76 carrera 3.0

warpspd · 12-07-2003, 10:32 AM

I just purchased a 76 3.0 carrera a few weeks ago. I just wanted
to get some info on this car. I checked in bruce anderson's performance handbook on the authenticity of the vin number which is 9116600251. The engine number is 930/02 which is
the correct 3.0 litre. This car does not have a vin plate on
the front window post. I wondered where I could get one
stamped with correct vin on it to maintain the originality
of the car.

I traded my motorcycle for this car so I am really not sure
of the true value of the car.I was told by several sources
that the value is comparable to the 78-79 911SC is this
true?

How much would updating the car to newer body and
interior pieces hurt the value. Since this car is sort of a
special model I am thinking that it should be kept as
close to original as possible.

sorry for such a long post.. thanks in advance...

Rick Cabell · 12-07-2003, 10:56 AM

See here:

Show me your original Carrera 3.0!

GeorgeK · 12-07-2003, 11:04 AM

The Carrera 3.0 is MORE interesting than a '78-'83 SC. Lighter, livelier (thanks to the 2.7 crank), and more exclusive (3600 built in all).
here 9116600362:

dd74 · 12-07-2003, 11:27 AM

The '76-'77 Carrera is coveted on this board - at least I off-and-on covet one. I don't think you'll garner much support to "update" the body. You can lighten it by removing things like the rear seat, getting rid of the electrical equipment (windows and sunroof, etc) and changing to a lightweight battery.

It'll supposedly give an SC a tough time (read: outperform) in most cases.

I'd leave it as is.

autoxracer31 · 12-07-2003, 11:55 AM

hey guys: this might be too off topic but, I have a 1974 that I put a 3.0 liter in... Is it lighter/ faster than an SC too???

dd74 · 12-07-2003, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by autoxracer31
hey guys: this might be too off topic but, I have a 1974 that I put a 3.0 liter in... Is it lighter/ faster than an SC too???

I've done the same - '74 with a 3.0. Yes, it's much lighter than an SC, and lighter than a Carrera 3.0, though this might be disputed in some circles.

Reasons:

1) No power equipment
2) No galvanizing
3) Although the 3.0 is heavier by about twenty pounds than the 2.7, the '74 still utilizes the magnesium gearbox.
4) Lighter (smaller diameter actually) wheels and (I believe) lighter brakes.

What year is your 3.0 liter?

autoxracer31 · 12-07-2003, 12:14 PM

the engine i had put in mine was a 78' along w/ removing the sportomatic tranny i put in a 915 5speed from 82? 83? one of the 2 years

fintstone · fintstone's Garage

Should be significantly faster if sorted out properly.

autoxracer31 · 12-07-2003, 12:15 PM

since you have done this w/ a 74' , i need to upgrade my brakes but i only have 15 inch fuchs, any suggestions

GeorgeK · 12-07-2003, 12:16 PM

DD, the '76 still used a magnesium gearbox, actually, some '77 did as well.

dd74 · 12-07-2003, 12:28 PM

Did it? Very interesting. That might explain use of the 2.7 crank as well - left over pieces from previous model years, etc.

Autoxracer31: On a '74, I'd stick with 15-inchers, but use wider 7-inch wheels. The widest tire you can safely fit with that wheel is a 205 width, 60 series tire. 55-series might be nicer. 50s are best, but you'll need to lower the car to avoid the large wheel-well gap between the tires and fenders.

dd74 · 12-07-2003, 12:32 PM

Again, I was comparing weight between Autoxracer31's '74 3.0 and a standard SC. I'm still fuzzy on the stats concerning the Carrera 3.0, though I'm learning...

fintstone · fintstone's Garage

Autoxracer31
If you have the "S type brakes".......alloy front calipers......then they are pretty darn good for most applications. (If not...there seem to be a lot more for sale lately. I am afraid you probably gave up some acceleration with the higher geared newer tranny though. I agree with dd74....keep the 15s or you will loose a bit of acceleration.