The real 73 RSR TF Winner - Porsche Factory Scam??

John:

I think the best source for discovering history are photos of the day. There is no doubt when looking at old photos that the red Strahle RSR was the same car with the same rear flares that ran as #107 at the TF. Two characteristics reveal the truth I think. The small dent in the rear flare and the mud flaps that no other RSR used.

We all know that factory records and those in books...and memories, sometimes get mixed up, but photos showing unique details are pretty infallible I think. I can't argue which VIN it had originally, but I would be willing to bet a steak dinner that it was the renumbered 360 0002. And it never ran at the 72 TdC.

Edit: Added a few more pics.

John

I am more inclined to agree with Gib's reasoning on this one - especially on tracing the #5 Strahle car through the #3 press martini car and to the targa #107T car and eventually #107 race cars (but not the original intended #107 race car which was R8). I think after that it was also the "mary stuart" wind tunnel car in June 1973.

I agree that it is not possible to be certain about its original ST chassis number, but accepted wisdom is that it was 911 230 0841 and there seems to be a fair bit of circumstantial evidence (race records of the targa, presumably based on material the factory supplied at the time or scrutineering material, other written material by Manfred Jantke etc) that by that time it had the identity of RS 0002.

I don't think it is possible to be certain of the chassis numbers of any ST converted to a RS/RSR (with the exception of RS 0001 / ST 911 230 0769 where there is documentary evidence of a production number for the ST and chassis number for a RS on the same shell). However the evidence that this transformation happened can be transferred to a testable theory that it happened for other cars as well.

I do agree that at least some references in the RS book are wrong ("911 330 0789" being the second car at the TdC) and some may be misleading, not necessarily deliberately but because of poor memories, poor (or lack of) records etc or just simple mistakes /typos etc.

On top of that I have "theories" that are testable but where there is not necessarily enough evidence to reach a firm conclusion.

However I believe that a lot can be learned by piecing together chronological historical photos and trying to match unique features like Gib has shown with the shape of and damage to the rear guard of the Strahle #5 car. Once the original identity of the car is established it can be followed through and IF it obtains another identity that can be matched to a high confidence level (but not for certain without documentary evidence from the factory.)

I have tried to follow this through using a process of elimination on the identity of some cars - ie following what we know is R2 through its guises and then following though other cars by features etc until only a few unknowns exist. Then I have tried to match unknowns together. By that way I think I have narrowed the options of what car was what - however IF additional information comes to light that challenges or contradicts this you have to almost go back to square one - and a lot of additional information has come to light on this board over the past 2 years.

I will try to follow the same logic here over a couple of posts following individual cars OR looking at events and eliminating cars to leave uncertain identities- it is almost like a series of simultaneous equations with not enough identifiers to reach a certain conclusion.

R2

It is easiest to start off with R2 - It has the easiest lineage to track and some easily identified features and still exists. Tracking it also narrows down possibilities for other cars identities.

R2 is 911 360 0020 and was car #2 at the TdC registered LEO ZA 69. It was built on a shell that has an oil door (like a small number of other early build cars) but has 1973 features such as black horn grills, light trim and RS series production looking rear guards - at least at the TdC.

It has some unique decals at the TdC compared with the other car there (eg the Shell decal has the word shell on this car but not on the other car) which can be traced directly to the car that did the "RSR testing" at Paul Ricard after the TdC (the registration plates were the same as well but they could have been swapped)

At Paul Ricard it acquired unique riveted on rear flares that are then identifiable at the Le mans test (car #61) by which time it had acquired new silver livery and the targa (car #9) where it also acquired a modified paint scheme and rear end.

After the targa it was rebuilt for Le Mans for Gregg as car 48, at which time it lost the 1972 oil door and changed colour again to yellow.

Following Le Mans it was used for the wide wheel tests (still with identifiable Le Mans livery) and then "restored" as a silver Martini liveried car #8 for Frere's magazine test and then went to the museum where it is now.

Most of this information is also available and confirmed by written material from race records, factory correspondence or material, Singer's book etc.

I don't think that you would disagree with any of this but I have started with it to eliminate various alternatives at the races in question, and also show how one car can mutate over time, so just following the photos does not always lead to the right conclusion.

photos
Tdc
Paul Ricard showing unique flares
Le mans test - same guards
targa - same guards
Le Mans - looks completely different but is the same car

Hi Hugh, Gib, Raj and all!

