.
4 bolt type 4 manifolds are probably easier to get, than 3 bolt 914-2,0.

A 1,8 l 85 HP AN-engine from 412 lim or european 914 equipped with 40 IDF and 009 can also be unboring.

Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:15 am

Wagen19:

I actually agree with all you have stated in this thread. The original question was "what are some inexpensive upgrades to a 1./1.8".

A couple of points I would liketo make:

1. The title lead me to understand at first that he is not NECESSARILY looking to acquire a 914 ith a 2.0L engine. That is big cost issue here in the US just getting a complete one whether it runs or not.
But, to your point...he also does not even have a 914 yet......so if he gets lucky....he might just find an affordable 914 with a 2.0L and make the whole process simpler...if not any less expensive.

2. He noted two common options...both are expensive...the type 4 store kits and the Jake Raby complete build.

So....its back to what he was first getting at. If you just stumbled upon 1.7L and 1.8L and that is what he has....what can he do to upgrade the power and reliability.

I think all of tehsuggestions so far are just fine. Each is a viable method.

I am also glad you brought back up ....details from bus engines as that was his second question.

It is this this subject I will add to:

In one respect, while there are more than a few differences beteen engine cases from early 411 through the last years of the bus....these are year or ERA specific and have virtually nothing to do with what make of model of car it came in.

A. In that respect, though some are better in little ways....all type 4 engine cases are totally usable to make 1.7L, 1.8L and 2.0L engines with. In effect they are all the same.
Same for the 2.0/71mm stroke and the 1.7L/1.8L/66mm stroke crankshafts. All are the same. Except for some variation from year to year...rockers are the same, pushrods are the same and oil pumps are the same.

B. The 1.7L and 1.8L heads are all the same....411/412....bus...914...except fro some small casting differences found in one particular letter code # that spanned all applications.

Here is a great video by Jake Raby about the casting differences between early and late engine cases. Any of them will work for a 914.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siPS_EBLxLY

C. Big issue to remember....heads...and to some degree...engine cases... that have run many miles in a bus whether they are 1.7L or 1.8L...rarely are good candidates for rebuilding something. The weight and aerodynamics of the VW bus just KILLS engines. They run hot. The buses have the issue of dropping valve seats because the head temp on busses are usually close to 100* hotter than small cars like 411/412 and 914 are.

This is not saying you cannot or should not use a type 4 engine case from a bus....just saying to check and measure it carefully and do not spend top dollar on it.

Heads from busses are always suspect. Heads from 411/412/914...less so.

D. There are very few bus pistons that have any usefulness to a 914 except some of the 1.8L pistons. All of the cylinders are just fine. The quality and make are the same for VW and Porsche. The difference is that the buses had larger piston dishes to make lower compression.

The 1.7L piston with the dome is the same for 411/412/914. The bus came with dished pistons for lower compression in the 1.7L just like the California model. You do not want those.

There are some rare and very old flat top pistons for 1.7L that are viable but you need to make your deck very tight to get comoression.

Ray

Sat Oct 04, 2025 1:49 pm

For my understanding all is very theoretical here. So there is no car and it´s also not known, if there is a concrete 1,7 l or 1,8 l engine at all.
But if so, it´s not known which one, carb (s) or which kind of fuel injection system and in which mechanical condition.
My intention was to show up, what kind of parts and engines are out there and what kind of individual combinations are possible, that can be installed in a 914.
Let´s wait for more input.

Sun Oct 05, 2025 6:15 pm

Ken Jansen of Jansen Enterprises< Belmont California builds very very top engines, from vintage stock to full on drag race. Reasonable prices, knows his stuff, expert machinist, great people at his shop. He can set you up

You want to keep stock injection? If so the 2 liter system D jet is the biggest stock system and you can bump the engine up with bigger pistons to 2.1 liter, using the stock injection . For bigger motors, you need to go to dual carbs or aftermarket injection.

I have a Jansen built 2.1 liter, with stock FI.

