Interesting 914 Article I just found, Jan 04 Classic Motorsports Options

[Tom_T]

This is an interesting older 914 article from 2004, which I just found perusing the website of "Classic Motorsports" that I recently subscribed to for the halibut!

http://classicmotorsports.net/articles/porsche-914/

Enjoy! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/type.gif)

[Tom_T]

BTW - yes I know, a few errors in it, like this:
"The 914 was designed by Gugelot Design GmbH." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

[dlkawashima]

BTW - yes I know, a few errors in it, like this:
"The 914 was designed by Gugelot Design GmbH." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Not to beat a dead horse (well, okay, I guess I am) but the thing that puzzles me is how an authority like Karl Ludvigsen could be so wrong about the origin of the 914? Was he misinformed? Did he just make it all up? Has he written any explanation, now that this has been revealed?

Reading thru the Mythbusters thread here ...
http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=51265

... reveals a Gugelot clay model that precedes the 914. It's not the BMW-Bayer fastback concept but another design:
(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads/post-5409-1252585190.jpg)
(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads/post-5409-1252585211.jpg)
(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads/post-5409-1252585231.jpg)

Take your hand and cover up the pictures of the model just aft of the door and the car looks like the spitting image of a 914, right down to the indentation for the door handle. It's hard to believe this model had no influence on the 914 exterior design.

The Das Grosse VW-Porsche Buch article (as well as the May 2011 Excellence article) features the BMW-Bayer fastback concept rather than this clay model. It's obvious the BMW-Bayer fastback concept did not influence the shape of the 914, but what about this other design study? Is this not the design that Ludvigsen suggests was the inspiration for the design of the 914? It's the one he includes in his book.

[Tom_T]

Dave -

While there are some similarities - there are far more differences in the two designs, and certainly not enough to be considered the basis for the 914 design (for example copyright law only requires 25% different).

Moreover, lacking a contract to do the design for Porsche/VW, it's hard for Gugelot or anyone to maintain that they did the design, so it's probably just speculation in the past. But they certainly could've been aware of the Gugelot design study at Porsche, and that could have influenced their design for the 914 indirectly.

Also somebody previously posted at another topic on here, a pic of the Porsche Design Studio with the design sketches of various studies for the 914, including the final design - supporting the history that it was done internally at Porsche Design. Maybe Sir Andy or someone can post it here for you.

Ludvigsen & the others espousing the Gugelot theory were speculating, without any basis of factual documents, as far as I & others have seen. Opinions get expressed & sometimes that gets spread by others.

...... and that is just IMHO!!!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[dlkawashima]

While there are some similarities - there are far more differences in the two designs, and certainly not enough to be considered the basis for the 914 design (for example copyright law only requires 25% different).

I'm not up to speed on copyright laws, but what you say makes sense. Else, any part of a car that resembles elements of another design could be considered a copyright violation ...


But here's an excerpt from Porsche 911: Perfection by Design, by Randy Leffingwell that I find interesting. This passage discusses Albrecht Goertz' role, or lack thereof, in the design of the 911:

Through Max Hoffman, his U.S. distributor, Porsche contacted Count Albrecht Goertz, who had designed the 507 for BMW. Goertz was a German living and working in New York City. Porsche gave him a set of dimensions and asked him to design a car with more interior space and an unbroken fastback roofline. Goertz spent eight months on the design, known internally as Project 695. His design prominently featured quad headlights in the style of General Motors and Ford Motor Company. The roofline tapered down to rear fender height, but it ended abruptly in several angled surfaces adorned with three taillights per side. In profile, however, the Goertz roof shape and front fender forms hinted at what was to come. It just was too American for Ferry.



... Henry Klie, the company's chief modeler since 1951, struggled to modify Albrecht Goertz's design into something Ferry Porsche liked. Goertz had come up with a new concept, still within the typ 695 designation. As Klie executed it he made half of it as Goertz designed it. But Klie did his own variation on the other half of the large form. Each of these got closer to what Ferry Porsche wanted.