First of all, thank you for all your input.

All very convincing stuff and my purpose was not to try to prove what something was, but to question some of the assumptions that have been reached. Wasn't it Sherlock Holmes who said: "Remove everything that can't be and, whatever is left, no matter how unbelievable, has to be the truth?" (Or something like that but you get the meaning!)

For instance, (and this is central to this whole question of just what did what?), Where is 911 360 0002? It vanishes after the middle of 1973. And where is 911 360 0019? It does not appear to have been built at all. I have never been able to find any reference to crashes, which might have destroyed these cars. A minor thought is: As the factory sold 911 360 0001 at the end of 1973/beginning of 1974, why didn't they take the opportunity to sell 911 360 0002 at the same time? (if it existed). Both these cars were obsolete by this time, the factory already testing the RSR Turbo Carrera for the upcoming season in 1974.

Also: I cannot help but think that the "0002/002/R2/RS2" identities have all become very mixed up and confused.

I have written to Jurgen Barth, asking for clarification from factory records, let us see if there is anything there!

John:

The Jurgen Barth and Lothar Boschen The Porsche Book book of 1977 under the Racing Cars section has a picture of the #3 press car with the caption: 'Development started with this factory-owned Carrera RSR in 1973.' (see picture below).

So Jurgen Barth should be a good source for determining what the VIN was of this RSR. Also, to Raj's point, this work would have been done by the Werks shop I am sure since it was racing development.

In the Carrera RS book, 360 0019,20 are both listed as having an Auxiliary Heater, which according to the footnote, was only done for 472 builds. They also had roll bars, and both options would fit a rally car. They both show a paint code 2225, which is the Grand Prix White/Red configuration...and the 2 cars at the TdC were red/white. Also, 0019 shows as having Dunlop tires, and 0020 fitted with Michelins. Both show a build date of 10/1972. No gear box S/N was shown, and the engines were 003/004 as you mentioned.

I think it makes sense that if 0020 was built (R2, #9 at TF), it is likely that 0019 was also. But I agree with you that both 0002 and 0019 should have some tracks in the records somewhere, or at least in someone's memory as to what happened to them. Since we think 0020 was a renumbered 72 ST, isn't it possible that 0019 was too...but again no tracks so far.

Maybe because they were renumbered cars this would explain why there is no LS, gear box s/n, 472/491 build number, or other options listed in the book for them.

It would be great to find the records that go with these cars, (and to find the real 0002 & 0019 cars), but at least for race #107 at the TF in '73, we know this car existed and how it evolved from June 72 through mid 73. And if Jurgen Barth confirms that it was indeed 0002, then we have solved half of the puzzle.

Stumbled on this rear shot of LEO-ZA (#6_?) at the Targa in '73, I didn't go back through all 47 pages to check....hopefully it hasn't been posted already.

Raj:

In the Carrera RS book, p.165: "Porsche's fondness for remodeling and renaming racing cars is illustrated by ....... Number 1 was used by the Pole Sobieslav Zasada as a rally car, and Number 2, after serving as a practice vehicle, was entered as number 107 in Targa Florio."

These comments must have come from some records, or memory of one of the many acknowledged contributors to the book.

Your comment that 0002 doesn't exist because it hasn't been found is not meant, I hope, to imply that it never existed as, if indeed, 0002 is verified as 107 (as the above quote suggests), then it did exist and we have lots of photographic history to go with it. We don't know what happened to that car (107 or 0002), and maybe today it doesn't exist because it was rolled into a ball during some testing by Werks, or it was renumbered again as a 74, 75, or 76 race car and the documentation was lost, as they didn't care about 'former' VINs, especially for a 'Mongrel'. But if 107 wasn't 0002, then which VIN was it? (There should be some records for such a widely photographed and successful prototype RSR.) We do know it existed and had quite a ride in 'year one' of the most exciting development period for the 911 as a successful racing car.

All very interesting!

Note: In the Carrera RS book, p.165: "Porsche's fondness for remodeling and renaming racing cars is illustrated by ....... Number 1 was used by the Pole Sobieslav Zasada as a rally car, and Number 2, after serving as a practice vehicle, was entered as number 107 in Targa Florio."

In Konradsheim's book also, Number 2 is identified on page 163 as chassis number 911 360 0020, (R2), which means that this car was the sixth placed car at the Targa Florio, not the third placed Race #9.

