The Legend of the "914 S" & "914 SC", Myth or Fact? Options

[SirAndy]

914-6 badge + a Dremel?

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

The 914-S badge on the black car is actually mounted on a early factory 914-6.

Judging from the incorrect edges on the lower portion of the S, i suspect the owner took a dremel to his 914-6 badge.

The car in question was also upgraded to a 2.2S motor, which explains the "S" quite nicely ...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif) Andy

[Tom_T]

If you want my opinion....well, you'll get it anyway.

The "S" was a Noth American MARKETING perpsective of Porsche/Audi (remember them?). Not condoned by the Factory, and eventually poo-poo'd.

Remember, only the basic format for sales brochures was provided by the Factory. The "fine points" were left to the importers, of which Porsche/Audi NA was one.

It was a marketing ploy guys. That's it!
Pat

ps: no doubt this will piss some people of, but I was there at the time. Ask me about the first 2.0 sitting in the lot in July '72, when I took delivery of my '72. Could have had the Fuchs from it fo $150.

It may surprise you, but ... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

I believe that is pretty much the case which I just presented with all of the documentation for same, in the preceding Pat. So you're not off base, it was simply put - a marketing terminology or nomenclature to call it a "914 S" in the brochures, & to "sell the sizzle, not the steak" in the advertising of it.

What I find odd is that Porsche home office was so shortsighted & two-faced about it.

Shortsighted in not seeing that the "914 S" would've probably helped them sell more 2.0's - and probably did so in the first half of the 73 model year, and maybe would've sold even better if badged as a 914 S!?

And the USA was 60%+/- of their market for all Porsches, & at least they were smart enough not to double brand them as "VW-Porsche" over here, so why not follow through with consistent model line-up naming/badging between the 911 & 914 series!? I mean, who cannot tell the difference between a 911S & a 914S anyway - that's just BS & illogical on PAG's part! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Two-faced because - while they had a hissy fit over the USA branch's use of 914S & put the kibosh on it almost immediately - although I think that they waited for 6 months thinking about it & watching how it worked, since I don't agree that it was a surprise to them - because they had corporate governance then too,

.... but they allowed the British distributor to continue to use the 914SC through to the end of of the 1976 MY & end of 914 production! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/WTF.gif)

I mean really! .... if it were really a problem to have had a 914S over here, then calling it a 914SC in the British Isles should've been an equal problem relative to their claimed confusion with the 911S. ... or why not then call them all 914SC's?

IMHO - there was more to it than what the "outside cover story" tells, because it just doesn't "smell right" even today, and it certainly is illogical & irrational - the opposite of which the precise Teutonic types like to claim of themselves!

In any case - the facts are the facts in this matter -

1. Porsche+Audi (NA) did in fact clearly advertise & promote the 914 2.0 as a "914 S" from Summer 1972 to December 1972 or January 1973 or so, with Porsche's/PAG's implicit or tacit approval -

... because PAG could clearly have shut down the "914S marketing campaign" long before Dec. 72 - if not immediately, had they wanted to, and they certainly saw the marketing & sales materials at some point early on. After all, they did get US magazines in West Germany back then.

2. Those 73 MY 914-2.0/914S cars came loaded with the extra Appearance & Performance Groups' options in the base price, i.e.: at no extra cost for that `73 model year only -

... except as Murray stated on the 74 MY 2.0 LE's, which in & of itself was in fact an extra cost item in a package deal over & above the base price for a 74 MY 914-2.0 - so it still wasn't "loaded in the 2.0 model's base cost".

In fact, the 73 MY 914S/914-2.0 was only about $1000+/- more than a base level 73 MY 914 1.7 - & with the extra cost of the extra Appearance & Performance Groups' options & alloy wheels of any type added to the base price of that model - the difference effectively disappears! Just look at the 73 MY's 1.7 & 2.0 models' window stickers on Jeff Bowlsby's 914 website if you doubt that fact.

So for a little extra dough, you got about 1/4 to 1/3 more HP in a much better equipped chassis - remembering that for the 73 MY the California 1.7's had been detuned to 69 hp from the "49 state 1.7's" 76 hp, vs. the 2.0's 91 hp.

