Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: FS: @classicdriver.com - 1965 911 2.0 US $ 291.000

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Woodland Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,381
    So Bruce what year is your car?

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    446
    My point is this happens with every single post-Aug '65 that comes on the market. Check the threads.

    My car is sn 302596. All the details of my car are well documented on this site, as well as my own site. Built in November of '65, delivered in December of '65, titled as a '66 as per all the records, the Kardex, CofA, original CA registration (which I still have) etc. So does that make it a phony pretender of sorts? Maybe in some circles, but I've never represented as anything other than that. I didn't start this debate and knew nothing about any this when I bought my car. I just wanted a simpler car than the '93 RSA that I had. As far as I'm concerned I like the direction Henk is going with http://www.911wooddashregistry.org. To me, that is a clear distinction, and is a nice add to the early 232 club. But then again there are plenty of other special 911's that come later too. I'm just tired of the bashing, inferred negativity, and the beating of this topic to death.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by luke-44 View Post
    That's an interesting document. It appears to say that authorization is granted to register '65 cars as '66's. If anyone is so inclined to describe their '65 car as a '66, I have n issue with that. But I'll continue to object to '66 cars being labeled as '65's. I agree, it is getting tiresome but when I was shopping for a real '65, I ran into a couple of these and could have been taken advantage of if I didn't know better. I'm going to spare others that if I can. I'm certainly not trying to offend anyone.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by luke-44 View Post
    My point is this happens with every single post-Aug '65 that comes on the market. Check the threads.
    It wouldn't if they weren't labeled as '65 cars. Does anyone really think it's a coincidence that this phenomena really started to gain steam only after the '65 MY cars shot up in value? If everyone described their car as Bruce did, none of this would be an issue. But they don't. Like it or not, their is a clear bump in value for the pre-summer break, '65 MY cars and I think sellers who classify their later cars only as "1965 Porsche 911's" are doing a disservice to their buyers. That's all.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    446
    Jp I know your mind is made up and I get that. But consider that others have a different opinion from you esp in Europe and that does not make them wrong. I can see why the European seller described it as he did. Being a euro car it may in fact have been titled as a '65. Why the big deal if seller disclosed the month of manufacture and other pertinent details like the s/n? Don't assume he is committing a fraud of some sorts. Let the market decide. It's a pretty car.

    Pre and post solex, wrap around vs straight knee pads, aluminum or steel steering wheel spokes, wooden dash, the number of screws on the top of the window frame, dash board screws, the shape of the ignition bezel and who know what else.

    I'm sure an objective person must think we are all nuts. Surely anyone looking to spend that kind of dough does the research. There's certainly enough info out there.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    446
    Quote Originally Posted by LiveFromNY View Post
    ...their is a clear bump in value for the pre-summer break, '65 MY cars ...
    The post '65's aren't doing so bad either.

    We should all enjoy the fact it has significantly increased demand for restoration services, strengthened our hobby (or business) and has saved a lot of some cars that otherwise may have gone to the crusher.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Woodland Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,381
    I'm really enjoying my 68

  8. #18
    not sure where the excitement comes from. Unless you have a 901 relax. In Europe for vintage competitions what matters is calendar year. plain simple. That has value in itself. it makes a Dec 65 more attractive to some than a Jan 66 car in terms of participation in these events. Sorry to see that everyone is now a "collector". My car was build in Oct 65 and allows me to participate in the right events therefore. That has value to ME. It is also unlikely to be on the market in the next 40 years so I could care less what others think.

    Those of you who own a SWB independent of year count yourselves lucky and enjoy the car as much as you can.

    best,
    TEE
    Registry Member #1869

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by TEE View Post
    not sure where the excitement comes from. Unless you have a 901 relax. In Europe for vintage competitions what matters is calendar year. plain simple. That has value in itself. it makes a Dec 65 more attractive to some than a Jan 66 car in terms of participation in these events. Sorry to see that everyone is now a "collector". My car was build in Oct 65 and allows me to participate in the right events therefore. That has value to ME. It is also unlikely to be on the market in the next 40 years so I could care less what others think.

    Those of you who own a SWB independent of year count yourselves lucky and enjoy the car as much as you can.

    best,
    TEE
    This is not all correct. All 911's up to 305100 (if converted to Solex) race in the same class, Period F, Klasse 11, Appendix K.

    Richard
    searching for engine (case) 903742

  10. #20
    Senior Member NorthernThrux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    London, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    2,258
    Did the Euro based seller provide a VIN ? That might clear things up.
    Bruce is clearly very honest and maybe doesn't see the attempts that slimy people go through to "reclassify" their cars for more gain. Maybe slimy is unfair. But I think that letter from Porsche lays out the parameters.

    I like Bloomberg's pragmatic take on the auction of one of the early cars in 2007. I would turn around their words and say there isn't anything wildly distinctive about the 65 and 66 cars. They just carry forward from the first cars.

    So what is so special about the original 235 911s produced? Really, not much, and most of it is bad. It isn't that these cars are better, they are just different and that was enough to start the bidding wars.

    How to spot one of the original 911s

    Here's a rundown on how to spot one of the original 235 911s: If it is still as delivered, the car will have the troublesome Solex carburetors and self-destructing open-jointed half shafts. Both of these are fine for museum cars but difficult to live with for cars that are driven further than on and off the trailer at concours events. The bulkhead panel below the engine cover that carried the release mechanism will be of a slightly different pressing than those used on subsequent 1965 models. The knee pads under the dashboard will not turn up at the edges, as done on later models.

    Note that most of these design features carried on, for various periods of time, through the 1965 and early 1966 models. So there isn't anything wildly distinctive about these first 235 cars that makes them instantly important, with one exception--the chassis number. But for some, apparently, that is more than enough.
    Early 911S Registry # 2395
    1973 Porsche 911S in ivory white 5sp MT
    2015 Porsche Macan S in agate grey 7sp PDK

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Message Board Disclaimer and Terms of Use
This is a public forum. Messages posted here can be viewed by the public. The Early 911S Registry is not responsible for messages posted in its online forums, and any message will express the views of the author and not the Early 911S Registry. Use of online forums shall constitute the agreement of the user not to post anything of religious or political content, false and defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise to violate the law and the further agreement of the user to be solely responsible for and hold the Early 911S Registry harmless in the event of any claim based on their message. Any viewer who finds a message objectionable should contact us immediately by email. The Early 911S Registry has the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary.