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 ....

[carr914]

Tom, 1st of all, my comment about the Facts was Not aimed at you, so don't get your panties in a Wad and I didn't call anybody a liar.

My point is when people offer up opinion as "Fact", then it misleads everyone that comes along. That is what is wrong with Wikipedia for instance,.

T.C.

[Tom_T]

Tom, 1st of all, my comment about the Facts was Not aimed at you, so don't get your panties in a Wad and I didn't call anybody a liar.

My point is when people offer up opinion as "Fact", then it misleads everyone that comes along. That is what is wrong with Wikipedia for instance,.

T.C.

Okay TC, I've pulled my panties out of my crack & feel much better this morning! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

All of those seemingly negative responses piled on top of each other just hit me wrong late last night, after spending the weekend trying to figure out whether or not the "mysterious disappearing clunk in the crankcase" of our 88 Westy is a bad bearing/etc. - needing a new engine - taking more $$'s away from my 914 resto!
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif) M#@$%%F$^*%$#@S*&O%$B*&@#!!!!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/headbang.gif)

So folks -

Sorry, but the only documentation which I've found on the Porsche AG putting an end to the 914S marketing campaign in the US/Canada, was the paragraph from the Feb 73 R&T, as well as other similar 2nd & 3rd hand sources in those 2 books in my first post referring to the "word from on high" to stop using it. Nothing first hand nor an official PAG document, but it's pretty clear what did happen from the R&T quote & I have no doubt that it did happen pretty much the way stated & P+A passed along the request to R&T not to use the "914S" in their article.

I think that MDG/Mike G, Pat G., TC (& maybe URY) got mislead skimming through the write-ups documentation of the period on the 914S story, & then focused more on some later opining about marketing strategies that I was doing as part of the "discussion" - thinking that I was instead trying to make that the focus of the topic post or trying to justify calling/badging 914-2.0's as "914S" (I was not, but anyone who wants to do so "for fun" should at least know the actual details of the story as much as can be known) - instead of what I intended: a clarification to others new to the subject that the 914S marketing campaign wasn't a few week long sidebar internal primarily or only to the Porsche AG & Porsche+Audi (US/Canada) entities.

I think that some folks are just the types who put the "914S" into the category of NARM (Not A Real Model - which it was not as far as the factory was concerned, even if P+A would've preferred that be the model name) - similar to the way the 356/911/912 fanatics put all 914's as NARP (Not A Real Porsche) - and so in their minds they just write it off as some silly marketing gimmick - which in truth it was, in the same way as was the "The __[blank]__ Porsche" series of the period! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

But I didn't want newbies to the history on this reading their comments as if it was a few week long "flash in the pan," which it was was not.

However, their concern is probably that someone will then think that it was somehow a "real model" - which I do not believe is the case in the way in which I chose to present it - particularly with the short & sweet "No" side of the issue put first from the outset & supported further in with the Feb. 73 R&T paragraph posted, which is pretty straightforward & obvious - i.e.: not really needing further "documentation" than showing the only 2 ways in which 914/4 2.0s' were badged & the later R&T statement.

Whereas, the "yes" side merely is presenting contemporaneous documentation (P+A ads & sales materials) which is not readily available to everyone today without digging for it over the months it took me to read & collect it all (i.e.: saving others the time & trouble).

My intent again in posting this topic, is basically to present the story/history of the 914S & 914SC marketing campaigns with period documentation - NOT to debate it's pro's, cons, nor pooh-pooh the idea.

What I would've expected from other 914 enthusiasts in such a presentation - & still hope will happen - would be to add to the documentation posted on either side of the story & add constructively to the knowledge base - NOT to try to debate it, complain about being too much to read through, cast it off with flippancy, nor to run me down for having the nerve to post such "official heresy" in the first place.

As far as I know, the USA only sold fully loaded 914 2L's for the first half of the model year or maybe as far as Feb.-March 73 or so, but unfortunately Porsche+Audi here couldn't convince Porsche AG to use the 914S badging. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

At least Porsche+Audi here WAS successful from the start in convincing them only to market them as a "PORSCHE" only without that confusing & eventually counterproductive VW-Porsche badge on the back! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

So we have to be satisfied that it is a provable point that Porsche+Audi here at least marketed them & talked about them as "914S" for the first half of the 73 model year! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

... and that IS exactly what the sales guy at LA Porsche+Audi called them when I went in there in December 72 for a "Winter Break Field Trip"!!!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) - with my classmate whose parents eventually got him one for graduation in Spring 73!

So - let's put the debating of the issue of it aside, & focus on filling in any missing details instead, as well as adding pix of period documentation - especially for the "missing" 914SC side of the story which so far is not covered except by a few of my references.

Again - Thanx TC for posting the additional pages of the full R&T article - yes it was Feb. 73, but the 74 reference I think might have been either a misprint or reference to the next coming model year.

And come on the rest of you out there - dig through your 914 archives & add some interesting related period documentation to add to the "knowledge base" here.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif)

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