Pat - I know that you had the option to pay $5099 for that 73 2.0 sitting in the lot vs. your 72 My 1.7 at around $4000 with at least some of the options & the better 80 hp 1.7 motor, but when comparing the same 73 MY 1.7 & 2.0 - the economics are a bit closer. Even in 1975 when I looked for my used 914, I still felt it was a better deal to pay $4500 for a 73 2.0 - over the $3000-4200 that I was seeing for a lesser equipped & lower powered with tail-shifter 70-72 1.7 model or even a wheezier 73 1.7L, as many folks have opted since.

[Tom_T]

914-6 badge + a Dremel?

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

The 914-S badge on the black car is actually mounted on a early factory 914-6.

Judging from the incorrect edges on the lower portion of the S, i suspect the owner took a dremel to his 914-6 badge.

The car in question was also upgraded to a 2.2S motor, which explains the "S" quite nicely ...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif) Andy

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif)
Well there you go Andy - you & he just clearly illustrated Porsche's concern over the confusion of 914S'es being 911s'es - in this case with a 911S motor to boot! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

Oh wait - that's why they took a perfectly fine 911T 2.0 flat 6 & detuned it from 120 hp to 110 hp before they stuck them in 914-6's - to avoid that perennial 914-6 & 911T confusion! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol-2.gif)

Maybe they should've just avoided all the "real Porsche" & "real sports car" confusion all together - and just dropped those tail-heavy 911's from the line-up - & just put the good engines in the better cars in the first place, so that all these motor swaps wouldn't be necessary!!!!
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

[MDG]

Here's my perspective. As someone who has owned a printing company for 17 years, I can tell you it's amazing how many things get produced, distributed, then recalled, redesigned and re-printed. Happens all the time; with banks, pharmaceutical companies, retailers, manufacturers etc., etc. It could be legal reasons such as copyright infringement. It could be the Head Office gets wind of it and drops the hammer. In major corporations the territories often work independently from the HO. Sometimes they get their wrists slapped.

I've know of the 914S story for decades - I have the same brochure Tom has posted on several occasions that came with my first '73 I drove as my DD in the 80s. Both my 73's - my old one and my current Phoenix Red - are fully optioned (including the rear window defroster) 2.0 914's.

The story I have always heard is just what Pat has said every time this comes up; Porsche NA decided to add some marketing spit & polish by 'creating' the 914S - a fully optioned version of the then new 2.0 914. They produced the literature, sent it out and then got the cease and desist from Stuttgart. Simple. Happens all the time. Kinda like the Beatles butcher cover.

[Tom_T]

Here's my perspective. As someone who has owned a printing company for 17 years, I can tell you it's amazing how many things get produced, distributed, then recalled, redesigned and re-printed. Happens all the time; with banks, pharmaceutical companies, retailers, manufacturers etc., etc. It could be legal reasons such as copyright infringement. It could be the Head Office gets wind of it and drops the hammer. In major corporations the territories often work independently from the HO. Sometimes they get their wrists slapped.

I've know of the 914S story for decades - I have the same brochure Tom has posted on several occasions that came with my first '73 I drove as my DD in the 80s. Both my 73's - my old one and my current Phoenix Red - are fully optioned (including the rear window defroster) 2.0 914's.

The story I have always heard is just what Pat has said every time this comes up; Porsche NA decided to add some marketing spit & polish by 'creating' the 914S - a fully optioned version of the then new 2.0 914. They produced the literature, sent it out and then got the cease and desist from Stuttgart. Simple. Happens all the time. Kinda like the Beatles butcher cover.

Absolutely Mike, for the most part - (IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) - with you & Pat, that it was nothing more than a marketing gimmick - the same as the ad series of "The __[blank]__ Porsche" ad campaigns of which this was a part or subset. I believe that I stated so above, & that their reason for adding the extra AG & PG options as "included" was to make it more comparable with the 914-6 which it was replacing.

My sole purpose for posting this info was to clarify & put to rest the subject as to the facts of the matters for all those out there who are or may later be curious about the subject (prompted in fact by some questions from others), which has not been done specifically as it's own topic in O&H - & it IS part of the 914's history.

And I was there & had the brochure too back in the day 38 & 41 years ago in person as a young adult, as a car crazy teenager Junior/Senior in High School when the 914's were released in 1969 - as well as a car crazy 20-21 year old Junior/Senior in college when the 914S marketing campaign started for the release of the then "new" 2 Liter 914 model.

