I'm selling my 1972 911T - seeking comments on an originality question

[rs911t]

My '72 911T will be on BaT by the end of the month and I'm conflicted over one seemingly minor modification. I hoping to get some feedback.

The executive summary: I acquired the car in 2002 and am the 3rd owner. The car was extensively modified ~1978 by a Denver shop called Rennenhaus: suspension, transmission and a 2.8L engine build.

All of these modifications remain, at least in spirit. I began a project in 2008 to rebuild the engine. Expecting a long-term affair I acquired a 1986 RoW 3.2L to stand-in until the rebuild was complete. Also, not wanting to cut a notch in the transmission for the engine's flywheel sensor, I picked up a refreshed 1980 915 with a ZF LSD. Long story short, the 2.8 was not rebuilt and the 3.2 became permanent. This didn't me cause any great distress at the time. While it was built on a proper type 911/51 case, it was NOT original to the car. I did not have a numbers-matching engine and 15-years-ago that label seemed to mean everything at resale. I no longer have the 2.8 - I sold it, disassembled, shortly thereafter.

The situation is that I have an all around very nice car trimmed for club trackdays and blasting around country roads. My focus has been to correct outstanding electic and mechanical issues. Two remain and are both related to the transmission: the 1980 915 needs a rebuild and the original mechanical speedometer hasn't worked since 2008.

I few weeks back I decided to resolve both issues by rebuilding the original, numbers-matching transmission and putting it back in the car. My mechanic, after talking to a trusted 3rd party, balked at cutting a notch for the flywheel sensor (deja vue 2008!). They encouraged me to leave it as-is and let the new owner decide what to do with the fresh-as-it-can-be, numbers-matching transmission.

The car is perfectly drivable, though I wouldn't track it without fixing the synchros. I'm left with a gnawing dilemma. List the car with excuses and an obvious solution. Or, cut the notch and list an excuse-free car.

Right now I'm in the "leave as is" camp, but I'd like to hear what others think. I ask only that we please not rehash the engine decision. I'll start another thread about the engine.

Thanks in advance!

[Matt Monson]

Rennenhaus was Grady Clay’s shop, and carries significant provenance of its own. If I were a buyer, I would rip out both the engine and gearbox you have installed, and put it back how they built it. Grady isn’t with us anymore and kind of the Vasek of the Rockies. Modified long nose Ts are a dime a dozen, but a Clay hot rod is something unique.

[Helix8]

I would refresh the transmission synchros and auction as a well sorted drive it now item and include the 2.8L needing rebuild and original transmission for the next owner to decide what to do with it. I auctioned a "hot rodded" Carrera not too long ago and was pleased with the number of followers, bidders and ultimately it went to a good home at was (I think anyway) a fair price for buyer and seller.

I did not know that about Rennenhaus and would therefore defer to Matt on this. GLWA

[rs911t]

I couldn't agree more re: the 2.8 and being a Clay hotrod. Unfortunately, that option is no longer available to me, unless you know where I can find a Clay engine. Also, note my point about the engine the car had that was not its engine. Anyone reading this that has a 1972 Clay hotrod ... send me the engine number. Maybe we can make a deal. :-)

[blucille]

A 2.8 is the motor to have in a longhood. A 3.2 is bad for the soul of the car.

[rs911t]

Originally Posted by blucille

A 1.8 is the motor to have in a longhood. A 3.2 is bad for the soul of the car.

1.8? Can we return to the transmission question? Please?

[Matt Monson]

Originally Posted by rs911t

I couldn't agree more re: the 2.8 and being a Clay hotrod. Unfortunately, that option is no longer available to me, unless you know where I can find a Clay engine. Also, note my point about the engine the car had that was not its engine. Anyone reading this that has a 1972 Clay hotrod ... send me the engine number. Maybe we can make a deal. :-)

I didn’t realize you had sold the takeout engine needing to be gone through. In your story that part wasn’t clear. It sounded like you had the old engine and gearbox still.

Sell the car as it sits, with the fresh matching 915. Don’t spend the labor to put it in.

[SalParadise]

On this one, I subscribe to the law of contrary public opinion - if everyone says one thing I say bet the other way.

You would not have asked the question unless you thought that you should put the original trans in that is perfectly rebuilt. Thats what you think - and it's such a tiny modification that it really, really means nothing.

I have no idea why everyone is putting a matching numbers tranny on such a high pedestal without having the original engine. You don't have the original engine, and you no longer have what would have been the second best - the 2.8 by Grady. These are long gone.

Notch the trans and that way it will have no issues. You can still put an original engine on that notched trans. Who cares? I would want the car the shifts nicely. It's not a concours car. Put the rebuilt trans in.

[SalParadise]

....and then sell the non-original trans that has issues - but not with the car. No one in most instances wants to deal with extra parts nowadays. That's how I have been seeing it.

And that's what the smart new owner is going to do - put the rebuilt trans back in, notch it, and move on.

[rs911t]

Thanks Sal. Nice summary, mind read and good question. Why put the tranny on a pedestal? "Numbers-matching" is a hat trick.

[911hutch]

I think Sal nailed it with sound logic. I agree with every point he makes.

[Matt Monson]

Installing that gearbox is just throwing more money at the problem. Was it fully updated with the shift sleeve upgrades? What about the mainshaft? Still the 7:31 ring and pinion, which is weaker than the one in the car. It has a weaker side cover. It has a mainshaft seal that isn’t easily serviced. I’m guessing it has no lsd, which the current gearbox has. And you have to change the axles to mate to the coarse flanges, because I’m guessing the car has been updated to fine. I’m not discouraging installing it because of numbers matching. IMO the wrong gearbox got rebuilt, and if I were a buyer, I would likely just sell the 72 gearbox to pay to rebuild the current one. Or do that yourself before you sell the car. A 72 915 is a turd of a gearbox unless a ton of money was spent to make it right.

[mepstein]

If you don’t have the original engine, I don’t think the trans matters as long as it works correctly.

[SalParadise]

Originally Posted by Matt Monson

IMO the wrong gearbox got rebuilt, and if I were a buyer, I would likely just sell the 72 gearbox to pay to rebuild the current one. Or do that yourself before you sell the car. A 72 915 is a turd of a gearbox unless a ton of money was spent to make it right.

This is where the specialized knowledge comes into play. As I was stating the above, I honestly do not know all the intricate details of various year 915s (earlier VS later) so if you were going to put in a 'rebuilt' '72 box that cannot or will not handle the power it's going to blow again sooner or later based on a gearbox that needs so much updating (unless it's all done the way Matt would do it, then you are fine). So it looks like you are faced with the fact of which is the 'proper' gearbox for the current engine. My guess would be that the newer box obviously is - so either you want to spend the money to fix it or not. As usual, either way it's going to be work, time and money to get it all together. It's never easy and the choices are never easy to make.

[rs911t]

Everyone, thank you for the comments. Lots of good info to chew on. I hope to see some of you on BaT in a few weeks. ;-)