I had written a long piece that covered a lot of the same ground that Gib has now posted last night and managed to delete it as I was trying to post it. :mad:

Even after a nights sleep I am still mad at myself.:mad::mad:

And now you guys have posted even more while I was trying to recreate it :mad: so i am having trouble keeping up with the argument line. I hope I don't repeat too much here.

So instead of going back over the same detail as Gib has now posted, this is the argument line without the detail on what he posted.

The two cars at the TdC look like sister cars. The RS book describes both as RSR’s and the TdC being the first official race for RSR’s.

They also show a lot of characteristics of 1973 RS/RSR’s but at least one of them (the #2 car for Larrousse) had a 1972 feature of an oil door.

1973 RS characteristics include the black horn grills, the black trim round the lights and the shape of the rear guards (unlike the Strahle car which has a different profile as Gib has shown). Non RS features, apart from the oil door are the front guards which are RSR (or ST), and not like a standard RS, and on the #2 car at least (you can’t see on the #6 car) the bubble air vent in the front quarter windows like the ST that Larrousse had in his 1970 TdF ST.

Due to the confusion over their identities I will refer to the two cars as the #2 car and #6 car in this post.

However by this I mean the #2 car is the Larrousse car, LEO ZA 69 shown elsewhere to be almost certainly 911 360 0020: R2: Built 10/1972, and the #6 car is the Waldegaard car LEO ZA 68, identity unknown for certain but said in the RS book to be an older 2.5 ST. However I agree with John that the “ST” number provided, 911 330 0789, cannot be correct as that car would not have been built by the time of the TdC.

Similarly by looking at the build specifications in the RS book, and the production numbers that I have (1031089 and 1031090 – I think these are sourced from one of your books John) R1 and R2 look like sister cars as well.

So if you postulate that IF the TdC cars were sister cars, and one of the TdC cars was R2, and R1 and R2 were sister car, there is a argument to be made that the TdC cars were R1 and R2.

The question then is, where are the proofs and, as John rightly says, what happened to the other car.

A further piece to add to or confuse the equation is that the RS book (I am not sure about contemporary sources) states that ONE of the cars was supposed to be reconstructed from an older 2.5 ST.

I had always assumed (for no good reason, and assisted by the reference in the RS book to it being the Waldegaard car) that this was car #6 but now I believe that if ONLY ONE was a converted ST it might have referred to car #2 and therefore the RS book is wrong in saying either it was only one converted, or it was car #6.

Looking at what is known about R1 and R2 from the RS book and other sources the following is evident:

While a couple of early RS’s (RS12 and 13), and possibly RS11, had 1972 shells with oil doors they were built before the end of May 1972.

Later build cars, from July and August 1972, RS15 (the white and blue M471 in the press photos), RS16 (the Paris show car) RS17 (the white and red car in the photos and the one at Monterey) have no signs of an oil door. Granted they could be airbrushed out of PR shots, but not from a show car, and not from the shots at Monterey. Also RS15 was pictured in the homologation papers and shows an interior engine shot of a 1973 oil system (maybe a different car was used for that shot but that is unlikely).

However car #2 definitely had an oil door and it is not too big a stretch to say that car #6 probably did as well given what has been said about it.

This then raises the question that IF both had oil doors, and both were sister cars built in OCTOBER 1972 why would they have oil doors when even the cars built in July did not – unless they were built on converted ST cars?

The first part of that to test is whether they were built in October as the RS book says.

RS 17 was built in July 1972 has production number 1030202. These cars (R1 and R2) are supposed to have production numbers over 1000 which is consistent with an October Build.

Gib covered the detail of the R1 and R2 build sheets (to the extent that they are known). What he did not say was that the Dunlop and Michelin tires specified were very unusual. In the first series of RS’s Dunlops were only specified for M491 conversions and a couple of special factory cars including R1 and RS 090, the yellow press car LB -P 220. NO other car has Michelins specified.

Maybe there was also a tire test on the agenda at the TdC that has not been recorded? or maybe the car already had Michelins before it was converted??

Gib also covered the options – possible for a rallye car but unusual for a track car, and also unusual that no LSD was specified - possibly suggesting that the donor cars already had one?. The engine numbers to me are not unusual – they are in the range of what would be experimental engines – and they certainly would have been that in “prototype RSR’s”. Also such cars would have had numerous engines and gearboxes so recording the one they were built with does not mean much.