The real trick to a 914 is handling. Sure you can put in a minster motor, I know folks with V8s in them, I have one with a V6, I have known folks with flat 6 motors too. Much beyond stock motors, the price goes up high for the engines. But handling, that is were these 914s shine, even with the stock 1.7 motor (I have had them, and they are peppy motors, and I was getting 35 mpg highway in mine on road trips on the mountain roads to Yosemite Valley in my misspent youthful days of rock climbing, driving like a maniac on them roads, through the curves, catching air on the crests of hills Mileage did suffer when driving like that) My 2.1 liter only gets me in the high 20's mpg on highways.
For handling, 195 50 tires, fat stiffer than the optional stock front sway bar (no rear bar please) stiff rear springs, lower springs. I have 150 lbs rear springs, with three links cut out for lowering. Elephant Racing poly bronze bushings. handles like a million dollar car, On twisty roads I can keep up with a friends 400HP racing motor 911, but he blows me away on the straight aways! It is always good to stop, so Porterfeld racing brake pads, they are noisy, and very dusty, but boy howdy do they grab on to the rotor and stop the 914 swiftly.

That is what the 914 is about, unmatched handling. Very fun.

Get the best rust free body you can find.

The later side shift tranny is better than the early tail shift tranny, but you can swap them, BUT is the linkage is in good shape, new plastic bushing bits, even the tail shift is ok. The tail shift linkage is a lot longer and mor complex than the side shift, otherwise the trannies are the same, 901 tranny.

Early cars are lighter, later cars have heavy doors, with a massive impact beam inside each door. The later cars have heavy bumpers, but you can install lighter early bumpers.

Think handling in the 914, not high power, but handling. Id take coworkers out on the freeway clover leafs and have them begging for me to slow down, scare the crapola out of them with what that little 914 can do on corners. Like it was on rails.

You want big power, like really big power, stick a small block in there, screw up the weight distribution, make it heavy, and it aint the insane handling little car anymore, oh sure it is still a handling machine with a V8, but not as nimble as the lighter version VW motor.

Handling, that is what will put the smile on your face, not power, but handling.

Sun Oct 05, 2025 10:44 pm

Congrats, thanks for your input. I totally agree with you, owning a 73 stock 2,0 l with orig. D-Jet and GB engine. Rims 5,5 x 15 ET 26 as in orig. Porsche list.
Good luck!

Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:37 am

wagen19 wrote: Congrats, thanks for your input. I totally agree with you, owning a 73 stock 2,0 l with orig. D-Jet and GB engine. Rims 5,5 x 15 ET 26 as in orig. Porsche list.
Good luck!

Totally agree!

While I did not get into what's needed chassis wise....its part of the point I was trying to make. A lot of hp is not really needed to have a really fun ride with the 914.

Motor wise, it's more about being in excellent tune and having great throttle response to go with really good handling.

It was/is the same recipe on my 412. Slightly lowered stance, better sway bars, end links, bushings, cleaned up steering, better shock and strut valving, very well tuned D-jet (far better than stock) on a modified 1.7L pushing right at 90hp at the rear wheels and right at 100 on the dyno.

Brakes were largely stock but with much better friction material. Pagidand cross drilled Zimmerman rotors on the front and Mintex shoes and self adjusters on the rear drums.

For a long time I was running 5.5" rims and 205/55-15 Continental sport contacts. When it gets back on the road it will have 195-60-15 and rear discs. Porterfield pads in the front and Pagid in the back.

You do not need large hp in the 914 to have a lot of fun. Ray

Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:09 pm

Over wide tyres can be a big horsepower drain , and a big downer for 0-60s , there is a dyno test out there from the smallest to largest reasonable width tyres on a pick up and the difference was 7.8% with the thinnest putting down the most power.
Porsche knew this oh so well and used this to their advantage on earlier type racing cars refining there suspension and weight distribution to be able to use the thinnest of tyres to increase performance yet still keeping great cornering . As they had a budget engine with the 914/4 to make a small sports car. They chose to do the same on the 914/4 as they did on their first race car, only increasing power by 4hp from it's vw supllied beetle engine in the type 64 , and not to touch at all the type 4 1.7 VW engine ,making up for it with finesse in the handling allowing for use of thinner lower power draining tyres.They had to make it nimble on a budget, named 'the poor man's Porsche ' or for those who drive on roads with bends 'the smart man's car.
The 911's of the time just before the 914 came from the factory with 165s.
It would be a shame to take a lot of time finessing what Porsche already did but more so with finer timing, performance air intake, weight saving to throw it away on fat tires especially as they will give very little extra speed around the corners but will slow you down considerably powering out of them, the inertia lag due to the extra weight is also a big downer, it would be different if you had twice the power and the extra width would be useful to stop wheel spin out of the corners.
Fatter tyres also take out a lot of fun in handling ,thinner tyres give a real feel of the car.
I made the mistake of fitting 195's on my 2.0l my friend had 165's on his 2.0l a totally different ride.
The fatter tyre 914 2.0l could be thrown into the corner faster but the 165 2.0l liter would power out earlier from the corner with the back end more reactive and fun...