What I find interesting is that, while the Goertz concept is far different than the production 911, Klie (and Butzi Porsche) used the Goertz concept as the starting point for their work. Does that warrant some level of credit for Goertz? Goertz suggested it did but of course he got no credit for the design of the 911. The Gugelot clay model that Ludvigsen credits as the basis for the 914 is certainly closer to the production 914's final shape than Goertz's concept is to the production 911.

... and then there are those who say the 914 looks just like a box of tissue, therefore design credit should go to Kleenex ...

[Tom_T]

... and then there are those who say the 914 looks just like a box of tissue, therefore design credit should go to Kleenex ...

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol-2.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

[Tom_T]

Hey Dave,

I just found where I'd seen that picture of the 914 design studies in the Porsche Design Studio, but unfortunately it's not an online source that I can just post here.

It's in the #191 May 2011 issue of Excellence magazine, in the "Who really designed the 914?" article on pages 95-99, with the pic in question at the bottom of pg. 96 - note the sketch behind & between the 2nd & 3rd from left guys in that pic.

Due to copyright laws I won't photo/scan & post it on here, but you can get that issue from them at: http://www.excellence-mag.com/back-issues

... or just borrow one from a P-car local in your area. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif)

Cheers! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)
... & Happy 4th Holiday Weekend! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/jsharp.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif)

[dlkawashima]

I just found where I'd seen that picture of the 914 design studies in the Porsche Design Studio, but unfortunately it's not an online source that I can just post here.

It's in the #191 May 2011 issue of Excellence magazine, in the "Who really designed the 914?" article on pages 95-99, with the pic in question at the bottom of pg. 96 - note the sketch behind & between the 2nd & 3rd from left guys in that pic.

I have that issue of Excellence. The caption on the picture says those are drawings of the 901 (911) and the 904, not the 914. The drawing between the second & third designers ..... are you saying it's not a rear view of the 911 but a rear (or is it a frontal) view of the 914?

[Tom_T]

I just found where I'd seen that picture of the 914 design studies in the Porsche Design Studio, but unfortunately it's not an online source that I can just post here.

It's in the #191 May 2011 issue of Excellence magazine, in the "Who really designed the 914?" article on pages 95-99, with the pic in question at the bottom of pg. 96 - note the sketch behind & between the 2nd & 3rd from left guys in that pic.

I have that issue of Excellence. The caption on the picture says those are drawings of the 901 (911) and the 904, not the 914. The drawing between the second & third designers ..... are you saying it's not a rear view of the 911 but a rear (or is it a frontal) view of the 914?

Dave, in my copy the caption reads: "...in Porsche's design studio with models and drawings of two contemporary 914 projects, the 901/902 [911/912] and 904."

As well as I can make out with my old eyes (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) , the clay model is the 901/902~911/912, the drawings behind L-R are the 904, not sure (maybe 914 or 911 side), 914 (frontal I think), then the white line or old time blueprint (blue background) maybe the other 914 study referenced in the caption. I wish I had a bigger clearer pic of it.

As the article said, the Gugelot design may have had some influence, but it's been refuted by Klie (who was there for the entire 914 design process) that they did any design work on the 914 under contract to Porsche. IIRC Gugelot maybe did later do some additional design studies for a 914 redesign as an after-the-fact design exercise.

[dlkawashima]

Dave, in my copy the caption reads: "...in Porsche's design studio with models and drawings of two contemporary 914 projects, the 901/902 [911/912] and 904."

As well as I can make out with my old eyes (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) , the clay model is the 901/902~911/912, the drawings behind L-R are the 904, not sure (maybe 914 or 911 side), 914 (frontal I think), then the white line or old time blueprint (blue background) maybe the other 914 study referenced in the caption. I wish I had a bigger clearer pic of it.

As the article said, the Gugelot design may have had some influence, but it's been refuted by Klie (who was there for the entire 914 design process) that they did any design work on the 914 under contract to Porsche. IIRC Gugelot maybe did later do some additional design studies for a 914 redesign as an after-the-fact design exercise.

