2.7RS 930 Porsche History

[tonypeoni]

Subjectively which car do you think had a greater impact on the perception of what a Porsche is and the future of Porsche as a sports car manufacture?

[Josh D]

I would have to say the RS as it was the first to homologate the 911 for racing classes. The turbo was a continuation of development of the 911 as a race car.

And you only have to look at the prices for those models today to get your answer on perception. The RS is valued way higher than the first turbo cars.

[javadog]

With a knowledgeable long-term 911 enthusiast, the RS. With the general public, or those new to Porsche, the 930.

JR

[NYNick]

I would say the 65 911. This was a seminal moment in Porsche history, and caused a major uproar throughout the world. I remember.

[reachme]

agree completely with Javadog

[Cooper911SC]

+1 for Javadog.

C.

[Flojo]

Well, ...
65 911
73 RS
76 930

If you cant get on of those 3, then:
911ST
911 2.7 Carrera

[TCracingCA]

Is that the rules by the various organizers whether that be FIA past or present, Trans Am past or present, SCCA past or present etc. dictated what Porsche chose to build or why a model was Homologated! Thus Porsche then makes the decision as to whether they want to be in a certain class etc.. But in the modern some of these organizations are getting smart and have asked Ferrari, Porsche, Mercedes if they were interested in participating and then some sharing of the future rules has occurred.

Thus because of the rules (and I will only take a small segment of the Porsche history): 1971 The "S" was the car. LeMans and FIA developed rules for Turbos, so Porsche fielded Turbos in the 911, and would build RS's and then RSR's, the IROC cars, and the 911 Turbo cars were essentially cutting edge which caused some rule tweaking and thus caught them out for a few years during the RS and RSR reign! But then that all evolved to the hybrid in between 934, and then eventually the 935 here in the states was finally greenlighted for competition late 1977, but formally for the 1978 season, but had FIA classes in 1976 in Europe and onward thru the dominating late 70's and into the 80's, and actually earlier starting with those first Turbo 911's, but due to the rule mods on fuel consumption etc.. They had a pause in appearances especially until other Manufacturers came up to speed and the organizers created what everyone was accepting as fair rules come essentially in 1976 in Europe and about 1978 here in the States essentially, But then Porsche kept winning and thus developing, etc.. Porsches success comes directly as a result of their flexibility and desirability to evolve their models and to outlay the budget quicker and better than any other Manufacturer in History!

Also don't beat me up if I am off by a year or so. above without pulling out books and such!!!!! I am just trying to give the basis of the reason why models are built and why they choose to build this number or that!

Thus in the modern-- 911 Turbo not designed to any particular racing Class that exists, but you still see a whole bunch of very fast Turbo's at enthusiast level events. Thus over the years we have had Cups, and the latest turn key racers for sell have been the GT-3 RSR's. Thus the creation of the GT-2 RS and such and special limited built Caymans and such seem to still be dictated by the Racing Rules or future Racing Rules! But also the Manufacturers are just trying to have multiple offerings for every budget and level of Performance also.

Thus my answer would be actually the 1967 911 R!!!!!!!!!! If you truly know Porsches history!!!!! Then second would be the 1972 911 Turbos that ran at LeMans and such! The 935 Baby didn't benefit the 911 lineage, therefore that was development that led to the 936 and 956/962's! And some would argue the 911 Turbos from 1972 because that also was a smaller displacement, but it was the first turbocharging of the 911 lineage and sure came as a development of the 917/10, but those 911's demonstrated the feasibility of running Turbos in Production based classes Group 4, Group 5!

And I can go on! Get the point! My opinion! Unless you want to get deep on Mag cases vice Aluminum and the advancements on the Turbo and such and really get into it! Oh yes, put one of the smile post things here and a beer toasting one also!

[wayner]

I look at it extremely simplistically.
Probably not as accurate but makes sense to me

1) the 2.7 was so that they could race a 2.8 RSR with the same aero and suspension pickup points
2) the 2.7 RSR was raced as a replacement for the 917 when rules changed
3) the 930 was a street going version of the RSR with now production flares and a high horsepower motor with less of a short fuse and expensive build compared to the 2.8 race motor.

Simple enough for me ;-)

[TCracingCA]

Both the 2.7 RS and the 2.8 RSR were homologated into racing independent of each other. One ran initially because of the number built Group 4 rules (2.7), and Group 5 (2.8). They were completely different animals!!! The 2.8 RSR was another bullet preloaded into the gun and ready to shoot, in anticipation of what the organizers would do next. And thus Porsche had the bullet to counter!!!!!

The first Turbo to be put into production technically was the 1975 Porsche Carrera Turbo and not the 930. Thus this would be the first of it's breed and the 930 is technically an incorrect answer!

