1967S engine numbers?

puzurinshushinak · 05-31-2002, 07:53 PM

Can anyone provide the range of engine numbers for the 1967 911S?

Peter Morgan's "Original Porsche 911" lists them as 960001-961178.

At the same time, Morgan says that more than 4,000 '67Ses were produced.

Can anybody explain the discrepancy?

Early_S_Man · 05-31-2002, 08:40 PM

Mogan's numbers are invalid, both the quantity of 911S models, and the engine numbers ...

Tobias Aichele shows total 1967 production at 6934 ... of which only 1709 were 911S ... 1549 coupes and 227 Targas. He also shows 1549 901/02 engines for 5-speeds and 227 901/08 engines (for Sportomatic) produced.

puzurinshushinak · 06-01-2002, 06:45 AM

You are a gentleman and a scholar, Warren.

Do you have any sense of why '67 values are so modest when compared to other early Ses? I have seen three 67Ses on Ebay in the past couple of weeks the high bids for which were $9-10,000. And there is an ad in the Boston Globe for an allegedly good condition, original 67S for $9,200. Even the grottiest long wheelbase Ses seem to go for more than that....

pwd72s · 06-01-2002, 08:18 AM

I think codition could be a factor here...as well as supply & demand, desirability. While it's true that the short wheelbase cars aren't as popular as the long wheelbase, I still consider the '67 to be MORE desirable than the '69-'71 models. But finding a '67 in great condition is VERY difficult. I Know of two that have sold well into 5 figures, tho...over $20,000 for a slate gray restored model, and over $30,000 for an all original silver car. Both '67 "S" models, documented as such.

Early_S_Man · 06-01-2002, 08:37 AM

Paul,

Pretty hard to figure, but, I suppose fear of rust is a factor, though you wouldn't think that would be a major factor in CA, though!

I know I certainly consider them to be the second-most-desirable 'S' models after the 2.4's, and their performance level doesn't seem to be widely recognized ... especially among those who are only familiar with 2.7's, SC's and Carrera's! Their capabilities above 80 mph on twisty roads or on a track is something to be reckoned with!

pwd72s · 06-01-2002, 08:41 AM

MY reasoning too, Warren. And when you toss in the factor that the '67 was the very first S? Yes, second in desirability only to the last S models, the 2.4. Have you ever driven a '67S? The high revving 2.0? Gosh, how can you not love this car????

Early_S_Man · 06-01-2002, 09:09 AM

Yes, Paul ... the FIRST 911 I ever drove in '72 was a '67 911S, and I still wish I had bought it! It was difficult to keep it under 90 on the highway, and amazing performance on skinny 165VR-15 Michelin XAS tires! Guess you could say it spoiled me against lesser models from that point on!

Saffs · 06-01-2002, 09:21 AM

I certainly could have my arm twisted and take charge of a nice '67S - in Slate Gray, please....

ErVikingo · 06-01-2002, 05:42 PM

For more info go to

www.early911sregistry.org

or www. early911s.com

Lots of good info there as well as a VIN decoder.