Best Rear End
- Thread starter Carbonite
- 776 comments
- 109,016 views
- 225
- Outremont
- 102
- Poland
502 vehicles were produced to homologate the car for competition with them featuring tuned engines, larger rear wings and flared arches to accommodate bigger wheels and brakes. The car looked fairly aggressive but was still civilised.
What a difference a year makes. For 1990, Mercedes decided to pull out all the stops and released the Evo II, one of the most recognisable Mercedes of all time. The car featured an absolutely mad bellicose body kit with huge arches, 18-inch wheels and a massive rear rear wing. To back up this new aggression, Mercedes managed to release another 40bhp from the 2.5 litre engine (195bhp vs 235bhp). The Cosworth’s self-levelling suspension was seriously high-tech too, meaning that this car really was a game changer.
What a difference a year makes. For 1990, Mercedes decided to pull out all the stops and released the Evo II, one of the most recognisable Mercedes of all time. The car featured an absolutely mad bellicose body kit with huge arches, 18-inch wheels and a massive rear rear wing. To back up this new aggression, Mercedes managed to release another 40bhp from the 2.5 litre engine (195bhp vs 235bhp). The Cosworth’s self-levelling suspension was seriously high-tech too, meaning that this car really was a game changer.
Last edited:
- 40,766
One thing I've found myself really attracted to over the years is a very specific shape of rear fender design; where a car that is ordinarily somewhat narrow and with pronounced tumblehome flares out quite a bit just around the wheel wells to fit massive tires in; but without resorting to the nearly bolted-on fenders look in the process.
The R32 had it front and rear (whereas the R33 and R34 didn't so much):
The M Coupe had it (which is why the regular Z3 Coupe looks so "off" in comparison):
The 993 Turbo did it (whereas the 930/964 looked more bolt-on in approach, and the 996 was much more slab sided):
And, yes, the C4 (though not as much as the others, and it's much more pronounced on the front than the rear):
The Esprit V8 also had it (likely why I always thought it was the best looking of them), though it was not as obvious because it also had tacked on fender flares. Some combination of a the fairly narrow greenhouse along with a lot of tumblehome on the overall body shape (which is the big thing, since so many cars nowadays are slab-sided what I'm assuming is aerodynamic reasons) makes the flared fender shapes really pop; especially with the flush appearance of the factory wide tires. Gives the appearance that the fenders were rolled from the factory.
The R32 had it front and rear (whereas the R33 and R34 didn't so much):
The M Coupe had it (which is why the regular Z3 Coupe looks so "off" in comparison):
The 993 Turbo did it (whereas the 930/964 looked more bolt-on in approach, and the 996 was much more slab sided):
And, yes, the C4 (though not as much as the others, and it's much more pronounced on the front than the rear):
The Esprit V8 also had it (likely why I always thought it was the best looking of them), though it was not as obvious because it also had tacked on fender flares. Some combination of a the fairly narrow greenhouse along with a lot of tumblehome on the overall body shape (which is the big thing, since so many cars nowadays are slab-sided what I'm assuming is aerodynamic reasons) makes the flared fender shapes really pop; especially with the flush appearance of the factory wide tires. Gives the appearance that the fenders were rolled from the factory.
Last edited:
- 50,876
- Australia
- SpacedustDaddy
A white Torino in another thread, brought back a memory of this:
One of my Uncle's had a white Catalina. I must have been about 7yo and went into the garage with my cousin to pretend drive. I switched on the hazards and couldn't turn them off. We both jumped out of the car and ran out the house. When my Uncle asked why his lights were on, I said, "The devil made me do it.".
I'll never forget those taillights flashing.
One of my Uncle's had a white Catalina. I must have been about 7yo and went into the garage with my cousin to pretend drive. I switched on the hazards and couldn't turn them off. We both jumped out of the car and ran out the house. When my Uncle asked why his lights were on, I said, "The devil made me do it.".
I'll never forget those taillights flashing.
Last edited:
- 29,726
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
A 964T is a 964T. "965" is a common colloquialism referring to the 964T because it's "more than a normal 964," but it's still a variant on 964 architecture. The 965 was a stillborn project at Porsche that evolved into the project that would eventually become the production 959.I agree wholeheartedly.
Do you mean the 964 turbo? 965 is a 964 turbo.
