Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Best model year for building Autocross/HPDE car?
Richard Casto
post Aug 2 2005, 06:50 PM
Post #1


Blue Sky Motorsports, LLC
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,465
Joined: 2-August 05
From: Durham, NC
Member No.: 4,523
Region Association: South East States



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
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porsche Rescue
post Aug 2 2005, 07:00 PM
Post #2


Saving and Enjoying Old Porsches
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,978
Joined: 31-December 02
From: Bend, Oregon
Member No.: 64
Region Association: None



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.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dave_Darling
post Aug 2 2005, 07:05 PM
Post #3


914 Idiot
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 14,981
Joined: 9-January 03
From: Silicon Valley / Kailua-Kona
Member No.: 121
Region Association: Northern California



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
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
brant
post Aug 2 2005, 07:40 PM
Post #4


914 Wizard
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,617
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Colorado
Member No.: 47
Region Association: Rocky Mountains



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
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GaroldShaffer
post Aug 2 2005, 08:22 PM
Post #5


You bought another 914?
*****

Group: Benefactors
Posts: 7,620
Joined: 27-June 03
From: Portage, IN
Member No.: 865
Region Association: None



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)


Attached image(s)
Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
nebreitling
post Aug 2 2005, 08:24 PM
Post #6


Member Emeritus
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,314
Joined: 26-March 03
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 478



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.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Richard Casto
post Aug 2 2005, 08:36 PM
Post #7


Blue Sky Motorsports, LLC
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,465
Joined: 2-August 05
From: Durham, NC
Member No.: 4,523
Region Association: South East States



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)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Richard Casto
post Aug 2 2005, 08:45 PM
Post #8


Blue Sky Motorsports, LLC
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,465
Joined: 2-August 05
From: Durham, NC
Member No.: 4,523
Region Association: South East States



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.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Randal
post Aug 2 2005, 09:03 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,446
Joined: 29-May 03
From: Los Altos, CA
Member No.: 750



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


My guess is that Nat's car is lighter than Trekkors.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Series9
post Aug 2 2005, 09:17 PM
Post #10


Lesbians taste like chicken.
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 5,444
Joined: 22-August 04
From: DeLand, FL
Member No.: 2,602
Region Association: South East States



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


Attached image(s)
Attached Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
J P Stein
post Aug 2 2005, 09:24 PM
Post #11


Irrelevant old fart
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 8,797
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Vancouver, WA
Member No.: 45
Region Association: None



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)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TravisNeff
post Aug 2 2005, 09:30 PM
Post #12


914 Guru
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 5,082
Joined: 20-March 03
From: Mesa, AZ
Member No.: 447
Region Association: Southwest Region



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.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ppickerell
post Aug 2 2005, 10:46 PM
Post #13


914 addicted
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,679
Joined: 14-October 03
From: Pleasanton, CA.
Member No.: 1,246



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.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
brant
post Aug 2 2005, 10:48 PM
Post #14


914 Wizard
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,617
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Colorado
Member No.: 47
Region Association: Rocky Mountains



QUOTE (Richard Casto @ Aug 2 2005, 07:45 PM)
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.

Richard,

you can back date the bumpers in metal (rubber) or glass.
Sounds like with your classification plans you'll need metal

the body structure behind the bumper is slightly different front and rear.
but the back dated bumper will hide/cover 99% of that.
and weight wise its probably only 10lbs difference in the body structure.

So Ideally the early car would be 10lbs lighter for bumpers, 10lbs lighter for ventillation, 10lbs lighter for seat, 30 lbs lighter for doors...

the point is that it adds up..
but 60-80lbs in the end isn't going to make or break the car unless your talking full tilt race car.

I'm happy to say that I was able to get my car down to 1850 with metal body panels..... although it is far from street legal or far from stock. (does have a passenger seat thou)

brant
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
nebreitling
post Aug 2 2005, 11:02 PM
Post #15


Member Emeritus
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,314
Joined: 26-March 03
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 478



QUOTE (Randal @ Aug 2 2005, 07:03 PM)
QUOTE
my quite stripped down '75 with fiberglass bumpers is quite light  


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

definitely it is... that /6 ain't light.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
grantsfo
post Aug 2 2005, 11:10 PM
Post #16


Arrrrhhhh!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 16-March 03
Member No.: 433
Region Association: None



QUOTE (914RS @ Aug 2 2005, 07:17 PM)
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

Yep go for the solid chassis. Makes things so much easier.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trekkor
post Aug 2 2005, 11:12 PM
Post #17


I do things...
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 7,809
Joined: 2-December 03
From: Napa, Ca
Member No.: 1,413
Region Association: Northern California



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

KT
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joe Ricard
post Aug 3 2005, 05:02 AM
Post #18


CUMONIWANNARACEU
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 6,811
Joined: 5-January 03
From: Gautier, MS
Member No.: 92



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)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Richard Casto
post Aug 4 2005, 02:42 PM
Post #19


Blue Sky Motorsports, LLC
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,465
Joined: 2-August 05
From: Durham, NC
Member No.: 4,523
Region Association: South East States



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.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st May 2024 - 06:24 PM