Hello, maybe someone with knowledge in the subject could throw some information of what is this extra code 569. Is it a package of anti-fog as I have seen in various books? Regards!
Printable View
Hello, maybe someone with knowledge in the subject could throw some information of what is this extra code 569. Is it a package of anti-fog as I have seen in various books? Regards!
Looks like front and rear fog lights. See here. (Google is your friend)
https://www.porscheclubgb.com/PCGB/m...s.pdf?ext=.pdf
Bob B
Thank you, Bob. Porsche France indicated this extra in my father's car as Amortisseurs de pare-chocs AR from there asks me. I have seen several books in which this extra is named as a group of added lights ... Could it fit with the perforations that my 911 has on the front bumper? As you see?Quote:
Originally Posted by SIMI BOB
Attachment 454730
Attachment 455796
The image comes from someone from the forum!
+
Attachment 455797
+
Attachment 455798
+
Attachment 455799
+
Attachment 455856
You have to be very careful. Many option codes were recycled, so you have to be very model year specific. I would tend to believe printed matter if it was correct year.
If the option description from France is correct (Amortisseurs de pare-chocs arrière), then the rear collision bar is a close translation. The "Tell us how you want it equipped" page is a 1972 option list, and 569 was not on the 1971 list. So this is consistent with your car.
the three holes in your bumper, if that is what you are asking about, they look like what a guy would do in his garage to hold his bumper up that was sagging. he would just drill holes and put a few screws in. I have seen it often. it was a cheap effective fix, but not factory.Quote:
Originally Posted by _gonbau
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott A
Thank you very much for that information, many will know those details due to the intensive use of their cars! These are details that are learned by word of mouth or simply by logic, something that I have not applied in this matter because as you say is an economic and fast method to solve a problem. I will try to see where these screws you are commenting would go.
+
I have checked what Scott A has told me. And he is absolutely right! Thanks to this I have also realized that the deformation in the front corner may be due to the metal arm that supports the bumper that at some point hit in this place breaking (according to what I think the defense and the arm) with its consequent repair!
Attachment 455855
Quote:
Originally Posted by davep
I am also to believe in the printed! I have to look where I got the image since I have it annotated as "1972 options" I think it was from someone in the forum! But in that same image I do not see the option code of my gas tank which "comes from the factory". I take the opportunity to ask. The numbers that are skipped in the options codes .... What do they owe?
Agree, 569 in 1972 its listed as Collision Bar, rear. (document in post 4 is mine)
In 1970 and 1971 its not listed, but beleive its the same.
1969 and earller had four digit codes, so they are out.
The french translation is not accurate btw, they do not know its the rear bar, an accessories.
Aamco sold it as an aftermarket, but the factory did too, slightly different.
Seen below, this one is Aamco.
Attachment 455935
Quote:
Originally Posted by 911T1971
Thank you very much for your answer! Clarified the issue of 569 I still need to ask Porsche Spain because in its "COA" this option is not expressed! I leave a picture of my back bar. They told me that it is part of a "kit" in which you could also put some bars on the roof to put some "skys" etc ..
Attachment 456060
Those over-riders and rubber are different than the standard parts, so obviously made for use with the bar. I don't think this was used as part of a ski rack kit.
I do not think so either! They only illustrated me with an image in which the "kit" was complete and all chrome was pretty good!
Agree
No ski rack.
Still not clear, which year is ur car?
Btw Pic in post 10 shows a front bar.
Rear bar were double.
72'Quote:
Originally Posted by 911T1971
you can see the post about him in my profile!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 911T1971
Are you sure about that?
it would be a curious fact xD
Attachment 456092
Looks like aftermarket but Im no specialist.
Here are factory items, 1970.
Front:
Attachment 456100
Rear:
Attachment 456101
Actually that's not correct, the Porsche factory rear bar for 1972 was single just like his that is pictured in post #15, and in English it was called "ram protection" or nerf bar and it's a very rare factory option and it's got nothing to do with ski racks, just do a search on the forum.
Thx, so i was partly wrong, didnt know 72 was different design. Thx
I found this photo that illustrates what I wanted to say with the "skys"! Also I leave you another I found another car with the same bar as my father! Great appreciations.Quote:
Originally Posted by 911T1971
Attachment 456115
Quote:
Originally Posted by gulforange
Thank you very much for the clarification! I'm going to investigate the forum!
