New member

[964RS_DAB]

Having joined DDK some 4 years ago, I have made my first post today!

I've owned a few modern Porsches (964, 968 and 996), in fact I still have the 996, however I do have a long standing itch for a pre 73 car. I quite fancy a decent RS or ST replica, but the more I read the more of a mine field it becomes!

If anyone does know of any excellent correctly specced replicas, not recreations or homages do let me know.

[hot66]

Belated welcome to Ddk

[Bootsy]

Welcome and good fortune in your quest for a car

[Schnellmann2]

Welcome to DDK.

A Zanzibar 996 GT3. Mmmm.

Good luck with your search for a rep.

Was curious as to what qualifies for you as a replica as opposed to a homage or recreation.

[Ian Gunney]

Welcome David

was your 996 originally owned by Ken Lowe by the way?

Ian

[964RS_DAB]

Welcome David

was your 996 originally owned by Ken Lowe by the way?

Ian

Yes I believe so

[964RS_DAB]

Welcome to DDK.

A Zanzibar 996 GT3. Mmmm.

Good luck with your search for a rep.

Was curious as to what qualifies for you as a replica as opposed to a homage or recreation.

I prefer the idea of having an exact replica rather than someone else's interpretation of the real thing. Many homage / recreations seem to have compromises (probably due to budget), things like wrong engine, or they are a back date etc. Whilst there is nothing wrong with either of these, it's not what I'm looking for.

[IanMcLeod]

An exact replica is very easy to build as long as you have the budget. I know someone that did exactly this a couple of years ago and was guided by the many reference materials available and the FIA homoligation papers and got the car FIA certified. It was not cheap though and budget is the main reason why a lot of the 'replicas' have compromises.

Ian.

[Schnellmann2]

Welcome to DDK.

A Zanzibar 996 GT3. Mmmm.

Good luck with your search for a rep.

Was curious as to what qualifies for you as a replica as opposed to a homage or recreation.

I prefer the idea of having an exact replica rather than someone else's interpretation of the real thing. Many homage / recreations seem to have compromises (probably due to budget), things like wrong engine, or they are a back date etc. Whilst there is nothing wrong with either of these, it's not what I'm looking for.

If you want an exact replica it might be best to build one yourself (or have one built), although amount spent would probably exceed the market value of the replica once finished (probably another reason for compromises being made).

For myself it is important to get close to the driving experience of the original 2.7 RS (so early chassis and 2.7 engine key) but I'm willing to accept some compromises, especially if it improves the car (e.g. like using later, better brakes).

[964RS_DAB]

Welcome to DDK.

If you want an exact replica it might be best to build one yourself (or have one built), although amount spent would probably exceed the market value of the replica once finished (probably another reason for compromises being made).

For myself it is important to get close to the driving experience of the original 2.7 RS (so early chassis and 2.7 engine key) but I'm willing to accept some compromises, especially if it improves the car (e.g. like using later, better brakes).

You're almost certainly correct, having 'my ideal' replica built is the best way to get what I want, but the uncertainty surrounding final budget and the idea of having a 'project' does not fill me with enthusiasm. Once complete I'm sure it would be a hugely rewarding experience.

I'm guessing an excellent 'correct' ST / RS replica would cost ~£150k?

[Schnellmann2]

[quote="Schnellmann2"

You're almost certainly correct, having 'my ideal' replica built is the best way to get what I want, but the uncertainty surrounding final budget and the idea of having a 'project' does not fill me with enthusiasm. Once complete I'm sure it would be a hugely rewarding experience.

I'm guessing an excellent 'correct' ST / RS replica would cost ~£150k?

I think it would be possible to spend £150k on an RS replica if you insisted on using all genuine RS parts. Risk is that you would end up with a more "genuine" RS than many real cars, which have been upgraded or modified over the years!

If you are planning to keep the car indefinitely (and have the funds) perhaps that is the best way to go. If you do go in that direction please record your progress in a thread.

[shoestring7]

Am I right in thinking that a 'correct' RS rep would cost less to build than a S/T - assuming you started from the same place?

C>

[neilbardsley]

Welcome. Good luck in your search. I couple of our regulars do this for a living so I'm sure one of them will be along soon to help!

[hot66]

if you're spending that kind of money on an RS recreation , you might as well buy an original 2.4S that bar 3 major items is the same car as an RS Touring, 3 items being:

1. 2.7 barrels & pistons
2. Wider rear wheels
3. RS arches/ rear bumpers

Beyond that they are the same car , even the Ducktail spoiler was optional.

An early RS lightweight is a different beast, but you'd struggle to recreate it exactly down to the thinner gauge panels etc

[IanMcLeod]

Am I right in thinking that a 'correct' RS rep would cost less to build than a S/T - assuming you started from the same place?

C>

Not sure these days because you can now by the correct lightweight RS steel panels from Porsche for bonnet, front wings and rear quarters at a significant price which would even up the shell costs between RS and S/T. A correct RS engine is no longer cheap plus I'm thinking stuff like correct RS petrol tank, lightweight glass, seats, etc are all likely to be in the S/T parts price bracket. So at the end of the day I'm not sure there would be a lot of price difference between a proper S/T replica and a proper RS replica.

Very few people ever build a proper replica of either because of cost. Building a mongrel hotrod makes much more sense to just drive and enjoy.

Or as James says if you are going big budget a standard S is probably a better bet.

Ian.