What is correct jack for '69T?

[NeunElf]

PET isn't perfect but it does give:

• 644.722.010.00 jack -68
• 914.722.010.10 jack 69
• 914.722.010.10 jack -71
• 914.722.011.10 jack 72-

And, Brett Johnson's The 911 & 912 Porsche, A Restorer's Guide to Authenticity shows a screw-type jack with a '69-'70 toolkit. The picture isn't detailed enough to show whether it's a yellow or green dot.

ejboyd5's post shows a 644.722.010.00 jack as is correct for a late 356B T6 through '68 911/912. The part number was the same starting with the 356A but with some differences.

Maybe Karmann was still putting the 644.722.010.00 jacks in cars in December of 1968, or maybe the jack in ejboyd5's '68 got changed somewhere along the line. Jacks could disappear in Porsche shops and be replaced with something else (it happened to me).

Barring a photo of the jack the day the proud new owners brought the 911T that's now raspritz's I'd recommend one of the screw type jacks as being what all the documentation points to.

[ejboyd5]

Are you suggesting that I should sell my original 644.722.010.00 and source a 914.722.010.10 because that is what is stated in the PET. Or should I apply common sense and believe that when Porsche/Karmann switched from SWB to LWB production they had many more pressing issues than the piles of left over 644.722.010.00 jacks they had been using for many years and would continue to use until the supply was exhausted. Let's not fall into the trap that the NCRS has created for its members by promoting its judging standards as the absolute last word on authenticity. By so doing, many unsophisticated, ovine owners have removed authentic, original fittings from their cars so as to conform with the arbitrary "standards," only to later discover that the removed parts were legitimate production line anomalies that were an important part of their car's history.

[NeunElf]

Are you suggesting that I should sell my original 644.722.010.00 and source a 914.722.010.10 because that is what is stated in the PET. Or should I apply common sense and believe that when Porsche/Karmann switched from SWB to LWB production they had many more pressing issues than the piles of left over 644.722.010.00 jacks they had been using for many years and would continue to use until the supply was exhausted. Let's not fall into the trap that the NCRS has created for its members by promoting its judging standards as the absolute last word on authenticity. By so doing, many unsophisticated, ovine owners have removed authentic, original fittings from their cars so as to conform with the arbitrary "standards," only to later discover that the removed parts were legitimate production line anomalies that were an important part of their car's history.

No, I was replying to raspritz's question "What is correct jack for '69T?" Two sources point towards the screw type 914.722.010.10. Raspritz didn't give a build date for the 911T in question.

And, the screw type 914.722.010.10 costs about half as much today as a the friction type 644.722.010.00.

Personally, I don't necessarily accept that because a car sits a certain way today and it's not known to have been changed that it must therefore have come from the factory that way 50+ years ago.

I can see three common sense ways your car could have come to you with the friction type 644.722.010.00 jack:

1. Karmann didn't start putting screw type 914.722.010.10 jacks in cars until after yours was built.
2. Karmann did start putting screw type 914.722.010.10 jacks in cars before yours was built but somebody grabbed some friction type 644.722.010.00 jacks about the time yours was built.
3. The original screw type 914.722.010.10 jack was lost before the car came to you and it was replaced with a friction type 644.722.010.00 jack.

Number 1 may be the most likely but the other explanations aren't disproved.

There's a big gap between knowing that your car defines all 1969 Porsche 911s and--on the other extreme--knowing that your car is not original. I think the truth is probably in that gap.

[ejboyd5]

Feel free to advance as many theories (guesses) as you like so long as you agree that there are very few absolutes when it comes to cars and their equipment when leaving the factory. Maintaining a steady output always takes priority and can explain many variations from "standard."

[69 soft window]

I had a '70 911T that was a 10/69 Karmann build and I remember that horrible jack, I say this because I used to rotate my own tires in those days and I thought that jack to be not very stable. I also have a 73.5 911T and I have the green dot jack in that car. Hope this helps.

[ejboyd5]

Let's face it. Whatever iteration of the Porsche jack one chooses to use, it is a very primitive affair. Here's a very basic adapter I whipped up to allow use of a standard floor jack as the prime mover. An advantage of this tool is that allows the floor jack (installed perpendicular to the major axis of the car) to roll back and forth on its little wheels to compensate for the changing position of the jacking point as the car lifts and returns to rest. This tool is hardly original with me, but a few minutes with some scrap steel, a saw and an arc welder can make anyone's life a lot safer than relying upon a factory jack.

[911MRP]

I'm no Jack or literature expert. This from an accessories brochure from early 70s. Printed in 71 for MY 72, I think ? Literature experts will know. Illustrating the option of plastic 85l tank and space saver? Fuchs is a single colour, not black / silver. Unless I'm mistaken that seems to be quite an early Jack variant wedged upfront. What part number is this Jack. Would that version of Jack actually have been found in the contemporary cars being shipped then around 71 for model 72? Another case of the literature not being reliable as reference, perhaps?

Steve
PS Not a Jack but a old tool I have that has a similar mechanism to some jacks used back then. Had it a long time, never used it. Don't recall how I came by it:

Similar tool as part of a set once saw (this pair not mine)

[911T1971]

911Mrp, I beleive pic above is off a 72 prototype in yellow with silver Fuchs, photographed in Spring 71.

[Jules Dielen]

and that looks like jack used on early 356A cars (1956ish) with the hollow carrier. Interesting picture.

[911MRP]

Makes sense that in 1971 the marketing folks used the MY 72 prototype in calendar to picture the assessories for the forthcoming model year brochure. While I'm no expert, the Jack they used always seemed like an anachronism whenever I saw the picture -- which is why I posted it here.

At first glance with the plastic tank and wheel not being black /silver I thought it was early shot of mexico blue RS wheel but there was no hue change at rim lip and from date of publication it quickly became evident it was earlier than even the RS prototypes of calendar 72.

Still think we are a some way from clarity and census on typically found Jack timeline for early 911 even allowing for all the real world reasons for anomalies and "stuff happens" randomness that will always confuse the issue on a loose accessory put in the trunk.