Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Legend of the "914 S" & "914 SC"
914World.com > The 914 Forums > Originality and History
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
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. dry.gif

Period!

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. dry.gif


<edit>
CLIFF NOTES VERSION: 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"? 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! 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! dry.gif

But we will have to ask that some of our Brit Teeners out there (both of you! - just kidding! 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:
Click to view attachment

.

Rest of the World's 914 2.0 Badging:
Click to view attachment

.

<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! blink.gif huh.gif 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! 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.

Click to view attachment Click to view attachment

.

.

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":
Click to view attachment Click to view attachment

.

... continued ....
Tom_T
... continued from previous post ...

Inner Pages 2 & 3 of 4 page Porsche+Audi 914 Sales Brochure referring to "914 S":
Click to view attachment Click to view attachment

.

.

Front Cover & following pages in order of 12 page Porsche+Audi 914 Sales Brochure referring to "914 S":

Click to view attachment Click to view attachment Click to view attachment Click to view attachment ...

.

... continued ....
URY914
Explain this.....

biggrin.gif

Click to view attachment
Tom_T
... continued from previous post ....

... continued ... Front Cover & following pages in order of 12 page Porsche+Audi 914 Sales Brochure referring to "914 S":
Click to view attachment Click to view attachment Click to view attachment Click to view attachment Click to view attachment Click to view attachment Click to view attachment

.

... continued ....
Tom_T
QUOTE(URY914 @ Jun 3 2010, 08:16 PM) *

Explain this.....

biggrin.gif

Click to view attachment


Sorry - NARB on a NARP. dry.gif

It's a made-up badge - my guess being the "-S" from a 911-S badge is attached/welded to a "914" (as I was going to try myself just for fun) - given the wide spacing & out-of-alignment from the 914 to the S on it.

Anyone can make anything up like that, but RJMII's at least look like they're correctly made badges! biggrin.gif
http://www.vintagetransrebuilds.com/transr...14s-emblem.aspx

... he also makes metal NARP badges too, but that doesn't mean that they were ever badged that way from the dealers or factory! dry.gif
Tom_T
Back to the documentation, after that sidetrack ...

... continued from previous post ....

... continued ... Back Cover of 12 page Porsche+Audi 914 Sales Brochure referring to "914 S":
Click to view attachment

.

.

Then - amongst the familiar "The __[blank]__ Porsche" series of print ads, there were the early 1973 MY ads during the second half of 1972 which touted the "914 S" as "The Super Porsche" was in the first one below (in both color & B&W). This was later changed to tout the "914 2.0" by the 1974 MY ads in the second ad, but oddly it was just reformatted with the text from bottom to top & still used of what appears to be the very same 1973 MY 914 photo - note the 70-73 MY positive side stripes, rather than the 74-76 MY negative side stripes as in the 3rd pic (from the 74 MY brochures).

Pix of Print Ads for 914S, 914-2.0 & 74 MY 914 with Negative Side Stripes:
Click to view attachment Click to view attachment Click to view attachment

.

.

Whereas, later 73 MY Print ads only referred to the 2.0L engine - rather than either the earlier "914 S" or later "914 2.0" nomenclature, as in "The Action Porsche" & "The City Porsche" print ads below.

"The Action Porsche" & "The City Porsche" print ads with reference only to 2.0L engine:
Click to view attachment Click to view attachment

.

.

So the use of the "914 S" nomenclature was pretty prevalent from the introduction of the 1973 models - including the "new" 2 Liter 4 cylinder model meant to replace the now discontinued 914-6. Most Teeners know that the 2L 4 turned out more power than the 1.7L denoting the "Super" for the "S" - 95 hp with the GA motor - which is sometimes listed as 91 hp - depending upon whether DIN or SAE numbers were used (vs. 100 hp from the higher compression "non-California-smog/unleaded gas" Euro/World GB motor - which had 8.0:1 vs. 7.6:1 in the GA).

But what made it "Special" as well? confused24.gif
... Well, for the initial 73 MY only the 2 Liter model by either name came "loaded" with the Appearance Group's & Performance Group's list of options at no additional charge - usually listed as "N/C" on the window stickers - ostensibly to help offset the perceived loss of value of dropping the 914-6 from the line-up, with the 914S/914-2.0 at essentially the same price as the 71 914-6.

These "included options" or "upgrades" included:

> Appearance Group Optional Equipment (comparable to Euro "Comfort Group") -
..... Chrome Front & Rear Bumpers
..... Fog/Driving Lights with Chrome (plastic) Grills in the Front Bumper
..... Black Vinyl Leatherette Covering with Chrome Trim (polished anodized aluminum in fact) at the rollbar/sail panels
..... Black Vinyl Leatherette Covered Center Console with 3 Gauges - Clock ("Kienzle" type), Oil Temperature Gauge ("wide red band" type), & voltmeter (same type 73-76)
......... ~ see here for gauge & other MY fitment info.: http://www.p914.com/p914_gauges_console.htm
..... Leather covered steering wheel (later 74-76 MY's switched to Vinyl Leatherette)
..... Leather Shifter Boot
..... Loop Pile Carpet (sometimes called "Velour" in the ads, etc.)

> Performance Group Optional Equipment (comparable to Euro "Sport Group") -
..... Front & Rear Anti-sway Stabilization Bars ("Sway Bars" for short - 16 mm front & 15 mm rear)
..... 5.5J x 15 Lightweight Forged Alloy Wheels - now commonly referred to as "Fuchs 2 Liter Alloys"* - with ...
..... 165HR15 Sport or Performance Tires, ofter Dunlop SP57 tires, as well as other tires from Michelin, Continental & Semperit
.......... (the 1.7's had 165SR15 size on "standard" 5.5J x 15 steel wheels - both usually are considered /80 ~ 165/80R15 in HR or SR)

* Note that most 914-2.0's from the "914 S" era were subject to the "BO Recall Campaign" released in Dec. 1972, which required that the dealers check that the Alloy Wheels were in fact of the part number ending in -01 with the machined inset around the center hole to receive the "new for 73 MY" self-centering lip around the front wheel "hub-centric hubs" - as opposed to some early -00 part nos. produced with a flat backed hub seat to fit earlier 914s as either an option or flat-out mistake by PAG &/or Fuchs.

More information on this recall - as well as the HO Recall for the battery & engine bay fuel lines applicable to all 914's - can be found at the link below of all recalls for the 914 series (the blue links in the chart link to pix of the actual factory & VWoA letters & instructions to the dealers, which Jeff Bowlsby has been kind enough to collect for us all, along with the rest of the excellent 914 info. there). PCNA is still obligated to perform any NHTSA required safety recalls - even at this late date - so long as it has never been performed on a particular car, so call the PCNA Customer Care 800# with your VIN & inquire.

http://www.bowlsby.net/914/Classic/Recalls.htm

.

