Page 100 of 268 FirstFirst ... 50909899100101102110150200 ... LastLast
Results 991 to 1,000 of 2676

Thread: 1973 Carrera RS Cars for Sale

  1. #991
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NoCal
    Posts
    369
    I feel confident the last of the thin panels were long gone by the time this car was built, so it makes little sense. There was a discussion here about 10 years ago relating to at what point the panels actually ran out which may have been expanded upon at some point. The specifications of this particular build: plenty of customer orders are like that. It certainly isn't any lighter than a stripper 911 of the same vintage. Now that they are worth so much it's become a big deal. Back in the day..... eeeh.

  2. #992
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,720
    Without seeing the evidence referred to in the listing I don't understand the rationale that Porsche would have had as a manufacturer for building a base (a.k.a homologation) configuration example at this stage in the RS product lifecycle? Maybe somone can enlighten me?

    All the first 500 and then 500 more RS are by definition "homologation" cars because they were built and weighed /certified. Granted the majority were then converted afterwards to the original customer desired configuration.... be it M471...472 ...491. A few of the early cars remained in "base" Carrera RS spec without having the conversion group order and these are dubbed RSH homologation.

    RSH configuration would normally have lighter panels, 6/7s , 165 front tyres, 185/70 rears, no torsion cover, single born etc etc. This car does not have all those homologation car hallmarks -- possibly as a consequence of being a late chassis number.

    There could of course be a very particular reason this car was built by the factory to "base" Carrera RS spec at that stage in the lifecycle and the research referred to in the auction listing may explain that reason and so prove be a key part of the famous RS limited edition model's motorsport story.

    According to my " Carrera RS Ordering Procedure and Specification " document dating from 1973 ....the Carrera RS ....being the base car was actually the cheapest way of getting an example. Each conversion order group had a given price on top of that most base Carrera RS price.

    If I had been a buyer in 73 intent in going rallying immediately I might have been tempted to buy the base cheapest RS config and then make my own Motorsport preparation changes locally. Pay for what modifications was required in local regulations to get car up to to rally spec ....rather than paying Porsche more for one of their M*** upgrade menu that may, or may not have suited my immediate sporting intentions.

    Serious buyers of this car presumably will get sight of the information referred to in the auction listing and will be better able to determine if it is (or is not) an example that has a historical significance in the formal homologation programme of the RS model. It was built this way for Porsche factory Motorsport purposes ....or wether just a pragmatic cost effective buy an RS for rallying by its original purchaser.

    Either way "base" spec cars that did not get an M*** conversion are few in number so maybe it will command a novelty price premium. Up to the buyer I guess.

    Either way, I wish the sellers well with the sale.

    Steve
    Last edited by 911MRP; 07-26-2016 at 09:30 AM.

  3. #993
    Early S Reg #1395 LongRanger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    California High Desert
    Posts
    14,303
    Seem to recall a discussion about 'RSH's being introduced to homologate various changes that Porsche was making to the cars along-the-way --- like alu engine cases, different trailing arms, etc . . . that sort of thing?

    .........

    We Can Be Heroes

  4. #994
    Senior Member HughH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    2,680
    Rick
    that is correct. i would have to go back and find the thread but it would appear that whenever a change to homologation status was required (and for the cars late in the run that seemed to be about homologation of parts for the next year like the AL case) a RSH car was produced to homologate that change. I believe that the build date of RSH#1470 coincided with the introduction of the modified rear trailing arm mounts and this last RSH built also seems to coincide with the introduction of alloy engine cases later seen on the RS 3.0. However none of the chassis numbers in the homologation papers exactly match the RSH chassis numbers and even when a chassis number and engine number are quoted in a homolgation paper they dont seem to match the actual engine fitted to either the RS number shown or the RSH produced at about the same time. in the case of the paper shown below it is not even a RS number but an S number which is probably something to do with the was the RS was presented to the FIA in the first place as an evolution of an S and they wanted the engine homologation change to apply to S engines as well.

    The exact details of all of this is something that I have never been able to get to the bottom of and i dont think it is covered in the RS book either
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Hugh Hodges
    73 911E
    Melbourne Australia

    Foundation Member #005
    Australian TYP901 Register Inc.

    Early S Registry #776

  5. #995
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,720
    Hi Hugh

    Interesting.

    That is my point/ question.

