Ok, here goes post number two. In my other post you will see I am looking for some tips on shopping for a 914…

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?act=...=ST&f=2&t=35953

I currently have been autocrossing on and off (most off) since the late 1980s and consistently at local events for the past five years or so (Honda Civic in STS). I have always loved the 914 and want to build a “fun” car for local competition. The idea is to buy a car that I can may run in DSP with a handful of modifications (suspension upgrades, and 2.0 swap if car was not initially a 2.0 L, etc.), then do a six cylinder swap and run in SM2 and eventually install safety equipment (cage, upgraded brakes, etc.) and participate in track days/HPDE. In addition to not making modifications outside the realm of SCCAs DSP and eventually SM2 classes, the car also needs to be licensed for street use. While this would NOT be a daily driver, I am not able (at this time) to trailer a car.

What I am curious about is if there is specific range of model years that would work best for me? I could go the 73/74 2.0 route, but as the car will exist in it’s stock or semi stock form for a short period of time, there may not be much motivation to pay the premium for a nice 73/74 2.0. I also tend to not want a 75+ due to the extra weight. But with the option of SCCA update/backdate rules, I don’t know if that is a valid assumption (i.e. can I build a lightweight 75/76?) And at the same time, maybe any 74 or earlier car would be just as good or better due to the SCCA update/backdate allowances. My concern about the very early cars is the potential issue with installing an aftermarket seat for the passenger (don't know if update/backdate will allow interior swap from newer car) and lack of sideshift transmission.

I know that you could build a "fun" car from any 914 of any model year, but would there be an order of preference when looking for a car. Something such as…

1. 73/74 2.0
2. Any early car with movable passenger seat and sideshift transmission
3. Any non 75/76 car
4. 75/76

I would appreciate any comments from anyone that has experience building to any SCCA Solo specs and especially anyone that has build a dual purpose autocross/track car

Thanks!

Richard

If your primary interest is "building" the car to your specs., you probably have the order about right.
If, however, your interest is simply getting a solid car for the uses you mention, buy one already finished, either four or six. You will save lots of money and be on the course/track much sooner.

The earlier cars are lighter, even once you swap in some of the later bits. (E.g., movable passenger seat, 2.0 engine, sideshifter, etc.) I'd go over those update/backdate rules carefully, and see if you can swap the parts you want into an early car.

--DD

I agree with Dave.
an early chassis will be lighter in the end.

but on the other hand another thing to consider is finding the most rust free car you can find. You'll spend hundreds or even thousands repairing rust and patch panels are heavy too. even if you give up 30-50lbs when your done on having a later car you can still be money ahead by not having to deal with rust.

I wanted a 1970 to build my current race car from, but ended up using a 72 chassis because it was the cleaner chassis.

brant

I run a 70 with FI 74 2.0L with Euro P&C, side shift trans, front factory sway bar, rear sway bar (disconnected), adjustable Koni's all around, GTS lemans seat with 5 point harness and falken Azenis tires. I run DSP and plan for a 6 in the next few years. That move with move me to SM2. I bought my car with most of the mods already done to it.

I really see no need in installing a movable passenger seat ina early car unless you have a lot of passengers. But for a car that is not going to be a daily driver (mine isn't either, but it could be) I wouldn't bother with that mod.

My little racer (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/wub.gif)

anything can be cut off, lightened, trimmed.... backdating rules are certainly a help, here. my quite stripped down '75 with fiberglass bumpers is quite light (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/cool_shades.gif)

if you don't mind spending the time/money modifying things, then just buy the best car you can -- a nice '76 is far mo' better than a decrepit '73.

QUOTE (itsa914 @ Aug 2 2005, 06:22 PM)

I really see no need in installing a movable passenger seat ina early car unless you have a lot of passengers.

Just to clarify the need for the passanger seat upgrade. Any HPDE events I may participate in most likely will involve an instructor and I will be wanting to provide the instructor with the same level of comfort and safety in the passenger set as I have in the driver seat. From an autocross point of view, I am guessing that the non-adjustable early seat is the lightest and best option. With this being a dual purpose car I expect I am going to run into a number of compromise issues. (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/smile.gif)

QUOTE (nebreitling @ Aug 2 2005, 06:24 PM)

my quite stripped down '75 with fiberglass bumpers is quite light  :shades:

Are you using a fiberglass replica of the older or later style bumpers (I don't even know which is available)? I don't know much about what they did to the 75/76 (if anything) when they changed the bumper. Basically can you mount the older style bumper on the 75/76? For some reason I was thinking there is at least a tab missing on the body or something like that. I suspect SCCA SM2 rules would prohibit fiberglass bumpers anyhow.

Semi related question... I also don't know how I feel at the moment about fiberglass vs. OEM bumpers. As the car is going to be driven on the street at times, what is people's thoughts about the safety of fiberglass bumpers vs. the steel or later rubber ones? Of course in today's crash tests, I would guess a 914 would score about the same (1 star?) regardless of the bumper material.

Oh, and thanks for all of the replies so far.

QUOTE

my quite stripped down '75 with fiberglass bumpers is quite light

My guess is that Nat's car is lighter than Trekkors.

To me, model year means nothing. Condition of the chassis means everything.

If you haven't met her, here's my girl: '72 3.6

You best get a copy of the SCCA rule book.
No FG allowed in the Street Prepared classes.
It's Katie bar the door in SM2....all it has to be is street legal.....there's some verbage here....
& no slicks.

I run SCCA F Prepared and the car is built to it....mostly (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif)

An early 73 2.0 without door beams would be pretty light, after that an early chassis with a late model drivetrain. Then again you can backdate/update or swap parts to get what you need. A solid chassis is most important.

Again, I AM NO EXPERT...but buying a car with some or preferably most of the work done seems a brilliant concept to me. Don't ask me how I know. I keep seeing a race prepped blue/white Marlboro flared 6 on ebay. Many people cautioned me about the folly of building my own car.

I hope to put my car on a truck scale on Friday.
I guess 2150lbs

KT

Yea my early car is pretty light 1965 lbs as it sit with Fuchs and Kumhos. Bought the car last year then it classed out as street prepared. Now it is SM2 because of the hopped up 2.0L

Now I bolted a late seat to the floor pan no rails. and the butt pad cut thinner. Recaro SRD for the driver it's comfy!!!!

no back pad just carpet. and enough carpet in the car to be class legal.

Fiberglass front bumper, driving lights, Most everything else is there ventilation and heat is easy to put back on.

Nearly finished buttoning up a flipped 5th / 3rd side shift.

With the Diamond wheels and Hoosiers it IS FAST.

I have figured out I am not a good enough driver to worry about weight yet. Usually if I replace something because it broke, I end up upgrading stronger, lighter or both. (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/smash.gif)

Thanks for all of the replies. I agree that #1 priority is a solid body. I have the SCCA rules in PDF form, so I will finish reading up on update/backdate issues.