Fritz

Im picking up a 73 911 this weekend. The main reason is that Im looking for something new. Ive done the 380hp turbo Mr2, the 210hp type r powered civic track car, and even a 73 351W powered bronco all from pretty much the ground up. Heres the ideal plan for the 911:

Built 3.2L
Full cage tied into suspension
17s or 18s just to annoy those who say its bad
fiberglass body because of rust on some panels and to save weight.

Anyhow, the big question comes from the suspension side of things. Im not familiar with the options for the porsches. Can anyone point me to the idea suspension that i can bolt up (weld in rather). Id prefer to spend under 2000 for the suspension. Somehow i think im going to spend more

JackOlsen

Guys who know better than me will be more specific. But if you're going for a cage, then tie coil-overs into it in back. But keep torsion bars (22mm or 23mm) in front for wheel and tire clearance, unless you're going with Turbo flares. 22mm front adjustable swaybars, and even bigger TRK or Smart Racing ones in back. You can modify your front strut mounts to allow more negative camber as well as additional caster. You'll probably be lowering the car, so invest in drop links (for the Turbo tie rods) in front to correct the steering geometry. Spacer kits don't help much.

935 rear spring plates are nice, but at least get the factory semi-adjustable ones, with new bushings all around. Bilsteing HD or Sport shocks, with the rears re-valved to match those coil-overs. You can have period-correct looking 17's made out of Fuchs, too. (Who says 17's and 18's are no good?)



In short, there's no reason that a 73 shouldn't be able to handle better (and be faster) than any normally-aspirated production Porsche ever made.

I know a guy who can get you good prices on the suspension components, too. Email me if you want his info.

Fritz

Thanks for the reply at this late on an hour. I'll definatly drop you an email in the coming weeks. Also while im rambling, what is the reasoning behind no one running turbo (3.3L?) based motors in their early 911s? Personally I can get a C2 If i wanted, but I have a thing for 70's styling and im no where near that era (21 ). Anyway, just wondering whats holding back early 911 owners from the dark side of boost.

Steven Race
Memphis TN

Waiting anxiously.

Fritz

Nevermind.

I found some posts and I think im just going to give it a healthy acid bath, start welding in the cage, work on the suspension and add limited slip and be happy for a while. I learned a long time ago going straight is boring.

JackOlsen

At the risk of irritating Turbo owners, the early engines have marginal low-end power, and then throttle modulability issues in track driving. When you've got to anticipate throttle response based on lag, and also work with the 100%-off-then-boom-100%-on characteristics of that throttle through something like a fast sweeper (where you're doing a lot of your steering with the throttle), well, it shows why some guys see their lap times get worse when they switch to the 'big gun' motor of a 3.3 Turbo.

Also, the Turbos have higher maintenance costs and shorter lifespans.

Of course, just about all Turbo problems can be corrected with enough money. If you can afford it, you can build a monster of a track car with one. And in a straight line, even with lag, they're dazzling.

(And as a sidenote, the smaller rear valence of the earlier cars makes it trickier to cover up the Turbo goodies in the back.)