Another forward dated "Sheeper"......72 T to 993...

[matt930s]

Pmin getting to ya?

MattR

Originally Posted by Ronnie's.930

^^^

Personally, I would not own a car that "looks" more powerful than it is, so for me, the drive-train comes first. Butt that said, and along the lines of the $ reference you made above, when I was a late teen/early twenties back in the 80s, "more pow'a" was out of the question as I have never been in a position to pay others to work on my car (wouldn't pay for it if I could, as working on them is part of the "pride in ownership" for me), and did not yet have the knowledge and experience necessary to build power or maintain a powerful machine, so I settled for fast looking back then. So with that in mind, you do make a good point.

I guess it also primarily boils down to personsl preference, as many members don't give a flip about engine power, and think originality is more important (something I don't give two ****s about - not even one ****, in fact).

On the 912 subject; I sling a lot more shat about them than I actually believe (mainly just to yank Christian's chain). I respect the 912 for what it is and it certainly is not a machine which poses as something it is not.

Now with all that nonsense barfed forth, it sure is nice that not everyone has the same tastes in machines - would be much more difficult to fling feces if that were the case!

[Ronnie's.930]

^^^ Ha! It took me a little bit to understand what you meant by "pmin" - well done!

[Racerbvd]

Personally, I would not own a car that "looks" more powerful than it is, so for me, the drive-train comes first.

That was the problem with the 912s, didn't have the power to back up the look of the 911.

[pmax]

Originally Posted by Ronnie...

Personally, I would not own a car that "looks" more powerful than it is, so for me, the drive-train comes first.

I bet your 930 sure looks powerful but still, it wouldn't keep up with the latest watercoolers.
Besides, replacing body panels doesn't change the driving experience so who cares what others think as long as it still drives and performs like a 911.

Originally Posted by Racerbvd

That was the problem with the 912s, didn't have the power to back up the look of the 911.

And they managed to 'top' that with the 912e which is not only slow but sounds like a VW bus.

[ficke]

[QUOTE=pmax;8820873]I bet your 930 sure looks powerful but still, it wouldn't keep up with the latest watercoolers.
Besides, replacing body panels doesn't change the driving experience so who cares what others think as long as it still drives and performs like a 911.



UOTE]

You are completely missing the point here.
A 930 looks like a 930 and it drives like a 930. I would bet money that Ronnie did not spend money and time to make his 930 look like a water cooled car, so your comparison is not applicable

And dressing up a car to look like another car that is more powerful does not diminish the driving experience of that car but it sure labels you as a poser/ wanna be.

And obviously the person who changes body panels to look like something better, is clearly very concerned about what people think they look like other wise they would have put their time and money into mechanicals that improve the driving experience.
Basic logic.

[Matt Monson]

For most of their life, 911s have been seen as status symbols to many. Frequently as the models evolved and changed, guys who couldn't afford the latest greatest built the closest thing they could afford. It's just part of 911 history.

Nobody would build this car today. It was likely done 20 or 30 years ago. And now the only reason it is for sale is the run up in values. This morning I saw a guy asking about a 69 911e with a slopenose conversion. everyone told him to run screaming. If that car isn't all rusted out and the original 2.0l is still there, that car is worth quite a bit. And worth restoring. Sheeper be damned. Who cares what the guy who did it decades ago was thinking. You want a longnose project? Cars like these ones are worth looking closely at and considering. But projects aren't for everyone.

[pmax]

My point was .... drivetrain mods is not all there is to customizing your 911.

No one, certain celebrities excepted, is posing 'in your face' and hyping their personalized cars to the world. They are just enjoying them as private owners and yes, enthusiasts. I would even say they are more of an enthusiast than the collectors who do not drive their condition one cars.

[matt930s]

The early 911L was about the same 0-60 as the 912. The 912 handled better.

1968 911L (2.0) 1075 1991 130@6100 176@4200 131
10.6 second 0-60

1965-69 912 970 1582 90@5800 122@3500 119
11.1 second 0-60

The 912 was the true bridge between the 356 and 911. Have you priced nice longhood 912s lately?

912 with a 912 badge ain't a sheep! Lol....

Originally Posted by Racerbvd

That was the problem with the 912s, didn't have the power to back up the look of the 911.

[Matt Monson]

In 1967 Zasada won the European Rally Chsmpionship for Touring cars in a 912. He scored more points in the series then Vic Elford in his Monte Carlo winning 911s. Power isn't always why one wins a race, just like the old 356s used to beat big engine Ferraris.

[matt930s]

Here's a fun read:

912s in Motorsports History

Originally Posted by Matt Monson

In 1967 Zasada won the European Rally Chsmpionship for Touring cars in a 912. He scored more points in the series then Vic Elford in his Monte Carlo winning 911s. Power isn't always why one wins a race, just like the old 356s used to beat big engine Ferraris.

[matt930s]

Now let's get back to talking Sheepers!


MattR

[Racerbvd]

Originally Posted by matt930s

The early 911L was about the same 0-60 as the 912. The 912 handled better.

1968 911L (2.0) 1075 1991 130@6100 176@4200 131
10.6 second 0-60

1965-69 912 970 1582 90@5800 122@3500 119
11.1 second 0-60

The 912 was the true bridge between the 356 and 911. Have you priced nice longhood 912s lately?

912 with a 912 badge ain't a sheep! Lol....

Problem was, it was Mustangs, Z28s & other Pony cars of the era that were running them, and as some 912s were purchased (I'm talking long after new) were bought by people who wanted a 911, and couldn't afford a 911, but still managed to find themselves revving their engines at stop lights when a "Pony Car" pulled revving their engines. Lets face it, to someone who don't know Porsches, a 69 911S & 66 912 look alike.
I don't disagree that a 912 handled well, just going by stories from old mechanics who fixed 912s trying to be a 911

[pmax]

Originally Posted by matt930s

Here's a fun read:

912s in Motorsports History

Thanks for the link, I'm going to buy myself a 912e to experience the sheepiness

[Racerbvd]

Originally Posted by pmax

Thanks for the link, I'm going to buy myself a 912e to experience the sheepiness

A 912E with a Jake Raby engine would be a BLAST, 911S/SC power +, better balance, yes.
And for the record, back in the 80s, a buddy built a turbo 912, and it was a Wolf, in sheep's clothing.

[2ndTARGA]

Originally Posted by matt930s

Now let's get back to talking Sheepers!

Sheeper-herder (rumored to be numbers-matching and with genuine factory all cloth rear flares!)

[Ronnie's.930]

Originally Posted by matt930s

Now let's get back to talking Sheepers!


MattR

All sheeper owners/operators should be required to rock a shirt like this when behind (pun intended) the wheel!

[matt930s]

Need a sticker.

MattR

[matt930s]

Certainly can't dispute the straight line performance of early American muscle cars, but most of them handled like a bucket of **** in the twisties. Apples and oranges my friend.

Btw, a 67 or 68 Firebird is still on my wish list.

MattR

Originally Posted by Racerbvd

Problem was, it was Mustangs, Z28s & other Pony cars of the era that were running them, and as some 912s were purchased (I'm talking long after new) were bought by people who wanted a 911, and couldn't afford a 911, but still managed to find themselves revving their engines at stop lights when a "Pony Car" pulled revving their engines. Lets face it, to someone who don't know Porsches, a 69 911S & 66 912 look alike.
I don't disagree that a 912 handled well, just going by stories from old mechanics who fixed 912s trying to be a 911

[Matt Monson]

When I was in high school all the shop guys were taking their dad's old Mustangs and replacing the straight 6 with a 289. Porsche isn't the only one who had entry level cars. Lots of ponies started life without a v8 heart.

And we were kids. I revved my dad's 83 rx7, which later became mine, at anyone who lined up with me at a stoplight. I'm 45 now. I've known the value of the twisties for 25 years.

[NYNick]

Let's remember our history folks. 912's were made because the factory was afraid the customer wouldn't support the price of the 911. And they were right, at first. They already had a proven, well accepted engine in the 356, with some left over, BTW, that fit nicely into the engine bay of the new body style. 912's were born.

Nobody in their right mind ever revved their 912 engine when pulling up to a stop light against ANY pony or muscle car. We knew how to beat those guys, and it wasn't zero to 60! Ask me how I know.

They were, and always have been, the poor man's 911. Slower yes, but all the fixin's of a true Porsche. We gave those BMW 2002's fits, and lost the big HP pony's in the twisties. I loved 'em, but they, and all the early cars, rusted like hell.