However, it was not a quickly retracted campaign as Mike & Pat imply. Nor do I think it should just be "blown off" as some crazy & irresponsible market guy's brash act, which got his hands slapped, and nothing more. It was in fact a well thought out, planned & executed broad based marketing campaign to introduce a new 914 (sub-)model to the North American marketplace, which lasted a long period of time as ad campaigns go! And one at least in part responsible for the best sales volume model year ever for the 914, since about 60% of them were sold here in the USA (not counting Canada), wherein more 73 MY 914-2.0's were sold than in any other of the three 74-76 by a large margin, as in the chart below prepared by PCA with data from Porsche & PCNA.



Here's my perspective and personal opinions as someone with my own business since 1983, involved in some major corporations before that, and some formal education in marketing during my MBA program - but it's still just IMHO & some Sherlock Holmes style deductive reasoning 4 decades later.

My other point in responding to Pat's comment (other than agreeing with him), was that IMHO the US marketing gurus probably were on the right track & more consistent in "branding" terminology & better for marketing the 914 2L's as a "914S" - as opposed to PAG's schizophrenic "branding" of the 911 series with letters (T, L, E, S, SC), while the 914 series was "branded" with numbers denoting engine type/size (-6, 1.7, 1.8, 2.0).

Clearly today we can see that it was a mistake for them to have branded this fine sports car as a "VW-Porsche" in the rest of the world - even if everybody cannot agree that the individual sub-models' inconsistent branding was detrimental. However, you all should take note that since that time - sub-models in all series have instead been consistently branded by Porsche by the letter convention - not engine size convention (924S, 928S, Boxster S, etc.).

If I had been PAG's Director of Marketing back in the day, then I would've strongly recommended using the same system as the predecessor 911 series & 356 series, by adding letters to denote sub-models - which has the added benefit of not needing to be changed as the 1.7 changed to 1.8, or for various 6 cylinder displacements. In that hypothetical case & assuming that you started in the initial 1970 MY, then the 2.0 (& later 72 MY 2.2/2.4) 914-6 would've instead been the 914S (so the guy with the dremeled badge had the right idea), then the 1.7 & 1.8 would've instead both been the 914T or 914L or maybe just 914 for all MYs, and then the 73-76 914/4 2.0 would've been the 911E or 914T if not used on the 1.7/1.8 (say! ... now there's a whole new set of "custom badges" we can all get to thoroughly confuse everybody).

But this is all just an academic hypothetical discussion on this point on my part, so don't other CW's "get your shorts in a bunch," nor those new to the world of 914s think that Porsche ever considered this way of denoting the 914's (as far as I know, they may or may not have ever even discussed it).

And I certainly would've "avoided like the plague" the ill-conceived co-branding of the VW-Porsche anywhere, even if the JV produced it and marketed it in certain regions. Again - Porsche+Audi NA had a far better handle on & were much less naive about market perceptions, than were their German counterparts at either VW or Porsche!

Where I disagree with Mike's & Pat's reasoning on this matter, is that in most cases it doesn't take 6+ months to effect the recall of the incorrect collateral materials, as happened in this case. Make that 9+/- months - if you figure that in the pre-digital printing age, they would've needed to produce the brochures & artwork/copy for the print ads 60-90 days in advance of that, in order to have them distributed to the dealerships by say July 72 when we first saw the 2 Liter 914s on the dealer's lots.

Marketing campaigns like that were not just thrown together willy-nilly, but were well thought out marketing strategies with coordinated ad campaigns, collateral sales materials, sales tactics, etc. And the US marketing staff at Porsche+Audi were trying to do their best to work around awkward model branding & marketing as pursued by their European counterparts.

Somebody from Porsche must have at least seen an ad with the 914S in a US or Canadian magazine before the end of the year in 1972 - even if nobody breathed a word about everything before then. Standard operating procedure would be to at least send copies of the marketing & sales info. produced to the home office. Ergo, it must've collected dust for 9 months - & nobody looked at a US/Canadian magazine or newspaper with their 914S ads in that time span either - in order to have ignored & not stopped the 914S sales & marketing program here.

I think that it is far more likely and reasonable to assume or guess, that someone at Porsche/PAG's executive suite was indeed aware of the 914S marketing campaign here in the US & Canada prior to the release of the materials - or at least shortly afterwords, and they instead elected to sit back awhile to see what happened. Then later at some point in early 1973 someone on top pulled the plug - because it was clearly "gone" as a 914S within the ONE month between the publication of the Jan. 73 Motor Trend article noting the "914S", and the Feb. 73 Road & Track article noting the "914/2" & going further to discuss the change & a complete lack of a substitute model designation supplied by Porsche!