The 917 was not replaced, it was outlawed by rules out of Competition. Thus the only thing Porsche had to field in the new Group 6 format was the Porsche Turbo 911 cars. They purposely were $crewed by the French and French controlled (at that time) FIA Organizers. Porsche was exploring a future with the 917/30 and that model was not Porsches creation, but Penske's and the expansion of the Interscope Series was thought to be the place to be and the future. Then the oil embargo's and a high profile of 1000+ hp (non green!) bad for the Company imagine took effect and changed racing at that period. Thus that is the one of the few times that Porsche got caught out!!!! The Race 911 Turbos were small displacement and with the new Turbo technology, so Porsche thought it would be good for their image! The Carrera programs were then developed as an offshoot of the chassis development and not the engine technology! They thought they were years from developing Turbos for the street and that prediction was accurate. The reliability was just not there yet! Also in competition the other Manufacturers were screaming foul! Thus this all led to making and fielding a more pronounced Production based appearance. Then with the advent of the 936, that was considered a leading edge developmental Prototype and the concentration went to moving that technology into the 935 and down the chain to a Production available Turbo. Thus Porsche helped their public image by sticking with the 936 program claiming developmental with limited entries and no privateer sells 1976-78. Porsche then grew tired of non-Production models being allowed such as Lola and such and then built the 956 to the loophole in the rules. Then IMSA basically outlawed that, so they countered with the 962!

I could keep pluggin in history between each sentence, but this is the summary of what happened!

[wayner]

Do you really think that my response is that far off base?

Are the 2.7 and 2.8 being completely different animals when you consider that important homologations elements like the 2.7 RS suspension pickup points allowed the 2.8 RSR to use those setting in racing.

Also, we could get pedantic about replaced versus outlawed, but the point is that I doubt that many buyers back in the day could tell you the difference between valve angles or other such trivial detail. Instead, in terms of the question posed at the beginning of this thread and influence, I don't believe that it much of a stretch to think of the first 930 as the 73 RSR for the street.

[oh snap]

As a child of the 80s, the 930 is THE iconic Porsche for me.

[TCracingCA]

Originally Posted by wayner

Do you really think that my response is that far off base?

Are the 2.7 and 2.8 being completely different animals when you consider that important homologations elements like the 2.7 RS suspension pickup points allowed the 2.8 RSR to use those setting in racing.

Also, we could get pedantic about replaced versus outlawed, but the point is that I doubt that many buyers back in the day could tell you the difference between valve angles or other such trivial detail. Instead, in terms of the question posed at the beginning of this thread and influence, I don't believe that it much of a stretch to think of the first 930 as the 73 RSR for the street.

This is a very intelligent crowd here on these Porsche forums, and you being one of those intelligent people. I was just keeping everyone honest. Yes there is some commonality of components and the FIA would tend to allow Homologation on specific parts and not just the car in it's entirety during the season for competitive adjustments. I think an RSR to an RS or even the 930 is like comparing a 1967 R to a 1967 S (maybe stretching there somewhat!).

The RSR's of both 73 and the 74 vintage are pure racing machine. The 73 RS lightweight is the closest you can technically get a license plate on! Naturally RSR's are some of my personal favorite cars, and I would love to operate one on the street with a license plate.

Just trying to simulate interesting discourse, and not just the traditional one liners!

[winders]

Originally Posted by TCracingCA

Porsche was exploring a future with the 917/30 and that model was not Porsches creation, but Penske's and the expansion of the Interscope Series was thought to be the place to be and the future. Then the oil embargo's and a high profile of 1000+ hp (non green!) bad for the Company imagine took effect and changed racing at that period.

The 917/30 was a development of the 917/10, both of which were Porsche creations with Penske being the team with which Porsche did development work. Mark Donahue was the Penske team member that Porsche worked with most.

Also, the car was developed for and raced in the Can Am series. "Interscope" was the name of a racing team (established in 1975 with a Formula 5000 entry for Danny Ongais), not a series.

Porsche would have continued racing the car in Can Am if the SCCA had not introduced a 3 miles per U.S. gallon maximum fuel consumption rule.

[winders]

Originally Posted by wayner

3) the 930 was a street going version of the RSR with now production flares and a high horsepower motor with less of a short fuse and expensive build compared to the 2.8 race motor.

The 930 was not a street version of the RSR. The 930 was built strictly for homologation purposes (934). Porsche wasn't even sure they could sell the 500 cars they had to build over two years. The rest is history.....

[TCracingCA]

Originally Posted by winders

The 917/30 was a development of the 917/10, both of which were Porsche creations with Penske being the team with which Porsche did development work. Mark Donahue was the Penske team member that Porsche worked with most.

Also, the car was developed for and raced in the Can Am series. "Interscope" was the name of a racing team (established in 1975 with a Formula 5000 entry for Danny Ongais), not a series.

Porsche would have continued racing the car in Can Am if the SCCA had not introduced a 3 miles per U.S. gallon maximum fuel consumption rule.

Your additions help. Yes a fellow enthusiast!!!! But I never followed that European Can am series and I forget what it was actually called, but whatever it was named, that is what I was talking about! AndYes Ongais and group were Interscope Sponsored!!!! And it evolved to running the 935 and then to a Lola T-600 for which I have some of their 1st place IMSA medallions in my house! And I love that vintage F-5000 car!

Yes the Porsche 917/30 there are two stories (one from Porsche and one from Penske). I tend because I speak English as my chosen language to buy into the Penske story version! Thus in a short reply because I do want to get in the evening commute traffic very badly in hopes of seeing home--- the Penske team when Porsche saw what they had developed and did to the car, basically Porsche decided to back them on further development and improvements, but naturally a Porsche representative had to be present to take all of the credit for the parent organization!!!!! Thus if Penske wanted the funding, who was he to dispute things while it was actually happening. Same thing like with Vasek Polak's extra 500 rpm capable valve springs!!!!!!

[winders]

Originally Posted by TCracingCA

Thus because of the rules (and I will only take a small segment of the Porsche history): 1971 The "S" was the car. LeMans and FIA developed rules for Turbos, so Porsche fielded Turbos in the 911, and would build RS's and then RSR's, the IROC cars, and the 911 Turbo cars were essentially cutting edge which caused some rule tweaking and thus caught them out for a few years during the RS and RSR reign! But then that all evolved to the hybrid in between 934, and then eventually the 935 here in the states was finally greenlighted for competition late 1977, but formally for the 1978 season, but had FIA classes in 1976 in Europe and onward thru the dominating late 70's and into the 80's, and actually earlier starting with those first Turbo 911's, but due to the rule mods on fuel consumption etc.

I am not even sure what you are saying here. It's too convoluted to make sense of. The first 911 race car with a Turbo was the 934 which debuted in late 1975.

[winders]

TCracingCA,

Have you read "The Unfair Advantage" by Mark Donahue? Mark spends most of his time in Germany at the Porsche factory developing the 917/10 with Porsche. In 1971, Penske was still a small team with limited resources. They could not fund the development done to the 917 to make it a Can Am winner.

[TCracingCA]

Originally Posted by winders

I am not even sure what you are saying here. It's too convoluted to make sense of. The first 911 race car with a Turbo was the 934 which debuted in late 1975.

I will gladly retract or admit being wrong if the need arises!

First Interseries and I said accidently Interscope! Thus European Can Am was the Interseries (slip of the tongue)! I have Ted Fields IMSA medallions!

First Turbo's, yes as I said need to slide the dates (to 1974), but they were the Martini livery cars #22, #8, #9 with the huge wings and they predated the 934! But I did have it backwards and the chassis was an evolution of the Carrera and they were called Carreras and carried the RSR title, but were Turbo'd. But this car is the forerunner to all of the Turbo 911's breed so I was talking about the right car, but just had the date wrong!

And above, I was only talking to the 917/30 model specifically and haven't yet mentioned actually the 917/10 development! Yes I have that book! But I have sat with Roger Penske and talked to this subject, but naturally I never spoke with Donohue!

But all of this is written and well documented and my opinion is that whether my memory or yours is capable of remembering better something in print is besides the point to leaving guys without access to those sources with the belief of the wrong car as the forefather of a breed! Yes Porsche got it so wrong in 1972!!!!! The banner was carried by the privateers! They put their eggs into (now I will talk to 917/10) but into the 917/10! Penske thought it was a piece of crap, but still was heads and shoulders above the competition because of the Turbo technology!!

I am a little rusty on Porsche in general, part of the reason why I am newly back on the forum! But what I wrote above just needs some tweaks of the dates and model prgression, but still gives a rough recount of what went down!

Yes keep me honest!!!! Thank you!

Ps some guys are touchy about having their Carrera called a 911! Hey for those types:

A Carrera is a 911
A Carrera is a 911
A Carrera is a 911
A Carrera is a 911
A Carrera is a 911
A Carrera is a 911

Oh by the way did I tell you guys that a Carrera is a 911!

[winders]

I did forget about the 1974 RSR Turbo 2.14. The Group 5 displacement limit was 3.0 liters and turbos were allowed in with a 1.4 equivalency multiplier.