Black & White Ad as above for the "914 S", with a detail of the text showing the "Extra Equipment" included in the 73 MY 2L's base price:
Click to view attachment Click to view attachment

.

... continued ....
Tom_T
... continued ....

More legible detail pix from Hi-Rez pix of my 12 page Early-73 914 Sales Brochure, with the "included" Optional Equipment on the 914S:
Click to view attachment

.

... better pic of back cover comparative Specifications at next post ....
Tom_T
... continued ....

More legible detail pix from Hi-Rez pix of my 12 page Early-73 914 Sales Brochure, with the "included" Optional Equipment on the 914S:
Click to view attachment

.

... continued ....
Tom_T
... continued ....

So when did the "914 S" terminology get dropped? confused24.gif
... I'd estimate that "word came down from on high" at Porsche/PAG to their USA marketing arm of Porsche+Audi sometime around December 1972 or January 1973, judging from the consecutive months' Jan.`73 "Motor Trend" and Feb. `73 "Road & Track" Road Test articles covering the "new for 73 MY" 914 with the new 2.0L Flat 4 Engine by either name - and assuming that the actual tests and article writing occurred in the month prior to the official dates on these magazines, as well as the publication/release date typically being late in the month before the date on any magazine.

Article text excerpts on the change from "914S" between the Jan. 73 MT on the 914S & Feb. 73 R&T on the "914/2":
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment

... continued ....
Tom_T
... continued ....

... continued 1/73 MT .... Article text excerpts on the change from "914S" between the Jan. 73 MT on the 914S & Feb. 73 R&T on the "914/2":
Click to view attachment

... continued ....
Tom_T
... continued ....

... continued 2/73 R&T .... Article text excerpts on the change from "914S" between the Jan. 73 MT on the 914S & Feb. 73 R&T on the "914/2":
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment

... continued ....
Tom_T
... continued ....

... continued 2/73 R&T .... Article text excerpts on the change from "914S" between the Jan. 73 MT on the 914S & Feb. 73 R&T on the "914/2":
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment

.

.

So from this, I suppose we could refer to all 1973 MY 914's with the factory 2.0L GA engine as the "914 S" - so long as they were originally sold here in the USA during "The Super Porsche - 914S" marketing campaign between the opening of the 73 MY sales around August 72 through at least December 72, and possibly as late as Feb. 73 - and possibly Canada as well, assuming that Porsche+Audi used the same marketing campaign there, which I believe they did.

However, I'm sure other owners of the 914-2.0 model may want to call theirs a 914S too - so whatever one chooses - at least you now know the story behind the mythical or legendary - or both - "914 S"!

So how about some others adding info on the Brit's "914 SC" now?
popcorn[1].gif popcorn[1].gif popcorn[1].gif popcorn[1].gif
zymurgist
QUOTE(URY914 @ Jun 3 2010, 11:16 PM) *

Explain this.....

biggrin.gif

Click to view attachment


914-6 badge + a Dremel?
ME733
QUOTE(zymurgist @ Jun 4 2010, 07:34 AM) *

QUOTE(URY914 @ Jun 3 2010, 11:16 PM) *

Explain this.....

biggrin.gif

Click to view attachment


914-6 badge + a Dremel?

.................Is that emblem one piece, and factory made, or did you make it yourself?........
ME733
I purchased my 914-S about two years ago.....This was a california dealer sold car, I am the third owner.(89101 original miles).a no rust survivor,previous owners took care of this car...previous owners all claimed that it was purchased as a 914-S....I made a list of options on the car as follows...1).leather boot around shifter,2)adjustable passenger seat,3)drivers side mirror,4)leather covered steering wheel,5) ugraded radio,6) fuchs (and mahle wheels)..7).front and rear sway bars...8),2.o engine,9)center console, guages, and storage compartment(under tray).10).arm rests with storage,11) tinted windows,12)fog lights,13)aluminum door sills,14)loop pile carpet,15)..chrome bumpers,16 dealer installed rubberised undercoating.....I wonder how many more options i should look for ...other than a rear window defroster this car has all options I know about.....so far....I look forward to hearing from other 914-S owners and specifics of their car.
URY914
QUOTE(ME733 @ Jun 4 2010, 05:44 AM) *

QUOTE(zymurgist @ Jun 4 2010, 07:34 AM) *

QUOTE(URY914 @ Jun 3 2010, 11:16 PM) *

Explain this.....

biggrin.gif

Click to view attachment


914-6 badge + a Dremel?

.................Is that emblem one piece, and factory made, or did you make it yourself?........


Not mine. I just found the picture.
Tom_T
QUOTE(ME733 @ Jun 4 2010, 05:44 AM) *

QUOTE(zymurgist @ Jun 4 2010, 07:34 AM) *

QUOTE(URY914 @ Jun 3 2010, 11:16 PM) *


914-6 badge + a Dremel?

.................Is that emblem one piece, and factory made, or did you make it yourself?........


That may be it Murry - since it has the "dash" in there & an odd offset to the connecting bar at the upper-left loop of the "S" - as seen in the enhanced view of it below - vs. - RMJII's design without the dash in the pic below that, which is closer to the way they printed it as "914S" or more ofter as "914 S" on the ads & brochures which I'd posted above.

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment

.

I'm considering eventually getting a set of the dual logo Lloyd plush floor mats in dark tan/saddle color for daily use, with "PORSCHE" in black or dark gray, over the red or maroon "914-S" - by having the "6" in 914-6 embroidery modified to read "914 S". I'll also get one of RMJII's "914 S" badges & set it up to temporarily hook it over somewhere on the interior or exterior for fun - all just rock the boat & please me, being the kurr dawg I am! laugh.gif

However - all you CW's settle down, cuz I'd pull those out & use Coco mats in tan dot on black for CdE events, like Steve G. has in his Sahara Beige 73 914-2.0 in the O&H "The few, the rare...." nailed topic. biggrin.gif

Where are the Brits!!?? confused24.gif
popcorn[1].gif
Tom_T
QUOTE(ME733 @ Jun 4 2010, 06:15 AM) *

I purchased my 914-S about two years ago.....This was a california dealer sold car, I am the third owner.(89101 original miles).a no rust survivor,previous owners took care of this car...previous owners all claimed that it was purchased as a 914-S....I made a list of options on the car as follows...1).leather boot around shifter,2)adjustable passenger seat,3)drivers side mirror,4)leather covered steering wheel,5) ugraded radio,6) fuchs (and mahle wheels)..7).front and rear sway bars...8),2.o engine,9)center console, guages, and storage compartment(under tray).10).arm rests with storage,11) tinted windows,12)fog lights,13)aluminum door sills,14)loop pile carpet,15)..chrome bumpers,16 dealer installed rubberised undercoating.....I wonder how many more options i should look for ...other than a rear window defroster this car has all options I know about.....so far....I look forward to hearing from other 914-S owners and specifics of their car.