The picture in post #19 is not a 1972 accessories brochure, it is a 1971 or 1970 because that red Porsche 911T has 2.2 engine decal on the rear window (1970/71). Starting in 1972 the engine grill would have a 2.4 badge and the grill itself would be black anodize along with the Porsche lettering and 911T emblem like your car in post #15.
Without seeing the cover of this brochure my money is it's a 1971 accessories brochure and on page 6 has a picture of the interior and it has a 911E badge on the glove box cover (1971 was the last year of this badge starting in 1972 there wasn't a badge on the glove box cover). If the brochure's cover is gray with the psychedelic 911 with orange wheels and pink wheel arches and blue Porsche stripe, then that's a 1971 accessories brochure, and for many years people though it was a 1972 accessories brochure.
Agree, Yes, red car pic is from the 1971 2.2l issue, not 1972.
You see the double rear bar mounted on red car.
In post 10 the 1970 issue is posted, same equipment.
Found another confirmation for 569
1972 issue
Attachment 456148
Check option 569. it say (shock) bar for rear bumper > Rammschutz für hintere Stossstange
Attachment 456149
-
@gonbau
You need to check 1972 brochures only.
While some options were carried over from previous
Model years, only the right year document will confirm the infos.
(Some pictures in brochures are also not updated, only written infos confirm the facts)
FYI, here some of the most common 1972 items, which were printed seperately as RoW (RestofWorld/Europe) and for USA marked.
Attachment 456150
Attachment 456157
Attachment 456151
Attachment 456152
Attachment 456153
Attachment 456154
Attachment 456155
Same cover exists for 1972 and 1973, different content.
Attachment 456156
I wanted to illustrate what I said before the Skys, what level of details you have in your mind! In order to differentiate them I start with the side oil cover and then I start to look at the motor grille that, as you say, is anonized black! Right now I have it painted with "FULL DIP" in black "mate" but rather for protection since when it comes out, I will try to take it as original as possible !! Thank you very much for the information, especially for the guidelines over the years! They are appreciated and when it comes to "certify" the options it is more pleasant to know in what years they were both!Quote:
Originally Posted by gulforange
Take this opportunity to ask a question .... The fiber defenses of the 911 S could be modified at the ends to enlarge them and that they were ST or would have to start from a defense to ST directly?
Thank you very much for the confirmation! Out of curiosity Do you have them in physical or has it been a compilation over the years? I am impressed by the level of detail! Thanks for that image in ALeman, it's worth a thousand words hahaha! By the way, that 911 of the "72" does not take the oil side cover a bit strange?
Yes, i have all brochure in physicial and much much more. We are planning a book for references but it takes a while to finish. Yes, many brochures reused older pictures and photoshopped/hand retouched pics, the 72 cover is such an example.
They draw the oil flap by hand to a 71 model, reason why only the written content in brochures confirms facts.
Hi Karim
Slightly off topic but mention it clarify a point of detail sources mentioned here...
Are we sure there are 72 and 73 versions of the large format brochure. The printing reference number and use of American English vs English English and VW-Porsche vertreibsgesellschaft mbH on one but not the other suggests to me RoW ve USA versions. I believe there were ROW and American English version each with slightly different content. I don't have your collection but do have both these and think the difference is clear particularly the 1006.20 vs 1006.23 reference.
Likewise the simpler brochure 4 page has 1004.23 vs 1004.20.
Porsche suffix xxxx.20 appears in a number of the documents that are original to my British market car and the xxxx .20 denotes ROW written in English. Great Britain, Australia, South Africa, etc. being examples in that market. English language clues in text being the spelling of certain words eg litre vs litre and so forth. This style subtleties jumps out to a Brit who has at times lived worked in North America. The language used by Porsche in ROW routinely uses Americanized spellings tire vs tyre but that is not unusual for companies publishing English documents in second language. The suffix large format 20 vs 23 brochure have a different style of writing in some parts. I suspect what has long been assumed to be 72 73 reprints is in fact a misunderstanding of NA vs RoW market variants of these There may indeed be reprints in 72 and 73 but doubt that is the reason. There are English language ROW and North America versions of drivers and owners manuals, etc as you point out so this was likley the case here. If using the two variations as reference to year this may be relevant -- although publications generally can be misleading in authenticity
I don't collect literature and recognise your collection and respect your deep knowledge on publications but sharing this viewpoint and drawing attention to xxxx.20 vs .23 being a useful determinant particularly if you will write a book one day about literature.
Best
Steve
Sometimes its not clear for which (english) market a brochure was used, especially in 1973, where the overall literature production was reduced.
