Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: JawjaPorsche Dec 13 2012, 07:00 AM

The ad says this is a rare 914-S for sale. The car does not have FI.

http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/cto/3470677982.html

Posted by: type47 Dec 13 2012, 07:13 AM

This is gonna up some sh!t

Posted by: bulitt Dec 13 2012, 07:18 AM

How can it be rare if they built 1000?

Posted by: ellisor3 Dec 13 2012, 07:24 AM

Let's see:

1.) Atlanta area Porsche
2.) So exceedingly rare, they imported 1000 of them
3.) So exceedingly rare, they never created a seperate model for them.

Who in Atlanta would know something about this?

Well atleast I know what the "S" is for

Posted by: nathansnathan Dec 13 2012, 07:35 AM

The "S" on the back is slightly crooked.

Posted by: Eric_Shea Dec 13 2012, 07:37 AM

Love the way the "S" was stuck on there. Just a little crooked.

Posted by: SLITS Dec 13 2012, 07:43 AM

Read the ad .... it was part of a litter.

Posted by: Cairo94507 Dec 13 2012, 08:13 AM

I just hope that whomever looks at that car is smart enough to do some research first so they don't get taken by the idiot seller.

Posted by: TurbOH Brad Dec 13 2012, 08:27 AM

LOL!

Posted by: tod914 Dec 13 2012, 09:10 AM

Looks like his "S" designation is about to be dropped by his Porsche too. Nice looking car otherwise.

Posted by: carr914 Dec 13 2012, 09:11 AM

Posted by: ConeDodger Dec 13 2012, 10:39 AM

All the S stuff aside, and the fact that we know who is probably trying to sell it, it looks like a pretty nice car. Not $14XXX. but nice none-the-less...

Posted by: 442nd914s Dec 13 2012, 10:56 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the first 1k special edition CA cars have vinyl on the A pilars?

Posted by: eric9144 Dec 13 2012, 12:13 PM

Yes and born in a separate litter

Posted by: MDG Dec 13 2012, 12:18 PM

I'll have to dig up that pic of my '73 with the 914 ASS emblem . . .

Posted by: reharvey Dec 13 2012, 12:39 PM

Think I'll add an S to all of my cars!

Posted by: RFoulds Dec 13 2012, 12:41 PM

I prefer the Type R, like all the tuner boys have.

Posted by: Hammy Dec 13 2012, 12:49 PM

It is a nice looking car, though for 14.5k I'd expect it much more original.

Posted by: Cap'n Krusty Dec 13 2012, 12:52 PM

It appears to have the wrong front bumper .................................

Posted by: Cap'n Krusty Dec 13 2012, 12:54 PM

If it weren't a NARP, you could put an "RS" on it and really have something special!

Posted by: Jgilliam914 Dec 13 2012, 12:56 PM

with the previous 3 posts

Posted by: 442nd914s Dec 13 2012, 12:59 PM

"S"=Special
"RS" = Really Special?

Posted by: Hammy Dec 13 2012, 12:59 PM

Did they actually have a "S" badge or were they just marketed as that?

Posted by: Cupomeat Dec 13 2012, 01:21 PM

Yeah, the S is tacked on and not sure where it came from.

Also, the Mahles, while probably the best looking of the 4 lug wheels, are NOT the gas burner variety (Which are only 5 lug).

So, without seeing it and know how original and rust free it is, I have no idea if it worth $14k. If it truly is a survivor it could be worth $10k or more (if they put the FI back on)

Kapt. Krusty, what is it about the front bumper that makes it not original?

Posted by: bandjoey Dec 13 2012, 01:28 PM

Still a nice looking car. If its solid it might bring 14. Add 1 penny for the crooked s

Posted by: Cap'n Krusty Dec 13 2012, 01:36 PM

"Ridiculously Special"

The Cap'n

Posted by: Cap'n Krusty Dec 13 2012, 01:40 PM

Note the lack of "bumperettes" on the front. Some may crudely refer to them as "tits". You know I would never do that. Right. AFIK, 73s had 'em, pre-'73s didn't.

The Cap'n

Posted by: Cupomeat Dec 13 2012, 01:43 PM

Right, thanks, good point. Of course an "original/Survivor" car would not have had the holes filled and the bumper re-chromed.

I call BS unless one of us looks at it.

Oh and thank you, ever so, for your consistent use of proper words and strict decorum in avoidence of such foul words...

Posted by: Cap'n Krusty Dec 13 2012, 01:49 PM

Your thanks are duly noted. "I Love Big Bumperettes"!

The Cap'n

Posted by: 914Eric Dec 13 2012, 02:05 PM

Hey...Mine is an "S"

Seriously though...I've read somewhere that the first 1000 which have the vinyl on the windshield posts were the ones with the "S" designation that was a dealer promotion. Soon after the first 1000 shipped, Porsche killed that designation...and the next batch had painted winshield posts.

The car shown doesn't even have the black windshield posts so unless it's been painted...It's not even an early car.

I also remember the dealer referring to our car as an "S" when we bought it and talking it up as to why they were charging a premium.
"This isn't a regular 914, it's a 914S"

I was 16 at the time and very excited. Remember that day well.

Posted by: Joe Sharp Dec 13 2012, 02:13 PM

Why can't all my 914's be an "S". We all know of the 914RS. If I wanted to be really rear couldn't I be The RSR?

Posted by: 442nd914s Dec 13 2012, 02:40 PM

Well my 2.0Lt doesn't have an "S" on the back nor does it have vinyl covers on the front pilars (B pilars yes) and yet the original bill of sale states is an "S" AND the legal letter size brochure discribes mine to detail that its an "S"

Posted by: MikeSpraggi Dec 13 2012, 05:07 PM

They didn't come with Webers .... they were Solex single barrels and officially were not imported to the US ........... I'm speaking of the "S" badge of course.

Posted by: Cap'n Krusty Dec 13 2012, 05:15 PM

The only 914s with those carbs were the base model European market '74 1.8s.

The Cap'n

Posted by: smj Dec 13 2012, 07:05 PM

Well I'm just going to have to get an "RRR" cut for my rarrrre carrrr now...

I'll just have to pray that nobody takes it for a reference to Robin Williams as Mork, the way somebody took my "NONELVN" plate as some kind of Lord of the Rings reference...

Posted by: SUNAB914 Dec 13 2012, 07:19 PM

Looks like an S to me, what's wrong with you folks?

Posted by: KELTY360 Dec 13 2012, 07:42 PM

How much time do you have?

Posted by: reharvey Dec 13 2012, 07:48 PM

I have a 73 sales brochure for the 914S.

Posted by: Cracker Dec 13 2012, 08:09 PM

You guys are so cynical...my Atlanta Special Edition (Vette) is a special "S" model and is #316/1000 - the "S" marker was a dealer add-on!!!

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 13 2012, 08:21 PM

"914S" was a USA marketing ploy 8/72 to about Jan/Feb/Mar 73 for the 914-2.0 model, and initially VW-Porsche wasn't even going to add a 1.7 or 2.0 badge to distguish between the two models!

So it could still have been marketed as a "914S" & not been one of the first 1000-2000 2.0's sold with the A-pillar vinyl "experiment" (it was also on early 1.7s with appearance group BTW) - would depend on the VIN & build date.

It should have D-jet, Fuchs 4 liter wheels, front tits, etc. if all original.

More on the 914S here for those who haven't read up on them...

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=107851&st=

.

That said... ....this could be Maury/me733's 73 914-2.0 ("914S") - an older member on here (age wise), which a friend is helping to sell for him, cuz I know he's been in poor health. He took good care of it, as he did his 356s before.

So maybe someone should check & see if it is his 914 first - before the sniping - and see if there is any way that we on here can help him out?

After all, that IS what has been done for others in similar circumstances here - you guys usually rally round to help out!

Just a thought!

PS - I'll try to call Maury or the ad guy tomorrow or this weekend to see if it is his & if we can help out in any way (I know his was yellow with a 914 S badge).

