The Legend of the "914 S" & "914 SC", Myth or Fact? Options

[Tom_T]

<edit update>
For the ADHD crowd & reading challenged & the just impatient....

The `73 MY's "914S" is a "Trim Designation" or "Trim Package" - the same as was the "914 LE" in the `74 MY.

It was official by Porsche & Porsche+Audi/Volkswagen of America for North America, & likewise for th Porsche distributors of the "914S/914SL" in Japan & "914SC" in the UK.

However, in the case of North America, Porsche Germany made Porsche+Audi/VoA drop the "914S" designation after running the program for over a year - from early -1972 in the pre-release campaign - through about March 1973 - apparently after pressure from the 911 crowd at PCA objecting to it confusing them over their911S's. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Period!

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif)

See my Post #205 on page 11 for more details - or just read on below & through the ensuing facts, then debate by the naysayers. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

<edit>
CLIFF NOTES VERSION: (IMG:style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)
- for those not interested in looking at cool old 914 stuff from back in the day"!

1. Porsche+Audi marketed the 914/4 2.0 "fully loaded" as the "914 S" in ads & sales brochures from Summer 1972 to about Jan/Feb 1973, then Porsche made them stop.

2. The British Distributor similarly marketed the 914/4 2.0 from Summer 1972 through 1976 as the 914SC, but was never told to stop.

3. Neither was ever badged as either a 914S or 914SC.

4. If one is interested, read the stuff posted here from that 1970's period.
<end edit>

There has been talk from time to time on here & elsewhere, about whether there ever really was a "914 S" &/or "914 SC"? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)
- especially amongst those of us with USA 1973 MY 914-2.0's from the first half of the 73 MY production!

Well - as many things 914 - the answer is an unequivocal "Yes & No"!

I can answer more definitively regarding the "914 S" in the USA & Canada/North America, since I researched that recently to better plan for the restoration of my early-73 914-2.0. However, I was already well aware of the "914 S" terminology back in 1975 & it's having been dropped unceremoniously at PAG's insistance during early 1973, because I'd reviewed MT & R&T road test articles on the "914 S"/914-2.0 which bracketed the change & made mention of PAG's forcing it to be dropped while researching the purchase used (3 yrs. old) of my one & only 914-2.0 which I bought in Dec. 75 & still own (2nd owner).

I also had 3+ years before that, gotten a "free" copy of the 12 page early 1973 MY 914 sales brochure from the Downtown LA Porsche+Audi dealership, from a classmate whose parents eventually bought him one for his graduation (oh to be so lucky! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif) ). In it, it referred to the "914 S", as shown in the pix on the following posts here of the similar current brochure which I had to buy last year, having misplaced the other! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

But we will have to ask that some of our Brit Teeners out there (both of you! - just kidding! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) ) to add in regarding your "914 SC".
- Yes, the Brits had "something completely different," as in the Monty Python bits!

First - "No" - 914's were never officially badged as either a "914 S" nor "914 SC" by either the Porsche+Audi US/Canada nor the British Isles distributors, and definitely NOT EVER by the factory.

North American 914s with the GA 2.0 motor were badged with the familiar separate "914" & "2.0" badges on the right rear body panel above the rear bumper & to the left of the right taillight.

Whereas the rest of the world's 2L's with the GB engine were badged with the familiar long "914-*-Porsche" between the rear trunk lock/button & right taillight (where "*" is the VW roundel Logo), with the 2.0" badge below that & aligned with the first long badge next to the right taillight.

USA/Canada - Porsche+Audi 914 2.0 Badging:


.

Rest of the World's 914 2.0 Badging:


.

<edit>
For many, this above is enough to know & take/keep the position on "no" - but it is NOT the whole story, much of which is not known today unless you were around then. If you're in the no camp, your point is taken & no need to torture yourself by reading on - unless you want to add some other documentation/pix from the period which relate to this subject - then please do so.

