Singer 911 - base most of the future Singer 911 production on the 964 chassis
06-28-2011, 05:37 PM
#1
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Singer 911 - base most of the future Singer 911 production on the 964 chassis
An exert from a Pistonheads interview of Rob Dickinson
PH: There must have been some huge engineering issues getting the first car completed to such a high standard. Are there further developments in store?
RD: The gestation of the car is kind of interesting. My initial plan was to follow the old hot rod philosophy of taking an early chassis and fitting a more powerful, more modern motor. That's what the orange prototype car was, although we're radically developing that as we speak. The plan is to bring the car a bit closer to the present in terms of its underpinnings. We're still building our cars on the early 911 torsion-bar chassis which were built up to 1989, but we're going to base most of the future Singer 911 production on the 964 chassis from 1990-1994, which by common consent in the Porsche world is the sweet-spot for performance and handling.
PH: So are you going to keep everything strictly air/oil-cooled?
RD: We plan to do a water-cooled car one day, but that will be a totally different machine. This car is homage to the 1965-1998 history of the 911. The newer chassis will give us access to ABS brakes and more sophisticated front suspension. That will be a very, very fast car.
http://www.pistonheads.com/doc.asp?c=52&i=23832
PH: There must have been some huge engineering issues getting the first car completed to such a high standard. Are there further developments in store?
RD: The gestation of the car is kind of interesting. My initial plan was to follow the old hot rod philosophy of taking an early chassis and fitting a more powerful, more modern motor. That's what the orange prototype car was, although we're radically developing that as we speak. The plan is to bring the car a bit closer to the present in terms of its underpinnings. We're still building our cars on the early 911 torsion-bar chassis which were built up to 1989, but we're going to base most of the future Singer 911 production on the 964 chassis from 1990-1994, which by common consent in the Porsche world is the sweet-spot for performance and handling.
PH: So are you going to keep everything strictly air/oil-cooled?
RD: We plan to do a water-cooled car one day, but that will be a totally different machine. This car is homage to the 1965-1998 history of the 911. The newer chassis will give us access to ABS brakes and more sophisticated front suspension. That will be a very, very fast car.
http://www.pistonheads.com/doc.asp?c=52&i=23832
06-28-2011, 05:47 PM
#2
... just to add my personal interview with myself
Q: Why not use a 993 instead of a 964? It's arguably better, as far as suspension and powertrain.
A: Because it's ugly! The 993's front end looks like a squished jellybean!
Q: Why not use a 993 instead of a 964? It's arguably better, as far as suspension and powertrain.
A: Because it's ugly! The 993's front end looks like a squished jellybean!
06-28-2011, 11:31 PM
#4
06-29-2011, 12:11 AM
#6
I agree but I can't imagine they are pumping out more than a handful of these a year at what...250K each (or whatever it was). There have been a couple of 964 coupes in the "prices" thread going for 15-20K they could have picked up as a starting point. All they really need is a decent shell...they will rebuild everything else right? They build some tough cars.
Trending Topics
06-29-2011, 04:56 AM
#8
Drifting
I think this was a good one!
"on the 964 chassis from 1990-1994, which by common consent in the Porsche world is the sweet-spot for performance and handling."
"on the 964 chassis from 1990-1994, which by common consent in the Porsche world is the sweet-spot for performance and handling."
06-29-2011, 01:35 PM
#11
I remember Rob hatching this idea a few years back at one of our Rgruppe Treffens in San Luis Obispo. I know he'd been thinking about it prior, but it really started to gain steam at that Treffen. I believe you were there Colin.
This was before I bought my 964 and the concept of any early car guys considering a 964 was so foreign. Look how things have changed in a few short years.
This was before I bought my 964 and the concept of any early car guys considering a 964 was so foreign. Look how things have changed in a few short years.
06-29-2011, 02:40 PM
#12
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I've followed lots of highly creative and beautiful builds on Rennlist and Pelican...and depending on the budget, lightweight is a common theme (of course) but also improving the rigidity of the older shells is required, to cope with the increased horsepower/handling. (creative welding required to reinforce the rear shock towers, sils, center tunnel, etc.)
With the introduction of the 964, Porsche was able to do a major redesign of the shell. This was required due to the new suspension design, ABS, and probably to address safety legislation among other things. These changes brought a welcome increase in rigidity, but also increase weight...
I know backdated 964-based projects always come out weighing more than cars based on the original shell, but the total weight is also usually affected by ABS and other mechanical systems not present on the original longhoods.
How much does each shell weigh? (longhood? impact bumper? 964?)
For example, lets say a 964 shell weighs approx. 100 pounds more than a Longhod shell. By the time you adequately reinforce a longhood shell, has the weight difference dropped to 70 lbs. due to the additional material?
What decisions does someone like Rob Dickinson or 9M make deciding which shell to use?
Would Rob D. say, "creating a backdated car using the 964 shell causes us a lot more cosmetic problems, but the dramatic increase in shell strength provides the car with a improved suspension base as well much more modern brake system (ABS). The improvements in the cars dynamic far outweigh the 75 lbs. weight disadvantage of using the 964 shell."
With the introduction of the 964, Porsche was able to do a major redesign of the shell. This was required due to the new suspension design, ABS, and probably to address safety legislation among other things. These changes brought a welcome increase in rigidity, but also increase weight...
I know backdated 964-based projects always come out weighing more than cars based on the original shell, but the total weight is also usually affected by ABS and other mechanical systems not present on the original longhoods.
How much does each shell weigh? (longhood? impact bumper? 964?)
For example, lets say a 964 shell weighs approx. 100 pounds more than a Longhod shell. By the time you adequately reinforce a longhood shell, has the weight difference dropped to 70 lbs. due to the additional material?
What decisions does someone like Rob Dickinson or 9M make deciding which shell to use?
Would Rob D. say, "creating a backdated car using the 964 shell causes us a lot more cosmetic problems, but the dramatic increase in shell strength provides the car with a improved suspension base as well much more modern brake system (ABS). The improvements in the cars dynamic far outweigh the 75 lbs. weight disadvantage of using the 964 shell."
06-29-2011, 03:23 PM
#13
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
What decisions does someone like Rob Dickinson or 9M make deciding which shell to use?
Would Rob D. say, "creating a backdated car using the 964 shell causes us a lot more cosmetic problems, but the dramatic increase in shell strength provides the car with a improved suspension base as well much more modern brake system (ABS). The improvements in the cars dynamic far outweigh the 75 lbs. weight disadvantage of using the 964 shell."
Would Rob D. say, "creating a backdated car using the 964 shell causes us a lot more cosmetic problems, but the dramatic increase in shell strength provides the car with a improved suspension base as well much more modern brake system (ABS). The improvements in the cars dynamic far outweigh the 75 lbs. weight disadvantage of using the 964 shell."
In addition, the impact-bumper cars (primarily from '76-on) were assembled with much greater levels of corrosion protection, and so there is less 'restorative' work needed just to get the shell up to par.
The aftermarket already supports all the necessary panels for backdating a 964, it seems to me the cosmetic issue requiring major attention are the rocker panels (unless you want to keep the aero rockers)