Posted by: Dr Evil Dec 13 2012, 08:34 PM

Posted by: Dr Evil Dec 13 2012, 08:36 PM

Ya, but Maury was a whack job The price fits his profile.

Posted by: MDG Dec 13 2012, 08:49 PM

Decided the whole 'bedside manner' is just a bunch of hooey, Doc?

And I thought that guy was Murray, no? Or am I thinking of someone else?

Posted by: Chris H. Dec 13 2012, 09:01 PM

For some reason that license plate is ringing a bell....it's a CA plate. Anyone else remember whose it was?

Posted by: Dr Evil Dec 13 2012, 09:22 PM

We were calling him Murray.

Posted by: MDG Dec 13 2012, 09:52 PM

You were calling him Maury not Murray. Stop messing with my head!! Look up there . . right there . . . you called him Maury.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 13 2012, 09:52 PM

Yeah Murray - brain fart on my part!

Not a whack job IMHO - nice guy in fact every time I've talked or PMed with him, & a Nam Vet - so how about a little respect Doc!?

It could also be someone who bought it from him, cuz when I talked on the phone with him last year in May 2011 when we were back in GA for my son's Basic/AIT graduation, he said that he'd not been able to drive it much.

Posted by: SirAndy Dec 13 2012, 09:56 PM

Respect has to be earned with actions, not demanded with words ...

Posted by: Dr Evil Dec 13 2012, 09:58 PM

Well, I am a Vet, and whack jobs served in Nam, too. The things are not mutually exclusive and I have had plenty of interaction with him on this site to have formed an opinion, and one supported by many others.

Back on topic, I do not see $14K+ in that car. Maybe in 10yrs.

Posted by: Dr Evil Dec 13 2012, 10:10 PM

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 13 2012, 10:12 PM

It looks like a nice car, but what I find perplexing is the owner is pushing the rarity of the mythical "S" designation, yet it has all these non-original parts on it. If it were all original it could be worth the $14K or more but the bumpers (both front & rear), the center console gauges, radio, steering wheel, carbs, Mahles, speakers in doors, etc. really take away from its value as an original survivor.

EDIT: adding Craigslist ad & pics for posterity ...

Posted by: MDG Dec 13 2012, 10:14 PM

Posted by: MoveQik Dec 13 2012, 10:16 PM

Mine is an uberonobtanium 914 RSR(Z package) Platinum edition. Most of you rookies haven't heard of it but I can assure you that it is worth BIG$$$$$. It was a one off prototype built in 2006 built off of a base model 1975 1.8. Very few made. If I had to guess.....I would say it is worth close to 55....maybe 60% of what it cost to build.

Posted by: Dr Evil Dec 13 2012, 10:18 PM

That is a pretty good ROI.

Posted by: tod914 Dec 13 2012, 10:21 PM

Didn't the "S' version come with Corinthian leather?

Posted by: MikeSpraggi Dec 13 2012, 10:34 PM

Yep.

Posted by: tumamilhem Dec 14 2012, 02:12 AM

I call bull Porsche advertised a 914 S which they never sold as a 914 S but the 2.0 instead. Besides, look at that rear badging. The S is not proportioned, it's larger than the 914 badge and too far away, doesn't even look like the same font - almost, but not quite. Looks like something fashioned and amaturishly executed to get a few more bucks.

Posted by: Cracker Dec 14 2012, 08:04 AM

You hit the nail on the head. The verbiage (garbage) is one thing...the primary object of the pokes, prodes and shakedown here is the BIG goofy "S" on the back. That's all I was "fun-ing" on...

Cracker

Posted by: Racer Chris Dec 14 2012, 09:38 AM

Now there's a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Murray was ok in my book.
I spoke to him at length by phone a couple times.
I thought he got a bad rap here, all because a couple of smartasses slandered him with unjustified and inaccurate personal attacks.
His colorful way of posting helped cement the negative opinions of the larger community.
I tend to believe his side of the stories over what the others said.
Just sayin'...

Posted by: reharvey Dec 14 2012, 09:39 AM

This ad says there was an S in 73 so whats the history behind all that.


Attached thumbnail(s)

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 14 2012, 10:08 AM

He earned my respect in talking to Murray Andy.

And in my generation we were raised to give others respect and to be polite from the outset & maintained until someone does something to unearn it; and which respect should apply in person, on the phone, and online.

Now Mike/Doc - I've seen that pic of you humping some statue which was posted on here a while back - so who's the "whacko"!!??

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 14 2012, 10:09 AM

go here & read....
http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=107851&st=

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 14 2012, 11:01 AM

No Tod, that was the even rarer "914 Cordova" model, of which they only built 3-1/2!

I'm sure you remember the Ricardo Montalban TV ad for it - it played one time.

Posted by: 914Eric Dec 14 2012, 12:06 PM

It's clear that both Porsche, and the American distributors were part of the 914S designation to some degree, and however briefly before it was killed. So for those of us with early 73 cars it seem legitimate to use the term...Perhaps even for ANY 73 2.0.

Does it mean anything really? No…Just historical minutia.

When I had the car appraised in the late 80's by some high-end auto appraiser when my company was shipping and insuring the car...in the detailed appraisal, he even listed the car as a 914S. Again, it doesn't mean anything, I know, but I just find it interesting that the designation was still alive with people in the know even 15 years later.


Got this plate in 1987 I think.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 14 2012, 01:11 PM

Porsche+Audi at a `72/`73 Ft Worth TX Auto Show -



.

and Steve G/smg914 had a similar plate to yours, but in NJ IIRC in the pic below.



.

Dang 914S rebels & trouble makers!

Tom T -in case you missed it: early `73 914-2.0 "914 S"
///////

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 14 2012, 07:36 PM

Yeah, it's obviously a fake "S" badge. I think it's unfortunate that the seller is trying to push the rarity of the so-called "S" designation. It seems like a nice car in its own right.

What makes the "S" moniker so polarizing is that most put no credence in it, but there are a few that disagree. To me (and this is only my opinion) the only special cars from the early '73 model year are the cars with vinyl on the A-pillar. At least that's something you can point out as different from the rest, not the phony baloney "S" badge the owner apparently is trying to pass off as real.

BTW, while it's not something you see everyday, adding an "S" badge has been done many times before. Here's one example, a '70 with a 2056 engine:

Posted by: SirAndy Dec 14 2012, 07:45 PM

I know that street! That looks to be in front of Bill Eason's shop in Oakland ...

Posted by: SUNAB914 Dec 14 2012, 08:02 PM

That muther F@$% stole my plate,

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 14 2012, 08:11 PM

You are correct. About two years ago, Bill sold this car for a woman whose husband had passed away. I went to Bill's shop to test drive it. It was the first 914 I test drove and so I passed on it. Still regret it. I think Bill wanted $6000, which, considering the condition of the car, was a great deal.

Posted by: URY914 Dec 14 2012, 09:37 PM

WTF is a handle package?

Does that mean it has front and rear "oh SHIT!" handles?

"Handle package front and rear sway bar"

Posted by: nsr-jamie Dec 15 2012, 08:39 AM

Cool plate!!

Posted by: 72914S Dec 15 2012, 06:01 PM

Here is 1


Attached image(s)

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 15 2012, 06:10 PM

Jim M/RJMIII was making his own custom 914-S badges, & now that Carrie/A&Pgirl bought his equipment, I assume she'll do them too.

Those were more like the real "911-S" badges after which he patterned them, & they looked more correct than a separate "S" at the 2.0/1.7 badge position - but they may leave you with vacant badge-stud holes to fill.

Carrie/A&Pgirl has a topic in the Garage &/or Member Vendors &/or parts for those interested.... .... maybe for

Again - not an "official" Porsche/VW-Porsche badge - but rather just for fun, or "just for the halibut"!

Merry & Happy All!

