From Road & Track, June 2013, page 58. Caption reads "The skeletal 964 is one of two 911s here built for driver training." Photo is taken at Porsche's warehouse for factory vehicles. The photo only shows the rear of the car.
It haunts me. I just can't stop thinking about it. It's sorta like a locost, except you start with the vehicle then cut everything off and weld on a roll cage / exoskeletal frame. Sorta like an Exocet. I can't stop wondering how little it weighs. And for what possible reason Porsche did that modification for "driver training." That just doesn't compute. But I love the result!
How many other cars would benefit from this treatment? I want to see a 944 done like this.
David
I've been haunted by the beauty of that myself.
That's fantastic.
"We can not train properly the driver if the car has a skin." Why?
Maybe because you can see the wheels and suspension working, kinda like an open-wheeler?
and I am sure being able to see, hear, and even feel what the car is doing helps a lot
Well sign me up for that training.
Porsche has been doing this for ages. Here's one that they did with a 356 back in the 1950s.
Better visibility of apexes? Looks like a ton of fun.
And here's before they started cutting, but after they removed the composite panels and rollcage:
That's it. That's all that Toyota Team Europe left of the Celica shell. Then they bolted in a spindly looking aluminum (!) roll cage, stuck some flared overfenders on, put in a 350-400hp engine, and went flying through the woods.
It's amazing... I would also like to sign up for "driver training"
The whole article was pretty awesome.
I've been wanting to build a street legal 90s Impreza 2.2 like that for YEARS now. 135hp is a lot more fun at 1900lbs.
I admit that it's a whole lot easier to understand what the suspension is doing as you drive when you can actually see it. I was just getting heavy into racing when I got to drive a Formula Ford. Lots of little light bulbs went off as theories and principles started making sense.
chandlerGTi wrote: The whole article was pretty awesome.
The whole ISSUE was pretty amazing. I haven't said that about R&T in ages.
Huh, a friend has an X-1/9 done up like that. It wasn't any lighter than a stock exxie and they aren't that light for their size to begin with.
Careful consideration of the structure and the materials used is important if you're going for improved performance.
Anyone else remember the RUF NATO 911?
turboswede wrote: Huh, a friend has an X-1/9 done up like that. It wasn't any lighter than a stock exxie and they aren't that light for their size to begin with. Careful consideration of the structure and the materials used is important if you're going for improved performance.
I have cut up an Exxie.. there is a -lot- of steel down low on those cars in the box sectiont that supports the engine and rear suspension. Lots of watertraps too
In reply to ValuePack:
EJ22 + aircooled VW
It is a lot more fun. 
JohnInKansas wrote: In reply to ValuePack: EJ22 + aircooled VW It *is* a lot more fun.
I daily drive a rotten, ratty Legacy with a perfectly serviceable low mileage dual port EJ22, don't tempt me.
You'll need to log in to post.
