Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Should I be suspicious

  1. #1

    Should I be suspicious

    See my last entry as regards the proper front panel in '67

    Being the OCD person that I am, I am always looking for new additions to the 67 Targa threads that I started. Found this one that was sold some time in the past by what purports to be a classic auto dealership designed to provide investment grade autos. Nice looking car but as per the usual just another dealer refusing to post the VIN number. Have taken to enlarging picture of the front number plates to get the VIN. Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn't. This car purports to be an "S" but when I enlarge the plate it is a six digit number without the S. Last digit looks fishy. Is this truly an "S" or am I missing something? See below. The quality of the pictures should allow further enhancement. What if anything should I do if something is not right.

    jenlarge.jpgi-gMp8M4b-X2.jpgi-3Xz7SMf-X4.jpg
    Last edited by doigthom; 10-10-2018 at 10:18 AM.

  2. #2
    Instagram Model Frank Beck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Posts
    9,751
    Warning! If I crap on you itís not on purpose.

    I often buy parts I think I need but find out I already own.

    "Save the whales."
    "Save the Rain Forest."
    "Save the baby humans."


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54DG48N4gs0

  3. #3
    Thanks for solving my self created mystery. Aluminum number plate just looks odd. Don't think I have seen one without the S stamped on it even if it is not artfully done. Sorry to raise suspicion on a fine look car. Already had it in my list from a different set of pictures. I even commented on the quality back then.

  4. #4
    I see one problem.
    Steve Shea #1 joined a long time ago
    58 speedster
    66 912
    67S
    73S
    97 VW eurovan
    1132 honda snowblower

    member Jackson Hole Ski Club

  5. #5
    What is the problem? But to my embarrassment I reviewed some of the picture I have collected. Looks like the earliest cars may have had the S struck next to the VIN number. However at some point it looks like the number plate was change to actually be embossed with "911S" in the plate before they stamped the actual VIN number thereby avoiding the necessity of adding the "stamped" S. Guess it was the same old story. Heinz used whatever they had until they ran out and then used the newer version. Sorry for any confusion I have caused. I may be even wrong on this latest explanation after re exam. Probably just my stupidity and they never did stamp an S on the aluminum VIN plate although I found a thread about a change for '68S cars. Here is the plate from 500006S.image.jpg

    Moe apologies!
    Last edited by doigthom; 10-08-2018 at 06:01 AM.

  6. #6
    Nothing related to the vin plate. The front panel with the drain/rib cutouts is not the right one for a 67.
    Steve Shea #1 joined a long time ago
    58 speedster
    66 912
    67S
    73S
    97 VW eurovan
    1132 honda snowblower

    member Jackson Hole Ski Club

  7. #7
    Not consistent

    randywells-25-4667.jpg20180316_105344 (2).jpg

    Second plate looks too new. HK Engineering did resto. Paint plate looks like a repo also. Original Porsche plates seem to have a slightly larger S following the 911 embossed model number. Also they seemed to have added a space between each individual VIN digit. Guessing I have created my own home grown "tempest in a teapot"
    Last edited by doigthom; 10-08-2018 at 08:08 AM.

  8. #8
    Yes, as Eric Linden (Soterik) noted above, the red car pictured was mine, and additional photos are in the link. The car did sell (after) the auction, and I have no idea of its whereabouts now, but it is "rumored" to be on the east coast. As far as the incorrectness of the front panel goes, there is a lengthy and unsettled discussion on this forum about cutoff dates for variants of these panels. I do know I did not replace this panel, nor was there the slightest evidence it had ever been replaced when I stripped all paint and undercoating from the car, and inspected all welds during my restoration of the car. Nevertheless, my statement does not prove the panel is correct in general. Perhaps it is an anomaly?

  9. #9
    Jim

    Thanks for not taking offense at my speculation aka stupidity. As to the secondary issue, I remember the thread about the front panel, but never paid it much mind. In my picture collecting I find these two. First one is 500587S and second is 500108S. I'll look for some more pictures for numbers in between. The yellow one above is 500368S. The other one was obviously reworked so it might be a new panel.

    DSC02603.JPGCarparc_Targa_28_1 (1).jpg

    Maybe a midyear change?

  10. #10
    The change was sometime in 72. 67 cars did not have this later panel. Properly restored 67s should not have these holes but it was the only way to get a replacement panel. So, many restored cars have the holes. Thus the extra holes iteration has become gospel or at least unsettled to some. There is a thread on this but many incorrect cars have been posted adding to the confusion.
    In my experience it is incorrect and all proper cars of the years in question should not have them. I think Restoration Design now has the right part. Until now it was up to your metal guy if you cared. If not no foul but not factory.
    Last edited by steve shea; 10-09-2018 at 05:46 AM.
    Steve Shea #1 joined a long time ago
    58 speedster
    66 912
    67S
    73S
    97 VW eurovan
    1132 honda snowblower

    member Jackson Hole Ski Club

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
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.