I don’t place any significance in the fact that they had no conversion number. They certainly were not RSH’s. Neither were they series production cars. As I understand it NONE of the M491 cars went through the RSH weighing process as they were pulled off the line for modifications before that and would have been to heavy. That is why the 1000 units homologation required the factory to submit cars up to a chassis number well over 1000.

Unlike a “series production M491” which would have needed specific paperwork to chart their progress through the production line, and thus a conversion number, these were special builds that may not have needed conversion documents thus maybe there was no conversion number for them. (Does that change the history on the number of RSH’s and RSR’s built?)

Furthermore, if the factory was building a race / rally version of the RS it may make sense to start with a shell that had all the necessary and proven structural modifications – ie a 1972 ST shell – as a base instead of starting with a new shell. That would at least save some time in the build. Such a project not only would not need a conversion number, it would also probably end up with a completely different build sheet to a fresh build, depending on the donor cars.

I therefore believe there is plausible argument to be made that:

• the two cars (R1 and R2) were built as records to date suggest they were, but BOTH were converted ST’s
• these two cars were the TdC cars

It would help this argument line if a photo of the #6 car could be found with an oil door. (or better factory documentation)

Granted this still does not address John and Raj’s point on what happened to R1.

The RS book (page 163) does address this saying that car #2 went to the Paul Ricard tests and car #6 was put back together and had a long stint on the “panzer” test track before being used as a practice vehicle in the 1978 Safari Rallye. I have spent a lot of time looking at the background of photos and video of that rallye and have not yet seen anything that might resemble such a car – I suppose that is not really surprising though.

I think it does address the point about the Strahle car and whether or not RS 0001 (S/T 911 230 0769.) could be R1.

Gib has posted on the Strahle cars unique rear guards and how they can be traced through to the targa #107 car. At that race that car was described as RS 0002 (either from factory documentation at the time or scrutineering info or factory information after that time). The factory has also said that both RS0002 and RS0020 were at the targa.

I think that the wind tunnel photos on page 94 and 95 of the RS book (one shown below), showing testing of the Mary Stuart tail following the targa are of this car. There are numerous similarities to the car at the targa. Then it is a matter of where it went from there, but if it was deeply embedded in the test and development area of the factory anything may have happened to it.

So far as RS0001 / 911 230 0769 goes, I understood from Raj that it was converted in August 1972 to RS 0001, at about the same time as the Strahle car seems to have been renumbered.

If this is correct, I believe that it was too early to be in the correct timeline for the R1/ R2 build, IF the production numbers assigned to them are correct. However there is no doubt that the overall shape of that car is essentially the same as the pictures of car #2 and car#6 at the TdC – to me that is an indication that St’s could have been converted but probably not that ST.

One thing that is testable however is whether there was a one digit typo on the R1 identity in the RS book or a bigger misidentification. The book identifies the source car as 911 330 0789. John Starkey postulates that it might be 911 230 0769. However it could be 911 230 0789.

Surely it is easy to test with the factory the identity of that car. If it turns out to be a series production car then the identity is probably wrong; if it is something else the identity may be correct (even though that number is not on the list of ST’s Raj posted).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Starkey

All very interesting!

In Konradsheim's book also, Number 2 is identified on page 163 as chassis number 911 360 0020, (R2), which means that this car was the sixth placed car at the Targa Florio, not the third placed Race #9.

---

John

i cant see that reference in my book

I think that this thread has proven that BOTH R2 (RS 0020) and RS 0002 were at the targa; RS 0020 being placed third (race #9) and RS 0002 being place 6th (race #107)

One of the biggest problems to me is the subtle difference between internal designations R1 (RS 0019) R2 (RS0020) etc and real chassis numbers RS 1 (0001) and RS2 (0002)

Hi Raj

I think that at least one person has posted a response from the factory Museum to the effect that:

• both RS0020 and RS0002 were at the targa
• the #48 car at le mans was RS0020

I agree that it would be much better to see original source documentation, and I accept that the factory information, or what is purported to be factory information may be incorrect. This thread tested that quite rigorously a year or more ago
I wonder where the Wagenpasses are for these cars - surely they would be a source of the truth?

On a question you asked yesterday about Janke's views. The comment I picked up on was from the the August 1973 Christophorus. Again I have it second hand so it would require testing for rigor.

Finally IF a car turned up today claiming to be RS 0002, I would be applying a lot more rigor such as examining its production number - both written on the dash like your car as well as stamped into the dash - before taking it seriously.