Posted by: 914Eric Dec 15 2012, 06:14 PM

I would NEVER put one of those on my car.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 15 2012, 06:22 PM

Okay All -

I heard back from the seller in the CL ad, and it is/was Murray's 73 914-2.0, and I've clarified on the "rarity" of the "914 S" for him, and pointed him to this site & others to list it. However, I'm not sure if he's selling it for Murray, or if he bought it from Murray at some point & is now selling it himself. I will post a clarification if/when I hear back.

Aside from the guy's limited knowledge of the 914-2.0/"914 S" & options etc., and aside from some writing errors (e.g.: "handle package" instead of "handling package" for the "Performance Group" of options with F&R [ant-]sway bars) - this looks to be a good 40+ year old car, despite some OE equipment different than what the "914S" marketing included -as noted in this 12/72 magazine ad below, which I listed below that. The seller may have those original parts in his stash to sell with the car. For those who like yellow 914s & are looking for a 73 2L - assuming everything checks out as a real 2.0 & in a PPI.



.

There is a listing of the options/groups included on the early 73 MY 914-2.0's marketed here in the USA/Canada only as the "914 S" FYI.

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=107851&st=

There's a difference between the first 1000 914s of the 73 Model year (perhaps up to the first 2000 judging by mine & a few others out there), where Porsche had both some carry-over of some earlier 70-72 MYs' parts - such as the chromed window windows & int. door handle surrounds, mixed brake calipers (mine has early rears & late fronts), etc.; as well as a very short lived "experiment" with putting the black pebble-finish vinyl from the Sails/C-pillar/Roll-bar also on the A-pillars & top of windscreen frame.

However, the 914-2.0's were marketed as such up to at least mid-model year, so perhaps as many as 3-6,000 `73 914-2.0's could be considered "914 S's" ( USA got about 60% of total production), & some like to call all "loaded" options `73 914-2.0's as 914S. Since it was only a USA-only marketing designation, it's not hard & fast. The main key is the 73 914-2.0's were mostly fitted with just about every option available (Appearance Group + Performance Group options) for the base price, and from the `74-76 MYs they were again made extra cost (a few de-optioned late 73 914-2.0's do exist & some dealers called them "914 Sports" like Dave K's).

If it has a Porsche COA (Certificate of Authenticity) confirming it as a 1973 914-2.0 & listing the engine & possibly the transaxle case numbers (I think I recall that he did get one), then that would confirm it as a "real" one (since there are so many 1.7 to 2.0 conversions out there, even PCNA makes you send a photo of you engine case # before confirming it on their COAs).

This seemingly very nice 73 914 is really only "off" of "all original," by the items listed them below as the "vs. xxxx"...

The rear "914" + "S" badge - vs. - a separate "2.0" in the place of the "S"

The Momo steering wheel is a nice aftermarket item - vs. - the original OE leather-wrapped Porsche 4-spoke "butterfly" style wheel

The USA Taillight lenses would have red where the ones on there have amber, & the USA oval front turn signal lenses would've been all amber (maybe he has the originals)

44mm IDF Webers (New) - vs. - D-Jet Electronic Fuel Injection with all system components & higher pressure fuel pump (which would be way too much pressure for carbs)
> it also may have some other performance enhancements or larger Euro 8.0:1 CR Heads, 2056 cc up-build, cams, etc.???

chrome bumpers (back-dated front) - vs. - the original 73 chrome front bumper with the 2 big rubber bumper guards/tits
- & the incorrect 74 rear bumper with the rear mounting holes for the 74-only rear guards covered with plugs - vs. - the smooth 71-73 style bumper
> I'm guessing it had a resto & some point prior to Murray, and the PO used nice chromed but 2 wrong-for-73-MY replacement bumpers.

Mahle "Baby Gas Burner Wheels" (4-lug Mahles are "Baby" GBs) - vs. - Fuchs 4-lug 2 Liter (windmill style) Forged Alloy wheels
> unless his COA or dealer new sale invoice shows the Mahles

Console and full instrumentation - with later updated gauges - vs. - the original & slightly larger with different faces: Keinzle Clock, Oil Temp Gauge (w/ wide red band) & Voltmeter

.

Based on the NADA values for Murray's zip code at the link below, if the car is as nice as I think it is, then it's a bargain at the asking price!

http://www.nadaguides.com/Classic-Cars/1973/Porsche/914/2-Door-Targa-2-0/Values

"Big Assed 'S' " badge & some non-original items aside - it certainly looks to be a very nice & running 73 914-2.0 well above the Low & above Average Values there - pending more pix, look-see & drive, & a qualified PPI.

I know there are several newbies out there looking for a 73-74 914-2.0, and this may be a good one for them.

Happy Holidays!
Tom
///////

Posted by: carr914 Dec 15 2012, 06:29 PM

A plate does not make a car, otherwise I could make a fortune

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 15 2012, 06:34 PM

I ordered & paid for a 914-S badge from Jim back in May 2012 (which I never got), but my plan was not to put it on my 73 2L - but rather to use it in some non-invasive way for display purposes.

.... you know, just for the halibut!

However, so long as somebody is personalizing their own 914 - & not making some odd claims about it, I see nothing wrong with an owner doing what they want with their own car.

Holiday Cheers!
///////

Posted by: 914Eric Dec 15 2012, 07:35 PM

Nice

Posted by: 914Eric Dec 15 2012, 07:51 PM

I'd put one on my tool box or hang in the shop, just not on the car. I've even thought about removing the dealer Add-ons that aren't technically original like the aluminum kick-plates, and non-factory Porsche badge on the rear. But since that is the way the car was delivered...I decided they should stay.

After all, Yenko was a dealer that did add-on to their cars and that has worked out pretty well.

Others can customize their cars any way they want. And then mine will be even rarer. Haha!

Merry Christmas back at you Tom!

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 15 2012, 10:10 PM

Eric - I was thinking along the lines of mounting it on a display board about the 914-S story, & of my resto/ownership.

All dealers did those add-ons, since they made & still make far more money - 50-60% profit - on those, vs. maybe 10-15% or much less on a car.

Sounds like yours was set-up by Yenko, similar to the way my buddy got his 71 914/4 from the dealer new here in SoCal (can't recall the dealer), & apparently everything on there was special ordered by someone who backed out - including the polished Western Wheels & rosewood dash kit in the pix below, so he got all the "personalization goodies" essentially free!



That's still the original paint & almost everything on it is still the way it rolled out of the dealership in early 71!

.

Posted by: MDG Dec 15 2012, 10:36 PM

Go big or go home baby. Woo-HOOOoooooooo!!!!

Posted by: Woody Dec 15 2012, 10:37 PM

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 15 2012, 10:41 PM

I think Eric was just using Yenko as an example. Yenko was a Chevy guy.

Eric, it's your car, so of course you should do as you see fit. But that rear badge ... I dunno.

Posted by: 914Eric Dec 15 2012, 11:42 PM

Yes...Yenko modified cars are some of the highest value you can find.

Dave,
Respect your opinion.

Given the rear badge was put on by the dealer, you would take it off? Ever since I realized it was a dealer add-on I've been struggling with this. What about taking off the rocker panel lettering and the aluminum kick plates?

Seems to me it either all has to go or all has to stay?

Posted by: Jmedeiros Dec 16 2012, 12:51 AM

I just bought a72 & the seller put a red 'Turbo' after the 914. I think it went faster than his bike so he thought it must be a turbo!! :-)

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 16 2012, 01:45 AM

Well, it appears these items were added by the dealer in an attempt to bump up the price. So personally, I don't find them sacred items that can't be removed. The stripes don't bother me, but the other two items, aesthetically, don't do it for me.

I guess I'd look at how difficult those items would be to remove without damaging what's behind them. But again, it's your car and your call, so please do what feels right to you.

Posted by: scotty b Dec 16 2012, 06:20 AM

Crooked

Posted by: MDG Dec 16 2012, 06:27 AM

So was I at the time . . .

