magazine alert
01-12-2011, 09:50 AM
#32
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have pictures of the car you are referring to as well. 2 Red cars were built in '93. I am not home right now, but i can post pics as well as the VIN's for both this evening.
01-12-2011, 01:58 PM
#33
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To your first thought- under normal circumstances, if you are going to **** in someone's research cheerios, it is common courtesy to offer a rebuttal that includes your own research and findings, or at the very least, SOME form of proof that you are talking from a place more credible than your five-hole (hockey fans, rejoice).
I guess it just comes down to a question of why it is beyond you to simply allow the situation to play itself out, and deal with the research that is presented, in full, WHEN it is presented? (And yes, I have been around here long enough to know that's a rhetorical question). After all, if the research is sound, you're going to look like a bit of a donkey, don't you think? (Keep in mind, I'm not defending the research as accurate or otherwise. I'm just defending Fox's right to do the research without people acting like the afore mentioned donkey).
Dave
01-12-2011, 03:11 PM
#34
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Cheshire, England & Trosa, Sweden
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All 11+1+3 can be found from PET. Is that all, I don't know. I think at least those 15 do exist, are real cars and have at some time been at factory. In order for car to be registered it needs some VIN. Those 15 were only ones I could find from PET during very quick search. There can be more but its not very likely. But its not too difficult to formulate VIN sequences and hunt for them.
Why one '94 MY has 0001 VIN is interesting. 0001-0060 VIN's from every VIN sequence are usually reserved for factory special models. Thats in theory. In practice they are nomally not found from PET and usually this means they haven't been ever made. Surely there are some errors in all large data storages and some VIN are probably missing but I would be very surprised if any other numbers between 0002 and 0060 are used. Usually numbers were assigned in sequence without any gaps. I would expect 0002, 0003 so on to exist if any numbers between 0002-0060 were made at all. Some spare bodies were probably made but even those would have been numbered before they left from factory.
WP0ZZZ96ZRS890001 has long list of street car options.
M042 Dunlop tyres
M197 88 Ah battery
M211 Characteristic ownership feature
M220 Locking differential
M272 ?
M384 Bucket seat with whole leather cover left
M385 Bucket seat with whole leather cover right
M407 18" polished wheels
M419 Rear luggage compartment instead of rear seats
M433 ?
M451 Prepared for sport group
M455 Wheel locks
M465 Fastening parts for transportation (series equipment overseas)
M480 6-speed manual transmission
M488 Stickers in German
M499 Version for West Germany
M510 ?
M534 ?
M564 Without air bag
M573 Air-conditioner
M595 Rear spoiler painted to match body
M605 Vertical headlight adjustment
M657 Power steering
M740 ?
Some codes can have wrong explanation in this context.
Turbo RS are different thing. They were made strictly for track use and are probably not included in PET at all. Also some of the above street Turbo S can have been converted to full on track duty. But they started life as street car based on VIN number and options. While Turbo RS were meant for track its still possible and even very likely that they all had some kind of chassis number stamped on them just to keep track whats what. Info is just not in normal PET.
Why one '94 MY has 0001 VIN is interesting. 0001-0060 VIN's from every VIN sequence are usually reserved for factory special models. Thats in theory. In practice they are nomally not found from PET and usually this means they haven't been ever made. Surely there are some errors in all large data storages and some VIN are probably missing but I would be very surprised if any other numbers between 0002 and 0060 are used. Usually numbers were assigned in sequence without any gaps. I would expect 0002, 0003 so on to exist if any numbers between 0002-0060 were made at all. Some spare bodies were probably made but even those would have been numbered before they left from factory.
WP0ZZZ96ZRS890001 has long list of street car options.
M042 Dunlop tyres
M197 88 Ah battery
M211 Characteristic ownership feature
M220 Locking differential
M272 ?
M384 Bucket seat with whole leather cover left
M385 Bucket seat with whole leather cover right
M407 18" polished wheels
M419 Rear luggage compartment instead of rear seats
M433 ?
M451 Prepared for sport group
M455 Wheel locks
M465 Fastening parts for transportation (series equipment overseas)
M480 6-speed manual transmission
M488 Stickers in German
M499 Version for West Germany
M510 ?
M534 ?
M564 Without air bag
M573 Air-conditioner
M595 Rear spoiler painted to match body
M605 Vertical headlight adjustment
M657 Power steering
M740 ?
Some codes can have wrong explanation in this context.
Turbo RS are different thing. They were made strictly for track use and are probably not included in PET at all. Also some of the above street Turbo S can have been converted to full on track duty. But they started life as street car based on VIN number and options. While Turbo RS were meant for track its still possible and even very likely that they all had some kind of chassis number stamped on them just to keep track whats what. Info is just not in normal PET.
Its not just you. Is 0001 new find or has it been listed somewhere else already?
I was under the impression that the VIN you list as WP0ZZZ96ZRS890001is actually WPOZZZ96ZNS820065 - The red Turbo RS? This is also shown as the case on: http://968turbo.homestead.com/ as well as other websites.
What is known is that Porsche produced a run of RS chassis (number to me unknown) which were I guess either produced with the intention of building into more RS cars or simply for shell replacements.
I've also read that several of these shells were sold to private individuals whom built their own Turbo RS cars from the ground up.
I do know fact that the #3 car was re-shelled having spoken to the previous owner whom had receipts showing such.
Do you have any information to add to the above.
Cheers,
Mark
01-12-2011, 03:19 PM
#35
As to your second point, you are completely correct- that another poster would DARE to 'drop his theory' in YOUR thread (cue the stomping feet and balled up fists), is reprehensible. I believe under Sharia Law, you are now within your rights to have him stoned to death. Maybe you can make this happen at the next East Coast get-together. Either way, I offer my sincerest apologies.
To your first thought- under normal circumstances, if you are going to **** in someone's research cheerios, it is common courtesy to offer a rebuttal that includes your own research and findings, or at the very least, SOME form of proof that you are talking from a place more credible than your five-hole (hockey fans, rejoice).
I guess it just comes down to a question of why it is beyond you to simply allow the situation to play itself out, and deal with the research that is presented, in full, WHEN it is presented? (And yes, I have been around here long enough to know that's a rhetorical question). After all, if the research is sound, you're going to look like a bit of a donkey, don't you think? (Keep in mind, I'm not defending the research as accurate or otherwise. I'm just defending Fox's right to do the research without people acting like the afore mentioned donkey).
Dave
To your first thought- under normal circumstances, if you are going to **** in someone's research cheerios, it is common courtesy to offer a rebuttal that includes your own research and findings, or at the very least, SOME form of proof that you are talking from a place more credible than your five-hole (hockey fans, rejoice).
I guess it just comes down to a question of why it is beyond you to simply allow the situation to play itself out, and deal with the research that is presented, in full, WHEN it is presented? (And yes, I have been around here long enough to know that's a rhetorical question). After all, if the research is sound, you're going to look like a bit of a donkey, don't you think? (Keep in mind, I'm not defending the research as accurate or otherwise. I'm just defending Fox's right to do the research without people acting like the afore mentioned donkey).
Dave
01-12-2011, 03:41 PM
#36
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only 'argument' I am making (if you want to call it that) is that people shouldn't be a**clowns to others who are putting forth time and effort to assist the community in better understanding our cars and their history. If asking for common decency really is an 'argument' to you, then I guess we know everything we need to about your proclivity towards said behavior.
So the only "means to support the argument" for common courtesy and proper etiquette would be proper parenting and a good upbringing. You can call me Daddy if you'd like, as it seems you received neither.
Keep laughing,
Dave
01-12-2011, 08:09 PM
#38
Super Moderator
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Do either of you want me to call RolexNJ to deal with this?
(hint: he even has a sticky at the top reminding folks)
Please show his forum the respect it deserves...Thanks
P.S. SDDave...it is generally a good idea for non members to try and play nice with members.
(hint: he even has a sticky at the top reminding folks)
Please show his forum the respect it deserves...Thanks
P.S. SDDave...it is generally a good idea for non members to try and play nice with members.
01-12-2011, 08:28 PM
#39
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the one side, you have a poster (member or non-member should have ZERO bearing on this situation ltc, and shame on you for suggesting otherwise) asking someone to show basic human courtesy to an individual who is going out of their way, and spending their own time and effort, to further the knowledge of the rest of us.
On the other side, you have someone who refuses to do so.
Sounds pretty cut and dry to me. If a moderator wants to show a BLATANT bias toward certain members, and allow said members to treat people with disdain and disrespect without provocation, then they are MORE than welcome to demonstrate that bias, in writing, and in full view of the rest of us.
As an aside, I have attempted to address that Member's attitude, and our disagreement, through PM, and have received no response. I guess when you can't pose for the masses, there is no value in discourse.
Dave
01-12-2011, 09:27 PM
#40
Race Car
I don't intend to take Damian's side or yours here, but I have to agree with your comment about members getting priority over non-members obviously being unfair. That's bull****. And ltc is the worst - more often than not demonstrating a bad attitude on Rennlist when he posts because he's a moderator and can get away with it, which is very annoying for those of us who are just here to talk about cars.
01-12-2011, 11:13 PM
#43
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
01-13-2011, 12:18 AM
#45
Super Moderator
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I don't intend to take Damian's side or yours here, but I have to agree with your comment about members getting priority over non-members obviously being unfair. That's bull****. And ltc is the worst - more often than not demonstrating a bad attitude on Rennlist when he posts because he's a moderator and can get away with it, which is very annoying for those of us who are just here to talk about cars.
I don't believe I used the term priority.
As for me being the worst, thank you, we all have our own place and jobs to do.
If you have issues with me, I would suggest you contact the Admin anytime.