$$Going once going twice$$

[jluetjen]

Originally posted by EJ11HHF
Porsche swtiched from KG to AG May or June of '73. I'm sure someone can narrow it down further. It's possible the RSR was built in the middle of 1973.

The tag for this car should then show "KG" rather then "AG" since according to this document the build date (auslieferungsdatum) was January 1973. Neither here nor there, but an interesting cross-check.

[cbeers]

I can't remember about the sun visors, but if there was a light in the trunk, it didn't light up.

One other note. When the deck lid was raised, there were two lights built into the lid, but not in the usual way. They were built into the "end" of the lid, not on the underside if that makes sense. They were such that they would be touching the rubber lip on the body when closed.

Is that right?


-Chris

[cbeers]

it did say KG in the aluminum tag up front.....

-Chris

[jluetjen]

Originally posted by EJ11HHF
You can see a sunvisor through the sunroof in this picture:



and the luggage light here:

Thanks Carl.
Starkey suggests that the luggage compartment light, clock and sunvisors were deleted from the light-weight models. I didn't see them listed in the ebay add's listing of options. Looking at the white 406, I noticed that it too has visors, as well as a clock, so I guess it's the same either way.

[jluetjen]

I guess at the end of the day, a really good 911RS replica would be worth quite a bit of money, although I doubt it would be worth a whole lot more then it would cost to replicate, so maybe +/- $60K - $100K. If that's where the bidding stops, then it would sound like the "invisible hand" of the market-place will have spoken. So then this auction would wind up like many others with the seller having unrealistic expections about what his car is worth.

[Wayne 962]

Originally posted by cbeers
what about the rear valence? I guess that could be a replacement with the re-spray, but still, it seemed strange to have a side cut out when you have a twin pipe car.

That's very common - I don't think that the dual pipe sport muffler was a factory option, particularly on the homologation cars...

-Wayne

[TRE Cup]

Guys, This is a TOURING model with lightweight mods done by some one at some place in time. So discussion about lamps, visors, seats, and all the bolt on parts, etc is moot unless the car would be restored to all original touring spec as per the records (as printed in konradshiem's RS book). Untill the Dr. allows more inspection, there are no visual clues other than what has been photographed already

But then again, we have to make sure it is a real RS, right?

[goat]

Yes it did have sun visors. and clock.
It had the two small lights in the ducktail at the bottom. Was that the same as what chris was talking about.

Another note He Demostrated the Emergency electric cut off. When he turned it off the clock was still clicking is that how they work?

[Carl Bauer]

Originally posted by jluetjen
The tag for this car should then show "KG" rather then "AG" since according to this document the build date (auslieferungsdatum) was January 1973. Neither here nor there, but an interesting cross-check.

John,

Porsche probably has a back stock of "KG" VIN tags that they used up before switching to the "AG" tags. But yeah, this car is before the change over to AG.

They did the same thing placing a back stock of optional early 911 parts on late 1973 911's (to get rid of them) before the change over to the '74 big bumper style.

[Wayne 962]

Originally posted by TRE Cup
Mr Beau
on lightweights it would be very hard to reproduce a car accurately. The later thicker metal cars are much easier to duplicate

That is why this whole discussion is so curious. Measuring the sheet metal will tell all. If you were to make a clone that would fetch high dollar amounts, you'd make dang near sure that you copied one of the later ones that had the regular sheet metal.

-Wayne

[Wayne 962]

Originally posted by TRE Cup
to expect a lightweight to remain 100% original over time is not realistic if the car was driven a lot. Rust, Accidents, racing "improvements", updating , changing from touring to lightweight trim- all hurt the value of a less than original car
The very original lightweights that are out there command top dollar because of this

Right, and don't forget that these cars were never in super high demand. Just as short as 5-6 years ago, you could easily buy one for $40K...

-Wayne

[Wayne 962]

Originally posted by 70SATMan

Other things to look at. Date codes on the gas tank, wheels and spare. If original to the car they should line up with production date. I know, easily changed but, does provide more data. There is also another number I believe stamped on the underneath of the pan around the crossmember. Think I remember reading about something like that.

Most cylinder heads have date stamps too, but these are near impossible to see...

-Wayne

[kenikh]

I thought it was only the part numbers that you can see under the car? The cast dates are hidden by the fan shroud.

[TRE Cup]

On the engine case itself there is the round date "stamp" that is molded in. The transmission has the same "stamp"
Matching numbers? someone had to have the original drivetrain (and that HAS happened before- a car built around a RS motor and trans!) OR a set of german # stamps

[Jays72T]

FWIW, here are some pics of my vin and front plate. The car is a 72T w/ original paint.

[pwd72s]

Originally posted by jluetjen
pwd72s and cerberus1, could you take a picture of the number plate in the front trunk of each of your cars, with a millimeter ruler underneath it for scale. It might help us to answer two questions:

- Are the charactors 5 through 11 evenly spaced as marked by the factory?
- Are they all tangent to a line?

Sorry, no digital camera here. FWIW,both my aluminum rivited plate and the number stamped near the smuggler box look much like Jay's above...except, of course, the numbers are a bit different.

[70SATMan]

So, it looks like the VIN plate changed to the 4 row for 72 and the font style of the trunk VIN changed too. Also looks like the VIN plate area got a little larger too. The very blurry photo of the "RS" VIN plate clearly shows the three row which would be incorrect but, could be a replacement.

Were the trailing arms steel or aluminum? I think only the front crossmember was alum. for the 2.7 RS.

[fryardds]

The RS has steel trailing arms but with a very unique gusset welded on for strength. The front cross member should be AL.

[Don Z.]

Originally posted by goat
Another note He Demostrated the Emergency electric cut off. When he turned it off the clock was still clicking is that how they work?

It depends. It's a mechanical clock. The spring winds down (I think it takes 4 minutes and 20 seconds, but my memory is not what it once was...) and the points close. This charges the solenoid, which spins the winding... and rewinds the spring for another cycle. So, depending on where it was in the cycle when he hit the switch, and how far it was off... yes, it would continue to click.

[69Sman]

Well, there seems to be a lot of confusion here, so I'll throw in my 2 cents, and see if I can confuse more.

M471 (lightweights) AND M472 (Touring) BOTH were manufactured using the thin sheetmetal until supply exhausted. I have seen with my own eyes, #411, Touring/first series, FAIL the 'push your thumb into the center of the roof' test, leaving a very uhappy owner with a dent in his roof. When the thin sheet metal supply was exhausted has been the topic of ENDLESS debate; some say car #1036, some say earlier, some later. My RS, Touring, #1248, restored in Germany as a M471, has a 'birthdate- of 4/18/1973. Per Konradsheim's book, this is right around the date where "thin sheet metal used until supply exhausted." Who knows which cars received which panels if ANY, after the chassis no longer needed to be individually weighed.

There a MANY little 'tells' to ascertain a REAL RS from a total fake, or clone. Brian has pointed correctly pointed out MANY of them. On my car, for instance - as a Touring, it came with a STEEL space saver spare, with a Bridgestone tire. The tire, of course having never been used, is date stamped 4/73. The 300khm speedo, correct for my manufacture date, is also date stamped on 4/73 on the back, and on and on it goes.

The EBAY car, because of the dupe chassis number, is very suspect. The owner's curt and defensive replies to emails ONLY makes MORE SUSPICIOUS. Without verification of the production number, and a complete and thorough search of all the little RS 'special things', along with a 'date stamp' check of all the places where one could check, we'll probably never know. AND, even then, A REALLY REALLY GOOD FAKE MIGHT PASS THE TESTS....