Mon Oct 06, 2025 4:47 pm

Nitramrebrab72 wrote: Over wide tyres can be a big horsepower drain , and a big downer for 0-60s , there is a dyno test out there from the smallest to largest reasonable width tyres on a pick up and the difference was 7.8% with the thinnest putting down the most power.
Porsche knew this oh so well and used this to their advantage on earlier type racing cars refining there suspension and weight distribution to be able to use the thinnest of tyres to increase performance yet still keeping great cornering . As they had a budget engine with the 914/4 to make a small sports car. They chose to do the same on the 914/4 as they did on their first race car, only increasing power by 4hp from it's vw supllied beetle engine in the type 64 , and not to touch at all the type 4 1.7 VW engine ,making up for it with finesse in the handling allowing for use of thinner lower power draining tyres.They had to make it nimble on a budget, named 'the poor man's Porsche ' or for those who drive on roads with bends 'the smart man's car.
The 911's of the time just before the 914 came from the factory with 165s.
It would be a shame to take a lot of time finessing what Porsche already did but more so with finer timing, performance air intake, weight saving to throw it away on fat tires especially as they will give very little extra speed around the corners but will slow you down considerably powering out of them, the inertia lag due to the extra weight is also a big downer, it would be different if you had twice the power and the extra width would be useful to stop wheel spin out of the corners.
Fatter tyres also take out a lot of fun in handling ,thinner tyres give a real feel of the car.
I made the mistake of fitting 195's on my 2.0l my friend had 165's on his 2.0l a totally different ride.
The fatter tyre 914 2.0l could be thrown into the corner faster but the 165 2.0l liter would power out earlier from the corner with the back end more reactive and fun...

You mention tire width, but not aspect ratio. I run the 195 50 tires. The 195 is not too wide and being 50 series is small diameter, which effectively alters the final drive ratio, resulting in quicker acceleration than a larger diameter tire. Also the ""back end more reactive" thing with narrow tires will limit cornering. If you enjoy driving on the edge of the tire breaking away, you can still do that with the wider tire. However if you are driving on a road, you dont have margin for error if the back end spins out, breaks free. Sure if you are playing around on an autocross track, with nothing to crash into, breaking away, spinning out might be considered "fun" by some. But for road use, spin outs and breaking free of the rear tires in a corner is just plain dangerous.

195 50 tires are not too wide. the smaller than stock diameter really helps the acceleration too.

Tue Oct 07, 2025 12:43 pm

zerotofifty wrote: Nitramrebrab72 wrote: Over wide tyres can be a big horsepower drain , and a big downer for 0-60s , there is a dyno test out there from the smallest to largest reasonable width tyres on a pick up and the difference was 7.8% with the thinnest putting down the most power.
Porsche knew this oh so well and used this to their advantage on earlier type racing cars refining there suspension and weight distribution to be able to use the thinnest of tyres to increase performance yet still keeping great cornering . As they had a budget engine with the 914/4 to make a small sports car. They chose to do the same on the 914/4 as they did on their first race car, only increasing power by 4hp from it's vw supllied beetle engine in the type 64 , and not to touch at all the type 4 1.7 VW engine ,making up for it with finesse in the handling allowing for use of thinner lower power draining tyres.They had to make it nimble on a budget, named 'the poor man's Porsche ' or for those who drive on roads with bends 'the smart man's car.
The 911's of the time just before the 914 came from the factory with 165s.
It would be a shame to take a lot of time finessing what Porsche already did but more so with finer timing, performance air intake, weight saving to throw it away on fat tires especially as they will give very little extra speed around the corners but will slow you down considerably powering out of them, the inertia lag due to the extra weight is also a big downer, it would be different if you had twice the power and the extra width would be useful to stop wheel spin out of the corners.
Fatter tyres also take out a lot of fun in handling ,thinner tyres give a real feel of the car.
I made the mistake of fitting 195's on my 2.0l my friend had 165's on his 2.0l a totally different ride.
The fatter tyre 914 2.0l could be thrown into the corner faster but the 165 2.0l liter would power out earlier from the corner with the back end more reactive and fun...