    Is there a specific documented link between this particular car chassis and some formal milestone or proof the Porsche factory needed to do in the RS homologation process at that particular stage in the model evolution? Something to get or retain the ability to enter relevant race series for the model or its successors? That seems to be what is implied in the listing.

    If yes, there was some documented factory purpose or requirement to its RSH configuration /status at that stage then arguably it is example deserving of some interest due to the novelty of that role and that distinction.

    If not, is its novelty more about the rarity factor of being one of few late examples ordered by customer devoid of M *** extras? Particularly if in fact some RSH features are not now evident (or maybe never were present, possibly due to it being a quite late example).

    Not knocking car and genuinely do wish seller every success. I'm just seeking to understand the significance of the RSH "shown to the FIA" comments in the auction sales listing. Curious if anyone knows the relevant details.

    I know first 500+500 cars were all Carrea RS(H) regardless of majority then converted by factory to M*** but tbh don't fully understand this RSH one for sale. I have copy of the homologation papers for the 73 and 74 3.0 RS too and will see if it is mentioned in there if time permits.
    Last edited by 911MRP; 07-26-2016 at 08:41 PM.

  6. #996
    Quote Originally Posted by john rice View Post
    I feel confident the last of the thin panels were long gone by the time this car was built, so it makes little sense. There was a discussion here about 10 years ago relating to at what point the panels actually ran out which may have been expanded upon at some point. The specifications of this particular build: plenty of customer orders are like that. It certainly isn't any lighter than a stripper 911 of the same vintage. Now that they are worth so much it's become a big deal. Back in the day..... eeeh.
    I have a Porsche Factory bulletin (which I have scanned and posted here before, probably in the thread that John refers.) Funny thing is, no matter what anybody says or proves or otherwise on this subject, people just believe what they want to believe anyway, so it's sort of pointless to debate. That said, it was at or around #1036 (April/May 1973) that the light weight panels began to run out. They did not ALL run out at the same time, so you might have a car with some lightweight thin gauge panels and some panels 'normal' gauge.
    Bahia Red '72 911S
    Meerblau PTS 2019 Speedster
    GP Silver, 2018 GT2RS WP....the BEAST
    Daytona Gray 2021 RS6 Avant....BEAST #2...Best daily EVER

    ES #333

    GONE...MANY, many great ones....

  7. #997
    Senior Member HughH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    2,680
    Steve
    I was just going thru my records on the RSH's and I the changeover to aluminium for homologation I think was with RSH #1382 not #1470 as I stated above
    In addition according to a prior owner (but not factory records - see below) IT has a 633 engine not a 663 one: 6331355, earlier than the one on the homologation papers posted above. Also Its Vin number is slightly earlier than the one on the homologation papers

    The comment of one of the car's prior owners at the time it was being discussed was " #1382 has motor number 6331355. As many of you know, that is a 911S
    number. The factory will tell you the motor number for #1382 is 6631355
    which is verified in the RS book. The confusion was two-fold;
    #1) #1382 has the above mentioned number but is stamped very clearly with a
    911/83 type number. How does an RS case get stamped with a 911S serial number?
    #2) Was the case mis-stamped? That seemed unlikely because
    the only mis-stamped number gives the motor a different identity.
    I asked Olaf Lang about it and he concurred that it was the latter,
    saying it was not that uncommon that a number was mis-stamped.
    I reluctantly accepted this answer."

    And "About six months later I was re-reading the FIA Homologation papers for the
    RS and came across something that I had, for years, totally missed. On May
    5th, 1973 Porsche homologated the AL case and stipulated that the
    case numbers be prefixed with 633. I finally had a definitive answer to
    the question. So why does the factory not list this in their records? I think
    it might go back to my previous post about the RSH cars. I believe Porsche
    had to present this new case bearing this numbering sequence to the FIA for
    verification. They did it using an RSH chassis. It is the only thing that
    makes sense because I have never seen or heard of another RS with a 633 prefix."

    at the same time in regard to RSH's being used to homologate certain parts he stated that "If you look at the FIA Homologation Papers you will notice that when Porsche homologated something on the RS, there was a corresponding RSH car built. It might not be exactly to the day but it was close. RSH #508, which I know intimately, was delivered with 7 and 8 inch rims which coincided with 7 and 8 inch rims being homologated the same month."
    and then asked if anyone could prove or disprove his view

    To date I have seen a lot of views on this but never concrete documented proof linking it
    Hugh Hodges
    73 911E
    Melbourne Australia

    Foundation Member #005
    Australian TYP901 Register Inc.

