Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29

Thread: 360 0002

  1. #11
    Thanks all , very much for the info. I will go further forward in the history later (the reason I originally posted) . But for now , I want to go the other direction it's Birth then on from there.

    So was this originally 230 0841 as , this list implies ? If so , is this correct : 'Scrapped' (renumbered ?) on 25.8.1972. Does anyone know any of the history from birth to Targa Florio 73 ?? Did it receive a 2.7 from the start ? , or first a 2.4 or 2.5 or 2.6 then the 2.7 . What engine numbers , obviously the Factory kept these records. And does it have a 360 0002 vin as 360 0001 does (230 0769 renumbered).

    And I believe 360 0001 was repaired /reconstructed (not a complete new body) . This must be the same for this car (....230 0841 ? / 360 0002 )
    Attached Images Attached Images   
    Last edited by Tour de Corse; 03-07-2025 at 04:44 PM. Reason: date added

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,085
    I have inspection report if 0001 somewhere … decades old. Maybe I can find ir

  3. #13
    Senior Member HughH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    2,815
    that is Fred Hampson's (sp?) list done in the 1980's well before a lot of information was discovered.

    9113600002 E42 Production number 1023901 Was S/T 911 230 0841. Re-numbered. It was the "Strahle" RS/RSR at the May 1972 Osterreichring 1000Kms.. That was to hide the fact that even that stage it was used to test both the prototype twin plug 2.8 RSR engines in the race and a couple of versions of the new "ducktail" at the circuit in the following couple of days. Even though it was entered by Strahle it was effectively a Werks Versuch team behind it with two factory drivers, Waldegaard and Steckkonig. it was delivered to the Versuch/race department area without an engine but with a 915/01 gearbox 7125011 with LSD (one of 12 built with an integrated oil pump and shaved gears presumably testing for the RS/RSR ones from the 73 MY) By the way the gearbox it had at the Targa, 7120029, was another special 915 gearbox, a 915/00, with the same ratios as the 915/01 ones but a limited run of 30 items also with an oil pump but with ground gears instead of shaved ones.(Both of these types of gearboxes were used in the M491 2.5 ST's of 1972)

    Name:  9.png
Views: 209
Size:  993.2 KBName:  10.png
Views: 211
Size:  602.8 KBName:  11.png
Views: 224
Size:  195.6 KB

    After that race it went back to the factory and presumably tests continued. The notation 'Scrapped' on 25.8.1972 can also be translated into "dismantled" which I think would be a better word in this case as a part of the R&D program would undoubtedly be dismantling the car and checking for wear, stresses etc. That is probably when it was renumbered 9113600002

    Its next appearance is in a publicity shot for the new RS below
    Name:  12.png
Views: 219
Size:  1.03 MB

    I dont know when this was taken but it must have been in November 1972 or perhaps slightly later as it is pictured with a Production RS 0092 (F17) at Weissach with snow around and 0092 was not built until November.

    Shortly after that is was "transformed" into the "Martini" press announcement car with publicity photos at Weissach again in the snow and later at the announcement of Martini sponsorship of the factory team in March 1973


    Name:  12.jpg
Views: 217
Size:  132.2 KBName:  13.jpg
Views: 218
Size:  88.9 KB


    it then went as a T car to the Targa Florio ,probably in late April.

    After the Targa it was used in wind tunnel; tests on refinement of the rear spoiler including testing a prototype "Mary Stuart " tail These apparently occurred in July 1973.
    During the time from its construction until this time it could have had up to a dozen different engines as a factory development car. ( most of the factory race cars had at least two different engines in a race weekend)

    Name:  16.jpg
Views: 232
Size:  145.1 KBName:  15.jpg
Views: 220
Size:  125.0 KBName:  17.jpg
Views: 226
Size:  251.0 KB
    Last edited by HughH; 03-07-2025 at 07:30 PM.
    Hugh Hodges
    73 911E
    Melbourne Australia

    Foundation Member #005
    Australian TYP901 Register Inc.

    Early S Registry #776

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2023
    Location
    Le Mans
    Posts
    130
    This is very interesting, and I totally agree with this history regarding this car (even if some associate this history with 0001).

    Now we have the period from 1974 to 1985, a period of ten years of shadow during which very few people know about this car or have photos of it. This still seems strange to me, especially in an era when almost any vehicle can be… "fixed up".

  5. #15
    I agree Leirbag , this why I posted this topic. I have a feeling I know . But before the 74 - on , I want to continue on the construction and early motors. Regarding construction , I certainly wish Mssr. Sprenger was with us still. I had the pleasure of his acquaintance years ago , he was very kind and helpful. I'm sure he would have known , as he would have most likely been involved.

    So , so far , the Factory (or anyone involved) , has not breathed a word of what history /duties , 0841 performed ? Was the car wrecked .....thinking about it . I would have to quess that it was........look to 360 0001. Or maybe not , if an additional reason was to have one more unit (number) to use towards homologation ?
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by Tour de Corse; 03-10-2025 at 04:47 PM. Reason: punctuation

  6. #16
    Regarding the original motor . Should we should assume it first had a 662 xxxx motor ?