Hey Murry Thanx! smile.gif

Were these from your 914's window sticker, dealer sales invoice/bill of sale, COA or ?? confused24.gif

Just to clarify for others reading this on the options on yours that you mentioned above, this is what I've found regarding them in my research on options, although often they'd list certain "features" as "N/C" on the window stickers along with true "options" -

1).leather boot around shifter, <App. Grp. & Std. on 914S>
2)adjustable passenger seat, <Std. on all 914s 72-76 MY>
3)drivers side mirror, <Std. on all 914s 70-76 MY, Passenger side mirror was an available Option & maybe Std. in some Euro Country(s)>
4)leather covered steering wheel, <App. Grp. & Std. on 914S>
5) upgraded radio, <Available Dealer Option for various radios @ all years & models, although factory did offer a "radio ready option" of antenna & speakers>
6) fuchs (and mahle wheels), <Perf. Grp. & Std. on 914S - the Mahles were "extra goodies" that you got with your 914 IIRC>
7).front and rear sway bars, <Perf. Grp. & Std. on 914S>
8),2.o engine, <Baseline for "914 S"/"914 2.0" model, but never an upgradable option on a 1.7 or 1.8 914 - it was either 1.7/1.8 or 2.0 model & engine>
9)center console, guages, <App. Grp. & Std. on 914S>
10? ... and storage compartment(under tray).10).arm rests with storage, <App. Grp. & Std. on 914S - I think you meant these 2 together with storage tray being under the flip-up hinged center cushion?>
11) tinted windows, <Available Option @ all years & models, as either tinted windshield or "Tinted Glass All Around" - which was both the windshield & side windows (wings & roll-ups) all tinted - always with safety glass in USA & never were the rear windows tinted, since they were shaded by the rollbar & sails anyway>
12)fog lights, <App. Grp. & Std. on 914S>
13)aluminum door sills, <Std. on all 914s 70-73 MY, later switched to black plastic ones for late-73 & 74-76 MYs>
14)loop pile carpet, <App. Grp. & Std. on 914S>
15)..chrome bumpers, <App. Grp. & Std. on 914S>
16 dealer installed rubberised undercoating <Available Option @ all years & models from factory or by dealers - mine also has dealer undercoating>

Another option which should be found on most or all USA 914s, is the "USA Equipment" on the COA &/or window sticker/Dealer B.O.S. - which included the US-DOT approved/required items, such as:
> laminated safety glass windshield (clear or tinted),
> 3-point safety belts appropriate to the MY (retractable starting in 72 or 73 MY)
> smog equipment & engine(s) as appropriate to the specific MY,
.... (IIRC - 69-72 basic smog controls, 73 decreased CO limits & added unleaded gas only 73-76, 74-76 further decreased CO limits, 75-76 added catalytic converter & air pump - each step reducing the hp output of the respective MY's engines)
> impact resistant bumpers appropriate to the MYs
.... (73 = Front 3 mph Bumper Guards ["Tits"], 74 = F & R "Tits", 75-76 = 5 mph "big bumpers" - & 75-76 with extra smaller "tits" required in CA for sure & MD too IIRC),
> Side-impact beams in doors starting after early production 73 MY

However, for ease of production & distribution/redirection, many of these ended up on all 914's worldwide, such as the "big bumpers", 3-point seat belts & side impact beams in the doors.

Additionally, all California 914s should also indicate on the window sticker &/or Dealer BOS/Invoice - a $15+/- "[California] Smog Test Fee", & in some MY's & on some engines/models there were 49 state & CA versions, but the 2.0's were all 50 state versions for the respective MY.

If your 914's window sticker lacks this fee but is touted as a CA car - then it's highly likely that it was NOT originally sold by a CA dealership when new, and a later smog test should show on the earliest CA DMV registration as an "imported" out-of-state vehicle (unless brought in after the smog exemption for pre-75 MY vehicles in the mid-1990's). Unfortunately, PAG's/PCNA's "Kardex" records don't indicate this, so a COA won't indicate it at all.

However, a continuous CA DMV registration chain from the date first sold/registered in CA consistent with the car's specific MY as shown on the DMV Reg. card (&/or by doing a DMV registration information request for a fee) may be another way to confirm a CA 914. Likewise, a continuous chain of service/maintenance records in CA could reasonably document a CA 914. {I had to use both types to document for PCNA that their records were in error by showing that my 73 MY 914-2.0 was supposedly first sold in Connecticut in 9/73 - more than a year after it was built in 8/72 according to my VIN sticker & chassis no. (which was not at all likely, as "hot selling" as they were then), when in fact my personal first CA DMV registration card from when I first bought it used/3 yrs. old on 12/26/75 shows that it was first sold in CA on 11/9/72!}

That's not to say that a particular 914 didn't "live" some or most of its life in CA - just that it probably was not one of the +/- 40% of all 914's which were originally sold new by Porsche+Audi dealerships located in CA.

Conversely, it's possible that some 914's so tested for CA smog compliance, were later diverted for sale in other states, or purchased here in CA & then relocated out of state later - or even immediately, esp. with the shortages of 2.0's in certain points of the production where "out-of-staters" would come here, buy a 914 & immediately drive/transport it to their own home state; & dealers could also work swaps between themselves - even interstate - as they still do today (as we did in-state for our 88 Westy to get what we equipment wanted in Dove Blue).


FYI All -
Various factory options & their factory code numbers are listed here by Jeff Bowlsby, with which you may have to "help out" the PCNA folks doing your COA, since they often misinterpret the old codes with newer ones - such as Pat Garvey's 72 914's "Norwegian Equipment", or their misreading the "#31 Beige" interior color on my 73 914S/914-2.0 as black!

Remember that at PCNA & PAG - they're human, numbers & codes have been changed by Porsche over the years, and their records are old, incomplete & sometimes in error - so sometimes their "Certificates of Authenticity" (COAs) are not all that "authentic" with regard to all of their information thereon, and you have to take time to work with them to get things corrected. Here are some sources to do so -

Options -
http://bowlsby.net/914/Classic/OpEq.htm

Accessories -
http://bowlsby.net/914/Classic/914Accessories.htm

Overall 914 Info which Jeff Bowlsby has collected pray.gif
http://bowlsby.net/914/Classic/

... as well as here -
http://www.p914.com/

This info & that here at 914 Info tab above & at p914.com are some great resources for whatever you need to research on your own 914!
smile.gif
Pat Garvey
If you want my opinion....well, you'll get it anyway.

The "S" was a Noth American MARKETING perpsective of Porsche/Audi (remember them?). Not condoned by the Factory, and eventually poo-poo'd.

Remember, only the basic format for sales brochures was provided by the Factory. The "fine points" were left to the importers, of which Porsche/Audi NA was one.

It was a marketing ploy guys. That's it!
Pat

ps: no doubt this will piss some people of, but I was there at the time. Ask me about the first 2.0 sitting in the lot in July '72, when I took delivery of my '72. Could have had the Fuchs from it fo $150.
ME733
........PAT, ...I disagree with your perspective on the matter......The advertising, and Information ...TOM...has collected are Porsche co. produced.....and what about the european 914SC? advertising at the same time...a little too coencidental don't you think?......I believe PORSCHE ,MAY have changed their minds, reguarding marketing..and production.....and producing a fully optioned car, for which the individual options had a higher value...than producing one with them already installed such as the 914-S....Only until the can-am cars were produced, did ALL of the similar options,( as included with the 914-S, ) Appear-reappear as it were ,(excepting the paint job).....as a complete factory optioned 914...all other 914,s, were a roll your own options, if you wanted to pay for them ....It,s very hard to find other 914,s , in other years that have similar or equal options as the 914-S...or ...can-am cars.
SirAndy
QUOTE(zymurgist @ Jun 4 2010, 04:34 AM) *

914-6 badge + a Dremel?

agree.gif

The 914-S badge on the black car is actually mounted on a early factory 914-6.

Judging from the incorrect edges on the lower portion of the S, i suspect the owner took a dremel to his 914-6 badge.

The car in question was also upgraded to a 2.2S motor, which explains the "S" quite nicely ...
shades.gif Andy
Tom_T
QUOTE(Pat Garvey @ Jun 4 2010, 05:55 PM) *

If you want my opinion....well, you'll get it anyway.

The "S" was a Noth American MARKETING perpsective of Porsche/Audi (remember them?). Not condoned by the Factory, and eventually poo-poo'd.

Remember, only the basic format for sales brochures was provided by the Factory. The "fine points" were left to the importers, of which Porsche/Audi NA was one.

It was a marketing ploy guys. That's it!
Pat

ps: no doubt this will piss some people of, but I was there at the time. Ask me about the first 2.0 sitting in the lot in July '72, when I took delivery of my '72. Could have had the Fuchs from it fo $150.

It may surprise you, but ... agree.gif

I believe that is pretty much the case which I just presented with all of the documentation for same, in the preceding Pat. So you're not off base, it was simply put - a marketing terminology or nomenclature to call it a "914 S" in the brochures, & to "sell the sizzle, not the steak" in the advertising of it.

What I find odd is that Porsche home office was so shortsighted & two-faced about it.

Shortsighted in not seeing that the "914 S" would've probably helped them sell more 2.0's - and probably did so in the first half of the 73 model year, and maybe would've sold even better if badged as a 914 S!?

And the USA was 60%+/- of their market for all Porsches, & at least they were smart enough not to double brand them as "VW-Porsche" over here, so why not follow through with consistent model line-up naming/badging between the 911 & 914 series!? I mean, who cannot tell the difference between a 911S & a 914S anyway - that's just BS & illogical on PAG's part! dry.gif

Two-faced because - while they had a hissy fit over the USA branch's use of 914S & put the kibosh on it almost immediately - although I think that they waited for 6 months thinking about it & watching how it worked, since I don't agree that it was a surprise to them - because they had corporate governance then too,

.... but they allowed the British distributor to continue to use the 914SC through to the end of of the 1976 MY & end of 914 production! WTF.gif

I mean really! .... if it were really a problem to have had a 914S over here, then calling it a 914SC in the British Isles should've been an equal problem relative to their claimed confusion with the 911S. ... or why not then call them all 914SC's?

IMHO - there was more to it than what the "outside cover story" tells, because it just doesn't "smell right" even today, and it certainly is illogical & irrational - the opposite of which the precise Teutonic types like to claim of themselves!

In any case - the facts are the facts in this matter -

1. Porsche+Audi (NA) did in fact clearly advertise & promote the 914 2.0 as a "914 S" from Summer 1972 to December 1972 or January 1973 or so, with Porsche's/PAG's implicit or tacit approval -

... because PAG could clearly have shut down the "914S marketing campaign" long before Dec. 72 - if not immediately, had they wanted to, and they certainly saw the marketing & sales materials at some point early on. After all, they did get US magazines in West Germany back then.

2. Those 73 MY 914-2.0/914S cars came loaded with the extra Appearance & Performance Groups' options in the base price, i.e.: at no extra cost for that `73 model year only -

... except as Murray stated on the 74 MY 2.0 LE's, which in & of itself was in fact an extra cost item in a package deal over & above the base price for a 74 MY 914-2.0 - so it still wasn't "loaded in the 2.0 model's base cost".

In fact, the 73 MY 914S/914-2.0 was only about $1000+/- more than a base level 73 MY 914 1.7 - & with the extra cost of the extra Appearance & Performance Groups' options & alloy wheels of any type added to the base price of that model - the difference effectively disappears! Just look at the 73 MY's 1.7 & 2.0 models' window stickers on Jeff Bowlsby's 914 website if you doubt that fact.

So for a little extra dough, you got about 1/4 to 1/3 more HP in a much better equipped chassis - remembering that for the 73 MY the California 1.7's had been detuned to 69 hp from the "49 state 1.7's" 76 hp, vs. the 2.0's 91 hp.

Pat - I know that you had the option to pay $5099 for that 73 2.0 sitting in the lot vs. your 72 My 1.7 at around $4000 with at least some of the options & the better 80 hp 1.7 motor, but when comparing the same 73 MY 1.7 & 2.0 - the economics are a bit closer. Even in 1975 when I looked for my used 914, I still felt it was a better deal to pay $4500 for a 73 2.0 - over the $3000-4200 that I was seeing for a lesser equipped & lower powered with tail-shifter 70-72 1.7 model or even a wheezier 73 1.7L, as many folks have opted since.
Tom_T
QUOTE(SirAndy @ Jun 4 2010, 06:44 PM) *

QUOTE(zymurgist @ Jun 4 2010, 04:34 AM) *

914-6 badge + a Dremel?

agree.gif

The 914-S badge on the black car is actually mounted on a early factory 914-6.

Judging from the incorrect edges on the lower portion of the S, i suspect the owner took a dremel to his 914-6 badge.

The car in question was also upgraded to a 2.2S motor, which explains the "S" quite nicely ...
shades.gif Andy

shades.gif
Well there you go Andy - you & he just clearly illustrated Porsche's concern over the confusion of 914S'es being 911s'es - in this case with a 911S motor to boot! laugh.gif

Oh wait - that's why they took a perfectly fine 911T 2.0 flat 6 & detuned it from 120 hp to 110 hp before they stuck them in 914-6's - to avoid that perennial 914-6 & 911T confusion! lol-2.gif

Maybe they should've just avoided all the "real Porsche" & "real sports car" confusion all together - and just dropped those tail-heavy 911's from the line-up - & just put the good engines in the better cars in the first place, so that all these motor swaps wouldn't be necessary!!!!
av-943.gif
MDG
Here's my perspective. As someone who has owned a printing company for 17 years, I can tell you it's amazing how many things get produced, distributed, then recalled, redesigned and re-printed. Happens all the time; with banks, pharmaceutical companies, retailers, manufacturers etc., etc. It could be legal reasons such as copyright infringement. It could be the Head Office gets wind of it and drops the hammer. In major corporations the territories often work independently from the HO. Sometimes they get their wrists slapped.

I've know of the 914S story for decades - I have the same brochure Tom has posted on several occasions that came with my first '73 I drove as my DD in the 80s. Both my 73's - my old one and my current Phoenix Red - are fully optioned (including the rear window defroster) 2.0 914's.

The story I have always heard is just what Pat has said every time this comes up; Porsche NA decided to add some marketing spit & polish by 'creating' the 914S - a fully optioned version of the then new 2.0 914. They produced the literature, sent it out and then got the cease and desist from Stuttgart. Simple. Happens all the time. Kinda like the Beatles butcher cover.
Tom_T
QUOTE(MDG @ Jun 5 2010, 06:20 AM) *

Here's my perspective. As someone who has owned a printing company for 17 years, I can tell you it's amazing how many things get produced, distributed, then recalled, redesigned and re-printed. Happens all the time; with banks, pharmaceutical companies, retailers, manufacturers etc., etc. It could be legal reasons such as copyright infringement. It could be the Head Office gets wind of it and drops the hammer. In major corporations the territories often work independently from the HO. Sometimes they get their wrists slapped.

I've know of the 914S story for decades - I have the same brochure Tom has posted on several occasions that came with my first '73 I drove as my DD in the 80s. Both my 73's - my old one and my current Phoenix Red - are fully optioned (including the rear window defroster) 2.0 914's.

The story I have always heard is just what Pat has said every time this comes up; Porsche NA decided to add some marketing spit & polish by 'creating' the 914S - a fully optioned version of the then new 2.0 914. They produced the literature, sent it out and then got the cease and desist from Stuttgart. Simple. Happens all the time. Kinda like the Beatles butcher cover.


Absolutely Mike, for the most part - agree.gif - with you & Pat, that it was nothing more than a marketing gimmick - the same as the ad series of "The __[blank]__ Porsche" ad campaigns of which this was a part or subset. I believe that I stated so above, & that their reason for adding the extra AG & PG options as "included" was to make it more comparable with the 914-6 which it was replacing.

My sole purpose for posting this info was to clarify & put to rest the subject as to the facts of the matters for all those out there who are or may later be curious about the subject (prompted in fact by some questions from others), which has not been done specifically as it's own topic in O&H - & it IS part of the 914's history.

And I was there & had the brochure too back in the day 38 & 41 years ago in person as a young adult, as a car crazy teenager Junior/Senior in High School when the 914's were released in 1969 - as well as a car crazy 20-21 year old Junior/Senior in college when the 914S marketing campaign started for the release of the then "new" 2 Liter 914 model.

However, it was not a quickly retracted campaign as Mike & Pat imply. Nor do I think it should just be "blown off" as some crazy & irresponsible market guy's brash act, which got his hands slapped, and nothing more. It was in fact a well thought out, planned & executed broad based marketing campaign to introduce a new 914 (sub-)model to the North American marketplace, which lasted a long period of time as ad campaigns go! And one at least in part responsible for the best sales volume model year ever for the 914, since about 60% of them were sold here in the USA (not counting Canada), wherein more 73 MY 914-2.0's were sold than in any other of the three 74-76 by a large margin, as in the chart below prepared by PCA with data from Porsche & PCNA.

Click to view attachment

Here's my perspective and personal opinions as someone with my own business since 1983, involved in some major corporations before that, and some formal education in marketing during my MBA program - but it's still just IMHO & some Sherlock Holmes style deductive reasoning 4 decades later.

My other point in responding to Pat's comment (other than agreeing with him), was that IMHO the US marketing gurus probably were on the right track & more consistent in "branding" terminology & better for marketing the 914 2L's as a "914S" - as opposed to PAG's schizophrenic "branding" of the 911 series with letters (T, L, E, S, SC), while the 914 series was "branded" with numbers denoting engine type/size (-6, 1.7, 1.8, 2.0).

Clearly today we can see that it was a mistake for them to have branded this fine sports car as a "VW-Porsche" in the rest of the world - even if everybody cannot agree that the individual sub-models' inconsistent branding was detrimental. However, you all should take note that since that time - sub-models in all series have instead been consistently branded by Porsche by the letter convention - not engine size convention (924S, 928S, Boxster S, etc.).

If I had been PAG's Director of Marketing back in the day, then I would've strongly recommended using the same system as the predecessor 911 series & 356 series, by adding letters to denote sub-models - which has the added benefit of not needing to be changed as the 1.7 changed to 1.8, or for various 6 cylinder displacements. In that hypothetical case & assuming that you started in the initial 1970 MY, then the 2.0 (& later 72 MY 2.2/2.4) 914-6 would've instead been the 914S (so the guy with the dremeled badge had the right idea), then the 1.7 & 1.8 would've instead both been the 914T or 914L or maybe just 914 for all MYs, and then the 73-76 914/4 2.0 would've been the 911E or 914T if not used on the 1.7/1.8 (say! ... now there's a whole new set of "custom badges" we can all get to thoroughly confuse everybody).

But this is all just an academic hypothetical discussion on this point on my part, so don't other CW's "get your shorts in a bunch," nor those new to the world of 914s think that Porsche ever considered this way of denoting the 914's (as far as I know, they may or may not have ever even discussed it).

And I certainly would've "avoided like the plague" the ill-conceived co-branding of the VW-Porsche anywhere, even if the JV produced it and marketed it in certain regions. Again - Porsche+Audi NA had a far better handle on & were much less naive about market perceptions, than were their German counterparts at either VW or Porsche!

Where I disagree with Mike's & Pat's reasoning on this matter, is that in most cases it doesn't take 6+ months to effect the recall of the incorrect collateral materials, as happened in this case. Make that 9+/- months - if you figure that in the pre-digital printing age, they would've needed to produce the brochures & artwork/copy for the print ads 60-90 days in advance of that, in order to have them distributed to the dealerships by say July 72 when we first saw the 2 Liter 914s on the dealer's lots.

Marketing campaigns like that were not just thrown together willy-nilly, but were well thought out marketing strategies with coordinated ad campaigns, collateral sales materials, sales tactics, etc. And the US marketing staff at Porsche+Audi were trying to do their best to work around awkward model branding & marketing as pursued by their European counterparts.

Somebody from Porsche must have at least seen an ad with the 914S in a US or Canadian magazine before the end of the year in 1972 - even if nobody breathed a word about everything before then. Standard operating procedure would be to at least send copies of the marketing & sales info. produced to the home office. Ergo, it must've collected dust for 9 months - & nobody looked at a US/Canadian magazine or newspaper with their 914S ads in that time span either - in order to have ignored & not stopped the 914S sales & marketing program here.

I think that it is far more likely and reasonable to assume or guess, that someone at Porsche/PAG's executive suite was indeed aware of the 914S marketing campaign here in the US & Canada prior to the release of the materials - or at least shortly afterwords, and they instead elected to sit back awhile to see what happened. Then later at some point in early 1973 someone on top pulled the plug - because it was clearly "gone" as a 914S within the ONE month between the publication of the Jan. 73 Motor Trend article noting the "914S", and the Feb. 73 Road & Track article noting the "914/2" & going further to discuss the change & a complete lack of a substitute model designation supplied by Porsche!

In fact, Porsche/PAG pulled the plug late in the game a bit more than halfway through the 1973 model year, but did it so fast that two "promotional" road test articles in consecutive months from major auto industry publishers were using two names for the car, & Porsche did so without the forethought to even suggest using the 914-2.0 designation until the following 74 MY - as evidenced by the two post-change 73 MY ads which I posted above, which merely refer to a 2.0 engine - not even a 914-2.0 at that point!

Clearly somebody from PAG acted quickly, and could certainly have done so back in Summer of 72! Moreover, they acted without any plan of action to redirect the marketing campaign & branding of their new flagship 914 model! IMHO - that was an ill conceived & amateurish move on whomever's part!

idea.gif ... and then there's that nagging "WHY" did they allow the Brits to continue to use the 914SC term in marketing the 914-2.0's in the British Isles (and perhaps elsewhere in the Commonwealth)?? confused24.gif

Again - where are the Brit's to add their two pence?? shades.gif
popcorn[1].gif popcorn[1].gif popcorn[1].gif popcorn[1].gif
MDG
To be honest Tom, I just skimmed through all that. But one thing I noticed; I never implied that the recall of the literature and the '914S' branding happened quickly. I'm not sure where Pat did either. I have no doubt it took months. And if lawyers where involved, months and months. That Motor Trend '914S' road test was probably done in the summer during the press junket on the initial roll out. MT published it when it fit their schedule.

No one disputes all this took place and that for a while the North American marketing guys tried to create a unique for us 914S.

Truthfully, I'm not sure what you are getting at here or what point you are trying to make. "Fact or Myth?" confused24.gif

This story has been around for 37 years and has been fairly well documented during that time as to what transpired, how the name came up and how the idea was trashed.
carr914
QUOTE(Tom_T @ Jun 5 2010, 07:04 AM) *


Shortsighted in not seeing that the "914 S" would've probably helped them sell more 2.0's - and probably did so in the first half of the 73 model year, and maybe would've sold even better if badged as a 914 S!?




What you are forgetting is that the 914 was the Best Selling car Porsche EVER had for the time it was for sale, until they started cranking out Crap in the 90's.

Tom, I think you are making way too much of this, But it may & I hope it educates the Newbies. Marketing & Lawyers very Rarely mix.

T.C.
ME733
............You people are overlooking , sidestepping , some basic facts.....to call the 914-S...a north-american only venture......The cars,914.s, that were produced, WITH ALL the options-WHICH WERE designated (914-S).....Had to be Purpose built ,manufactured.(during 1972,actually, and sold in 1973).....and...that process of including all of the (expensive) options HAD to have had porsche AG approval.(during 1972-1973......and.... at the same TIME other 914,s were being produced which DID NOT HAVE all the options..(offered on the 914-S)......There was a difference in the options, and, thus, the designation as these cars sold in late 1972-early 1973 in america.....as I said previously the FULLY optioned 1974 914 was the LE, can- am car.,obviously designated....do they have a special rear badge?....So the reality , and facts are....1) Porsche AG authorized SOME (1972-1973) early cars to be produced FULLY OPTIONED....2)...Porsche AG, and american distributors, had photographs, artwork,publications and broschures available for the cars...purpose built....designated 914-S...3)..the fully optioned 1974 914,s were designated LE,can-am and were ALSO purpose built.
MDG
. . . . and the point is?

Tom starts this thread off, I gathered, as some sort of educational '914S - what's the deal' kind of thing. Did they? Tom asks . . . well yes and no. The no gets 4 lines of type. The yes goes on for pages and pages.

As soon as Pat or myself offer up some more weight to the 'no - not really' side of the story, pages more are written. Why? Are you guys trying to uncover some dark conspiracy here?

Is this all about having justification to be able to refer to your cars as a 914S? If so, go for it!

My first '73 was built in late 1972. My current '73 was built in March 1973. Both cars came with every option available.

Regardless of some short lived, North American produced sales brochure, the only difference between them is the colour.
URY914
Frankly, I'm confussed by all this. WTF.gif Is there a conclusion in less than 25 words?
ME733
..........MDG, I see, understand your point. I think.......the basic point is , of this on going posting is that 1) there were a series of fully optioned 914,s constructed in 1972-73.....2)Porsche ag produced and had literature available for those cars SEPERATE from the other 914,s produced during the same time frame.3) those fully optioned cars were SOLD as 914-S.....at least for a period of time, WITH Porsche ag knowledge.........I have not seen or heard of any , RETRACTION letter, or documentation, from porsche ag. as to the designation of 914-S not being authorized....4).These cars were produced by Porsche ag, and still exist.,and have the Porsche ag. markrting materials to conferm they were SOLD as 914-S......The point is , in reality , there WERE 914-S cars produced, possabaly in limited numbers. Those of us who HAVE ONE are intrested in preserving them as they are different and a little special.
MDG
Hmmm. It's common practice in automobile production that initial assembly lines produce different trim levels so the dealerships have availability to fall buyers. So those buyers aren't turned off by having to wait a month or two.

For Germany to have made a bunch of Appearance Group model 2.0 914's in advance to ship to NA is nothing unusual.
carr914
[quote name='carr914' date='Jun 5 2010, 05:13 PM' post='1328473']
[quote name='Tom_T' post='1328275' date='Jun 5 2010, 07:04 AM']

But it may & I hope it educates the Newbies. Marketing & Lawyers very Rarely mix.

T.C.
[/quote]

Well, I thought that this thread would educate Newbies, BUT, when people post "Facts" that are Not facts, it will not educate, but confuse.

The S was Marketing by the American distributor, period.

Here are some Facts;

By the 1973 Model year, the 914-6 was gone.
EnthusiastsCar Magazines were not impressed with the 1.7 (See attached R&T excerpt)
The Porsche designed 2.0 was coming out.
Magazine Ads were produced touting the better model the 2.0 (in your guys words the S)

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment
MDG
QUOTE(URY914 @ Jun 6 2010, 09:51 AM) *

Frankly, I'm confussed by all this. WTF.gif Is there a conclusion in less than 25 words?


Yes. The R&T excerpt TC posted above (which ironically Tom did as well in one of his initial posts) pretty much sums it up nicely.

That's what a good editor will do for you; point made in a paragraph. Period.

Moving on.
ME733
[quote name='carr914' date='Jun 6 2010, 10:48 AM' post='1328762']
[quote name='carr914' date='Jun 5 2010, 05:13 PM' post='1328473']
[quote name='Tom_T' post='1328275' date='Jun 5 2010, 07:04 AM']

But it may & I hope it educates the Newbies. Marketing & Lawyers very Rarely mix.

T.C.
[/quote]

Well, I thought that this thread would educate Newbies, BUT, when people post "Facts" that are Not facts, it will not educate, but confuse.

The S was Marketing by the American distributor, period.

Here are some Facts;

By the 1973 Model year, the 914-6 was gone.
EnthusiastsCar Magazines were not impressed with the 1.7 (See attached R&T excerpt)
The Porsche designed 2.0 was coming out.
Magazine Ads were produced touting the better model the 2.0 (in your guys words the S)

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment
[/quote]
........................Could you post the entire page, which includes the paragraph you have shown?.....thanks.
ME733
.............COULD you post the entire page(s)... , from which , the paragraph you show came from., and the source if possable would be appreciated.thanks.
carr914
Full Article, some of which is on Pg1 of this thread

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment
ME733
.......Thank you carr914,....for the posting of the r/t article..what was the date ,as I can not see /find it......and the specific small paragraph ,you posted previously, is not in the article you posted last.....could you help out again by providing the full page , source and date, of the small posting you made earlier....thank you.
Tom_T
QUOTE(MDG @ Jun 5 2010, 01:31 PM) *

To be honest Tom, I just skimmed through all that. But one thing I noticed; I never implied that the recall of the literature and the '914S' branding happened quickly. I'm not sure where Pat did either. I have no doubt it took months. And if lawyers where involved, months and months. That Motor Trend '914S' road test was probably done in the summer during the press junket on the initial roll out. MT published it when it fit their schedule.

No one disputes all this took place and that for a while the North American marketing guys tried to create a unique for us 914S.

Truthfully, I'm not sure what you are getting at here or what point you are trying to make. "Fact or Myth?" confused24.gif

This story has been around for 37 years and has been fairly well documented during that time as to what transpired, how the name came up and how the idea was trashed.


Mike & Pat, don't get me wrong - no harm no foul! smile.gif

The purpose of this write up is in the History part of the O&H theme, so it is just to pass along the info. for others who may be interested &/or heard the "legend" - so I don't want them later on reading this & thinking that is was some quickie flash in the pan that was pulled back quickly, since it lasted half +/- of the 73 MY.

In reality it's more of a curiousity, & I like to play what if's as in the above. It probably would make for a good B-school case study! biggrin.gif
Tom_T
QUOTE(carr914 @ Jun 5 2010, 02:13 PM) *

QUOTE(Tom_T @ Jun 5 2010, 07:04 AM) *


Shortsighted in not seeing that the "914 S" would've probably helped them sell more 2.0's - and probably did so in the first half of the 73 model year, and maybe would've sold even better if badged as a 914 S!?




What you are forgetting is that the 914 was the Best Selling car Porsche EVER had for the time it was for sale, until they started cranking out Crap in the 90's.

Tom, I think you are making way too much of this, But it may & I hope it educates the Newbies. Marketing & Lawyers very Rarely mix.

T.C.


I agree it was the best selling, & sold as many in 6 MYs as ALL years of the 356's combined. Unfortunately, the VW-Porsche JV set a goal of 30k per year, so even the 27k+/- of the 73 & 74 MY's disappointed them! dry.gif

IMHO, a company like Porsche lucky to make/sell +/- 10k 911s/912s a year prior to that, was probably setting unrealistic goals for the 914. It was a true loss to drop the excellent handling 914s, in favor of the 924s IMHO! sad.gif

Anyhoo, you're right on - not a big deal I was making, just passing along the info. So thanx for posting the full article, cuz my pix of it are way too big to upload here - ergo only the excerpts!

BTW - that article is the main one which convinced me to buy my 73 914 2L over a 240Z, back in 75! biggrin.gif
Tom_T
QUOTE(ME733 @ Jun 5 2010, 09:57 PM) *

............You people are overlooking , sidestepping , some basic facts.....to call the 914-S...a north-american only venture......The cars,914.s, that were produced, WITH ALL the options-WHICH WERE designated (914-S).....Had to be Purpose built ,manufactured.(during 1972,actually, and sold in 1973).....and...that process of including all of the (expensive) options HAD to have had porsche AG approval.(during 1972-1973......and.... at the same TIME other 914,s were being produced which DID NOT HAVE all the options..(offered on the 914-S)......There was a difference in the options, and, thus, the designation as these cars sold in late 1972-early 1973 in america.....as I said previously the FULLY optioned 1974 914 was the LE, can- am car.,obviously designated....do they have a special rear badge?....So the reality , and facts are....1) Porsche AG authorized SOME (1972-1973) early cars to be produced FULLY OPTIONED....2)...Porsche AG, and american distributors, had photographs, artwork,publications and broschures available for the cars...purpose built....designated 914-S...3)..the fully optioned 1974 914,s were designated LE,can-am and were ALSO purpose built.


Yes Murray, the USA marketing arm Porsche+Audi was duly concerned over the $5099 East POE & $5299 West POE cost relative to it's 71 914-6 at about the same price, so they requested them to be sent here loaded - at least early in the model year through Jan-March 73.

However, Steve Gaglione (Sahara Beige 73 2L in O&H "The Few, the rare...") recalled some late in the 73 MY which were not loaded with everything, we both speculating that it was due to the base price having been increased twice in 73 due to the DM to $ exchange rate & high inflation driving up the base price on them & P+A wanting to be able to still offer a basic 2L around the old $5100-5300 opening price - even if missing some options - from the prior year through at least the R&T 2/73 article.

I've never been able to verify that nor find any 73MY 2L window sticker with those extras not N/C or without the full AG+PG option lists, so I really don't know if they indeed sold any lesser equipped 73 2L's here. confused24.gif
Tom_T
QUOTE(MDG @ Jun 6 2010, 05:35 AM) *

. . . . and the point is?

Tom starts this thread off, I gathered, as some sort of educational '914S - what's the deal' kind of thing. Did they? Tom asks . . . well yes and no. The no gets 4 lines of type. The yes goes on for pages and pages.

As soon as Pat or myself offer up some more weight to the 'no - not really' side of the story, pages more are written. Why? Are you guys trying to uncover some dark conspiracy here?

Is this all about having justification to be able to refer to your cars as a 914S? If so, go for it!

My first '73 was built in late 1972. My current '73 was built in March 1973. Both cars came with every option available.

Regardless of some short lived, North American produced sales brochure, the only difference between them is the colour.


Mike - the No part is pretty self evident, because none were ever badged as such, beyond the "for fun" 914S badges made up after the fact. Does it need more weight - only if someone can offer some other useful document or internal memo from Porsche to P+A to drop the 914S ads, because I've never seen one & it would be interesting to see something.

However, what is NOT around & is far less obvious because it never gained or held traction in the Porsche marketing scheme - and of which many of the younger Teeners may not be aware because they weren't around back then when we were - is the documentation which I chose to share by doing this write up on it which you state goes on for pages. That way others can read it, see the documentation from the actual period, & go from there.

This doesn't have to be some nefarious scheme nor process to justify sticking a 914S badge on my car! .... believe me, if I'd wanted to do so, I could've & would've long ago with no justification required! biggrin.gif

Sometimes you guys just try to read too frigging much into somebody posting some 914 related info. In my mind, posting this sotrt of historical stuff is no different than posting a cherry 914 like Steve's in "The few, the rare ..." or wheels, tires, or anything else in the nailed forums. It's just info & facts man - nuttin more!

So I encourage other to post some useful 914 info. which you have around, rather than just looking to make commentary on others, in order to keep this O&H section alive. So far I've tried this & the vintage ads to little positive reception, so I'm beginning to feel why Pat G. got so frustrated here! dry.gif

Still no Brits with info on the 914SC????
popcorn[1].gif
Tom_T
QUOTE(URY914 @ Jun 6 2010, 06:51 AM) *

Frankly, I'm confussed by all this. WTF.gif Is there a conclusion in less than 25 words?


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 the outset 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.

More than 25 words, but I'm sure you can wade through the 4 points if you're reading this.
Tom_T
[quote name='carr914' date='Jun 6 2010, 07:48 AM' post='1328762']
[quote name='carr914' date='Jun 5 2010, 05:13 PM' post='1328473']
[quote name='Tom_T' post='1328275' date='Jun 5 2010, 07:04 AM']
[/quote]
Well, I thought that this thread would educate Newbies, BUT, when people post "Facts" that are Not facts, it will not educate, but confuse.
Click to view attachment
[/quote]

TC - you're coming around the bend on that one, & don't know where you're coming from with that sort of spurious accusation, and then repost something I had already posted to make your point!? WTF.gif

I posted original material from that 1972-73 period & those were facts which are/were facts - period!

Moreover, I clearly stated when I was writing something which was speculation or a personal opinion, and no facts.

The paragraph above from the R&T article was what I posted myself to make the point on the timing & why of the end of the 914S marketing campaign.....so again WTF.gif

Let me make a fine point here, this kind of running down somebody for putting up info here from the period, instead of adding something constructive yourselves really is uncalled for & frankly P.O.'s people. It's no wonder others reading these things are reluctant to participate, which is precisely at least part of why Pat quit as moderator. Think about beyond you and whomever's post you want to run down, to how others will read it & take the general tenor of the group.

And Nobody likes to be called a liar my friend: "when people post "Facts" that are Not facts" .... which that implies! mad.gif
Tom_T
My initial post has been edited with a "Cliff Notes" version for impatient types who want everything in 25 words or less, as well as a disclaimer for the "master debaters" looking for conspiracies to disprove! So you can't say I'm not responsive to your comments & criticisms. biggrin.gif

Signed -
One ticked member dry.gif
Bleyseng


Porsche didn't "kill" the 914, VW did as they owed the Karmann plant and forced Porsche out as VW wanted the line for the new water cooled Scirroco. Porsche tried and failed to find a suitable affordable place to setup the line to keep production going but failed. The 76 MY cars bodies were made in 1975 and at the Christmas break the line was switched over to Scirroco producion. This is why Porsche came out with the 912E, to fill the gap in their line with a inexpensive car after the 914's were sold out. So you could add the 2100 912E cars to see about how many 76 914's should have sold. The question is how long would Porsche continue selling the 914 at 6-7000 cars a year? What would they have done to upgrade the model line "IF" VW hadn't pulled the assembly plant from under them...
Remember, Porsche fully owned the 914 from mid 74 as they had bought out VW at that time. They had plans for the 914 but when VW announced their plans in 1975 for the Karmann plant Porsches plans went up in smoke. dry.gif

The 924 is another story as VW pulled out of the production of this car at the final moment and the Audi plant were the cars were going to be made came to Porsche with a sweetheart deal to distribute the cars as Porsches.

I
Bleyseng
sorry, stupid Surinamese provider did it!
I
Bleyseng
double post
I
Bleyseng
double post
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.