[William Miller]

Originally Posted by BillJ

Filter was in the engine bay next to the motor on the suction side. You need to make sure that the tank has a good baffling system to prevent foaming and the keep the oil somewhat stable. This is very critical. If you ever do this , make sure you design, then buy your parts. I would have prefered a smaller tank located closer to the engine, but we could not make it safely fit and space near there. Stephen's link is really good!

Typcially the battery is relocated, as well as the fuel tank.

How well is a stock 914-4 or -6 balanced?
It seems like things are being moved foreward and maybe lower?
So does anyone know of hand the size of the stock tanks?

[smdubovsky]

BillJ, great pics.

Bill M, a stock 914 is pretty balanced. Pretty clase to 50/50 but I cant find hard data now. A -6 weighs about 100# more than a -4 but I dont know how that affects distribution. I haven't put mine up on my scales yet to know.

When you strip the car far more weight comes off the nose. Spare tire, air ducts, etc. The only thing in the rear is the carpet. My battery has located to the RF and it also has a cooler. I would think moving the oil tank & battery to the RF would help offset the driver but have nothing to base that on. The more hp you're sitting on, the more rearward the bias should be I think (else corner exit will really suffer)

My only test data is that in slow turns at willow I couldn't get the front to bite and turnin (AT ALL!). The LSD may have been most of the 'problem' - Im not used to driving w/ one. I didn't have problems w/ traction out of turns so that lead me to think the front could use more weight. The only practical thing left to do is to remove the factory fuel tank and go to a cell like BillJs. I dont think Im going to do that to this car though (or if I did, I wouldn't cut the 'firewall' - just because the car is in such nice shape)

All the racers seem to have placed everything very low and far forward. They probably know something (vs my just guessing)

The stock fuel tank is ~12gal. (12.5gal?) Found that out the hard way

SMD
________
LAMBORGHINI V10 SPECIFICATIONS

[type954]

http://www.914club.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=63760

no connection to the seller.

[William Miller]

Tanks! Get it!
Another good price point, but I still need a car to go with it!


BTW, I was just thinking about the transmission options.
If I was to use the stock 914 transmission don't I need a $400 special flywheel? I wouldn't need that I used my 915 transmission right? Then the $400 could go twards whatever parts are needed for the transmission conversion parts Right?

I'm off to go look at that car that's in the barn!

[smdubovsky]

Bill,
If you use your 915, you'd need to flip the R&P ($ to reset the backlash) and then you'd need the wevo tailcone ($2000! http://www.wevo.com/wevo915sideshift.htm). Much cheaper to use the 901 that comes in the car. Im not sure what flywheel is needed (you're more than welcome to see what mine looks like), but I've seen you fab your own for less Basically the tranny is the same 901 as the early 911s had. So whatever flywheel is required to put a 9-bolt 3L into an early longdhood...

Good luck at the barn! take pictures.

SMD
________
Milf Anal

[BillJ]

I did find that with the fuel cell filled up that the front did "bite" a little more. Made sense with the weight more centered on the axle. The other option for fuel is of course the patrick motorsports converted fuel tank to ATL fuel cell at $1995 - both pretty and dear (and not worth it). Alignment and corner balancing certainly help offset these differences in weight distribution. Lower is, as far as I know, always better. The lower your Center of Gravity the better.

Oh and as we discussed, you will need a different flywheel for your 3.0 motor.

[William Miller]

On the tranny I was thinking 915 if I use the 3.6 engine since I already have an early C4 flywheel machined for that. I was really thinking the 3.6 option just got a little cheaper!

I know, I know, I keep confusing everyone. It's hard to keep track of it myself.

If using a 915 what about drive shafts?
I guess I should go read the wevo site.

Barn find was too ugly to take pictures.
It's been there so long the flat rear tires are now one with the floor!
Many parts have been stripped and rust is bad. Salvageable, but I know there are better opetions out there.
Maybe a source for parts if I do end up with a 914.
I'll keep the guy's number anyway.

[racer]

The stock tank is NOT 12 gallons but 16.4 gallons, located relatively "high" but between the axles, which improves the balance. A same period 911 carries its gas (closer to 21 gallons) lower, but most of it is at or infront of the axle line, thus, you can really notice handling differences in a 911 when the tank is full or closer to empty. The difference between full and empty in the 914 did not have as much impact on handling.

Putting a 3.6 in a 914 is overkill. 247hp (more if chipped ~ 260hp) pushing 2300ish lbs? A carbed and "cammed" 3.0 will be 210-220 hp, will be lighter and will not necessitate a 915 trans swap. A "stock" 3.0L at 180hp is still plenty fun.

If the battery box in your roller is stong, leave it where it is. Why move it unless you have to. Afterall, you said this was a Street/DE car, not a "race" car. You can learn to embarass a lot of "faster" cars even with only 200hp. Why? lighter weight and great balance.

Also realize that it will get awfully tight in the front trunk for: 1) remounted fuel cell, 2) relocated battery and 3) front oil cooler with proper ventilation (either out the floor or out the top)

One of the neat things about a 914 is they have great storage. Put a spare in the front trunk and some tools, and in the back your chair, overnight bag and the roof and never feel claustrophibic.

Heck, if its a race car, then start cutting all kinds of metal out of it

[smdubovsky]

Good to know the tank is bigger than that. Thouhg, Im positive I didn't put anywhere near that in it when it ran dry.

Originally Posted by racer

Putting a 3.6 in a 914 is overkill.

Dave, you CLEARLY dont subscribe to the dorki more power is better disease. You are hereby banned from posting any more

But seriously, a 3.6 isn't overkill. Not even close. My miscarbed, mis-camed, little 3.0 puts 180hp to the ground (dyno proven). Its no where near actually being a "fast" car in my book. I haven't weighed it, but its very stripped and the PO claimed 2060#. So, when I get it running right and possibly 220-240 @ the crank thats only 8-9#/hp. Respectable, but not even close to 3.6 or 911 turbo territory. Ching's 3.6 RS clone leaves it for dead (hes only 2200#). My 911 will definately beat it up Way more power, way more tire, not too much more weight... But, all said and done its still a fun car. Absolute heresy to talk about having too much power.

Our discussion of the tank forward of the front axle is to get more weight on the nose to help handling. Yes it changes w/ fuel load, but the 914 tank is very high (and still very nearly over the front axle). I could feel the difference as it was going empty. I was simply commenting that I think mine needs more overall weight bias towards the front (as its currently setup).

SMD
________
Headshops

[BillJ]

Bill - I have taken a right seat session in a 3.6 powered 914 and let me say that it was incredible and was by no means overkill. The only cars that could even come close to keeping up were the 996 cup cars at the Glen. That said, you need a lot of chasis and suspension development to make it work right.