I found the picture in question on several different websites, so I will assume it's okay to post a copy of it here. What I find significant is that the other websites set the date of the picture as 1963 ...... too early to have a 914 study in the Porsche Design studios. So that fuzzy frontal drawing between designers 2 & 3 has to be the 901/902 ..... unless it's the early Gugelot design from 1963.

http://www.9magazine.com/f-a-butzi-porsche...h-birthday.html

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads_offsite/trackthoughts.com-12234-1309589684.1.jpg)

[Tom_T]

I found the picture in question on several different websites, so I will assume it's okay to post a copy of it here. What I find significant is that the other websites set the date of the picture as 1963 ...... too early to have a 914 study in the Porsche Design studios. So that fuzzy frontal drawing between designers 2 & 3 has to be the 901/902 ..... unless it's the early Gugelot design from 1963.

http://www.9magazine.com/f-a-butzi-porsche...h-birthday.html

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads_offsite/trackthoughts.com-12234-1309589684.1.jpg)

Thanx for finding the pic Dave. I was able to blow it up with my Picassa & it appears that the one which I thought was a 914 frontal view is more likely the rear of the 901/911, since it appears to be part of a 4 view single sheet of the 901/911 with 2 sides, rear & frontal views which is divided by the old school mechanical square on the elevated drawing board.

I still cannot tell what the reverse print behind F.F./Butzi's head is - 901/911 or 914 sketch? If it's not, then somebody has misinterpreted the sketches in the background, and lacking a better print/negative with more clarity, it will be hard to identify the far right reverse print.

Whether the correct date is 1963 or 64 is immaterial to the 914's design, because I've read in different sources that the 914's design started in either late 63 or 64.

Clearly the 901/911 design was well advanced by the point of this pic, and the car was released to the public in either Spring or Fall `64 IIRC - i.e.: the 901/911 design was already a done deal & a more or less completed design project by that point, as was the 904 which was also released for production in 63/64.

That said, both F.A. "Butzy" Porsche & Klie have been very clear over the years that the 914 was the exclusive design of the Porsche KG Design Studio - and NOT of Gugelot (despite industrial mystery theorists' claims), and Porsche does have the internal documentation to back up the claim.

IMHO - credit should be given where credit was due, and not to later industrial conspiracy theorists.

As a design professional myself (Architect), I always found it extremely irritating that higher up bosses or outsiders devoid from the design process of a particular building would take credit for a particular design - especially when it was a successful award winner - especially when they had little or nothing to do with the project's design process.

It also must be recognized that ang such project - building, auto or industrial design, etc. - are not the product of just one "design genius", but of a TEAM of talented individuals, which all too often the design firms in question all too often negate & outright refuse to give any credit whatsoever of the talented individuals who bring projects to fruition.

So IMHO,
First - we should not be taking design credit away from the Porsche Design Team;

... and ...

Second - we should laud them for giving credit to the entire styling team in this photo - rather than just to F.A./Butzi.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif)

[dlkawashima]

It's obvious the reverse drawing is not a 914. Here's a blow-up of the image for clarification.

Tom, with all due respect, I think you're misinterpreting the point of this picture in the Excellence article. The caption clearly states (at least it's clear to me) that the drawings in the background are of the 901/901 & the 904. I think the picture is there in the article to simply show Klie and Butzi Porsche as they were way back when the 914 was just a glimmer of an idea.

To your other points:

-I've never seen 1963 as the date of the 914's initial design studies. I've always seen 1964. For example, the Excellence article from May 2011 and the German article referenced by Sir Andy in his Mythbusters thread both state 1964 as the start date. Do you have a link to some articles that show the 1963 date instead?

-I wouldn't call Karl Ludvigsen an industrial conspiracy theorist. He is a well respected automotive journalist and a recognized authority on all things Porsche.

-I never suggested taking design credit away from Klie or any members of the Porsche Design team. However, I did ask how Ludvigsen could have gotten it so wrong.

-I agree that everyone responsible for influencing the shape of the 914 should be given design credit. Earlier I asked an open ended question: if a design team starts with a base design and then moves on from there, should the designer of the base design be given partial credit for the final shape? Porsche did not think so, as witness Goertz' lack of credit for the 911's final shape.

[Tom_T]

Hey Dave -

I'm not trying to shoot barbs at you, but have tried to point out the differences in Gugelot designs speculated to be progenitors of the 914, and that there was never anything documentary to prove that Gugelot even had a contract to do any work on it for Porsche.