You mention tire width, but not aspect ratio. I run the 195 50 tires. The 195 is not too wide and being 50 series is small diameter, which effectively alters the final drive ratio, resulting in quicker acceleration than a larger diameter tire. Also the ""back end more reactive" thing with narrow tires will limit cornering. If you enjoy driving on the edge of the tire breaking away, you can still do that with the wider tire. However if you are driving on a road, you dont have margin for error if the back end spins out, breaks free. Sure if you are playing around on an autocross track, with nothing to crash into, breaking away, spinning out might be considered "fun" by some. But for road use, spin outs and breaking free of the rear tires in a corner is just plain dangerous.

195 50 tires are not too wide. the smaller than stock diameter really helps the acceleration too.
Just only a very few thoughts:

> racing bicycles are using very narrow or slim tires, because of low rolling resistance and very low weight

> a tire with small outside diameter makes better acceleration because of ratio.

> small and narrow rims and tires are reducing weight and total weight of vehicle and you have at least 4 wheels on your car. (maybe one more in the trunk)

> a light wheel and tire has lower inertia

> Porsche Salzburg used 155 SR 15 for the most of their rally beetles. Ask them why they did so

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=713568&highlight=salzburg

My thoughts about extra wide rims and wide tires, I will tell later.

Wed Oct 08, 2025 9:10 pm

wagen19 wrote: zerotofifty wrote: Nitramrebrab72 wrote: Over wide tyres can be a big horsepower drain , and a big downer for 0-60s , there is a dyno test out there from the smallest to largest reasonable width tyres on a pick up and the difference was 7.8% with the thinnest putting down the most power.
Porsche knew this oh so well and used this to their advantage on earlier type racing cars refining there suspension and weight distribution to be able to use the thinnest of tyres to increase performance yet still keeping great cornering . As they had a budget engine with the 914/4 to make a small sports car. They chose to do the same on the 914/4 as they did on their first race car, only increasing power by 4hp from it's vw supllied beetle engine in the type 64 , and not to touch at all the type 4 1.7 VW engine ,making up for it with finesse in the handling allowing for use of thinner lower power draining tyres.They had to make it nimble on a budget, named 'the poor man's Porsche ' or for those who drive on roads with bends 'the smart man's car.
The 911's of the time just before the 914 came from the factory with 165s.
It would be a shame to take a lot of time finessing what Porsche already did but more so with finer timing, performance air intake, weight saving to throw it away on fat tires especially as they will give very little extra speed around the corners but will slow you down considerably powering out of them, the inertia lag due to the extra weight is also a big downer, it would be different if you had twice the power and the extra width would be useful to stop wheel spin out of the corners.
Fatter tyres also take out a lot of fun in handling ,thinner tyres give a real feel of the car.
I made the mistake of fitting 195's on my 2.0l my friend had 165's on his 2.0l a totally different ride.
The fatter tyre 914 2.0l could be thrown into the corner faster but the 165 2.0l liter would power out earlier from the corner with the back end more reactive and fun...

You mention tire width, but not aspect ratio. I run the 195 50 tires. The 195 is not too wide and being 50 series is small diameter, which effectively alters the final drive ratio, resulting in quicker acceleration than a larger diameter tire. Also the ""back end more reactive" thing with narrow tires will limit cornering. If you enjoy driving on the edge of the tire breaking away, you can still do that with the wider tire. However if you are driving on a road, you dont have margin for error if the back end spins out, breaks free. Sure if you are playing around on an autocross track, with nothing to crash into, breaking away, spinning out might be considered "fun" by some. But for road use, spin outs and breaking free of the rear tires in a corner is just plain dangerous.

195 50 tires are not too wide. the smaller than stock diameter really helps the acceleration too.
Just only a very few thoughts:

> racing bicycles are using very narrow or slim tires, because of low rolling resistance and very low weight

> a tire with small outside diameter makes better acceleration because of ratio.

