RE: Autofarm Porsche 911 'backdate': Driven

RE: Autofarm Porsche 911 'backdate': Driven

Friday 17th October 2014

Autofarm Porsche 911 'backdate': Driven

It's easy enough to be a bit sniffy and purist about backdated 911s ... until somebody loans you one



A little while back I was a tad snobbish on social media about a 911 Carrera I'd seen on my local High Street. It was a Tiptronic 996 with the factory aerokit that someone had decided badge up as a GT3 and I may have basically described it as an abomination.

Tiptronic 'GT3' actually more authentic? Discuss...
Tiptronic 'GT3' actually more authentic? Discuss...
Only to get a text from a mate who'd seen the post suggesting I might want to avoid the local for the rest of the weekend. Why? "It's my brother-in-law's car, he knows I've got a friend who works for PistonHeads and he's not too chuffed." Awks, as one might say, were one 16 years old.

Saying that I think we can agree where a Tiptronic Carrera masquerading as a GT3 sits along the 'good Porsche, bad Porsche' axis. But if we're going to get all purist about it that car has much more provenance and originality than what you see here. Indeed, if we're going to call out fakery a 1979 SC made up to look like a 'long hood' S/T of the previous decade should by rights attract even more indignation - reference our recent Tell Me I'm Wrong on just this topic.

And yet. Just look at it.

Car originally converted from crashed SC
Car originally converted from crashed SC
Keyboard worrier
Easy enough to be elitist from behind a keyboard. Rather more difficult when sharing a brew with the owner and man who oversaw its construction before being given the keys and told "bring it back when you're done, no rush." 10 days later after lots of extended 'errands' (if anyone needs any milk I seem to have bought quite a bit...) and a bit of daily grind commuting the keys are still in my possession and the car will be readied to attend a Sunday Service at the Porsche Centre Silverstone. Has my stance on backdating changed? There's a question. One I'll duck for now by telling the story behind this car.

A 1979 3.0 SC, it was bought by Autofarm after being crashed and with heavy damage to the nearside front wing, windscreen scuttle and A-pillar. We've met Autofarm before on these pages, driving a previous 964-engined backdate and meeting owner Josh Sadler. By now you're probably thinking 'ah, the British Singer!' but while Autofarm project manager Mikey Wastie admits demand for such cars has increased they're more your traditional restoration shop with the ability to pick and choose the best of the 911 back catalogue to build the Porsche of your dreams.

Lio used it as a daily driver in this configuration
Lio used it as a daily driver in this configuration
Tonight Matthew...
Which is exactly what owner Lio di Mascio had them do. From wrecked SC Autofarm built the car into a 2.7 RS lookalike and his initial desire for a 993 C4 S was forgotten the moment he saw it. For nigh-on six years and nearly 35,000 miles it was both his fun car and his daily driver into London before he chopped it in for a second-gen 996 GT3, a move he regretted when he realised the friendliness shown to the old car in cut and thrust traffic was turned on its head in the GT3. That and its licence eating potential saw it last just 18 months in his care before thoughts turned to a 930 Turbo. An inspection on his chosen car revealed hidden horrors just as Josh passed on a tip that Lio's original 911 was coming back onto the market. It was a no-brainer. So to round two.

Clearly of a different mindset, the interim custodian had covered just 4,000 miles but addressed a couple of things Lio had been too busy driving it to attend to. There was still a to-do list though and, as happens, things spiralled and a respray turned into something more extensive and the S/T inspired car you see here. "I didn't want an original, I wanted a car to use," says Lio. And use it he has, the odometer now showing just shy of 150,000 miles and regular runs to Le Mans and roadtrips to Scotland under its belt. If you ever need a case study of an old car thriving on 'correct' usage and maintenance it would seem this 911 is it. Sure, there will have been some fairly big bills along the way. But Lio's logic is having tried a modern 911 and not got on with it he'd rather put the same money into a car perfectly customised to his tastes. No apologies to purists. Just the car he wanted.

Second time around and en route to current look
Second time around and en route to current look
Nerd alert
A bit of geekery though. The engine is, at heart, the SC's original unit bored out to 98mm for a capacity of 3.2 litres. 993 head studs, pressure-fed tensioners and new cams are among Autofarm's tweaks, Weber 40s with K&N filters dealing with fuel and air in while an SSI heat exchanger and single outlet Dansk backbox sort out exhaust and soundtrack. Power? Lio and Mikey exchange looks and shrug. Enough, the emphasis being on longevity and toughness than all-out power with Mikey suggesting something north of 250hp. Chassis-wise the car runs 930 Turbo torsion bars and road spec Bilsteins in the original damper struts, Boxster brakes and 15-inch Fuchs wheels with seven-inch tyres up front and eight-inch items at the rear. A true mix-and-match then but sympathetically done with due deference to maintaining a traditional look and feel. But robust enough to use regularly.

