And 2300495?Originally Posted by Leirbag
And 2300495?
Baudett // https://www.instagram.com/Baudett_canarias/
My opinion is that this "R" is far from meaning "Rally." I believe the "R" stands for R-ennausführung (racing execution). This can be supported—or at least that’s what I think. For rally vehicles, the designation "S/T" already existed in my understanding. For racing vehicles with a 2.5L engine, I’d say the designation is "S/R" for R-ennausführung, as seen in the RSR. Or does the "R" in RSR also stand for Rally? I still lean towards Monaco’s interpretation.
The "S/T" vehicles were special vehicles. Then there were the M491 2.5L or "S/R" models, like the one shown by Leirbag, where the caption clearly indicates it. Other publications have also referred to it as an "S/R." If you look at those publications, you can infer that the M491 2.5L vehicles were also called "S/R." Considering that the "S/T" vehicles from 1972 were delivered around January 14 (or close to it) with Z-program numbers that are relatively close (M471 + M491), and that the M491 vehicles were delivered much later than January 14, I would argue that an "S/R" is an M491 2.5L vehicle.
I’d say that most of the "S/T" vehicles listed today would actually be "S/R," with some "S/T" belonging to the Z program. This thought keeps recurring to me, and along with Monaco’s words, it seems to make sense. I still find it interesting to discover more information about the "S/R" designation. From my perspective, as I mentioned earlier, the "ST/R" designation is an invention.
I would like someone to "certify" that those letters were written on the fender of a Porsche vehicle. Do we have 100% evidence that such a notation was real?
Best regards.
If the question isn't considered rude...
how old are you right now, Leirbag?
Baudett // https://www.instagram.com/Baudett_canarias/
little update, thanks to my friend who noticed it
based on pictures from 70s/80s, I would say no. (answer subject to change)
It is possible that it's a mistake, but I think there must be a document or a picture that proves what Copley Motorcars (or rather the sellers) claims. In my opinion, this is a unique case and I don't think there is anything to analyze in it, if not a transition period between 1970 and 1972, where two philosophies of racing 911 were produced.
I'm 21 (it was written in my instagram bio before you blocked me for I don't know which reason...)
Does anyone have a racing/owners history related to 230 1155 ? I think I've found some photos with matching details (rollbar,etc), but no owner's name linked to. (period 72/73)
Last edited by Leirbag; 12-09-2024 at 01:52 PM.
Transition period? I would like you to elaborate a bit on what you think that period entailed. By 1971, the ST existed, and it had been documented since 1970. The ST (basis) could be prepared for circuits with a larger engine.
For 1972, I understand things were different. It started with a 911S m471 or m491 vehicle... or Z-programm (the S/T, according to my thoughts), but for 1971, it seemed clear how to "make" an ST. An STR would contradict what that vehicle represents, which is a safari car. A rally car...
Understanding that the "R" should indicate R-ennausführung (racing version) and not rally... 911R-ally, 911TR-allye, 911Rs-Rallye... STR, in my view, would indicate a vehicle with a powerful engine designed for circuits, not for rallies or normal driving, which is why that inscription on that vehicle seems extremely peculiar to me, to say the least. STR, in my opinion, does not suggest rally in any way. Where did that designation for this vehicle come from, or who was the first to "mention" it? That is a question I believe deserves an answer. I think it’s a mistake and that the inscription on that piece would have said "at most"... S/T.
I don't think it has to do with two distinct racing philosophies. The ST was a rally vehicle. The SR was a racing vehicle. STR, from my point of view, is an "invention" created to blend concepts, likely to obtain better benefits and more publicity (I say this from complete ignorance, so it could be wrong). At some point, I would like to confirm if that inscription truly existed on that car or if it only said S/T.
From my perspective... the "R" was added to that vehicle as a trend of that time, for those who believed "R" meant rally, to give more weight to the vehicle than it already had (an outstanding car). That’s what I think, and I wanted to express it here since I consider it extremely important to differentiate these vehicles.
Has anyone ever spoken to Barth about STR vehicles?
Does anyone know if this vehicle, in its construction sheet, included the inscription "S/T"? Since the vehicle has a license plate... I would be interested in knowing that "small" detail for my research.
Baudett // https://www.instagram.com/Baudett_canarias/
A great place to level set for the endless intrigue that surrounds the racing "S", which was never officially known as an ST at the time but only became known as such later... the homologation papers for the car starting in '69 and updates through '72.
Old hat for many...
https://historicdb.fia.com/car/porsc...s-2195-et-2341
Funny how members try to make a Phd. Thesis out of completely non relevant historical info at Porsche that time.
I think there is some truth in it, but I don't think we need to fall into over-analysis either.
May not be relevant to you but may be to others. What are your thoughts on the topic?
Peter Kane
'72 911S Targa
Message Board Co-Moderator - Early 911S Registry #100
I've honestly wondered as I've read this thread if there's a book in the making here.
(a) 1970 911T Sportomatic coupe
(b) 2016 E350 4MATIC wagon; parts hauler for (a)
ESR #1474
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote