Weight of a 1973 911s?

Mojo · 08-08-2005, 03:01 PM

I was trying to figure out what new car compares to a 73 911s
I know there 190hp and 178tq. But I don't know what they weigh.
Did a search coundn't find it.
I was wondering HP per pound. Anyone know? Thanks.

Zeke · 08-08-2005, 03:08 PM

Spec book says 2248 lbs. dry for '71 T, E & S

randywebb · 08-08-2005, 03:14 PM

Off the top of my head, 2340 for a '73.

It's probably at rennlight.com - not sure if Thom uploaded all the pages in the thing I sent him.

Duke · 08-08-2005, 03:20 PM

The 1973 Carrera RS 2.7 weighed 2200 lbs., & was second overall, East African Safari, 1974. By contrast, the 1974 Carrera RSR Turbo 2.1 weighed 1810 lbs. & was second overall, Le Mans, 1974.

Mojo · 08-08-2005, 04:17 PM

Well using 2248 its 11.83 lbs per HP.
Thats more than a wrx
but less than a wrx sti
The new gto is in the 9lbs per hp, but weighs a ton.
and the Lotus elise has more hp per lb but less torque per lb.
Just some fun comparisons

Jeff Higgins · 08-08-2005, 04:20 PM

My '72 T is right on 2300 with half a tank of gas. It has less trim than an S and no sunroof. It does have a larger SC tank, so that half a tank is 9-10 gallons. Figure about 2230-2250 dry.

Bill Verburg · Bill Verburg's Garage

According to the pCA "Bible"

Class Year      Model                       Weight     HP     Ratio (lb./hp.)

D     72-73     2.7 Carrera-Lt. Wgt          2116     210        10.08

E     72-73     2.7 Carrera-Touring          2365     210        11.26

G     72-73     911S                         2365     190        12.45

Mojo · 08-08-2005, 05:01 PM

Thanks bill, now I can do some comparisons to see what new car is closest to the old 911s, Thats going to be a hard one to find.

Tom F2 · 06:54 PM

According to Car & Driver in 1972, the 911S with sunroof weighed 2,455 lbs. The 911T without sunroof, but with fuchs, appearance group, 5 speed and sway bars, weighed 2,425, while a similarly equipped 911E Targa weighed 2,475. I believe that the folks at C&D actually weighed the cars, and did not rely on the factory numbers, which are for stripper cars. Probably, some of the differences between C&D numbers and factory numbers lies in how the cars are weighed, too, i.e., with or without fuel, tool kit, spare, etc.

To give you something to calibrate the C&D information with, they reported, a few years later, a curb weight of 2,825 lbs. for the '76 Turbo Carrera (and a 0-60 time of 4.9 seconds for the same car!) and a curb weight of 2,630 lbs. for a '78 911SC Targa. A 1973 914 2.0 was reported to weigh 2,160 lbs.

All of these weights are for cars without air conditioning, except for the Turbo Carrera.

darkbeer · 08-08-2005, 06:58 PM

I think that some "moving & storage" places & truck stops have scales...I don't know how accurate they are but that is a possibility for getting ones car weighed.....

afterburn 549 · 08-08-2005, 07:22 PM

my 75 s weighs 2020 -full tank of gas and fire ext on board.....yup I am braging

drsimonwong · 08-08-2005, 07:49 PM

I thin adding 200 to 250lbs ontop of the factory spec. weight is prudent. These cars are sans every option. AC, sunroof, electric windows etc and have an almost empty fuel tank.

My '85 fully loaded with just about every factory option weighed in at 2800lbs or 248lbs more than spec.

I think the older cars may be less, but interestingly if you check Bill's PCA spec sheet the touring RS is 249lbs heavier than the RS. It is my understanding the RST is a RS with all the creature comfort goodies.

Simon

Jeff Higgins · 08-08-2005, 08:00 PM

I use the weigh station out on the freeway near my home. The scales stay on 24/7 whether or not the station is open and manned. It's free, it's easy, and they are certified. Just puul on in when the sign says it's closed and you will have it all to yourself.

Mojo · 08-08-2005, 08:15 PM

Well after figuring out "lbs per hp" and "lbs per torque"
Im now more confused than ever.
I really feel that both HP and torque matter, and it seems like weight isn't a linear scale, lighter is better.
But what about safety, more weight is safer.

randywebb · 08-08-2005, 09:55 PM

No, more rigidity is safer. However, wt. is partly correlated with rigidity, hence the idea that wt. is per se safer.

Bill Verburg · Bill Verburg's Garage

Quote:

No, more rigidity is safer. However, wt. is partly correlated with rigidity, hence the idea that wt. is per se safer.

Actually the deadliest cars are the strongest, stiffest most rigid ones like the old tube frame Indy cars of the '50s. The trend in safety has been a solid cocoon for the cockpit w/ crush zones and tear away components every where else.

Doesn't really apply to a production car as even w/ the crash bumpers removed('73 back didn't even have them) there is still a lot of crush zone.

avendlerdp · avendlerdp's Garage

Not hijack but.... How much lighter are the earlier 911's? Is a 70 any lighter then a 73?

Alex

randywebb · 08-09-2005, 11:34 AM

I agree with Bill - I posted the simplified 'version' for heuristic purposes.

I'll try to post my Excel page of whole car wt. data later - am painting the house right now -- it's such fun I just can't bear to take the extra time...

Early_S_Man · 08-09-2005, 12:54 PM

The 911S numbers are a bit questionable in the '73 Road & Track track test of 911S and RSR ... but worth looking at, anyway!

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?threadid=58484&highlight=rsr+911s

afterburn 549 · 08-09-2005, 12:59 PM

as the years go by they get more and more heavy ,,you know pwr this pwr that,crash bumpers, hot and cold running ho2, catastrophic deverters, font and rear washers,ect, ect, ect ......