It's no purist recreation, just Lio's ideal 911
It's no purist recreation, just Lio's ideal 911
Which we have been doing. Primed with a couple of pumps of throttle and a nadge of the hand throttle behind the handbrake the engine catches with a cough, a bang that echoes around Autofarm's courtyard and then an idle my motoring hack's big book of adjectives dictates should be described as 'purposeful'.

The much maligned 915 gearbox (identifiable by reverse being down and to the right rather than up and to the left as it is on the later G50 - I had to look it up) has had the Autofarm treatment too and there's a positivity of gate and engagement to prove the horror stories wrong. First baulks slightly, second is helped by a 'one-and, two-and...' rhythm and tickle of throttle and third slots in nicely, with due deference to letting the shifter navigate the transition into the central plane of its travel in its own time. You wouldn't want to rush it and let the clutch out to find yourself in first again...

3.0 SC now a 3.2 with added Weber goodness
3.0 SC now a 3.2 with added Weber goodness
And third is where you want to be. A little breathless in second, with some load against them by 4,000rpm the Webers are sucking hard and a piercing howl that makes a mockery of the 991's piped in induction noise silences every other thought that might be going through your head. It's fabulous. It pulls hard in fourth and fifth too but the car's sweet spot is on a twisting A- or B-road slotting between third and fourth and leaning on that booming torque delivery rather than revving it out.

Fit for purpose
Firmly rather than harshly sprung, the thick-rimmed wheel wriggles and writhes about as the tyres sniff out bumps and cambers but instinct takes over and you know when to let it have its way and when to assert some control into the proceedings. The best thing is all this happens at sensible speeds, rather than the three-figure ones that all-too easily appear on the speedos of modern Porsches without even a prickle sweat on your palm. The need to slow it and settle it into a corner before leaning on the traction out of it entirely fits with a fast road style of driving where speed is dictated by knowing what's round the corner, not just how quickly you can take it. At pace it demands concentration, coordination and forward planning but, heck, isn't that what makes driving fun? And at a cruise along the motorway it's reasonably quiet, refined and liveable.

As the car is now, exactly as Lio wanted it
As the car is now, exactly as Lio wanted it
At heart this car is clearly just a very, very well sorted 911. The shell feels super stiff - the only additional reinforcement is a strut brace up front - and the complete lack of clonks, rattles, squeaks or sloppiness is a fine advert for the skills of the team that built it. If it was my car I'd happily have it drive exactly like this but in its original SC clothes.

But it's not my car. It's Lio's. Much as one wouldn't pass comment on another man's dress sense or how attractive his wife may be I'm not about to make a value judgement on his car's appearance. But whatever your stance on originality there's no denying it looks absolutely gorgeous and people respond to it with genuine excitement. Final nail in the coffin of any argument against what's been done to this 911 is that an SC wasn't sacrificed in its creation - one that might otherwise have been scrapped has been reborn. If only being proved wrong was always so enjoyable!

A little taste of flat-six noise





   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

Huge thanks to owner Lio di Mascio and Mikey Wastie at Autofarm - see the car this weekend (October 19) at our Porsche Sunday Service at Silverstone

Author
Discussion

250GTE

Original Poster:

120 posts

118 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Given that actual early 911's cost a fortune (£200 K 2.4S anybody? )good quality "backdates" make a load of sense if you want something to maximise driving pleasure.

BertBert

18,953 posts

210 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Depends on how much you want to spend for how it looks. The backdating thing here adds nothing to the driving experience.

So take a boggo SC, do an engine rebuild to a short stroke 3.2, junk the CIS and put carbs or EFI on, new exhaust, change the torsion bars and shocks, do something with the brakes (boxter if you must) and there it is. Depending on your balance of DIY v paying people for the work, half the cost. And all the money spent where it counts - on the going, turning and stopping bits.

If you are paying someone to do that lot for you, how much would it cost? Eeek £15k-25k depending on detailed choices. Money well spent? I'll let you know. One thing I do know is that the Nick Fulljames (Redtek) version which is not backdated, but based on a short stroke 3.2 is utterly brilliant to drive.

Bert

P4ROT

1,219 posts

192 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
I have a new feature for the PH staff:

TELL ME I'M WRONG ABOUT WHEN I SAID I WASN'T WRONG

hehe

marcosgt

11,011 posts

175 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Did the word count get exceeded and the sub-editor just remove random words?

As one might way.... wink

M

Dan Trent

1,866 posts

167 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
No, that's just me getting my mucking keys fuddled while typing and neither of us spotting it. PH live subbing desk on the case though - tip of the hat.

Cheers!

Dan

phib

4,464 posts

258 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Please stop these articles ..... my bank balance can't take it !!

Sold my original rhd 2.7 lightweight then built a rep which was actually better than the original !!

Then sold that ..... really would love it back !!

Narrow body, 1972 shell with a 3.5 on carbs

Phib

smilo996

2,754 posts

169 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Well I know which one I would have. Authentic or not.

Gud in Scandinavia means God, so clearly it was high quality divine intervention job.

