rfloz

What I don't get is the weight. R&T says it weighs 2743# after losing 362#.

First, do 964s really weigh 3105#?

Second, my '84 is a tick under 2400# with 5 gallons of gas.

Admittedly, mine is pretty much a delete everything example, but it still has factory steel wide fenders and front trunk lid and aluminum front bumper, as well as OEM manual sport seats. So, I could lose maybe 100# more.

I'm not claiming it's a poor man's Singer. But hey, I like it; even w/ a near stock 3.2. With a 3.6, I wouldn't be getting a whole lot more performance for my added 1/2 mil. That's a lot for perforated seats and slightly better gaps in the body work.

Don't get me wrong, I've seen one up close and it really is stunning, but I'd rather invest in a nice vacation home.

ADias

I see the Singer as a resto-mod. Very well built but way overdone, making it a piece of jewelry. Anyone can take an SC or 3.2 and fully restore it to top condition for way less than $100k. To me that would be a more appealing car, as I do not drive pieces of jewelry, especially ones with quilted leather in the engine bay.

Chris M.

Ditto. I wish I had my SC the way it looked the day I bought it...decent shape...but needing cosmetic help...for $12000...won't find that again...

Charles Freeborn

What he said. An SC with some later driveline parts. Buckets o' fun. As for fit and finish, that's a matter of skill and how much time you've got to spend.
-C

Bisimoto

Thanks for the kind words. I do need a wide rear track as the vehicle does make north of 850whp, and is a blast to drive. I love the classic looks of the older 911s, hence my tribute to the IROC. The scientist in me tugs towards new technology: the water cooled 4 valve head engine, full drive by wire (a first in an aircooled chassis), and functional CAN BUS protocol for reliability, lightweight and ease of module communication.

To the gentleman who spoke of me in an awkward manner, no need to be nasty: I am not familiar with your vehicle, or any conversations with you...feel free to visit anytime, and I display no chagrin. I am, however, an open and honest enthusiast and engineer who loves to interact with other Porsche owners, compare notes and share experiences. I love talking about, and showing off, this and other projects, and my Porsches are meant to be driven, not polished: over 25,000 miles on the blue one since I built her.

If this is "ricer", then kindly pass the soy sauce:








A little racing for the '76:

race911

Explain why drive-by-wire is desirable? Trailing brake is tough enough in a torsion bar car. Throwing in a computer that may or may not respond to your command when needing to plant the rear is something I don't think I'd find desirable at, say, Thunderhill T1. Happy to compare notes via AIM, Motec, or any other front line data.

(On my mind recently because of a possible heat related malfunction on the stability control with the 996 Turbo when I was NOT expecting it.)

Bisimoto

Sure:
One less aperture for a boost leak, typically seen with Idle control valves.
Improved idle control.
Smoother traction control protocols.
Ability to set up varying pedal to throttle plate ratio control (ECO/normal/sport modes, Valet mode capabilities, personal preferences, et cetera)
Fail-safe protocols (throttle position could be tied into fail-safes attributed to fuel and oil pressure, and lambda)

I hope that helps.

race911

You're putting TC in a torsion bar chassis? Now THAT would transform the old buckets of bolts.

Else, not sure I care about valet mode, etc. on a track car. Which is the only reason I keep them around. And can't say I ever had one come back to the shop, critically or fatally injured, that would have been saved by a limp mode. Well, other than a puked tensioner. Have to say it would have been hilarious in the 2.7/no oil cooler/air conditioning equipped/Phoenix climate that would have rendered the car a 912 if the oil temp went above ~220F.

nowata

with cars like this it's about the journey, not the destination. the buyer finds gratification in working with craftsmen who have the "eye" for details.

somewhere there is a bored ortho surgeon, lawyer, construction magnate, etc. who has some money and wants to embark on a creative expedition that has some "old world" qualities like fabrication, paint, uphostery. kind of like a "shop class as soulcraft" meets rarified air. some of them choose to go thru the imagination, development, construction process with their car enthusiast children as a sort of exclusive tree house project. so singer, foose, confederate cycles, burt rutan, and the like service this clientele. from my perspective it's a hell of a lot more interesting that putting that money into a painting or sculpture.

problem develops when there are too many "singers" out there. I met a guy last wknd who just took delivery of two singers. Both were incredible and made the adjacently parked 918's and P1 pale in comparison. I think I was told that there are something like 40 singers on back log. doesn't take long before they aren't so unique. not to mention all the wannabes that this thread is acknowledging. but there will be other things.

JCP911S

It's always Hot Rods vs Concours. Two obsessed people spending stupid money to create some perfect reflection of their own ego... and getting 40 cents on the dollar for an investment in a car they will never drive.

But they are "Job Creators"... god bless them... I love looking at the cars, and don't have to write the checks.

Or you can just buy a nice stock version of the car, and drive the heck out of it, and have fun...