Unfortunately, that blow-up of the reverse print or sketch certainly isn't the 914 we know, but I still cannot tell what it is.

At the risk of (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dead horse.gif) ... You're misreading the caption, as the Excellence caption to the picture reads in full:
"BELOW: Heinrich Klie (at far left) and Ferdinand Alexander Porsche (at far right) in Porsche's design studio with models and drawings of two contemporary 914 projects, the 901/902 [911/912] and 904." [emphasis added]

Excellence is very clearly stating in the part which I highlighted, that there are two 914 designs represented in the Studio in that old photo - and just as clearly Excellence appears to be WRONG.
In our past few posts, we've both had trouble finding any one 914 project in that studio - let alone two! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

Obviously the vaulted Excellence has made an error.

The well renowned "914 expert" Dr. Brett Johnson likewise has some errors in his vaunted book on 914 originality & restoration. He is also by the way a Veterinary Doctor who collects 356's & is in fact far more expert in his pet hobby of collecting & restoring 356s - than he is in the 914 world (puns intended (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) ).

To answer your earlier question - I suggest that likewise - Ludvigsen either made a similar error to Excellence & Dr. B.J., made an overstatement (as to Gugelot's involvement in the 914 design), or repeating those theories of others without sufficient back-up, etc. People make mistakes, and fall into certain erroneous ideas, etc. - and Ludvigsen is human. Until it can be clearly proven otherwise, Ludvigsen is wrong, in error, or made a mistake, or whatever. Shit happens.

AFAIK Gugelot never produced any contracts, memos nor any other documentation that they were ever under contract to design a sports car for Porsche leading to the 914. I can tell you when I was a car crazy teen back at the time of it's design release in the late 1960's magazines, into the 1969 pre-sales blitz & throughout the 69-76 run of the 914 - that Gugelot didn't try to lay claim to the design - let alone release anything to prove their involvement in the 914's design, that I recall reading back then. It wasn't until much later that these Gugelot claims & theories started to surface.

If you want to counter-bust the Gugelot myth, then you yourself will need to do some primary research into actual hard copy documents from the period and from the Gugelot business - most or all of which will probably NOT be found on the internet. The web wasn't even an inkling in anyone's mind in the 1960's.

Back to the earlier drawing by Gugelot which you posted - IIRC this was an independent project which Gugelot pitched to BMW, Porsche, maybe Peugot & Fiat, & several other auto makers back in the 1960's, so elements of it's design could've been said to have showed up in several cars. As an "independent speculative project" done by Gugelot on their own initiative, that wouldn't qualify it as a project done for Porsche (nor VW nor the JV).

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads/post-5409-1252585190.jpg)
(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads/post-5409-1252585211.jpg)
(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads/post-5409-1252585231.jpg)

While it's got some similarities at the frontal area to the 914's final design, it's not the same shape nor design front end - in addition to it being a front engined & RWD/rear transaxle design, with the spare mounted in a rear trunk. Additionally, the top sketch indicates a shaped rear targa glass similar to the 911/912 Targas (not arrow showing how it comes out, as the the arrow showing how the targa top comes off), while the model show the finned sails with an inset but sloped rear window - so even this design changed over time.

Those are an awful lot of design differences - and only some passing similarities of certain elements - to call it the 914's progenitor.
As I initially said, having seen it, it certainly could've influenced the Porsche design for the 914.

IIRC the late-63 start on the 914's design - which in no way "proves" anything about Gugelot's involvement BTW - was noted in this book:


AFAIK Goertz' got credit for what he did do in things that I've read on the 911/912 (901) design, which was not the final design - but rather other design studies which predated the 901 project. There's a difference between doing a predecessor project or design study which leads to a later one, and being in the continuity & flow of a design process leading to a final design.

I've had many of those over my career - even to the extent of design competitions where a bunch of competing designers enter their schemes, one gets selected, and then the client picks what they liked from all of the submittals & fold it into the new design solution done by the winning competitor (both for outside & in-house competitions & alternative designs' development). Not much one can do about that either! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I don't know what else to tell you about the Gugelot claim, other than to find good solid hard copy evidence that they did have an assignment from Porsche to do a design study for "Project 914" as it was called (in German of course (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) ).