That GT thing is an abomination.

bobbo89

5,151 posts

144 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Talking of a British Singer, I stumbled upon this company a few months back whilst browsing the porn on C&C.

http://www.911-retro-works.co.uk/index.html

Not a patch on a Singer bit for a fraction of the price they're doing some very interesting stuff!

k-ink

9,070 posts

178 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Building a custom classic car to your own spec is cool.

Sticking fake badges on a base spec car is as sad as it gets. The GT3 example is just as bad a wonky M3 badges on diesel rep mobiles. Those who so desperately crave false attention from others need to see a therapist.

There is no comparison. At all.

hondansx

4,562 posts

224 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
k-ink said:
Building a custom classic car to your own spec is cool.

Sticking fake badges on a base spec car is as sad as it gets. The GT3 example is just as bad a wonky M3 badges on diesel rep mobiles. Those who so desperately crave false attention from others need to see a therapist.

There is no comparison. At all.
+911!

k-ink

9,070 posts

178 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
^
I love what you did there biggrin

Schermerhorn

4,342 posts

188 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Why do all these retro-911 restorers insist on using Fusch style wheels only? Surely there are other designs out there that would make their creations stand out from the rest?

JohnT993

101 posts

152 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Lovely bit of kit!

iloveboost

1,531 posts

161 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Looks like a nice car and sounds good as well. I don't think anybody can argue with somebody buying one of the less desirable 911 models and using lots of money, time and talent turning it into one of the more desirable models. It may not be a real one but I doubt anyone will really know, or care. Proof of the pudding is in the eating, etc.
smile

canucklehead

416 posts

145 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
looks good and goes great, no valuable original spec car ruined to make it happen......nothing to see here except a gorgeous, well-sorted vehicle.

Lio is a lucky chap.

BrewsterBear

1,503 posts

191 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
The 911 and Fuchs are like strawberries and cream. They're just so synonymous. I'm restoring my SC at the mo, junking a lot of the weight and going for GRP bumpers, rebuilding the engine to a short stroke 3.2, etc. I considered what to do wheel-wise for a long time. Campagnolos? They look good, but hard/impossible to source in 16". Minilites, to me, look like the owner couldn't afford decent wheels and had no imagination. BBS look a bit BMW/VW.

I managed to find a set of refurbished 16" 7&8s (the 8s with the 911 offset, not the 944 offset). Awesome deep dish look and fill the arches perfectly. They cost a fortune, but I should recoup some of that from my 6&7s and my car will look perfect on them.

donteatpeople

831 posts

273 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
k-ink said:
Building a custom classic car to your own spec is cool.

Sticking fake badges on a base spec car is as sad as it gets. The GT3 example is just as bad a wonky M3 badges on diesel rep mobiles. Those who so desperately crave false attention from others need to see a therapist.

There is no comparison. At all.
I very much agree with this. It's the intention behind the modifications that is the defining line between good and bad for me.

Aesthetic improvement (even if only in the owners eyes) = Good
Deception = Bad

Talking of M badges where they shouldn't be... I saw an BMW the other day where the owner had added an M badge directly in front of the X5 badge. I'm not sure if it was intended as a joke but it did make me laugh.

mikeinsheffield

1,038 posts

184 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
k-ink said:
Building a custom classic car to your own spec is cool.

Sticking fake badges on a base spec car is as sad as it gets. The GT3 example is just as bad a wonky M3 badges on diesel rep mobiles. Those who so desperately crave false attention from others need to see a therapist.

There is no comparison. At all.
Wot he sed ^
yes

MichelV

133 posts

151 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
BertBert said:
Depends on how much you want to spend for how it looks. The backdating thing here adds nothing to the driving experience.

So take a boggo SC, do an engine rebuild to a short stroke 3.2, junk the CIS and put carbs or EFI on, new exhaust, change the torsion bars and shocks, do something with the brakes (boxter if you must) and there it is. Depending on your balance of DIY v paying people for the work, half the cost. And all the money spent where it counts - on the going, turning and stopping bits.

If you are paying someone to do that lot for you, how much would it cost? Eeek £15k-25k depending on detailed choices. Money well spent? I'll let you know. One thing I do know is that the Nick Fulljames (Redtek) version which is not backdated, but based on a short stroke 3.2 is utterly brilliant to drive.

Bert
About right. But if you give the standard 204 hp SC engine a 964 camshaft and a balanced and lightweight flywheel I will even cut your money in half and have 95% of your performance. CIS is not that bad simply a lack of understanding. But I have to admit that a backdated looks sexier.

AlbionAutos

3 posts

119 months

Friday 17th October 2014
quotequote all
Very much in agreement with the general sentiment on here, if the work is done to a high quality and avoids awfull fibreglass pattern panels then why not. Not sure if I would badge a backdate as something it never was nor never will be, however whats up with just having a period "911" script on the decklid?

Each to their own and if I was in the market for a 911 that I could use pretty regularly and not worry about putting the miles on a genuine RS etc then a backdate would be my solution too.

Interesting point about the reactions from other motorists too, top looking motor and properly sorted, would have space on my drive any day!