The „white 911E“ luxury format brochure does differ in content, but you actually need both years to get proof. Possible used in 1972 for RoW only, in 1973 I assume for all worldwide markets, since a 73 US rear bumper design is seen on the pictured cars.
They show clearly 1972 and resp. 1973 cars, identified easely with the chrome vs black front grills.
Some pages are similar in both years, however some did change for 1973 issue.
(The 1973 brochure is much more common on the market, the 1972 less).
All were printed in english, german, french or italian.
1972 top
1973 down (cover patinated)
Attachment 456170
Here some pages which differ:
1972 top
1973 down
Attachment 456171
1972 top
1973 down
Attachment 456172
1972 top
1973 down
Attachment 456173
1972 top (note oil flap)
1973 down (note oil flap missing > photo retouched)
Attachment 456174
1972 top
1973 down (seen far left is the planned „top of the line“ 73 2.7S model w wide flares (a RS prototype...the factory changed its concept and decided to go for a limited edition 2.7RS instead), pic taken in Spring 1972, the model line is therefore wrong, too late to change and it went into printing w/o changed)
Attachment 456175
1972 top
1973 down
Attachment 456176
Although undated -- so agree the year is not clear-- each is clear marked on language and markets in the print code suffix.....XXXX.20 in one case and different suffix on other
Decodes as follows:
Where first digit 2 indicates English
The second digit in conjunction with the 2 ie 20 designates English Rest of world ( britain, Australia..
To be clear I've added photo both are English language --not comparing German to English.
Attachment 456186
Different print numbers and one is VW Porsche the other is not. Hence my point that there are ROW and NA variants of this document
It is my view that the intended market is amajor reason the text content is different particularly when looking at the style of the writing which is more anglesied style in xxx.20 than the other version.
I have both versions in English but .20 came among my cars papers along with with a British market technical spec insert and also a foolscap price list.
The way things are phrased subtly differ in England and North America. Becomes evident when two English variants compared back to back. " Petrol Vs " gasoline" an obvious example. Note other spec and the horsepower differences reflecting the products in the different markets. Carbs for T vs all mfi makes it pretty clear.
Attachment 456191
Similar on the simpler brochure
Attachment 456189
Again both are written in English language albeit subtly different tag line. Litre vs Liter.
Attachment 456190
Just one of those small detail... back to the original question.
Not convinced personally that there is evidence of 72 and 73 being the reason for two version for the two luxury white brochures that we we see written in English -- based on the two examples that I own. I might be wrong.
I do however think there is clear evidence ( examples as shown above) there was a ROW English and a North America version of the luxury brochures in English. Geographical segmentation resulting in the content being different I.e. tweaked in each version to suit the ROW vs NA english speaking markets. The xxxx.20 suffix for British, Australia etc, the vw Porsche branding, the language phrasing, the vehicle spec details that we see on one fitting the row market.
Not a big deal either way but just another interesting detail :)
Edit:
I have three copies of the White luxury brochure all written in English ....but none of mine have the photo in showing three cars which is presumably 72.the upper image. If anyone has a copy of the luxury brochure with the three car image that written in English it would indicate there are also 72 and 73 variations in English beyond the NA vs Row variations I know exist from my own megre literature pieces. There was clearly a German one shown top in karim's photo here but was there one in English with that three car content presumably for 72?
Attachment 456274
Further research needed offline before your planned literature book, I'd suggest, rather than this discussion of references becoming the core of this thread. Or maybe needs a new thread as this is a tangent to OP.
Best
S
Quote:
Originally Posted by 911T1971
Wow .... that I did not expect! Thank you for that level of information again ... It would never have crossed your mind that you would have done it "by hand"
I think I roll to one side and I open my eyes wide to learn! Certainly so much knowledge in you makes me seem extremely small in this world! If the book goes ahead, I'll be there to buy it. The only question I have of what you are illustrating is about the "discarded" Rs. Have there been "other" discarded modifications? Excuse me if I derive the subject a bit. I can leave it aside.
P.S. It would be interesting to change the title of the post by m569 1972.!
Again, thank you very much for all that you are teaching here!
Hi Baudett,
Karim certainly has an impressive literature collection...
Not sure what you mean by " discarded RS" "other discarded modifications" but the whole RS homolgation special edition model essentially arose out of the ashes of an aborted "interesting 914 project" once the decisions had been made to go for it to meet FIA CSI homologation timescales.