In fact, Porsche/PAG pulled the plug late in the game a bit more than halfway through the 1973 model year, but did it so fast that two "promotional" road test articles in consecutive months from major auto industry publishers were using two names for the car, & Porsche did so without the forethought to even suggest using the 914-2.0 designation until the following 74 MY - as evidenced by the two post-change 73 MY ads which I posted above, which merely refer to a 2.0 engine - not even a 914-2.0 at that point!

Clearly somebody from PAG acted quickly, and could certainly have done so back in Summer of 72! Moreover, they acted without any plan of action to redirect the marketing campaign & branding of their new flagship 914 model! IMHO - that was an ill conceived & amateurish move on whomever's part!

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif) ... and then there's that nagging "WHY" did they allow the Brits to continue to use the 914SC term in marketing the 914-2.0's in the British Isles (and perhaps elsewhere in the Commonwealth)?? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

Again - where are the Brit's to add their two pence?? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif)
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif)

[MDG]

To be honest Tom, I just skimmed through all that. But one thing I noticed; I never implied that the recall of the literature and the '914S' branding happened quickly. I'm not sure where Pat did either. I have no doubt it took months. And if lawyers where involved, months and months. That Motor Trend '914S' road test was probably done in the summer during the press junket on the initial roll out. MT published it when it fit their schedule.

No one disputes all this took place and that for a while the North American marketing guys tried to create a unique for us 914S.

Truthfully, I'm not sure what you are getting at here or what point you are trying to make. "Fact or Myth?" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

This story has been around for 37 years and has been fairly well documented during that time as to what transpired, how the name came up and how the idea was trashed.

[carr914]

Shortsighted in not seeing that the "914 S" would've probably helped them sell more 2.0's - and probably did so in the first half of the 73 model year, and maybe would've sold even better if badged as a 914 S!?

What you are forgetting is that the 914 was the Best Selling car Porsche EVER had for the time it was for sale, until they started cranking out Crap in the 90's.

Tom, I think you are making way too much of this, But it may & I hope it educates the Newbies. Marketing & Lawyers very Rarely mix.

T.C.

[ME733]

............You people are overlooking , sidestepping , some basic facts.....to call the 914-S...a north-american only venture......The cars,914.s, that were produced, WITH ALL the options-WHICH WERE designated (914-S).....Had to be Purpose built ,manufactured.(during 1972,actually, and sold in 1973).....and...that process of including all of the (expensive) options HAD to have had porsche AG approval.(during 1972-1973......and.... at the same TIME other 914,s were being produced which DID NOT HAVE all the options..(offered on the 914-S)......There was a difference in the options, and, thus, the designation as these cars sold in late 1972-early 1973 in america.....as I said previously the FULLY optioned 1974 914 was the LE, can- am car.,obviously designated....do they have a special rear badge?....So the reality , and facts are....1) Porsche AG authorized SOME (1972-1973) early cars to be produced FULLY OPTIONED....2)...Porsche AG, and american distributors, had photographs, artwork,publications and broschures available for the cars...purpose built....designated 914-S...3)..the fully optioned 1974 914,s were designated LE,can-am and were ALSO purpose built.

[MDG]

. . . . and the point is?

Tom starts this thread off, I gathered, as some sort of educational '914S - what's the deal' kind of thing. Did they? Tom asks . . . well yes and no. The no gets 4 lines of type. The yes goes on for pages and pages.

As soon as Pat or myself offer up some more weight to the 'no - not really' side of the story, pages more are written. Why? Are you guys trying to uncover some dark conspiracy here?

Is this all about having justification to be able to refer to your cars as a 914S? If so, go for it!

My first '73 was built in late 1972. My current '73 was built in March 1973. Both cars came with every option available.

Regardless of some short lived, North American produced sales brochure, the only difference between them is the colour.

[URY914]

Frankly, I'm confussed by all this. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/WTF.gif) Is there a conclusion in less than 25 words?

