Page 3 of 4

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:19 pm
by sladey
The “numbers” in “Matchng Numbers” are only important because they are on a car or engine.

So if you stuck those numbers on a Skoda would it still be matching numbers?

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:45 pm
by mycar
Vin, engine and gearbox, shirley ?

And then doors and lids with a 356.

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:24 pm
by one-two
You lot do seem to be making heavy weather of this. The numbers can match in a reshell, but nothing else does. The moral of the story is that sometimes you need to look beyond the numbers. But if it makes it easier, we can agree the numbers don't match. Even when they do!

2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:42 am
by sladey
No heavy weather - it’s quite simple really

A numbers matching car is worth more than a reshelled car.

A numbers matching car is not a reshelled car.

Wrongly describing something could lead people to pay more than something is worth. That wouldn’t be fair now would it?

Personally I couldn’t care less about originality and a properly reshelled car can be a great thing - best of both worlds.

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 10:37 am
by 210bhp
But James point is when exactly does a restoration become a re-shell? At what exact point is the original identity of the chassis lost? How much of the original material has to remain for it still to be considered ‘original’ ?

Remember the silver RHD 2.2S that Barry built up from a barely recognisable shell with just a set of roof rails and centre tunnel remaining of the original shell. Is that an original matching numbers car?

Regards
Mike

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:38 pm
by 911hillclimber
Mike, that is a very fair question, but there can be no answer in the world of car restoration?

If a shell is so damaged (collision, rust or fire say) that the numbers are damaged, part or fully removed (not by cutting out) then that shell is dead as far as original numbers are concerned.
For a 911 shell to have a tear across the bulkhead and dash under panel then that shell must be in quite a state.

Keeping the panels that carry those numbers and welding patch or complete panels, Porsche or other origin, to them is fair game esp if put in place by say, Barry, where any join is invisible.

From what I've seen on here a Barry Shell, treated and primer'd to factory details looks like a brand new shell, yet could have been extensively repaired.
However, to be able to prove Barry did the shell is a huge plus no matter how much new was used on the old shell.

I'm with Sladey, not bothered about originality, just look at my car, probably the most unusually modified shell in the DDK ranks, and the wrong drive train, but any buyer would be made aware of the car's details, history etc and they can decide on it's market value.

Same for the subject car here too?

Question:
If this car was re-shelled a long time ago, did Porsche supply new shells where the body shop would stamp the shell with the original's numbers, or did the shell have it's own unique number from the factory?

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:14 pm
by stretch
If a rusty car has retained it's dash and front bulkhead and rusty panels are replaced around it, then i would say it's still matching numbers. Unpicking this area and dropping it into another shell, that's another story IMHO. A re-stamp is a complete ringer.

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 5:50 pm
by 210bhp
So Dave, can this car, when restored, ever be considered matching numbers?

Image

Image

Image


Regards
Mike

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 5:54 pm
by stretch
For me Mike, NO. Others will have a different opinion. I had a RHD 2.2s several years ago that had a badly corroded chassis number.
I decided to strip and sell it. I have no regrets either.

Dave

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:31 pm
by Ralph
Were complete shells ever sold with a blank chassis number stamping section?

I recently saw the remains of a very damaged and rusty shell that was being liberated of this area as it had no chassis number and it was to be used in the 'restoration' of another shell. You could see no evidence of there ever being a number - it looked virgin metal.

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:31 pm
by 210bhp
It’s quite interesting isn’t it.
That car has the bulk (pun intended) of its factory body and just about all of its mechanicals, a fairly complete interior and no bulkhead and yet you would say it’s never going to be the original car.

And yet the Canford 2.2S was stripped of just about all of its body save for the bulkhead, centre tunnel and roof rails, most of its interior replaced and is considered a matching numbers restoration.

I remember your car and I think you did the right thing even though it was a rare find. I’m sure you don’t have any regrets.

Regards
Mike

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:06 pm
by stretch
For me, the heart of the car is the pedal area to the back of the fuel tank.

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:52 pm
by Darren65
210bhp wrote: Image
.....I have the perfect fix for that! :P .....

Image

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:22 am
by Berny
that one's for lhd.

Re: 2.4S at Brooklands

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:03 am
by Darren65
Berny wrote:that one's for lhd.
.....easy fix! :wink:

Image