Fanatic

WOW! I thought this thread died about a week ago but as I see it opened up a whole new can of worms. All the little things I never new about RSA's.

All this input is great and has definitely got my wheels spinning on what would be ideal for my needs.

Since I first posted this thread I got a change to test drive an RSA for the first time and I must say....what a blast to drive. I've driven 993's and 996's, but just not the same visceral feeling driving the modern cars as one breed for racing.

I've listened and have given some thought to getting a regular C2 and gutting it out and setting it up to suit my needs but still haven't committed to either car just yet.

Do I want the rarity of an RSA or save some $$ and get a C2? Tough decision for someone that's always admired the RSA nameplate.

Keep the input coming!

Thanks!

Bill Gregory

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica"><strong>This thread is incredible. The myth of the RSA lives despite the facts!</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I had one RSA "expert" tell me that there was a rumor that Porsche tested all engines for HP and that the higher HP ones were reserved for the Carrera RS and RS America's. I suggested he look into how the Carrera RS engines were constructed before repeating that rumor any further. Geesh!

Strabo

I bought a 1993 RSA with dyno results showing 244.3 HP at the rear wheels. I think factory spec was 247 housepower. 2.7 HP seems like an extremely low amount of loss in the gear train. Something doesn't add up. However, I have never heard Bill's story about selecting the best motors for RSs

Strabo.

Jim Michaels

Even if the higher hp 964 motors were selected for the RSAs, I seriously doubt that even the strongest would show anywhere near 244 hp at the rear wheels. As I understand it, a higher hp motor would have no more than a very few hp more than the average motor of the same type. The RS motors are somewhat enhanced, yet the official claim is that they have only 10 hp more than the regular 964 motor. I've heard the stronger motors story from several sources, but, until we get verification from an official source, I'll consider it just another interesting RSA rumor adding to the oral culture of the RSA.

BTW, I saw one of the rare yellow RSAs at the Hershey swap meet yesterday. Saw three others; two white ones, and a black one for sale.

Strabo

My understanding is that the RSA drivetrain is precisely the same as the US C2. The 964 owner's manual includes an RSA supplement; both list the same engine specs. Beyond that, I have no way to verify that. And I also recognize that the factory has a habit of does strange things and often doesn't communicate very well, so rumors and misinformation are pretty common.

ltc

All Porsche motors are run on the dyno before being released to drivetrain/chassis assembly.
The limit is that the HP must be within 2% of design spec; otherwise, it is torn down, rebuilt and retested on the dyno. Of course, if the motor makes more than the design spec, it is left alone.
When I was at Zuffenhausen last year (the company I work for is a supplier ot Porsche), they were just bringing on line 4 more dyno cells to handle the V motors for the Cayenne and the Carrera GT.

clubrcr

Doing research on my US Carrera Cup, I have found that no one at Porsche will admit if the higher horspower motors were even used for the Cup cars. Although many sources say the motors were handpicked based on higher horsepower. Some even say they were balanced and blueprinted for the track events.

If you have ever driven a Cup car or RS, I think you would agree that the motors are stronger.

I would have to disagree that Porsche would have done this for the RS America. Remember that Porsche was going through some tough times in 1992 with sales being very low. The RS America was an attempt to bring in a low cost car to the market. This car took off as a club car, but was not the RS counterpart from Europe. The RS car sold for a higher price than the regular C-2. If Porsche spent the time and effort to put better motors in these cars, they would not have accomplished what the marketing department was trying to do. Sell a low cost 911 that Porsche could turn a profit on.

I apologize to any RS America owner, but I would have to have disagree that the RSA had a more powerful motor.

As for the thread about 244bhp to the rear wheels. It is no secret that Porsche has published low horsepower numbers in th epast for insurance reasons. I have heard the 3.6 Turbo "S" was published at under 400bhp and many sources said it was closer to 450bhp.

Jim Michaels

To elaborate on what Jim said, according to Bob Gagnon (Pano, May '93), all the RS cars (Touring, Basic, and Cup USA) had selected pistons/cylinders, and blue-printed engines. They also had "Sport" DMEs rather than the "Standard" DME of the RSA and regular C2. Engine types were given as M64/01 for the C2 and RSA, and M64/03 for the RS and Cup. Fuel requirements were given as 93 octane for the RS and Cup cars, and 92 octane for the C2 and RSA. Given those engine differences, I would not be surprised if the RS and Cup cars made more hp than the official 260DIN stated. The RS Basic and the USA Cup also had a "sports" flywheel that was 15.4 pounds lighter than the standard dual mass unit of the other cars. According to Bob, the 29 Cup cars tested at Andial did not vary more than 1.5 hp from 275 SAE in race trim (no mufflers, modified air box) on 92 octane fuel.