However, this post isn't here for a debate - although it seems that we have a lot of "master debaters" logging in here with a burning desire to prove someone - anyone - wrong. Even to the point of agreeing with me then saying I'm wrong, and one re-posting information which I'd already posted in an effort to prove me wrong! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/WTF.gif)

I'm just presenting some factual documentation here on what the "914S" thing was all about - so others will know that there is some basis to it, even if it was not a "real" 914 model nor badge name. I have also thrown in some of my own thoughts, speculation & opinions, which I hope are clear from the way I've stated things (IMO, IMHO, I speculate or suspect or estimate that ... , etc.) that they are just that - which is not to claim that they are "facts".

As you can tell by my edits here, I'm getting a bit frustrated with the "master debaters," conspiracy police, & those who consider "914S talk" as heresy - but it did exist - to a point, as the following explains & provides period documentation to back it up. To the point - it is an indisputable fact that Porsche+Audi in the USA & Canada marketed the then new 914/4 2.0L model as the "914S" from Summer 1972 through about December 1972 or January/February 1973 -period! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)
<end edit>

.

Today, one of our member vendors here - RJMII - makes custom aluminum badges in a "914 S" design, and could customize anything else - including "914 SC" - should someone want one for display purposes or fun in a temporary attachment/placement. However, IMHO I would not recommend placing one in the rear badging position, because you'd have to weld/braise/putty to fill in the mounting stud holes, which is NOT a good idea nor an acceptable "Originality" approach.

.

.

Second - "Yes" - The Porsche+Audi US/Canada distributor did in fact initially market the "new for the 1973 model year" (MY) 914/4 with the GA 2.0 engine as the "914 S" from mid-72 through early 1973.

While the British Isles distributor marketed their GB engined 2.0's as the "914 SC" from mid-72 through the end of the 914's run in 1976.

Oddly - according to both the period articles in the left book below & commentary by the second book's author - Porsche never asked them to drop the "SC" nomenclature - even after the "911 SC" was introduced later. Whereas their almost immediate objection to the US Porsche+Audi arm using the "914 S" in marketing, what that they were concerned that it may confuse the public with the 911S & detract for that far more expensive car's sales (more than 2x the 914-2.0' price in 73 MY).

A fair amount of factual back up for both of these "914 S" & "914 SC" marketing programs can be found in the 2 books whose covers are pictured below - both of which are still currently available in print from numerous sources - so I won't duplicate that information here.



.

.

Additionally, Porsche+Audi printed both 4 page & 12 page 914 full color sales brochures for the US & Canadian dealerships, both of which clearly & unequivocally referred to the "914 S" - not a "914 2.0" at that point in time (although the terminology was eventually changed to "914 2.0" by the 74 MY as seen later).

Front & Rear Covers of 4 page Porsche+Audi 914 Sales Brochure referring to "914 S":


.

... continued ....

[Tom_T]

... I'd wager it was written summer/fall of '72 - Porsche (or as R&T states the 'Home Office'), had already killed the 914 S attempt by NA

No Mike/All it was still in use in Nov/Dec `72 & the article was written or at least finalized around then - since my buddy & I got a tip from the LA Porsche+Audi sales manager when I went with him to look at the 914's during Nov. & Dec. `72 - & he & the sales people then still referred to the 2L as the "914S" & still were handing out brochures with 914S (which is where & when I got my original 12 pg. one). He told us in Nov. to go out to one of the canyon side roads off Mulholland Dr. (IIRC) where R&T was doing their pix for test drive from the Feb. 73 issue, where we saw them shooting that very same black 914 2.0 under that oak tree in the one pic, before they ran us off! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

1. Porsche+Audi marketed the 914/4 2.0 "fully loaded" as the "914 S" in ads & sales brochures from Summer 1972 to about Jan/Feb 1973, then Porsche made them stop.

Is this based on the MotorTrend and R&T articles? If so, with all due respect, this is an opinion based on an assumption. MT's January article calls it a 914S and a couple of months later R&T explains if differently?