    Early S Registry #776

  8. #998
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,720
    Great update Hugh.

    Thank goodness I'm not in the market for one of these later RSH because tallying their chassis no. to a formal homologation requirement /event undertaken by factory seems very difficult -- despite your diligence and the earlier work of other owners.

    Would be neater and easier to understand role of each late RSH if the precise chassis identity/ configuration of relevant car, the actual official activity undertaken by the relevant body and the results of the activity were all clear, aligned and well documented.

    Without that, I find it hard to understand if /why the factory had specific a reason to build each such RS as homologation example at this late stage. Especially since the initial 500 plus the further 500 had collectively done their initial intended and well documented Homologation role ...thereby the RS programme had already delivered on the models stated purpose much earlier based on first two series.

    Maybe research/documentation referred to in listing makes all clear?

    Be interesting to see what this particular example fetches at auction.

    Steve
    Last edited by 911MRP; 07-27-2016 at 07:16 PM.

  9. #999
    I think its easier to think of the first batch of 500 as cars necessary to homologate the racing version. The RSH cars were basically changes (i.e. updates) to that original homologation as required by the FIA.
    Technically, all 1973 RS models start as the RSH version, then get their Touring or Sport designations (or left alone as an RSH) afterwards along with requisite option changes and additions.
    I'm open to being corrected, but that's the way I interpret it.
    Cole Scrogham
    Porsche Restoration
    911, 912, 911R, RS, RSR, IROC

  10. #1000
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by HughH View Post
    Rick
    that is correct. i would have to go back and find the thread but it would appear that whenever a change to homologation status was required (and for the cars late in the run that seemed to be about homologation of parts for the next year like the AL case) a RSH car was produced to homologate that change. I believe that the build date of RSH#1470 coincided with the introduction of the modified rear trailing arm mounts and this last RSH built also seems to coincide with the introduction of alloy engine cases later seen on the RS 3.0. However none of the chassis numbers in the homologation papers exactly match the RSH chassis numbers and even when a chassis number and engine number are quoted in a homolgation paper they dont seem to match the actual engine fitted to either the RS number shown or the RSH produced at about the same time. in the case of the paper shown below it is not even a RS number but an S number which is probably something to do with the was the RS was presented to the FIA in the first place as an evolution of an S and they wanted the engine homologation change to apply to S engines as well.

    The exact details of all of this is something that I have never been able to get to the bottom of and i dont think it is covered in the RS book either
    Hugh

    Here an official Dutch technical documents on the rear trailing arm modification wich i found in our papers, maybe this solve some mistery about the use of parts.

    rondschrijven Carrera RS 1973_0007.jpg

    I translated it for you for easy reading;

    Incoming 9-5-1973 from chassis number 911.360.14O9
    From the date mentioned are the cars of type 911 SC equipped with short arms made from steel part number, left 911.331.053.10
    Right 911.331.054.10 in this connection was the cross
    mounted suspension tube changed part number 911.331.039.00 and the brake lines, part number 911 355 .627.O2 left 911.355.653.01
    right.
    For the above date under the standing chassis numbers were
    already built in this embodiment


    And a document on changes on the alu front support ;

    rondschrijven Carrera RS 1973_0006.jpg

    translation;

    from April 9, 1973

    From above mentioned date at the Carrera RS front axle auxiliary support of steel built in part 901 341 013 00

    Alumium auxiliary carrier section 911 341 013 03, which was mounted because of its low weight, can be exchanged without problem on a steel specimen.

    alumium axle auxiliary support as part no longer available.

    The can be used if any parts lying in stock.
    Wim van den Berg
    Holland

    911 2.2 E 1970
    911 2.7 Carrera 1974
    911 3.0 RSR 1974 Tribute
    930 3.0 Turbo 1976

Similar Threads

  1. 1973 Carrera RS 0172 for sale in Switzerland
    By Ghost Chaser in forum For Sale/Wanted: Early 911 Cars, 1965 - 1973
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-13-2012, 09:10 AM
  2. 1973 Carrera RS for Sale
    By stuntmanmike in forum For Sale/Wanted: Early 911 Cars, 1965 - 1973
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 07-12-2012, 01:33 AM
  3. Porsche Carrera RS 2,7 1973 for sale
    By Thomas lundeval in forum For Sale/Wanted: Early 911 Cars, 1965 - 1973
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-16-2011, 08:46 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-03-2011, 03:06 AM

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.