SOT/ i really like the 356 replicas, I would totally drive this one Options

[jsayre914]

I dont even care if its a replica, it is just sexy. 25000 seems like a good deal to me, but I live in reality, and I did not hit the lotto yet. But seriously, if I did get it, I am not sure if I would drive this one or the 914 more often (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)


The link

[Cap'n Krusty]

I've owned a number of speedsters, back when they were cheap. I've serviced and driven any number of replicas, including a repop Convertible D that was factory built in Canada. They're just not the same thing. For a Poseur, they're fine, but I can show you how to spot a fake from across the parking lot. Same for Spyder kit cars. Having worked on and driven the real deal, the kits, while pretty nice, just don't get it. Fiberglas kits just don't feel like steel or aluminum, and kits are, well, kits.

As for the '72 Ghia being better than a '56 Speedster, good luck with that one. Although the Speedster had swing axles, it had about one and a half times the HP, shorter gearing, about 10 times the brakes (Porsches had more brakes than the Vettes of the same years), a lower CG, and a substantial weight advantage. Cooler, too. And better seats.

The Cap'n

[Cohibra45]

I've owned a number of speedsters, back when they were cheap. I've serviced and driven any number of replicas, including a repop Convertible D that was factory built in Canada. They're just not the same thing. For a Poseur, they're fine, but I can show you how to spot a fake from across the parking lot. Same for Spyder kit cars. Having worked on and driven the real deal, the kits, while pretty nice, just don't get it. Fiberglas kits just don't feel like steel or aluminum, and kits are, well, kits.

As for the '72 Ghia being better than a '56 Speedster, good luck with that one. Although the Speedster had swing axles, it had about one and a half times the HP, shorter gearing, about 10 times the brakes (Porsches had more brakes than the Vettes of the same years), a lower CG, and a substantial weight advantage. Cooler, too. And better seats.

The Cap'n

Obviously didn't read the article.....

I have a copy if anyone wants to know any specifics.

"In the all-important handling test the Ghia devastated the Speedster. It was able, even on its standard-issue tires, to duplicate the Speedster exactly. VW's double jointed rear axles and semi-trailing arm suspension (adopted in 1968) are what make the difference. It works better than the Speedster's rear suspension. On the skidpad both cars generated identical 0.73 G lateral acceleration--with the Ghia exhibiting less understeer than the Speedster below that maximum, and neither prone to making the transition to oversteer without giving forewarning." "In terms of absolute handling performance, the cars were very nearly equal--even to the extent of sounding alike as both produce the same reassuring whonks and thumps as the suspension works to keep the wheels on the pavement--but the Speedster does it without straining while the VW seems a bit unfamiliar to its role as a sports car. However, under braking, just the opposite is true. It is the Ghia which stops as if it were second nature, while the Porsche is uncertain. And in this case the Ghia not only feels better, the test results show that it was significantly more capable."

Just a couple quotes from the article. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/driving.gif)

BTW, about the hp/tq figures, the cars tested were a "normal 1600 Speedster" and a new 1972 KG. The Porsche 1600 made 70bhp @ 4500 rpm (SAE gross) and 82 lb-ft @ 2700 rpm (SAE gross) while the KG 1600 made 60 bhp @ 4400 rpm (SAE gross) and 81.7 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm (SAE gross).

The Porsche even had Continental 165HR-15 radial ply tires vs the Ghia Continental 5.60-15 bias ply........ (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)