Posted by: scotty b Dec 16 2012, 06:29 AM

Oh I understand. You should see what happnes when I put on emblems crunked

Posted by: balljoint Dec 16 2012, 06:41 AM

Actually, Tom and Eric may have stumbled on to something. Yenko did own a Porsche Audi dealership during the Seventies. I think it would be interesting to find out what dealerships did make changes to these cars. Yenko may have done their thing to some 914s and considering their history and the current value of their Camaros, a Yenko 914S could be more rare than a 916.

Posted by: scotty b Dec 16 2012, 07:00 AM

interesting indeed. I looked at this car about 12 years ago. The owner claimed it was some kind of special dealership built car. I thought he was delusional or trying to blow smoke up my keester. If Yenko did own a dealership, could this have been one of his cars ? Don was known for putting decals on his cars, and I have never seen this decal on another 914, it also had a odd interior cloth. Not a houndstooth, but a similar pattern


Attached image(s)

Posted by: Eric_Shea Dec 16 2012, 09:09 AM

Scooter... The are at least 3 confirmed Yenko built 914s with that stripe package floating around the Pennsylvania countryside. When asked, Don stated:

"...our first Yenko car was a 65 corvair. When I saw the 914 at our Porsche Audi dealership, it just came natural. Air-cooled, engine in the middle and it had those looks that reminded me of our first "Yenko". Aside from the side strips, there was a slight interior treatment and we made sure each one of the Yenko 914s had every bit included in the handling package offered by the factory at the time. But hey, I'm a Chevy guy..."

Posted by: MDG Dec 16 2012, 09:12 AM

Cool.

Posted by: scotty b Dec 16 2012, 09:17 AM

Great. So I passed up a potentially valuable car. Story of my life right up there with the '69 Boss 302 I could have had for 1000.00 in high school and didn't have the money because I had blown it on VW crap

Posted by: Eric_Shea Dec 16 2012, 09:19 AM

You made it to high school?

Posted by: scotty b Dec 16 2012, 09:36 AM

Posted by: Woody Dec 16 2012, 09:50 AM

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 16 2012, 12:03 PM

Now this is going BIG

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 16 2012, 12:22 PM

Wow, it would be very cool to find one of those.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 16 2012, 01:32 PM

I was looking at a used 67 Yenko Corvair in San Diego back in 69 for my first car, & was getting ready to pull the trigger, when the seller blew the motor street racing it!

I think he got scrap price of a few $100s & I went on to get my 1st car as a `68 Opel Kadette 2dr notchback sedan with a whopping 1.0L mated to a 4spd & fancy-schmancy rubber floor mats!

By the time of the Open, my folks had talked me into being more conservative & save more for college & pay less for a car.

... yes Eric, before you ask - I made it thru HS to college, as well as grad school .... barely!

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 16 2012, 01:34 PM

So - was the 914 + the big "S" replacing the 2.0 badge part of Yenko's special 914 package?

Scotty - do you remember seeing the rear "S" badge on the 914 in your pic?

PS - IIRC, Yenko only had the Chevy dealership, and bought the 914-2.0's from the local Porsche+Audi dealership - or from their distributor - and then added their upgrades package, & resold it at their usual mark-up for tweaked cars. I was born in Pittsburgh PA & still have family there, & used to go back to visit them almost every year. Many of the family being car buffs, we were well acquainted with Yenko, and it was my Dad's brother with the hot rods & `58 `Vette who moved out to Santa Ana in `57 who turned me on the the Yenko Corvair for sale from my prior post.

Posted by: scotty b Dec 16 2012, 01:58 PM

I dont recall whether there was a s badge or not Tom. This was over 12 years ago. I was in my 20's, and just getting into these cars. At that time I had no idea of the special cars like the S, LE, Yenko etc. If only I had known then what I know now

I also have no idea if there was a direct link to Don Yenko and the S designated 914's. I would assume he just a 2.0 car whether it was the mythical S or not

Posted by: balljoint Dec 16 2012, 02:18 PM

Yenko also owned a Porshe Audi dealer in PA. This is very common for one group to own dealerships of different manufacturers. Maybe not mixing the big three domestics but imports were another story. I grew up next door to a family that owned a Chev Olds dealership. They eventually had a Jag dealership as well but sold it when Ford bought Jaguar.

Yenko was famous for their Camaros but they had other interests as well. This is a matter of posterity. In fact IIRC there was a court case against Yenko related to book keeping with the Porsche dealership. Who knows, the record battle may have been spawned out of the unapproved rebadging of 914S's.

I maintain that the sheer value of a Yenko Camaro is evidence of the potential value of a Yenko 914S. Especially since 914s have a history of being abused by their owners. Primarily via neglect, whatever the basis. Oh yes, in my opinion, even though I am mostly only seen as a Bug expert, I feel strongly that the rarity of these cars could push them into 916ish valuations.

Tom, you grew up in PA, you don't remember Yenko owning a Porsche Audi dealership? Perhaps they bought one after you moved away?

You know Yenko may have completed various 914S vehicles and shipped them across the country. Even via other dealerships. There is still a ton of research to be done here. Eric and Tom may have opened up something very big here. This is cool.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 16 2012, 02:39 PM

Yes Dave, it was a very long time ago. We moved from PGH to San Diego in `63 when I was 10 & Dad got a new job out there, and went back every summer until I moved on to college, and then it was Xmas break, and then every other year or so. Last time in PGH was passing through in July `11 while driving my son's car to him at Ft. Drum NY.

So I probably did miss that he had the P+A dealership. He didn't have it up to `63, but the Chevy one was well known. But then I'm an old fart, so maybe it's just my half-zymers kicking in!

Most of those multi-dealership ownership situations were/are tightly controlled by contracts with the mfgrs. to limit to only "sister makes" - although now the mfgrs. have less control of those limitations so now you see many with Ford, Kia, VW, etc. under one group - mostly mega-big ones like Penske, etc.

That's probably why Yenko had to sell the P+A & Jag brands back then.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 16 2012, 02:55 PM

Okay, I just heard back from the seller on this 73 914-2.0 "914-S", and Murray passed away 2-1/2 months ago.

It was Murray's, but it was apart for resto/refurb work by Murray when he took ill, and eventually the seller/current owner (who has known him since the 1960's) bought it from Murray a few months ago to finish it up & sell it. He knew the PO before Murray, & linked Murray with him to buy it a few years back. So the seller knows a lot about the car's more recent history, and the PO before Murray is apparently still around, aside from some typo's etc. in his CL ad.

The seller is an older & mostly 356 guy, and he had the engine, carbs & transaxle gone thru & it's running very well now. I've suggested that he put it in the classifieds on here, and add the rebuild/refurb info & modify some of the "914-S" info.

Given what he's said has been done & it's current mechanical condition - it's a strong runner in very good looking condition - so if that all checks out & there is no tin worm issues, then it's probably a good deal at $14,900. He said he also has the OE Fuchs for the car as well.

The ATL area CL ad is still active on here...
http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/cto/3470677982.html

Maybe billHh needs another 914 in his stable form the right coast!?

Posted by: balljoint Dec 16 2012, 03:00 PM

Just with a limited check I can only find records of Yenko's Porsche Audi dealer back to the Seventies. That puts it long past your date of departure.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 16 2012, 03:11 PM

I probably didn't pay attention then, on short trips to visit family.

Posted by: sixnotfour Dec 16 2012, 03:16 PM

All Yenkos records got burned, He was a Chevy man, He issued my Dad a yenko serial number so he could race SCCA in a corviar.
I wish I had kept that only piece of my corvair past.

BTW everything yenko did had his name on it.

Posted by: Eric_Shea Dec 16 2012, 05:22 PM

They exist...



They even made them in a weird baby $hit green!

Posted by: MDG Dec 16 2012, 05:24 PM

Okay. I guess I eat my words then. Tom was right. I was wrong.

Posted by: sixnotfour Dec 16 2012, 05:47 PM

Company Name: YENKO, DON PORSCHE AUDI
Status: Active Filing Date: 04/01/1974

Posted by: scotty b Dec 16 2012, 05:56 PM

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=19803817PaDampC3d21_135.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985



COMMONWEALTH v. DON YENKO PORSCHE-AUDI


17 Pa. D. & C. 3d 21 (1980)



Commonwealth
v.
Don Yenko Porsche-Audi

No. 81.


Common Pleas Court of Washington County, Pennsylvania.





June 30, 1980.


Gordon F. Harrington, for appellant.

John J. Kennedy, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, for Commonwealth.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------











[ 17 D. & C. 3d 22 ]


RODGERS, J., June 30, 1980.
This is an appeal by Don Yenko Porsche-Audi, of Canonsburg, Pa., from the order of suspension issued by the Director of the Bureau of Traffic Safety of the Department of Transportation of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, suspending appellant's certificate of appointment to inspect motor vehicles "for a period of six (6) months for violation of Section 4731 of the Vehicle Code for fraudulent record keeping (records poorly kept, stickers missing and unaccounted for)."

For reasons hereinafter stated, the appeal is sustained and the suspension set aside.

On or about October 1, 1979 Yenko was notified by the Director of the Bureau of Traffic Safety that a report of September 14, 1979, received from the Pennsylvania State Police, indicated Yenko was charged with "improper record keeping (records poorly kept, stickers missing and unaccounted for).. . ."

After administrative hearing, Yenko's certificate of appointment was suspended for "a period of six (6) months for violation of Section 4731 of the Vehicle Code, for fraudulent record keeping (records poorly kept, stickers missing and unaccounted for)."

At the hearing de novo before this court, the Commonwealth presented evidence that Yenko's copy (TS-431) for the first cycle of 1979 showed 220 inspections, but its work records showed 270 actually performed, and that for the last cycle of 1978, 251 inspections were shown on Yenko's copy of the official form, and the work records showed 241 inspections actually performed. These were errors caused by one mechanic incorrectly interpreting the numbers written in by the prior mechanic.






[ 17 D. & C. 3d 23 ]


The Commonwealth also showed that in the last cycle of 1978 one sticker, P48 . . . 912 was not shown on the TS-431 form. Yenko submitted work records showing this sticker had been affixed by the then service manager who was qualified to perform inspections for a vehicle of Dennis Lehman, but the service manager had failed to note the inspection on the official form.

In addition, the Commonwealth showed that Yenko's mechanics had erred in showing that five stickers had been affixed to ten different vehicles, thus causing the official form TS-431 to fail to account for five stickers actually and properly affixed to five other vehicles.

While other charges were included in the letter of October 1, 1979, the suspension was for fraudulent record keeping, which the bureau equated with records poorly kept, stickers missing and unaccounted for.

While the investigating state police officer, who was the inspection station supervisor and auditor, admitted that he found no fraud and no intent to falsify, nevertheless he stated it was the policy of the Commonwealth to equate fraudulent record keeping with improper record keeping, and that the Commonwealth had concluded the petitioner was guilty of fraudulent record keeping, thus justifying the six month suspension.

This court must decide only whether Yenko has committed the violation for which the sanction was imposed: Com. v. Cormas, 32 Pa.Commw. 1, 4, 377 A.2d 1048, 1050 (1977). The six month suspension has been imposed for fraudulent record keeping (Com. Exh. 2). To be sure, in the initial letter (Com. Exh. 1), the charge was "improper record keeping". Section 4731 of the Vehicle Code, 75




[ 17 D. & C. 3d 24 ]


Pa.C.S.A. §4731, says this: "A record shall be made of every inspection and every certificate issued and the record shall be forwarded to the department in the manner and at the time the department shall specify by regulation. An official inspection station and its records shall be open for inspection by any police officer or authorized department employee." The Department of Transportation has implemented the Vehicle Code by regulations found at 67 Pa. Code, Chapters 471-490. Section 490.1 of Chapter 490 reads, in part, as follows:
"§490.1* Cause for suspension.

"The complete operation of an official inspection station is the responsibility of the owner. Failure to comply with the appropriate provisions of the Vehicle Code or department regulations shall be considered sufficient cause for suspension of all inspection privileges. In addition thereto, violators are also subject to criminal prosecution. . . .
"(1) Duration of Suspension

. . .

3rd and
1st 2nd Subsequent
Type of Violation Offense Offense Offense
. . .
Fraudulent record keeping 6 months 1 year 3 years
. . .
Careless record keeping Warning 3 months 1 year

"(2) Second and subsequent violations as listed above are determined on the basis of previous offenses of the same nature within a three year period."






[ 17 D. & C. 3d 25 ]


It is apparent that the Department of Transportation, by its regulations duly enacted under section 4731 of the Vehicle Code, has distinguished a charge of fraudulent record keeping from careless record keeping. Duly authorized regulations have the force of law: Com. v. Locust Point Quarries, Inc., 27 Pa.Commw. 270, 275, 367 A.2d 392, 394 (1976). See, also, Crary Home v. DeFrees, 16 Pa.Commw. 181, 329 A.2d 874 (1974).
Words shall be construed according to rules of grammar and according to their common and approved usage: 1 Pa.C.S.A. §1903(a). Fraudulent record keeping necessarily involves an intent to deceive, an intent obviously absent where the charge is mere neglect or inattention.

Laws and regulations should be construed, when possible, to give effect to all of their provisions: Com. v. Locust Point Quarries, Inc., supra, at 394. Statutes and regulations in pari materia shall be construed together and the particular controls the general: 1 Pa.C.S.A. §§1932, 1933.

The attempt by the Department of Transportation to equate fraudulent record keeping with improper record keeping strikes from its regulations the charge of careless record keeping. The omission of the proviso to section 819(b) of The Vehicle Code of April 29, 1959, P.L. 58, as amended, 75 P.S. §819(b), from section 4724 of the present Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S.A. §4724, does not have the effect of equating fraud with negligence. Cf. Walker Pontiac, Inc. v. Com., 37 Pa.Commw. 614, 413 A.2d 375 (1978).

The belated claim by the Commonwealth that the finding of fraudulent record keeping was based on a previous warning that the petitioner had "failed to utilize required tools when inspecting motor vehicles.




[ 17 D. & C. 3d 26 ]


All tools extremely dirty and cluttered over the entire garage," by letter of March 8, 1977 is not a prior offense of the same nature as required by section 490.1(2). Even if the alleged prior offense had been for careless record keeping, a second offense of careless record keeping does not support a charge of fraud.
Elementary due process requires the Commonwealth to specify initially whether the charge is careless record keeping or fraudulent record keeping, and whether the Commonwealth is claiming that the inspection station has committed a prior offense of the same nature within a three year period. To allow the Commonwealth to determine in its sole discretion whether the petitioner's action was fraudulent or careless under the rubric "improper record keeping" would be arbitrary and capricious.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





The court finds that the Commonwealth failed to prove that appellant was guilty of fraudulent record keeping, the alleged violation for which the sanction was imposed.



ORDER

And now, June 30, 1980, the appeal of Don Yenko Porsche-Audi is sustained and the suspension by the Bureau of Traffic of the Department of Transportation of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is set aside.

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 16 2012, 06:40 PM

Here's an excerpt from the book, Yenko: The Man, the Machines, the Legend ..

In the meantime, Don Yenko began to look into
other franchises for the Pike Street location. "My Dad was
fascinated with the Porsche," said daughter Terri. "That
car had been his main rival in sports car races. If my dad
didn't win a race, no doubt the title had gone to someone
racing a Porsche. Well, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
My dad acquired Porsche/Audi and later Fiat franchises
for the Pike Street location. It really was my dad's baby. I
don't think my grandfather was too enamored with foreign
cars. I think he probably considered them un-American.
It took some convincing but Dad did finally talk his father
into looking beyond Chevrolet."

Posted by: turk22 Dec 16 2012, 06:49 PM

I can't believe the legs of this thread, and the cool turn it has taken.

I never had any idea that Yenko did anything with Porsches at all, and 914s at that!

Posted by: MDG Dec 16 2012, 07:07 PM

I can't quite believe it either.

Posted by: Woody Dec 16 2012, 07:10 PM

Posted by: sixnotfour Dec 17 2012, 03:44 AM

Attached image(s)

Posted by: 442nd914s Dec 17 2012, 08:28 AM

Look what I found in the 1973 publication of Clymer repair handbook

Posted by: 914Eric Dec 17 2012, 09:48 AM

That settles it then.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 11:21 AM

My 73 914-2.0 was built 8/31/72 by chassis no., and it's original rear trunk back wall panel has the 2 holes for the 914 machine punched & flat on the back/inside - whereas the 2 holes for the 2.0 badge has "push-through at the holes from being drilled after-the-fact & probably after assembly. It's harder to see from the outside in the pic below, but the inside is immediately obvious when you rub your hand over the surface. Sorry no pic of that inside - but the rightmost hole below definitely shows the tell-tale rounded in shape from drilling, & the glue residue was from the 1980 repaint when the studs were broken off. I've talked to a few other early 73 MY built in Aug/Sept 72 owners who had this drilled 2.0/1.7 mounting stud holes situation too.



.

That would seem to coincide with the written articles of that day which I've read (both then & recently) which stated that Porsche/VW-Porsche initially didn't plan to differentiate the 1.7 from the 2.0 with different badges. It's also possible that the badges were just late in production & receipt by the OEM supplier who cast the badges and so some 914s were shipped from the factory without them.

Ergo, there is a possibility that some early production 1.7's & 2.0's were shipped to the USA & elsewhere without any engine/model badge - but just the "914" badge, but I've never seen any proof of this. If so, then it's probable that Porsche would've released a service bulletin or circular instructing dealers & distributors on how to drill holes & add the 1.7/2.0 badges if not installed at the factory, as well as shipping the badges.

If any/all of the above is/are the case, then it's also possible that some renegade or "free thinking" Porsche+Audi dealer might have commissioned their own "914-S" badges like the above, which could mount using the 2 "914" badge stud holes only. I don't know if Eric's example is one of the "modern" repro "914-S" badges like those by Jim M/Carrie, or a TIG welded/glued cut-apart "911-S" + "914" badge, or one that was custom made back in the 1970's by/for a dealer.



.

They also could've cut off the "S" from the "911-S" badges & drilled just the single hole for the one stud on the S/right-hand portion of the 911-S badges, since they were relatively cheap at $2.50 or $5.00 back then. The single stud of a cut 911-S badge could also explain why Murray's looks wanky vs. the red one's badge in the pics below.





.

In any/all badge cases above - thereby saving them drilling the 1-2 additional holes, as well as better fitting with VoA/Porsche+Audi's USA marketing campaign for the "914 S" as shown in that 12/72 magazine ad which I posted above, as well as with the dealer sales brochures printed by VoA/Porsche+Audi USA & used in the 1st half of the 73 MY up to maybe March/April `73, depending on the dealer & how long it took them to use up their supply of the first printing.

1973 MY P+A Dealer 4 Pg. & 12 pg. Sales Brochures:

> Back & Front Covers (same as at 12 pg. version):


> Inner Spread pgs. 2 & 3 @ 4 pg version:


> Inner Spread on "914 S" on pgs. 10 & 11 of 12 pg. version:


.

> Note that the Center Console Gauges in the Sales Brochure Pix vary from Actual Production at the OT Gauge:

~vs.~


.

I don't recall seeing any back in 72-73 when we took our "field trips" from college at USC up to LA Porsche+Audi or down to Circle or Chick Iverson P+A down south, but there may have been a few out there.

But you just never know what those "cowboy" US Porsche+Audi dealers would do!

So for the ultra-CW purisits - if the factory actually left off 1.7 & 2.0 badges on the first few hundreds/thousands of 914's, does that mean for absolute correctness we'd need to go without!!??

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 11:26 AM

Scotty, this means they vacated Yenko's suspension regarding State inspections, and doesn't really have anything to do with them being forced to sell the P+A dealership. It sounds like Yenko was the typical dealership though - more interested in selling cars & services, than in those pesky details, since they don't deny negligent record keeping, just the State's fraud accusation which brought about the more serious suspension penalty!

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 11:31 AM

Eric - if Murray's "914 S" was a Yenko job, could it have been Yenko who modified it with the Weber 44's?

.... do you know anything more about what the "Yenko Package" included for their version of a "914 S" &/or on those 3 confirmed ones?

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 11:36 AM

Why Thank You Mike!

.... but what about this?



.... and your prior BS?

Posted by: MDG Dec 17 2012, 11:48 AM

Your welcome.

And no, I still stand by my theory that the entire "S" thing is the result of a heavy German accent and he was actually saying 'Ass.'

Not S.


Ass.

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 17 2012, 12:07 PM

Tom, Murray's 914 was a California car. Murray's car, and the other as well, look like they have the "S" from the late '80s era of Porsche badging, like this one from the 944 S2:



Regarding Yenko, the Yenko family did not open a P+A dealership till calendar year 1974, more than 18 months after the first sales of the 2L fours. I think it would be a big stretch to try to bring any Yenko tie in to the "S" story.

Posted by: balljoint Dec 17 2012, 12:17 PM

Have we seen this one before?

Posted by: balljoint Dec 17 2012, 12:18 PM

Tom,

Have you ever seen what Michael has done to my threads?

I feel your pain, but I'm pretty sure it's all in fun.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 12:24 PM

Who's heavy German accent???

Posted by: scotty b Dec 17 2012, 12:27 PM

Tom, my posting that had absolutely nothing to do with the lawsuit within. It was merely to verify that Yenko did in fact still own a Porsche dealership in 1980. We now have proof he had a lot from at least '74-'80

Posted by: balljoint Dec 17 2012, 12:28 PM

That Yenko dealership is in operation to this day. I wonder if they would even still have any information about packages that they offered on cars?

Especially since they seemed to not care too much for retaining their records.

I can't say that I have ever seen a picture of a 914 with Yenko striping with their name but since they were synonymous with Chevrolet it may be something they deliberately avoided.

I am sure I have seen the Yenko name come up before in relation to 914s though. That's what rang such a bell for me when it was brought up in this thread. One of those did you ever have the feeling of deja-vous before did you ever have the feeling of dejas-vous before things.

I am curious about other Porsche Dealerships in the same geographic region at the time as well. A prestigious name like Don Yenko opening a Porsche dealer may have stepped on the toes of other Porsche Audi dealers. Or it is possible that they took over for a defunct dealership?!? Possibly with some older unmoved inventory that might have benefited from the boost of a special package.

I liked that Stinger Honda package, I am sure there is something out there related to their Porsche product. Perhaps there were even Yenko 911s.

Now that I think about it, they may have been more secretive about it, especially if Porsche was carefully trouncing impure North American marketing ideas.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 12:53 PM

Dave, I see what you mean on those "S" badges on Murray's & the red one.

Yenko could've done his version after Porsche Germany had quashed the USA P+A's "914 S" marketing campaign, because....well, just because he could & was just cantankerous enough to do so!

But the P+A "914 S" marketing thing, are separate from this new subject of what Yenko did & whether or not he called or badged his version as "914-S" at all.

From Eric's post quoting what Yenko had said, they're making sure the 914-2.0 had all the Porsche handling bits on them, so that could mean it's a late 73-74+ era 914, when Porsche+Audi/Porsche AG made the sway bars & Fuchs & everything back to extra cost options.

The main "advantage" of the early 73 MY 914-2.0's marketed as "914 S" here in the USA only (maybe Canada too?) - is not that it's a "914 S" per se, but rather that you got a 914-2.0 fully loaded with all the options available from the Appearance & Performance Groups of options (only special order/add-on stuff like radios/speakers/antenna, AC, LSD, etc. weren't on that list) - all for the initial Aug./Fall `72 base price of $5199 East Coast POE & $5299 West Coast.

Late in 1973 MY after several mid-MY price hikes due to the escalating DM vs. the $ prompted them to offer de-contented 914-2.0's with lesser or no optional equipment, in order to keep the base price down. This was the norm for the rest of the 914 run 74-76 MYs. You can see the range of option group fitment for `73 at Jeff Bowlsby's 914 website, under the "Models" & at the "Window Stickers" pages.

IIRC they'd risen almost 150% to about $7500 EC-POE by March `73!

For those who don't know, that purdy Orange 914 in Dave K's avatar is a confirmed late 73 2.0 which had been de-optioned & offered with only the F&R sway bars & Fuchs 2L wheels of the Performance Group, & IIRC Dave said it was marketed by the dealer as a "914-2.0 Sport" model.

Chime in if I've got any of this wrong about your 914 Dave K.

So back then & nowadays you can basically save yourself some time & trouble if you're looking for a GA 2.0 engined 914 which has all of the AG & PG goodies, by looking at 73 MY - & specifically the earlier 1/2 - 3/4 of that MY, cuz they were all fully loaded back then.

Whereas the later 73 MY - 74 MY GA & the 75-76 MY GC engined 914-2.0's were hit & miss as to what options the car came with, which probably only matters to CWs & original car collectors - since anyone can modify the engine & options on any 914 ..... even the badges!

Posted by: turk22 Dec 17 2012, 01:24 PM

My 73 2.0 was a June 73 build (from the VIN sticker 6/73).

It has everything that is listed on the previous pages 914S stuff that Tom posted.

Center Console w/gauges
5 Fuchs alloys
fog lights
Chrome bumpers
dual tone horns
it has the Front and Rear swaybars..... It also has the "914 2.0" badge in the back.

What I don't have is the original window sticker...man would I love to have that...

Posted by: 914Eric Dec 17 2012, 02:15 PM

What I was saying with my reference to the Yenko legend was that there are a long list of dealers that have made modifications and add-ons to cars over the decades. Many like the Yenko's have proven to be the most desirable cars in some cases. To be honest, I didn't even know Yenko had a Porsche dealership. Am I implying that my car is somehow Yenko special...No.

My dealer, Greene in Norwalk, added the aluminum kick plates, Porsche lettering on the rocker panels, and the most controversial of them all…An additional Porsche badge on the rear.

On inspection of the additional Porsche badge, you see that it is made identically to both the 914, and 2.0 badges. Same exact pins in the back, as well as the same exact mounting hardware and special washers. They are not some peel-n-stick junk that some salesman on a whim decided to slap on.

So if I choose to remove the badge, I would need to fill and sand the holes, and then re-spray perfectly Fine original paint on the back of the car. That seems stupid to me.

That is why I brought up Yenko. I’m pretty sure people wouldn’t remove Yenko engine parts or graphics that weren’t “Factory” and then re-paint the car. So my opinion is that what came from the Dealer is what's original. Others might think that I should remove this piece and repaint the car. I think repainting an original paint car is far worse than the added badge. And I think the badge looks cool.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 02:16 PM

Steve, though it's not "your" window sticker, I thik there is one from a 914-2.0 close to your build.

http://bowlsby.net/914/Classic/WindowStickers.htm

http://bowlsby.net/914/Classic/ModelNumbers.htm
> the Model Number should appear on the window sticker &/or at the dealer sales invoice, and denoted equipment option groups, if included from the factory.

You could also contact Steve G/smg914 with the gorgeous 73 914-2.0 which was also a June 73 build, as he has all of his documentation (his is featured at the O&H Forum under the nailed thread: "The Few, The Rare...").

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=101921

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 02:25 PM

Eric - you definitely should not do that, as it could make yours no longer qualify for preservation class (survivor class in some car shows), as that & something else now or in the future could go past the 10-25% limit on repaints & changes - especially if there is some other bodywork ever needed in the future. It's best to preserve the original paint, etc. - so long as they are in good condition, since at 40+/- years old the survivors like yours are few & far between!

BTW - that Bahia Red 71 914/4 of my buddy's with the turned aluminum aftermarket threshold plates like yours that I posted above, Steve's Sahara Beige & I think Dave K's Orange 73's are also all survivors in original paint.

Posted by: nathansnathan Dec 17 2012, 02:31 PM

You can see in the "914" and "2.0" on the right that the x height (typographer's term for height of a lower case x in any particular typeface) of the "914" lines up with the x height of the "2.0". The "914" has a wonky low x height. The "914S" badges shown above really butcher it imnsho.


As a graphic designer, I cringe looking at that. The attention to detail just isn't there, so yeah I would totally say that it shouldn't be there, any of the "s"'s previously shown or the "PORSCHE" on the left in the pic above; they are just wrong to my eyes.

Posted by: Eric_Shea Dec 17 2012, 03:18 PM

I don't think a 914S and a Yenko are the same thing. It was my understaing the Yenko's were 74's which would tie into the opening of his dealership. Maybe wanted to make a splash??

I vaguely remember a tub someone was putting together here and he said it was a Yenko?? LONG time ago though. No time to search it now. Must ship alloy calipers.

Posted by: Dave_Darling Dec 17 2012, 04:09 PM

Nobody was saying that the "S" had anything to do with Yenko, or vise-versa. It was just used as an example of cars that had dealer-added parts being more desirable than the cars without.

--DD

Posted by: Eric_Shea Dec 17 2012, 05:06 PM

See post 122

Posted by: MDG Dec 17 2012, 05:17 PM

That was a joke, Tom.

Posted by: MDG Dec 17 2012, 05:18 PM

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 17 2012, 05:32 PM

Well then, he would've "Hess"!

Posted by: MDG Dec 17 2012, 05:36 PM

Yes, That could be it.


Oh - watch yourself with Dave. He has squinty little beady eyes.

Posted by: scotty b Dec 17 2012, 06:11 PM

I think there is some confusion due in part to two things.

1: two different subjects in the same thread ( the S designation, and the Yenko possibility )

2: people not paying attention to when that transition was made


There was never any implication that a S was aYenko. Yenko was simply brought up in the S discussion in relation to the rarity of the Yenko cars. It has since snowballed from there given the car I had a pic of with the odd stripe, and the since confirmed, Yenko/Porsche dealership connections.

At this point A 914S is an 914S, and a Yenko 914 is a Yenko 914. Let's stop confusing the two, and get on with the seperate subjects

Posted by: balljoint Dec 17 2012, 08:33 PM

Michael and Thomas, if you two get me tossed back in the sandbox then I will not be happy about it. I'm gonna call the Yenko dealer from the Penguin phone tomorrow.

I will report back with my findings.

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 18 2012, 10:52 AM

I keep my Penguin on the Tellie, Dave!

Let us know what you find out.

Whenever I get back to PGH again, I can try to swing by Yenko P+A, but IIRC we have some members living in/around PGH who could go by sooner.

Since this wasn't a FS listing for the car per se - but about the "914-S" question, IMHO it's perfectly fine to delve into other "914 rarities & oddities" on here, since the topic started Jawja seems to be okay with it.

Also, Steve/smg914 had started this listing of the rarest 914s over on 914club.com which has some interesting production number data.

http://www.914club.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=254336&st=0

If we ever get a number on the "Yenko 914" it might be worthwhile to post that info there, as a non-factory "dealer special" - not too unlike the dealer 914-6/GT "dealer prep'd" cars using factory & some other aftermarket parts in some cases.

FYI - at one time I'd "guess-timated" the "early-`73 "914S"/914-2.0 production imported to the USA & marketed during the "914S" promotional period 8/72 - 3/73 at maybe something like 4,000+/-.

However, that was only a SWAG estimate based on a PCA generated chart with total `73 914 production for the 73MY x +/-8/12 of year x +/-60% to USA x +/-40% as 2.0's = 4,000+/- "914-S's" - & therefore it's nothing official, but a best guess when Murray & some had asked a couple of years ago.

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 19 2012, 04:05 AM

Tom, if you go with the number posted by http://www.bigporsche.com (17,991), you can eliminate one of your geusstimates. Using your formula, that would bring the total to 4822.
The fully optioned 2-liters have models designations 473644 and 473664. You would think there would be a way to get the full year production numbers of those two model numbers.

Posted by: Racer Chris Dec 19 2012, 07:52 AM

What's it doing there?

Posted by: gandalf_025 Dec 19 2012, 09:41 AM

I think the appropriate quote would be

"Oh, intercourse the penguin!"


Still funny..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwTqC2T6q4E

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 19 2012, 11:33 AM

You've jumped ahead in the bit Gandalf -

Chris was baiting us for the next line answering his/the bit's query:

"Standing!"

Now that's really bad that it comes to mind for me in such detail still today, but I spent 9 hours up & 19 back through a blizzard on a ski trip from SoCal to Tahoe in the late `80's, and our driver had the full set of Python TV show audio tapes, which we all played along with for those 28 mostly boring hours on the road!

Posted by: Racer Chris Dec 19 2012, 11:49 AM

... and to continue with the bit:

"Burma!"

"What'd you say Burma for?"

"I panicked."

Posted by: Dave_Darling Dec 19 2012, 11:53 AM

"It is now nine o'clock, time for the penguin on top of your television set to explode."

BOOM!

"How'd he know that?"

"It was an inspired guess."

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 19 2012, 12:24 PM

Good info Dave, so at an actual 65.04% - I was pretty close at guessing 60% of the914's coming to the USA (as commonly used in car mags. of the day for Porsche's overall ratio, as was the CA import/sales 40%).

The production numbers I used were about the same from the PCA publication in the pic below - but it breaks out the 2.0's, and I was just being lazy about not looking up my actual estimate number at post #172 in my 914-S topic over in the O&H Forum - so just said 4,000+/- & my actual SWAG estimate was 4800+/- at the post below, but it also gives timeframe & options info. to identify a "914 S" `73 914-2.0....

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=107851&st=160

Unfortunately, AFAIK or anyone knows, there were no records by model number - except LE's & 914-6's - for 914s nor any "specials" in the 911 line-up either. The 914 being a "mutt" also had limited info on the Kardex's - often leaving off the transaxle case no. (as with my 914-2.0's COA).


> Note that PCA even qualifies their numbers above as the best available info or estimates, but not exact/conclusive.

.

It's also interesting in that topic what Al Wiedeman says, recalling from he worked for the SoCal Porsche+Audi dealers:

"al weidman
post Sep 13 2010, 08:14 PM
Post #161

Al Weidman
**
Group: Members
Posts: 143
Joined: 22-February 08
From: Oroville, Ca.
Member No.: 8,736
Region Association: Northern California

Let me add what I think I remember. I sold Porsche's at Kendon P/A and Circle P/A from the summer of 1969 to the fall of 1975. I sold some new 912's then basically all of the 914's. We installed Porsche crests on all 914 hoods, coco mats side stripes and radios, since we could get Clarions for about $40. Per customer's request, we did interior swaps, wheel swaps, exhaust installs and there were even 914 mud flaps. We also put side mouldings on many cars.
As far as the '73 2.0 goes, we believed it was going to be the 914s. We had the brochures and were told about all the improvements and it would have a broader appeal than the 914-6, which we had a hard time selling even at a discounted $5000 even, into 1972. Now comes the interesting part. We heard that the PCA was the lobbying group to drop the "s" as they were insulted that Porsche would even consider calling a 914 an "s". This would explain the time delay and also why the Brits were not advised to stop. In those days the 914-6 was the only 914 considered a real Porsche because the chassis were shipped to Porsche for completion. Even the 912 was suspecious to the 911 crowd and also not accepted by the 356er's either. Remember most Porsche buyers were enthusiasts and knew the cars and options well. Actually quite a lot of our 911's were special ordered. When the wealthy picked up on Porsche's is when they were only interested in "Which is the best or fastest one they make?" The 914 opened up a whole new crowd. I taught many girls how to drive a stick shift. If they would have made an automatic, they could have sold a million. I just don't think they had the capacity to do it. Also VW had planned to stop the car in '74, that's when Porsche stepped up and finished the run to '76 to have a transition car to the 924 and it's connection to Audi for production capacity and maintain an entry level Porsche. BTW I was awarded the "Salesman of the 1972 LA car show" by coming close to selling a car the one of the judges. I knew the cars and loved them, still do, although I have forgotten some of the options."

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 19 2012, 12:33 PM

... thus proving I'm not the only Python manic on here! I even bought the DVD's & turned my now almost 24 year old son into one as a teen, much to my wife's chagrin!

Posted by: Racer Chris Dec 19 2012, 01:21 PM

"They take them when they're small."

"What happens when they molt?"

"Lions don't molt."

"But penguins do. Therefore I've run rings around you logically."

"Oh, intercourse the penguin!"

Posted by: jockellis Dec 22 2012, 10:41 PM

If it sells for that, it will validate P.T. Barnum's theory of predatory commerce.

Posted by: kg6dxn Dec 23 2012, 12:26 AM

IBLT

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 23 2012, 02:59 PM

Since none of us out of GA have actually seen it to check condition, we can't say if it's a good price or not.

IMHO & according to the experts at NADA, Excellence, Hagerty & other comps (some posted above), it is right in the ballpark - aside from the seller's "914 S" mantra & non-OE stuff: "S" badge, Momo wheel, wrong year F&R bumpers, D-jet & modern radio (the correct Fuchs 2L wheels do come with it & the Mahle Baby-Gasburners" on there).

Many would gladly pay $15k for a well sorted rust-free 73 2.0, with a freshly overhauled motor & transaxle - even with those non-stock items, & the recognized comps support that, as does Hagerty's pricing guide!

Do you know more about this 914 Jock, or just putting in an opinion based on ...????

Posted by: Dave_Darling Dec 24 2012, 08:20 AM

You're a bacon lettuce and tomato sandwich??

--DD

Posted by: Racer Chris Dec 24 2012, 12:08 PM

I thought he bought a lottery ticket.

Posted by: Dr Evil Dec 24 2012, 02:34 PM

Hmmm, Yenko dealership is in Canonsburg which is 15min from me. I wonder if it is still there. Should I go look?

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 24 2012, 03:46 PM

Here's an old classified ad for Yenko Porsche+Audi but looking at Google maps, I don't see a Yenko dealership in the area.



As it looks now ...

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 24 2012, 04:16 PM

Dave, do you know if that ad is from the PGH Press-Telegram?

It looks like their fonts to me. I ask cuz my Great-uncle worked there in the 50's-60's, & I think they were still open in 74.

PS - note the used 73 914 ad below that - $4495 1 year old, so I'm guessing it would've been a 1.7, since the 2.0's were $7k+ by the end of the 73 MY.

Posted by: carr914 Dec 24 2012, 04:19 PM

Looks like a perfect home for Dr Evil's Emergency Room & Tranny Clinic

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 24 2012, 04:25 PM

They may have moved a couple of doors down...

http://www.bizapedia.com/pa/YENKO-DON-PORSCHE-AUDI.html

Don Yenko Porsche Audi
573 W Pike St
Canonsburg, PA 15317

Posted by: scotty b Dec 24 2012, 05:04 PM

I like that building

Posted by: nomore9one4 Dec 24 2012, 05:19 PM

I believe the Pantera in the ad above it belonged to my former employeer..He ended up selling it in the late 80's to the guy who owned Suburban Buick..Now a subaru dealership.. small world indeed

Posted by: dlkawashima Dec 24 2012, 06:47 PM

Yes, the Pittsburgh Press. It's the January 12, 1975 edition. Put 29 in the page search box and then zoom into the upper left corner.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=djft3U1LymYC&dat=19750112&printsec=frontpage&hl=en

There are also a lot of Yenko ads in the Observer-Reporter.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=6w2ZCmoKEM0C

Posted by: Tom_T Dec 25 2012, 02:25 PM

Thanx Dave!

Have a Merry one!