"...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. :o) But maybe I should compare them to my '73 S 2.7MFI... hahaha ;o)