coomo wrote:i had issues with last lot genuine front wing/horn grilles.Both needed a load of manipulation, and leadwork to make the (genuine very old) horn grilles fit.However, wonky horn grilles appear to be an acceptable nuance of the 911.Plenty are out of line with bonnet edge.Its a bugbear of mine,which Im not fond off.There was a guy on Pelican.Who accurately measured his genuine front wings,which were out 1/4inch edge to tip.
Plus wing door gaps needed edges rebuilt.Usual Danks sillls etc, always require a fair amount of hammer work.Having said that.Buy a ferrari 550,and try an fit a front fibreglass bumper (4kish at time) Its hilarious! (wasnt at time though!)
I noticed on mine the horn grille mounting tabs pivot so there's a good degree of freedom to fit them in different positions.
Sent from my SM-G988B using Tapatalk
1970 911T, Signal orange (Restoration thread)
1988 3.2 Carrera backdate, Black
2001 996 Turbo, Lapis blue (am I allowed to put that here?)
I'm looking for a pre-impact bumper 911S or other high-revving 911 to restore - please let me know if you see one.
coomo wrote:i had issues with last lot genuine front wing/horn grilles.Both needed a load of manipulation, and leadwork to make the (genuine very old) horn grilles fit.However, wonky horn grilles appear to be an acceptable nuance of the 911.Plenty are out of line with bonnet edge.Its a bugbear of mine,which Im not fond off.There was a guy on Pelican.Who accurately measured his genuine front wings,which were out 1/4inch edge to tip.
Plus wing door gaps needed edges rebuilt.Usual Danks sillls etc, always require a fair amount of hammer work.Having said that.Buy a ferrari 550,and try an fit a front fibreglass bumper (4kish at time) Its hilarious! (wasnt at time though!)
I noticed on mine the horn grille mounting tabs pivot so there's a good degree of freedom to fit them in different positions.
Sent from my SM-G988B using Tapatalk
Yes they all do that,however if the angle is accute as the grill is pulled down, gaps appear!
RobFrost wrote:FWIW on my "remarkably original" 1970T I've sanded back the paint on the left sill and on a prima facie basis there's about a one inch gap between the quarter panel and sill, filled with some metal apparently different to steel (hypothesis: lead). Maybe they were always gappy from the factory.
Below link is a factory video. Although it's hard to see clearly but @ time lapse 2:23 the welder is working on the joint between the rear 1/4 and sill:
That original top weld being made at 2:23 is present on mine on both sides. It demarcates the front of a little corroded hole above the kidney bowl reinforcement. I guess the weld remains because it's thicker and the jacking point acts as a drip stop.
On the vertical face below, the outer sill appears to cut inwards behind the rear quarter panel and there's about a 1 inch wide vertical strip of apparently different metal to the rest, which is the "apparent gap".
Sent from my SM-G988B using Tapatalk
1970 911T, Signal orange (Restoration thread)
1988 3.2 Carrera backdate, Black
2001 996 Turbo, Lapis blue (am I allowed to put that here?)
I'm looking for a pre-impact bumper 911S or other high-revving 911 to restore - please let me know if you see one.
That's where I was imagining the form of the two wings may vary, right at that transition area.
Rare I think to have a coupe wing rust right up there so a good chance the wing forms are the same in that area, BUT, I do not actually know if the form is the same or simply similar.
Still think a pm to Barry will help you.
73T 911 Coupe, road/hillclimber 3.2L
Lola t 492 / 3.2 hillclimb racer
Boxster 987 Gen II 2.9
IanM wrote:Can anyone confirm if targa rear quarters can be used on a coupe if its roof gutters are in good condition?
I'm not sure it'd work: as well as the area directly under the Targa hoop, and the rear where it joins into the screen rail (tonneau?) there's every chance the rest of the join under the rear 1/4 light area will be different as Graham suggests.
I suspect you'd end up with so much join it'd not be worth it. You'd want to do a lot of templating at least before getting too committed.
DDK Member1243 07741 273865. Now booking Spring '24. Home of the RY Austin 7 Trophy's
The cut (on that one anyway) is higher up than you might think from that picture as I needed to get to the inside of the parcel shelf sides. It was higher than Barry wanted (made it difficult to get to the back of) but it’s where I needed to do to get rid of all the rust. I also remade the window flange as it was a mess after removing the quarter.
If you are doing quarters you’ll join them around this window flange irrespective of where you do the other cut (or remake the gutter) which rules out the Targa part.
As an aside:
When I put new Porsche supplied rear 1/4s to my 911 in '88 I stupidly cut the whole wing off right to the top of the B post so included all the window frame. This was due to extensive rot where the foam (?) infill of the inner cavity had thinned the area with rust. This meant swaging over the new wing to the roof flange (drip channel/rail) which was a sod by hand and a home made V 'chaser' to drift it all over. Gary's cut or there abouts is a far wiser move.
73T 911 Coupe, road/hillclimber 3.2L
Lola t 492 / 3.2 hillclimb racer
Boxster 987 Gen II 2.9
All I can add from a common sense point of view is that the narrower the join the less sensitive it will be to inaccuracies, visually I mean. So better up where the join is short
Sent from my SM-G988B using Tapatalk
1970 911T, Signal orange (Restoration thread)
1988 3.2 Carrera backdate, Black
2001 996 Turbo, Lapis blue (am I allowed to put that here?)
I'm looking for a pre-impact bumper 911S or other high-revving 911 to restore - please let me know if you see one.
RobFrost wrote:All I can add from a common sense point of view is that the narrower the join the less sensitive it will be to inaccuracies, visually I mean. So better up where the join is short
Yes, makes sense. Thanks Rob.
However, as Gary said he had to remake a window flange, I wonder if the more spot welds (in the window flange area) are left alone, the better?
RobFrost wrote:All I can add from a common sense point of view is that the narrower the join the less sensitive it will be to inaccuracies, visually I mean. So better up where the join is short
Yes, makes sense. Thanks Rob.
However, as Gary said he had to remake a window flange, I wonder if the more spot welds (in the window flange area) are left alone, the better?
If you are in the realms of swapping out 1/4 panels then remaking the flange is the easy bit.
I could have reused the flange, but in the interest of a clean build process and neat joins a new slice of metal was the only option.
As you can see from the picture above I made the new bit of metal about 20mm high. Barry then shaved it down to match the new panel after he welded it on.