> small and narrow rims and tires are reducing weight and total weight of vehicle and you have at least 4 wheels on your car. (maybe one more in the trunk)

> a light wheel and tire has lower inertia

> Porsche Salzburg used 155 SR 15 for the most of their rally beetles. Ask them why they did so

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=713568&highlight=salzburg

My thoughts about extra wide rims and wide tires, I will tell later.

The 914 aint a bicycle. Wider tires can help handling. a reduced diameter (i.e. lower profile) can also help handling. I have driven 914s both ways. Oh and that wide small diameter tire I use probably weighs about this same as a stock tire.

The width of the tires in question are a very very very tiny factor in acceleration. For best handling, a soft sticky tire compound is also desirable, true that has more rolling resistance, but again it aint that big a deal as to acceleration or power loss. But a wider tire , a low profile tire, and a sticky compound will greatly improve handling.

These are facts.

as for removal of the air cleaner, replaced with a screen, that is just bad advice, unless one wishes to do frequent engine over hauls. The K and N filter is also not very good at filtering.

Also your advice to remove the spare tire and other items from the trunk to save weight is a poor choice for handling as we have found improved handling with those items in the trunk, and a full tank of gas too. If the front is too light, handling can suffer.

What might work for a rear engine Bug may not apply to the 914. I do know that many many great handling autocrossing 914s and road driven 914s do have wider low profile tires than the skinny tall stock tire.
I read the three pages of posts on the thread you linked, saw a reference to tires, where one guy stated he uses a 205 tire, which is wider than stock.

Like I said before, the 914 aint going to be a fast accelerating car short of major engine upgrades, BUT the 914 can easily and inexpensively turned into a very fantastic handing car, that can beat many cars that cost 10 times as much money. Any loss in horse power do to a 195 50 x15 tire is insignificant, but the handling gain is massive. Of course you also need to lower the car, stiffer spring, poly bronze bushings help too as does a fat front sway bar, and a fuil tank of gas, with stuff in the front trunk does help handling too.

Now if your into hyper miles per gallon goals, then yeas, get super skinny hard tires, remove every last bit of added weight. Give the driver Ozempic too.

Thu Oct 09, 2025 1:06 pm

I tend to agree. From the stock 185/sr-15.....and I say stock because you would never find any 914s through the late 70 and 80s running 155 or 165 width tires. Pretty much if they were still running stock rims, they went to the biggest tire they could run on 4.5" rims. If they were running 5.5" rims they would run 195s or 205s.

And...all 914s I have ever seen or worked on with stock rimsand pretty much the vast majority of ACVWs that were running either the stock 4.5s or aftermarket 5.5s....were running the maximum width of tire they could get. About half were running lower sidewall like 60 or 50 series.

Why? ....because it handles better in cornering and is less prone to kidding/slipping in mixed weather. Very most importantly it now has more rubber on the pavement for better braking.

That last part is the biggest key here. I went to 205-60-15s on my 5.5s because I drove daily in metro where "in town" speeds were 60-70 mph and bumper to bumper. No lie! Dallas, Houston, Atlanta. You need more tread on the pavement for cornering and stopping power.

As noted, the weight difference between a 165 and a 195 is negligible. The difference between a 165 and a 205 is noticeable when you pick it up....but not significant to the car...weight wise.

However, yes, going wider...all other things being equal meaning lets say they are all the same diameter to perceived gearing does not change.....produces more road friction and can soak up a little hp. What I am stating is that its not a weight thing.

Also, getting back on topic here.....we are talking about "inexpensive upgrades" to the 1.7l or 1.8L....not wholesale building a larger or totally different engine.

So let's get some clarification on that last part from the original poster.

1. Are/were you asking about what you could build a 1.7L or 1.8L into....meaning .....using the case and heads, getting all kinds of new parts and doing machine work....what could you build out of it?
Well in that case....being a 1.7L or 1.8L has no bearing. It's just another engine case and you can build whatever you have $$$$$ for.

2. Or are we speaking of keeping it a 1.7L or 1.8L and doing serious tuning? (by serious tuming I mean valves, cam, compression, fuel system tuning, ignition system tuning, exhaust).
Notice I did not say crank. If you are changing the crank and stroking it....its no longer a 1.7L or a 1.8L. You are building a different engine.

Or are you speaking of upping a 1.7L or 1.8L to a 2.0L. To me.....that's not an upgrade. That's a completely different engine based around a longer stroke. To build it properly...0retty much everything but the engine case needs to be changed.

Ray