He wrote 964 and not 964 turbo. A 964 is NOT the turbo version.
What I have read is that there was a 969 prototype which was called internally the 965. It was not the prototype for the 959 but a successor of the 959 built on the upcoming 964 platform. The 959 was built from 1986 - 1993 before the 964 which was built from 1989 - 1993.
The 969 prototype (successor of the 959 and to replace the 930 also known as the 911 Turbo) was canceled and the 964 turbo was born.
Owners of a 964 turbo say that all the body parts not shared with the standard 964 have 965 stamped into the body parts including the Turbo Cup Wheels.
https://www.total911.com/fortune-telling/ Read the comments.
It seems that nobody knows for sure.
Whatever is correct, in MHO some Porsches have the most best looking rear ends.
Last edited:
- 16,104
- Melbourne
- ScottPuss20
- CheetahsMeow
- 684
- Croatia
- NekoPuffer_PPP
Ford GT90
- 6,041
- Puget Sound
- Crash852
Do you mean the 964 turbo? 965 is a 964 turbo.
Oh god, I never thought I would see this debate here on GTP as well. This is within the realm of a Porsche pedant. Interestingly enough, there's been a thread that popped up recently on Rennlist with people arguing about this.
So it is well known that there was a stillborn project coded by Porsche as the 965. However, as kikie alluded to, parts for/first used on the 964 generation Turbos all start with 965 in the part number (really, it's parts first installed and used on a specific model; if another model reuses the same part later, the part number retains the original model's prefix). This includes wheels, suspension components, body panels, even the basic non-yet-serialized VIN sticker. Porsche has a habit of using the internal code designation as the leading digits for parts first used in that model (with exceptions for things like fasteners and clips and things like that, which often use a 900 or a 999 prefix).
So this settles it then, right? 964 generation Turbos are really 965s. But the thing is (and this is something I learned only on a Porsche forum), Porsche also incorporated the model code into the 7th, 8th and 12th digits of the VIN itself (check for yourself if you don't believe me, the Porsche classic parts catalog is available direct on Porsche's website). So for a regular 993, the 7th, 8th and 12th digits would be 9, 9, and 3 respectively. Likewise, 911 generation Turbos, the 7th, 8th and 12th digits would be 9, 3, and 0 respectively. However, on the 964 generation Turbo, the 7th, 8th and 12th digits of the VIN is still 9, 6, and 4 respectively. So part designations say one thing (964 generation Turbos ARE 965), while VIN numbers say another thing (964 generation Turbos ARE NOT 965).
For the 911, the Turbos had a separate code (930), but with 993 and on, no Turbos had a distinct code. So which camp did the 964 fall under? There's precedent and history of Porsche doing both.
Did Porsche officially repurpose the 965 internal designation code away from that stillborn project to the 964 Turbo? Porsche hasn't officially and definitively weighed in, but there's no reason why a company can't repurpose or reuse an internal project code/name. The reasonable compromise to me seems to be as long as the context is clear, it's acceptable to refer to the 964 generation Turbo as either a 964 Turbo or a 965.
Last edited:
- 4,578
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
One thing I've found myself really attracted to over the years is a very specific shape of rear fender design; where a car that is ordinarily somewhat narrow and with pronounced tumblehome flares out quite a bit just around the wheel wells to fit massive tires in; but without resorting to the nearly bolted-on fenders look in the process.
The R32 had it front and rear (whereas the R33 and R34 didn't so much):
The M Coupe had it (which is why the regular Z3 Coupe looks so "off" in comparison):
The 993 Turbo did it (whereas the 930/964 looked more bolt-on in approach, and the 996 was much more slab sided):
And, yes, the C4 (though not as much as the others, and it's much more pronounced on the front than the rear):
View attachment 979922
The Esprit V8 also had it (likely why I always thought it was the best looking of them), though it was not as obvious because it also had tacked on fender flares. Some combination of a the fairly narrow greenhouse along with a lot of tumblehome on the overall body shape (which is the big thing, since so many cars nowadays are slab-sided what I'm assuming is aerodynamic reasons) makes the flared fender shapes really pop; especially with the flush appearance of the factory wide tires. Gives the appearance that the fenders were rolled from the factory.
I nominate your post to be the best in this page...
- 15,165
- Grandville Mi
- Gotbeefboy564
- Got beef boy564
Similar threads
