Value of 71 911T?

[jcc911]

I know this can be a tough question to answer, but what is an approximate value for a 71 911T sunroof coupe.
He is the little that I know about it. FOr some reason it has a 69 transaxel, Meaning it is a 2.0 L and old 5 sp shift pattern.
Good maintainence, body is decent, new tires, complete brake overhaul (lines calipers MC pads, etc.), webbers rebuilt, carerra tensioners.

What do I need to know and lookfor with these early year 911s?
Thanks for your help, J.

[fryardds]

The value is most directly corrolated with condition and originality. The better the condition of the body and mechanicals the higher the value. This also ties in with the last thing you asked about which is what to look for and that is rust especially here in the Midwest.

Do you need a shop to do a PPI? If so I know of a very good shop near you in Cedarburg. The guys there really know the early cars very well.

[jcc911]

Yeah, Fabson Eng. that is where the car was maintained, I could give him a call as he knows it well. I guess I was just looking for a going rate.

Also if anyone had any comments on the 2 L engine. Thanks

[fryardds]

Well at least you can know the car has been maintained and repaired correctly mechanically.

Are you saying that is has a 2.0L engine as well as transmission? In your first post you mentioned just a '69 trans. If so it has the least desirable combination, that is a non-matching engine of the lowest HP.
So even if the body is straight and rust-free with good paint it will still be at a significant discount to the same car with a matching 2.2L. I am certainly no expert on that end of the market but a guess would be in the $9-10K area and that maybe generous.

[jcc911]

Thats odd, for some reason he was telling me that the '69 engine trans was "better." I did research, though, that it did have the lowest HP rating.

[70SATMan]

Aaron at FlatSix knows the early cars really well and can do a thorough PPI.

Personally I wouldn't even bother with a 71 with the 2.0 normal. You don't get case squirters or the 2.2 howl Unless, you plan to hot rod. Then use the mismatch, lowest HP yadda yadda to your benefit to knock the price way down.

[jcc911]

I agree with you guys, I think I am going to pass on this one.
Thanks for the insight!

[mschnittker]

The 2.0 non-S vanilla motor is a nice motor, understressed, lots of power at high revs, the webers are very good. That it has the chain tensioner upgrade is very good. The 2.2 T doesn't really have that much more power, if any, since the .2 liter increase was mainly to compensate for added pollution controls. If the motors are tuned properly they both have plenty of power. Only when you get to the 3 liter motors is the power difference really obvious and the cars are heavier then too of course. I think the 901 transaxle in a 69 is basically the same as the 911 transaxle in a 71 except it doesn't have the push clutch of the 70/71 which is a plus in my book. But I am puzzled why someone would put a 69 trans and 69 motor in a 71T. Weird. As just a driver, who cares what motor is in it? If the car is of a bright color that is a big plus. If the paint is original or a repaint of the original color that is a plus. Rust of course is EVERTHING. If no rust at all, and I mean look hard and find none, then the motor and trans is not important at all. You can find a 71 trans and motor easily. Finding a rust free body is not easy at all.

[jcc911]

Color is Guards, not sure if it is orignial though, I did not look that close. Just wanted to get a feeler for what others thought. The other thing I did not like was an IROC (i beleive) front bumper was added.

Did the 71 have 16" fuchs on it? This one does.

[fryardds]

Nope, should have 15 X 6 inch, either deep or flat face.

[fryardds]

J.

This car may end up being more than you want to spend but here is a very nice example of 2.0L 'T'. If interested just hop on the ferry in Milwaukee and check it out.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?threadid=288342