    Whether the 1st or later . Just from deduction of the available data which I have (mostly from Dr. K's list , I looked at this yesterday) , the 2.7 (911/83 ? , which I can see from a closer look was single plug) should have been either : 663 0001 , 663 0002 , 663 0005-0020 , 663 0024 , 663 0026 or possibly 663 0071........and also could have been 663 0060 . Upon reviewing this , it also reminded me of a few related things I have noticed about use of early 663 motors. For one :

    On the Dr. K book (1st addition) list , it shows motor 663 0060 being installed in both 360 0045 (a Sonauto delivered 472.....which remember Sonauto was actually partly owned by Porsche).....AND 360 0974 (the crashed , Factory owned , original no. 107 at 1973 Targa Florio). Is this a mistake ? Is it repeated in the more recent edition of this book ? This is very strange , that usually means it is not a mistake . We just do not know the story.


    Interestingly , the sister Sonauto delivered 472 (360 0044) , I have in my notes as being used in 1973 by Raymond Touroul

    shown 360 0974 (orig. no. 107 pre-crash)
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by Tour de Corse; 03-18-2025 at 03:57 PM. Reason: photo added

  7. #17
    Righteous Indignation 70SATMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,312
    Quote Originally Posted by Tour de Corse View Post
    Thanks all , very much for the info. I will go further forward in the history later (the reason I originally posted) . But for now , I want to go the other direction it's Birth then on from there.

    So was this originally 230 0841 as , this list implies ? If so , is this correct : 'Scrapped' (renumbered ?) on 25.8.1972. Does anyone know any of the history from birth to Targa Florio 73 ?? Did it receive a 2.7 from the start ? , or first a 2.4 or 2.5 or 2.6 then the 2.7 . What engine numbers , obviously the Factory kept these records. And does it have a 360 0002 vin as 360 0001 does (230 0769 renumbered).

    And I believe 360 0001 was repaired /reconstructed (not a complete new body) . This must be the same for this car (....230 0841 ? / 360 0002 )
    That VIN stamp is unlike any ‘73 font I’m used to seeing, including the RS. Is that because it was a test car or is that a re-bodied stamp?
    Michael
    “Electricity is really just organized lightning”

    -Dusty 70S Coupe
    -S Registry #586

  8. #18
    Senior Member HughH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    2,815
    The race ,practice and experimental engines were a pool of engines that were used across quite a number of different cars
    And in any one weekend for example one car could use a previous weekends race engine as it’s practice engine and a completely different one as the race engine and I presume each of the race engines was rebuilt on a very regular basis
    So many of the engines were used in Multiple race cars and each car used multiple engines just in a race Weekend

    When you get to the experimental cars like like this one, the chances of having multiple types of engines as well as multiple engines is very very high
    all of the detail would have been recorded in Werk one or the experimental area however, I have been told numerous times that that sort of detail along with all the documentation on the modification to engine that is documented in various Kardexes Etc. Was destroyed sometime in the late 70s or 80s and there is virtually no chance of finding it. I have heard from different people that either there was a flood or a fire in that area of the factory that destroyed all those old records i’m not sure what to believe in that case, but none of them seem to have turned up

    The only details I have for sure are that the car was delivered without an engine It raced with an RSR prototype engine and the race engine use at the targa. I doubt that it ever had a stock 2.7 RS engine but probably had multiple 662 and 663 M491 engines of different specification and possibly some of a milder tune however, most of the photos I’ve seen seem to indicate a race type engine in it given the exhaust pipes. I would be pretty sure that the initial engines fitted to it were 662 engine Although the number and type number of “strahle” Engine or engines in the May 72 race is anyone’s guess I would be surprised if they only used one engine that weekend
    Hugh Hodges
    73 911E
    Melbourne Australia

    Foundation Member #005
    Australian TYP901 Register Inc.

    Early S Registry #776

  9. #19
    Senior Member HughH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    2,815
    Quote Originally Posted by 70SATMan View Post
    That VIN stamp is unlike any ‘73 font I’m used to seeing, including the RS. Is that because it was a test car or is that a re-bodied stamp?
    Michael
    It is almost certain because it was stamped in the race shop/customer service area and they had a different stamp gang to the one used on the production
    That car still has the original production number for 1972 but the Vin was re-stamped when it was rebuilt as an RS /RSR
    Hugh Hodges
    73 911E
    Melbourne Australia

    Foundation Member #005
    Australian TYP901 Register Inc.

    Early S Registry #776

  10. #20
    Righteous Indignation 70SATMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,312
    Very cool! Thanks Hugh.
    Michael
    “Electricity is really just organized lightning”

    -Dusty 70S Coupe
    -S Registry #586

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 and Terms of Use
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.