I don't buy that at all. Those articles could have been - and probably were - written months before. The MT bit could have been written, edited and mocked to print by the time word came down on the name change. If they are anything like the publications I deal with, those mags are printed 2-2 1/2 months in advance of pub date which means final art for layout is a month plus ahead of that.

Yes it is in part based on those 2 articles from Jan. & Feb. 1973 - as well as from other articles in the 914 Portfolio book & other magazines, as well as in the Brian Long book and others. The story is around in many sources.

I believe that I backed my dating up by 2 months from Feb. 73 as the possible timing for the decree from PAG for P+A to stop, but even if it were 3-4 months as you suggest may have been the case - that is still Sept/Oct. of 72 - but their change wasn't fully implemented until sometime after Nov./Dec. `72 by my own personal & first hand experience at the time. However, up until this point my intent was only to provide period documentation on the subject at hand, rather than my college days "field trips" to the dealership a few blocks away & elsewhere.

I personally know because I was there with my own eyes & ears in Nov. & Dec. 1972 to see & hear the 914S term in use at Porsche+Audi dealerships, who continued using the 914 sales brochures & print ads with "914S" well into Dec. `72 & early 1973. If PAG had wanted to effect the change completely in the Summer or Fall of 1972 - as you are suggesting, then certainly they would not have been still handing out brochures with 914S in them during Dec. `72 & Jan. 73. Thereafter, from about Mar. 73 or so until the end of the 73 MY in June/July 73, they simply used the 914 designation alone with reference to the 2.0 motor - as I posted in the 2 post-change ads from Spring 73, as far as I can recall or have seen since.

IIRC - even Pat Garvey has said in the past that he recalled the dealer's sales people calling it a 914S &/or having the brochures with that terminology when he was in the in mid-1972 (Summer or Fall - I don't know which).

BTW - a group of us also went to the inaugural Long Beach Grand Prix the following model year, and asked the reps there "whatever happened to the "914S" designation?" upon seeing the new 74 MY brochures with "914 2.0," & they told us that Porsche told them to stop using it midway through the `73 model year.

Whether or not PAG wanted to end it before Dec. 72 - Jan. 73 - the "hard copy" fact remains that both print ads (I personally have a B&W 914S ad from a Dec. 72 publication) & magazine articles - in addition to the sales materials noted above - with "914S" references, were all still in circulation during Dec. 72 - Jan. 73. Ergo - it had NOT been fully withdrawn & wound-down until halfway through the 1973 MY - regardless of when PAG's intent, first notice, notifying R&T for their article, etc. occurred.

While it's interesting information on the timing of the R&T magazine article's possible publication process & timing - in terms of the function & presentation to consumers, it is a moot point because the public was still seeing "914S" all through the first 6+ months of the 73 MY - which is an undeniable fact per the publications posted here & elsewhere - whether you &/or others "buy it" or not.

Anyway, enough of this nonsense. The 914S has been a pet theme of Tom's since some of his earliest posts. More power to him for putting his thoughts down.

There is nothing further of value here for me so I'm done with this time waster.

cheers, mike.

Mike - perhaps you came into this thinking that this was my "pet theme" & therefore presumed that I was trying to prove something more than what happened in the "914S" saga? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

In previous posts I had reacted to some folks claiming that there never was anything at all about a "914S" - since I knew that there was from my personal first hand experience. Here I was just trying to provide some actual documentation to & references of the "914S marketing campaign", how it was presented in officially sanctioned documents & ads, & approximately the timing & duration of the campaign - nothing more.

There is more that you could add, if you have any further documents &/or information on the matters at hand......then by all means please do so! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/type.gif)

However, if your intent is to prove me wrong & question my & others personal first hand knowledge from that time - & try instead to make a case that is was a fluke ended by September of 1972 - then, yes you are wasting your time here because there were clearly documents & publications in circulation to the public with reference to "914S" up to & including at least January 1973 - irrespective of when they were prepared. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

If that is the case, then I really do not understand why you would want to take such a hard line position to shoot down myself & other members who were actually there "back in the day" buddy, cuz you're not usually that way on here!!?? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

Cheers Back at Ya! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)
Tom
///////