The RS model was launched in early part of October 72 -- somewhat out of step being a little later the typical timing of Porsche annual production model changes. Pace of rapid change and evolution of design details is quite evident in the literature around that late calendar 72 timing. In addition to the brochure above with that 2.7S, other small examples are: the loose one page leaflet insert to the RS sales brochure informing side late change to negative image carrera side decals; the kundendienst-information showing it with an S front spoiler rather than the final RS front spoiler (in all except French markets); that same document also showing chassis numbers 9113601001 -5000 designated as SC Coupé as compared to the RS coupé 911360001-1000; arguably the separate blue RS model supplement rather than RS being extra content in the ROW drivers handbook; sticker on the service record to ad the correct model lineup for the earliest RS, also the 73 retail price list in the British market had to be hastily reprinted just one month after the new 73 model year one had been issued by importer without the RS model even being mentioned.
Were the UK importers unaware and surprised by a fast paced secret homologation project or if aware just keeping it under wraps until launch despite the waste of redundant pricelist? Ferry Porsche was after all a member of the British importers management Board.
This 2.7S being featured in this luxury model year brochure in NA before it was decided that 73 RS not to be sold there.
Literature details ...Kind of like footprints of the evolving thinking during calendar 72 in the relevant documentation.
Steve
New topic discussed here
http://www.early911sregistry.org/for...894#post972894
Attachment 457213Attachment 457212Attachment 457211Attachment 457210In reference to post #18 the single bar is also shown in the factory 1969 Porsche accessories brochure and is listed as option #9306 without the black rubbersAttachment 457209
ram protection 60?
Attachment 472007
option code 569 from 1971 was (kit M429 and M571)
in 1972 the 569 became the nerfbar! But, what have extra number does the kit 429 + 571? I try to see these extras in the original 72 list and I don't see them.
I have another question regarding these two documents. Both documents are porsche originals and indicate the 1972 extras, correct? Why in one of the brochures does not appear the 571 and in another it does? specifications of each country?Attachment 551874Attachment 551875
https://www.early911sregistry.org/fo...AAAElFTkSuQmCC
How about some information on the documents you show?? When researching and asking questions, the reader needs a frame of reference.Quote:
Originally Posted by _gonbau
US vs non-US options? I don't believe the rear fog light was available for US delivery (DOT)
Ok, so there is something that I do not understand. I thought that the frame of reference was the same post and the question would be understood so I go to it. The documents that I have shown belonging to this same post. Do they belong to the American market? I understand this from what you say. But ... then, what number was the rear light kit for the German market? Is there a document where the kits are named? I remember some
+
I would also like to ask regarding the delivery in Hahn 115. Appointed in other posts. Did I understand that being "so close" to the factory did not appear in the delivery brochures?
+
if 569 was not available in 1971 ... When was this code used for the light kit? Before 71 or after 72?
+
stupid question! One of the documents is obviously German!
+
Is there a known vehicle that has equipped the 569 fog light kit? Or that extra number didn't even really exist?
+429 was also not allowed in the US in 1972?
m566?
+
what year were M429 fog lights?
https://www.early911sregistry.org/fo...AAAElFTkSuQmCC
After two years and multiple brochures (as well as accessories) all discussed in the thread it was just confusing..Quote:
Originally Posted by _gonbau
I tend to trust the original parts manuals first and then brochures second.
The rear crash bar is shown as an option in the 71 parts manual with the different bumper over rider called out to go along with it. It is also called out in my 72/73 parts manual. Interestingly I just learned something new today that I didn't before. For 73, the parts manual lists the chrome over rider for the crash bar for the T's and E's but, not the S or the RS. For the S and RS, the manual calls out the BLACK over rider with the crash bar. I don't think I've ever seen a picture of that configuration.
Considering the '73 USA requirement that spawned the big clunky rubber over riders, I doubt that the rear crash bar would have been available for the USA market in '73, thought the manual doesn't state it. Does call out the rubber over riders as USA specific.
Also in my 71 manual, the rear fog light is listed for markets EXCEPT USA, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland.
So, I think it is safe to say that a brochure intended for a particular Country (market) would not list options that couldn't be delivered to that region.
Zubehörpreisliste 3.2.1973 shows M569 crash bar as an option for T/E/S but not in combination with 411 (black overrider), while in this case the black overriders are the Rilsan black coated metal ones and not the US plastic ones.
Well then the '73 parts manual and the '73 brochure don't agree. Which is correct? Odd that the parts manual specifically calls out the black over riders for S and RS.Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk07
black and chrome had been an option for all models.
have offered a set black M411 front rides S spec