Cheers & Have a Great 4th Holiday! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/jsharp.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif)

[dlkawashima]

At the risk of (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dead horse.gif) ... You're misreading the caption, as the Excellence caption to the picture reads in full:
"BELOW: Heinrich Klie (at far left) and Ferdinand Alexander Porsche (at far right) in Porsche's design studio with models and drawings of two contemporary 914 projects, the 901/902 [911/912] and 904." [emphasis added]

This is how I read that caption:

"BELOW: Heinrich Klie (at far left) and Ferdinand Alexander Porsche (at far right) in Porsche's design studio with models and drawings of two contemporary 914 projects: the 901/902 [911/912] and 904."

My guess is the Excellence editors wanted a picture of Butzi and Klie back in the day. They had this picture ..... no 914 content, but hey, close enough. And yes, I agree, there are no drawings of a 914 in that image.

Happy 4th to you as well! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif)

[poorsche914]

Tom - I agree with Dave's interpretation of the caption.

"BELOW: Heinrich Klie (at far left) and Ferdinand Alexander Porsche (at far right) in Porsche's design studio with models and drawings of two contemporary 914 projects, the 901/902 [911/912] and 904."

The "two contemporary ... projects" refers to the 901/902 and 904 NOT that there are two 914 projects.

HAPPY 4th of JULY (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif)

[Tom_T]

Dave & Porsche914 -

Sorry, but you cannot just willy-nilly substitute on your own after the fact, a colon for a comma (I just double checked that it is in fact a comma), and change the who "interpretation" of the writer's speculated intent! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Think back to your basic English classes in HS &/or college - a comma in that placement means that all those items separated by commas and "and" or "or" are included in the referenced group - not first isn't but the rest are.

Had it been originally printed as a colon in the magazine, then Dave's "interpretation" would indeed mean that they meant that the 914 wasn't meant to be included in the group of other contemporary projects in the photo.

As I said in my post , I don't see any 914 in the photo once I could blow up the one Dave posted. So- in any friggin' case - Excellence's writer & editorial staff either made a grammatical error of not using a colon, or else they too thought that one of the drawings were of 914 a concept(s).

In either case - I don't really give a "Flier" about it, and NO - I still do not agree that anyone has shown any convincing proof that Gugelot had anything whatsoever to do directly with the 914's design - including Ludvigsen. I remain open to such factual proof, when & if that should happen - not theories & suppositions based on 2nd & 3rd party articles, internet chatter, etc.

IMHO - if Gugelot really did have such documentary proof, then they would've brought it forth long ago - perhaps in the form of a copyright lawsuit, or at least in a "Hey, we had something to do with the 914's design" article - & I do not mean in a 2nd or 3rd or 4th party tenuously claiming it it a book or article, or one of the numerous online misquotes without backup.

So as of now, I'm done - no, over done, with an argument about the "Gugie 914 design" theory! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

After all, this topic was posted to alert members to another 914 article out there - itself with a few errors, and instead morphed into yet another postulation of the "Gugie Theory"!

Nuff is Nuff guys - go (IMG:style_emoticons/default/jsharp.gif) something! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)

[SirAndy]

I still do not agree that anyone has shown any convincing proof that Gugelot had anything whatsoever to do directly with the 914's design - including Ludvigsen. I remain open to such factual proof, when & if that should happen - not theories & suppositions based on 2nd & 3rd party articles, internet chatter, etc.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)


What we DO have, however, is this:

Inquiries with the Porsche Factory, personal talks with Ferdinand Alexander Porsche, the head
of the Porsche Design Studios at the time as well as talks with employees of the Gugelot Company
did, however, not verify Ludvigsens theory. Gugelot was never commissioned with the Design of
the 914. Furthermore, Porsche did not use the Gugelot-Auto as the base or template of their own Design.

Ferdinand Alexander Porsche:
"Gugelot never did anything to the Car! They had a car that had a few similarities with the 914,
that's all. The most one could do is to point out those similarities, but Gugelot had nothing to do with the Car.
It's always the same, there's a lot of talk and rumors, like when people say that my grandfather once worked for Renault ..."

[Tom_T]

Danke Herr! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_flagge6.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_wirdgut.gif)