Differences in body shell 911 T,E,S 69-73?

[mezger]

Hello,

are there any differences in the LWB body shells 911 69-73?
I found a body shell without VIN, seller says it is a S...

Regards
mezger

[ossiblue]

Originally Posted by mezger

Hello,

are there any differences in the LWB body shells 911 69-73?
I found a body shell without VIN, seller says it is a S...

Regards
mezger

The only difference in the shell--meaning the sheet metal stampings--will be the VIN, AFIK. S had different trim along the rockers and bumpers, different gauges, brakes, and some suspension components, but the basic body panels and fenders were the same as other models. As mentioned, this is only from my experience which does not include any deep investigation into S cars, so a true expert may offer something that will identify a shell as an S that is part of the unalterable construction.

IMO, a shell without a VIN is always suspect. If the one you are looking at has no VIN, claiming it is an S should not influence the price as 1) there will never be a way to verify it's authenticity or true identity, 2) restoring it to an S will always be subject to doubt, 3) getting a new, legal VIN, will not restore the value from a factory S VIN, and 4) building it into a track car is not dependent on the shell being from any particular model.

[edesign45]

I'm not an expert on this but I do believe the rear shock towers are different (larger) on the 72-73 chassis. When using later aluminum trailing arms on a 69-71 911, a Bilstein style shock will bind/rub on the chassis do to the geometry of the shock angle. A more slender shock like a Koni Classic can solve this issue if you insist on using AL trailing arms. This is not an issue on a 72-73 chassis.

[ossiblue]

Originally Posted by edesign45

I'm not an expert on this but I do believe the rear shock towers are different (larger) on the 72-73 chassis. When using later aluminum trailing arms on a 69-71 911, a Bilstein style shock will bind/rub on the chassis do to the geometry of the shock angle. A more slender shock like a Koni Classic can solve this issue if you insist on using AL trailing arms. This is not an issue on a 72-73 chassis.

This is a good point^^.

When I read the OP, I immediately thought he was concerned about differences between an "S" shell and any other model. However, rereading the post, that is not entirely clear. Subtle differences between shells during the production years of 69-73 may be what he is after.

[Tim K]

Also, '69 had the harnesses plugged into a welded tab/bulkhead between the upper rear shock mounts.
I *think* the early LWB cars had a different cutout for the oil tank filler/filter. Can't recall what year(s).

Did you check for the number stamped in the dash by the ash tray?
Not sure if it's an option but taking the dash pad off should (hopefully still) reveals the VIN in grease pencil above the gauges.

Tim K

[bobolsn]

1972 had the oil fill on the right side, just behind the passenger door.

Bob

[MAH77]

'72 has the oil filler door behind the passenger door, but that's the same across all trim lines. If it doesn't come with a matching numbers engine/transmission I'm not sure how you could justify any price premium for it being an S tub.

[barzini]

Didn't the 911 T's coming out of Karmann have thinner roof and floor panel steel?

At least for the 70's?

I've read that some of these 911T's were then used by Werks for the factory 911 ST's with other parts, ie fenders, doors, etc.

[mezger]

Originally Posted by ossiblue

This is a good point^^.

When I read the OP, I immediately thought he was concerned about differences between an "S" shell and any other model. However, rereading the post, that is not entirely clear. Subtle differences between shells during the production years of 69-73 may be what he is after.

you're right. I asked for the differences between the models T,E,S

I know that there are differences between the years and 69 is special in the rear shock tower area.

regards
mezger