Model years & difference in handling?

[larry47us]

Val:

I think that when you talk about pre-smog, you are really talking about pre-74, since the 73 cars were pre-smog and had the standard early bumpers.

Also, I believe that you can nearly always find parts, the issue is how much you are willing to pay for them. I know that if you are willing and able to wait, you can probably find parts at a "reasonable" cost. But of course, that is all relative.

My tendency is to agree with the other guys on this thread, that if you find a relatively unmolested pre-74, that you should leave it be, and not modify it. If you get a later model with smog control stuff on it, and you are going to track it, can't you just have the smoggy stuff removed?

The early cars are becoming less common. But on the other hand, the rarer they become, the more the value of mine is going to be enhanced. Hmmm.

larry

[ttweed]

Originally posted by Val
I didn’t believe the whole group from 66-89 could be so similar, (except 69E) but I guess they are, and that’s a good thing.

Since we were talking about handling, all the torsion bar cars from '65-'89 can be easily updated/backdated to similar specs, except for the difference in wheelbase in '69, which is a little tougher. The drivetrains and overall weight are a different story though. The big differences started in '74.

No smog, and fender modification brought me to a ’74.

That would be an excellent choice for a track car. It is now smog exempt in CA, you can strip the extra weight out, tack on some fiberglass bumpers and flares, and get rid of the problematic mag case/smogged 2.7 in favor of a 3.0, 3.2 or 3.6 swap, put on some wide tires and install a cage and go racing while still being street legal. That is exactly what I advised this fellow in our club to do when he got tired of beating up his pristine 993 C2S on the track, and he is running the wheels off this '74 car now with a built 3.0 and RSR flares with his brother as codriver at all our local events.

I’ve never owned a Porsche, so I really don’t know how important wide tires are to the handling of a 911.

You need as much tire as your power level requires. For the stock 2.0 liter cars with < 200 HP, 205 or 225 tires would be fine. If you're putting in a higher HP engine, you're going to need more rubber, unless you like burnouts and sliding around the track.

Ttweed wrote that all Porsches are expensive to maintain and hard to find parts for.

This statement was made relative to other marques, especially domestic makes. There are some parts that are NLA for the SWB cars, but in general, you can still find everything you need either new or used or reproduction for just about any Porsche. It just takes more searching and time and $$$.

Here's the gratuitous shot of "Mr. Smooth's" '67S for Shawn.


TT

[Zeke]

Originally posted by NeunElf
The '65s also have the same shorter wheelbase.

I tend to forget that there exists a '65 911. Only because the 356 ran through '65. It's hard to fathom both cars for sale at the same time. My understanding is that they actaully weren't for sale in the US until late '65 ('66 model year). How many '65 911s were made anyway?

[Shawn]

Zeke, the "Porsche 911 Redbook" claims production as:
9/64 to 12/64 235 cars, then
1/65 to 7/65 3,125 cars. I think these were all sold as 65 year models.

TT, thanks for the pic.

Shawn.

[Jol Dantzig]

I like the nimble feel of the older (lighter) cars myself. I tracked and autoX'd an '85 911 with a 3.4L for years which was fast and fun too, but the older cars ate me on the shorter stuff.

Having started with a street car (914) and modified for over seven years running I have come to the conclusion that if you think you are going to want a full-blown event car, start with one that somebody else spent all the money on. I think that most everyone would agree that you rarely get fifty cents on the dollar with a race car.

Point in case... there are plenty of track cars for sale on Rennlist and elsewherre right now for a fraction of what they cost to build.

Hope this helps.

Jol

[NeunElf]

Originally posted by Zeke
I tend to forget that there exists a '65 911. Only because the 356 ran through '65. It's hard to fathom both cars for sale at the same time. My understanding is that they actually weren't for sale in the US until late '65 ('66 model year). How many '65 911s were made anyway?

Hey, there were even some '66 356s (both model year and calendar year). If you pay attention to 911 evolution, you might even think the line: "Porsche stopped building new cars when they stopped building 356s." refers to the '65 vs. the cars that came after it...

I think there were probably around 1,500 911s built in the 1965 model year, based on the chassis number of the "newest" '65 I know of (mine). I don't know when deliveries started to American dealers, but there weren't many American regulations to overcome in those days, so I don't know why Porsche wouldn't have started importing them early in the model year. I know of a couple cars with chassis number under # 150 being in the States.

There was supposed to have been some book published in Texas and used a "bible" for various state DMVs that says the earliest 911s were '66s. It's not true, but it caused many '65s to have been registered as '66s.

Nowadays, there are a lot of people incorrectly claiming their '66s are actually '65s. Some of those cars even look like calendar year '66 cars.

[NeunElf]

Originally posted by Val
However, I like wide fenders and tires because my assumption is that they enhance handling. I wasn’t sure if modifying a pre-73 was a good idea, so that’s why I asked the question. No smog, and fender modification brought me to a ’74.

NeunElf’s comment about a stock 1968 being one of the terrors of the autocross makes me wonder if I really need wide fenders & tires. Maybe a stock pre-73 911-S will give me all the handling I need? What type of cars would a stock 1968 911 compete against in autocross?

As to what class Marcel (the '68 911L) competes in, it's usually the earliest stock 911s. I ran my '65 in the same class as Marcel in my first Autocross. Needless to say, it wasn't close.

However, when I said Marcel contends for best time of day, I meant he beats every car in every class. There's more than a little driver skill involved.



As to your other point about wide tires meaning better handling. There's something to that theory, but don't forget that the older 911s are much lighter than the newer ones: they don't need as much rubber. Many Porsche experts describe the early long-wheelbase cars as the "best balanced" of all 911s. They also recommend against putting wider tires on the rear wheels of these cars.

You might actually be able to pull more lateral Gs in a 1989 Turbo, but that doesn't mean the handling is better than, say, a 1973 911S.

[Val]

Thanks, Tweed, Larry and Jol. Man, are you guys helpful! You’re also reading my mind. I’ve been checking-out GT-Racing’s 73/74 RS and RSR kits.

Next, I was going to ask if it is cheaper to build it, or buy it already built, but Larry took care of that. I guess just like everybody else I like the RSR, RS, and stock pre- ‘74s. The body on that Polka dot car is perfect! "Mr. Smooth's" '67S is beautiful, what color is that, I've never seen it before?

Jol, was your 3.4L, '85, 911 street legal?

Thanks, Val

[Val]

NeunElf said;

"You might actually be able to pull more lateral Gs in a 1989 Turbo, but that doesn't mean the handling is better than, say, a 1973 911S."

Wow, who'd a thunk it? That really leans me in the direction of an older 911!

Thanks, Val

[SprintStar]

Originally posted by ttweed

No, but I would say the '65-'68 SWB cars cannot be changed to the longer wheelbase without a lot of work and expense, and the SWB cars are getting rarer and perhaps should be preserved. They have a certain "uniqueness" to their handling which can be an advantage in some situations.

YMMV,
TT

Tom, I like the feel of my SWB '67S on track. But I'd like to know what situations do they excel in? Thanks.

Sprint.