72/73 rear spoiler option #

[kaufmanp]

On my highly optioned '73 911T, my COA also seems to have a Rear Spoiler indicated.

and no mention of a "S" type front spoiler.

[NZVW]

I was going to ask for this tread to be canned,, but then thought about the overpriced uneducated statements our "manufacturer" makes on a piece of A4 cheap paper called a COA ,, (((Really Porsche ))) then I changed my mind.

Owning a 45 yr old car or older and asking the manufacturer for basic infomation should be a matter of pride for them.
Now its,, state your numbers and if its correct we "may' confirm, if not correct F Off.
I can handle and understand that,, We dont want VIN numbers poorly stamped on toooo many older cars (RS) etc.
So lets (Porsche) just pump out inaccurate expensive, misleading verificational documents which are false and incorrect.
Well done
Mark

[911MRP]

Mark,

I had posted here suggesting that this forum compile a list of known repeat errors on CoAs then feed it back to correct and educate Porsche at source. But then deleted post. Why bother. Unless management at AG and sales regions bothers to make sure the heritage info is correct and staff are trained things won't improve. If errors in a paid for service were being made in some other part of the operation it would probaly get fixed but some reason this is not getting scrutiny. I find it quite interesting that a reasonably senior Porsche employee signature appears on error prone certificates.

Pity if wrong info from OEM misleads and unnecessarily excites folks who are learning about their Porsche cars. Unsurprisingly owners will believe Porsche OEM information if they have paid to research their car and (naively) believe the official signed certificate. With risk of litigation and data protection etc probably such things will eventually get stopped. The much missed old guard factory archivists like Olaf who looked into things properly and wrote letters of confirmation for free (not money making incorrect certificates) were a different breed but sadly it is a poor show from Porsche these days. The level of interest and volumes are no doubt a different order of magnitude than back in nineties.

Not just Porsche however, more generally, in UK the government licencing body DVLA will no longer provide previous owner details due to data protection unless there is a legal reason. Pity if chassis/ PO etc information that feeds our little hobby and helps us make connections is squashed by legal concerns or the information becomes meaningless through OEM ineptitude and disinterest in their historic product information resources.

I'm fortunate to have letters from factory and DVLA full details that I've used to connect to all PO because I did this digging a long ago but getting harder and less reliable these days apparently.

Steve

[sithot]

Paperwork adds value to any car. There is the truth and then there's everything else which may not be that.

[911T1971]

It seems the COA are generally accurate, at least German and Swiss ones, where the people can understand German and translate correctly the Kardex.

Looks like problem is mainly reported from the US (and maybe all English based translation) COA.
I think the COA translation system is not centralised (but the source of Info is..) and so every importer does it on its own, including using people not really adapted to understand the german written Kardex or microfiche stored in Stuttgart.

[Perry911]

It's a translation error.
Did these cars in question have muffler skirts?

[NZVW]

It seems the COA are generally accurate, at least German and Swiss ones,

Last time I looked out my bathroom window there was not a cow with a bell hanging round it head.

Sounds to me then that people buy inaccurate A4 COA's rather than the car itself I guess unless ther's an "udder" hanging over your windowsill .
Mark

[911T1971]

NZVW, COA are done by the local importers asking access to the centralised Kardex in Stuttgart.
Since those documents are written in German and both Swiss and German understand these documents without the help or need of translating it, they do fewer and actually no faults at all.
Of all faulty COA reported, unfortunately they were all/mostly done via the US.

[NZVW]

Yes I understand the "lost in translation" aspect of this topic and this is why items on the Additional Optional Equipment had an allocated number,
Why the COA's don't just state those numbers rather than attempting to translate the part would resolve this.
I have noticed that some of the Optional additional equipment listed do have the number as well and "spoiler" is one that is often seen with a poorly translated description as well as its allocated code number.
Mark

[patrick911]

Then there's also the difficulty that some codes used for our early cars were also used more recently, the M491 option (which to us refers to a 1973 RSR) used to be an option to have the turbo look in the eighties and nineties if I'm not mistaken.