Porsche 914/6 collectability

[6 Shooter]

"...a bone stock 914/6 is a lump. A well maintained and good running 2.0L four cylinder 914 is arguably more fun because of the lighter weight and similar horsepower."

Hahaha... hey, I have two of those lumps ('70 & '72)... ;o) nothing against the 914/4-banger crowd and their "lighter weight" (eng and wet sump), but I've always loved the sound of a flat 6 (corvairs don't count ;oP ). I'll take the 6's standard, non alloy brakes (vented front rotors and larger rears), the dry sump, and a stock "lump" of a 2.0 6 over the "more fun" of a three or four year newer 2.0 4 with no regrets. ;o) ;oP


"So the watters of demand are muddied by the differences between those who want to collect and those who want to drive."

Not to mention the waters affected by the buy-in and repair cost difference.


"let's compare two cars of the same vintage ... a 1970 911S and a 1970 914/6. A bone stock 1970 911S is a true driver's car. It's fast, comfortable, handles pretty well and it can be used day after day as it's farily bulletproof in its construction. For all intents and purposes you could say that the 1970 911S is a car that everyone wants. The 914/6 of the same vintage is significantly slower, far less well-appointed, it handles much better than the 911 due to the mid-engine layout, and they were relatively finnicky cars due to the IDT carburetors. If put to a decision, I think it's safe to say that 99% of the population would choose the '70S over the '70 914/6."

There's so much here... IMHO, I don't think it's fair to compare a "same vintage" stock '70 S and a '70 6... first, there's the displacement of 2.2 to 2.0, not to mention pistons/compression, cams, and MFI to 40 Webers. Maybe compare a '70 S to a '70T... or a '69 S to a '69T... at least the displacements are same... but of course, we know that any early S kicks... What's the difference between a '69T eng and a stock 914-6 eng... great for point A to B. But to compare a '70 S to 914-6? I think that's almost as unfair as comparing a 914-6 to a 914-6GT. ;o)


"For all intents and purposes you could say that the 1970 911S is a car that everyone wants.... If put to a decision, I think it's safe to say that 99% of the population would choose the '70S over the '70 914/6."

Of course 99% would prefer a '70S... but not everyone could not afford a '70S. I think that a '70 914-6 had a base price close to $6000... I remember hearing that a 6 was about $500 less than a 911T with a 4-speed. I'm trying to remember what my 'buried' sales brochures said... I think that a 914-4 was about $3000 or 3500. I'm guessing that a '70S was about $10,000. Now, $3-4000 was alot of $$$$ back then... so stepping up from a 1.7 4-cyl to a 914-6 to a 911S wasn't so easy. A new VW Bug was around $2000, a Buick was around $3500. Otherwise there would be alot more early 911S running around, then and now.
Not to mention that Porsche had an additional problem selling the 914-6 because it was being called the ugliest Porsche. Road & Track even
showed how several designers would redesign the ugly 914 body.

FWIW, my '70 and '72 are both factory "lumps": #1412 and #181. ) But maybe I should compare them to my '73 S 2.7MFI... hahaha ;o)

[cmacar]

make it even a 1969 911 t & a 1970 914-6, there both have the same engine, why compare a 70 911s to a 70 914-6, it is well known that a s had all the goodies, unless the 914-6 has the same goodies, the sports package then see what happens.

[Cornpanzer]

Raj,
That Blut Orange looks great on a 6'r!

[Macroni]

Rare rare rare................and 35K original miles with all documents and ownership

hmmmmmmmm..............

[Mark Morrissey]

I thought you said it was Tangerine? Wow, Raj... that's a beauty.

[JKW]

Regarding the question about the relative performance of the 914/6 and the same year 911, take a look at Excellence Was Expected 1st Ed. p. 573 quoting period test report from Auto Motor Und Sport: "the German magazine noted with satisfaction that the 914/6 it tested accelerated better than the 1970 911T and had the same top speed as that car, even though the 911T had an engine ten percent bigger with fifteen more horsepower."

Also, take a look in Time and 2 Seats (Chapter Xi) for race results: At Nurburgring race of May 1970 the 914/6 GT and the 911 in the 2 liter class did this: 911L (G. Loos of Porsche Salzburg (factory entry) 9:46.5; 914/6 GT: 9:58.9. Loos was FQ and 1st at finish. 914s finished 2, 3, 4 and 5th in the class, ahead of other 911s. Given that the 910 of Wicky turned a 9:39.9, I'd say that Mr. Loos could drive.

At Le Mans that year, the 914/6 GT won GT and finished 6th OA, ahead of all 911s in the 2 ltr and 2.5 ltr classes. 914/6 GT qualified in 2 liter class at 4:30.0. 911S qualified at 4:29.6. (2.5 ltr 911S driven by Kremer also qualified at 4:29.6.)

Watkins Glen July 1970, 914/6 GT qualified at @ 1:28.8; fastest 911 was 1:28.6.

Osterreichring October 1970: 914/6 GT was FQ (and winner) in 2 ltr GT @ 2:09.55; fastest 911 was 2:07.37 (in 2.5 ltr GT).

Jon

[914-6gt]

Nice introductory report on the six. I'm not saying R&T had their hand on the pulse of the 914-6, but at the time, this is what was reported. In my opinion, the true measure of a car's performance is how well they do at the track...

[JKW]

Ludvigsen p. 575 also noted that the 914/6 was voted import car of the year in 1970 by a panel comprised of Phil Hill, John Cannon and Carey Loftin: "[T]he Porsche was the only really modern automobile of the [nine cars considered]. Small overall dimensions, large passenger and luggage space, small engine but good performance, unexcelled cornering and braking capabilities and, of course, mid-engine location -- the new status symbol after 5-speed gearboxes."

[69softwindow]

I would like to offer a different perspective on the914-6/911s comparison. I was fortunate to be in the market for a new new 911 in 1970. I was an 18 year old kid at the time and car crazy since the age of 4, I had scraped up enough for a down payment and thru the help of my father co signing the loan would make the monthly payments while I worked my way thru college. I grew up in glendale, ca. And the local Porsche was allred brothers and Jim allred was the owner. I went down to see him one day and he proceeded to tell me about the new mid engine 914. What he did not realize was the only Porsche I desired was a 911 I had no interest in the 4cylinder914,as we talked he quickly discovered I knew what I wanted and it was a911. He had a 914-6 just outside his door and said well look at that it has the 911 six. Again I proceed to tell that for the difference in price about 431 less than a 911t there was no comparison, he got up form his desk and said let's go look at the 911t there in the back. Excuse my digression on this tale but it points out the difficulty they were having trying to sell the 914-6 against there own product the 911, there simple was no comparison . Now bring a 911s into the discussion and it becomes even more lopsided. That is the way it looked to consumers on the showroom floor in 1970.

[Bullethead]

^^^ Going to a dealership with a teenager's infatuation for the 911 is understandable. We can assume you didn't drive the teener because if you had, the comparison was pretty striking. Pricing and VW stigma negatively affected perception of the 914/6, but my test drive memories are positive... the 6 was a revelation. A friend's T74 Lotus Europa was the only car I had driven exceeding that sensation of connectedness.

The 911's shape is iconic, but 914 styling has aged very well... even more appealing to enthusiasts as time goes on.