914und993

Strabo -

Does your car have a lightened flywheel? If so, then the dyno will show "more" rear wheel horsepower than would be expected, especially if the test is conducted in lower gears.

Chip

9caregiver

I have read these posts for a while and I would like to add what I know and also try to dispell some of the myths and rumors surrounding the RSA.

I have owned four RS America and two Carrera Cup USA cars over the years. RSA #8110, #8060, #8020 and currently #9264. The first three cars with the 8 as the fourth digit had rolled fenderwell lips. The rears were rolled as the Cup USA/ Euro RS cars and the fronts were rolled less than the Cup USA/ Euro RS. The later having it's lips rolled down to the front bumper where the RSA is only rolled at the top. I have compared the Cup USA to the RSA and can tell you the rolled fenderwell lips are the only body modification on the early RSA tubs.

There was a detailed list of modifications that were performed at Porsche on the Euro RS and Cup Cars that included SEAM WELDING as well as provisions for a safety harness, kill switch, alternate abs mount, tow hook reinforcement, ect... It would not make any sense that Porsche would choose to do the seam welding and none of the other NGT work performed on the Euro RS and the Cup Cars. What would make sense is that Euro RS Touring tubs were used for the early RSA. The Touring had the rolled fenderwell lips ONLY and none of the other steps performed on the NGT list of modifications. It would be nearly impossible for a true Cup Car tub to have been used for an RSA. Porsche performed these modifications by hand as the tubs were needed. An RSA with a Cup Car tub would be easy to spot today by the visible of the NGT mods. I would love to see one surface.

Porsche had difficulty in selling the Euro RS in 1992 so the creation of the RSA killed two birds... Porsche would use up the remaining Touring or unmodified tubs for NGT on the RSA and the creation of the RSA would be used to boost weak sales in North America. According to the September 1992 Road and Track only 250 cars were initially planned. This would be close to the number of cars produced in the first batch of the RSA.

I have also found my first three cars with the "8" as the fourth digit in the serial number had the same engine type number as a standard C-2 but also had "RS" written in red crayon on the front of the engine (rear of car) behind the heat shield on the rocker box. This is the same marking that was on the Cup USA engines which were published as having hand selected parts or "blueprinting". My latest RSA #9264 does not have rolled fenders OR "RS" written on the engine.

There was also one noticeable difference on #9264 compared to the earlier cars- no black paint around the interior door pannels, under the dash or behind the front grills on the tub. I found no other modifications to the tub in common between the RSA and the Cup USA/Euro RS.

As far as values are concerned ten years have made for a varried field of cars today from $27,000 rebuilt salvage cars to low mile cars in the $50's and up. Two years ago I sold #8060 with 2,100 miles for over $55,000 the first time it was advertised. As time goes on you will see really good low mile, unmodified RS Americas regularly break the $50,000 mark. Cars that have not been used on the track or that have modifications will command the premiums over the majority of cars that have seen track duty and beyond.

These are special cars that have gained a really big following and you should be happy to pay $40,000 for a good example. Look at it this way in 1973 a 911S was only 20 horsepower less and a little bit fatter than a 1973 RS. They were also alot closer in price than today. With some modifications they would be close in performance but the S still will not be an RS. Today the best 73S is in the $30,000+ range, recently one of the best 73 RS Touring models sold for over $100,000 and the 73S is three times as rare!

There is no comparison in PRESENCE between the standard car and the RS America. If you do not care about the RS Legacy I would buy the C-2 and have fun with it. Just don't knock the car because you do not see the value in investing in an RSA in addition to enjoying it. Try one, You will like it...Alot. Don A.

Strabo

Chip,

My RSA has stock motor and drivetrain, as far as I know. I don't believe the motor has ever been out of the car. And I know for sure that it revs much more leisurely than my SC which has a light flywheel.

Strabo

Jack667

fyi -
These guys have a used manual rack advertised for $150
<a href="http://www.tremotorsports.com/Classifieds.html" target="_blank">http://www.tremotorsports.com/Classifieds.html</a>

clubrcr

Rennman:

Wow, you really have done your research. Don't mean to be picky, by one correction to your post. I think it is the 73RS Lightweight you are referring to that has sold for over $100,000. I have seen several 73RS Touring models with prices in the $70s.

9caregiver

Jim, I agree that there are driver type cars in the 70's range, however there have been three recent sales of Touring models that have sold for over $100,000. The Red car from N.Y., Jim Newton's 86 Parade winner (converted to lightweight specs), And another car on the West Coast with real low KMs. They were all Blue Chip cars. there was a sale of a lightweight version that hit the $150,000 mark. Another interesting parrellel is that in 1973 the Touring version was actually more expensive than the Lightweight version much the same as the C-2 to RSA. I also own a 73 RS Touring that may be on the market over the summer... Don

9caregiver