[ME733]

..........MDG, I see, understand your point. I think.......the basic point is , of this on going posting is that 1) there were a series of fully optioned 914,s constructed in 1972-73.....2)Porsche ag produced and had literature available for those cars SEPERATE from the other 914,s produced during the same time frame.3) those fully optioned cars were SOLD as 914-S.....at least for a period of time, WITH Porsche ag knowledge.........I have not seen or heard of any , RETRACTION letter, or documentation, from porsche ag. as to the designation of 914-S not being authorized....4).These cars were produced by Porsche ag, and still exist.,and have the Porsche ag. markrting materials to conferm they were SOLD as 914-S......The point is , in reality , there WERE 914-S cars produced, possabaly in limited numbers. Those of us who HAVE ONE are intrested in preserving them as they are different and a little special.

[MDG]

Hmmm. It's common practice in automobile production that initial assembly lines produce different trim levels so the dealerships have availability to fall buyers. So those buyers aren't turned off by having to wait a month or two.

For Germany to have made a bunch of Appearance Group model 2.0 914's in advance to ship to NA is nothing unusual.

[carr914]

[quote name='carr914' date='Jun 5 2010, 05:13 PM' post='1328473']
[quote name='Tom_T' post='1328275' date='Jun 5 2010, 07:04 AM']

But it may & I hope it educates the Newbies. Marketing & Lawyers very Rarely mix.

T.C.
[/quote]

Well, I thought that this thread would educate Newbies, BUT, when people post "Facts" that are Not facts, it will not educate, but confuse.

The S was Marketing by the American distributor, period.

Here are some Facts;

By the 1973 Model year, the 914-6 was gone.
EnthusiastsCar Magazines were not impressed with the 1.7 (See attached R&T excerpt)
The Porsche designed 2.0 was coming out.
Magazine Ads were produced touting the better model the 2.0 (in your guys words the S)

[MDG]

Frankly, I'm confussed by all this. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/WTF.gif) Is there a conclusion in less than 25 words?

Yes. The R&T excerpt TC posted above (which ironically Tom did as well in one of his initial posts) pretty much sums it up nicely.

That's what a good editor will do for you; point made in a paragraph. Period.

Moving on.

[ME733]

[quote name='carr914' date='Jun 6 2010, 10:48 AM' post='1328762']
[quote name='carr914' date='Jun 5 2010, 05:13 PM' post='1328473']
[quote name='Tom_T' post='1328275' date='Jun 5 2010, 07:04 AM']

But it may & I hope it educates the Newbies. Marketing & Lawyers very Rarely mix.

T.C.
[/quote]

Well, I thought that this thread would educate Newbies, BUT, when people post "Facts" that are Not facts, it will not educate, but confuse.

The S was Marketing by the American distributor, period.

Here are some Facts;

By the 1973 Model year, the 914-6 was gone.
EnthusiastsCar Magazines were not impressed with the 1.7 (See attached R&T excerpt)
The Porsche designed 2.0 was coming out.
Magazine Ads were produced touting the better model the 2.0 (in your guys words the S)




[/quote]
........................Could you post the entire page, which includes the paragraph you have shown?.....thanks.

[ME733]

.............COULD you post the entire page(s)... , from which , the paragraph you show came from., and the source if possable would be appreciated.thanks.

[carr914]

Full Article, some of which is on Pg1 of this thread

[carr914]

[ME733]

.......Thank you carr914,....for the posting of the r/t article..what was the date ,as I can not see /find it......and the specific small paragraph ,you posted previously, is not in the article you posted last.....could you help out again by providing the full page , source and date, of the small posting you made earlier....thank you.

[Tom_T]

To be honest Tom, I just skimmed through all that. But one thing I noticed; I never implied that the recall of the literature and the '914S' branding happened quickly. I'm not sure where Pat did either. I have no doubt it took months. And if lawyers where involved, months and months. That Motor Trend '914S' road test was probably done in the summer during the press junket on the initial roll out. MT published it when it fit their schedule.

No one disputes all this took place and that for a while the North American marketing guys tried to create a unique for us 914S.

Truthfully, I'm not sure what you are getting at here or what point you are trying to make. "Fact or Myth?" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

This story has been around for 37 years and has been fairly well documented during that time as to what transpired, how the name came up and how the idea was trashed.

Mike & Pat, don't get me wrong - no harm no foul! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

The purpose of this write up is in the History part of the O&H theme, so it is just to pass along the info. for others who may be interested &/or heard the "legend" - so I don't want them later on reading this & thinking that is was some quickie flash in the pan that was pulled back quickly, since it lasted half +/- of the 73 MY.

In reality it's more of a curiousity, & I like to play what if's as in the above. It probably would make for a good B-school case study! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)