'63 356B T-6 Rebuild

[JOP]

Looking good John,
So are you doing the right as OEM or do you copy your new left side ?

I have sometimes experianced that when you look at 356 that have been repaired that you get all sorts of wheel arcs......too wide, to narrow, not in a nice arc or just ugly and out of line....you start woundering if they fixed them in a nonlighted garage.

Thanks for your update
Ps did you get yourself a Artic overal so you can stay out working in the garage the whole winter

[JTR70]

Nice job rolling and shaping that fender repair section John! I see several solid hours invested there. Sorry to hear that you missed the corner contour a bit Now that you have a template from the black car I assume you'll just add in what you lack as it goes? Keep up the great work! Your chassis repairs look really nice in the wheel arch shots BTW.

[John Pierce]

Hi Justin,

The fender wheel opening contour is exactly as made by Karmann. Enough original metal was on my car to see that the contour wasn't messed with by Bubba

For some reason the Karmann metal workers made the left and right fender front arches differently, as shown now on 2 cars from the same year. I made templates of the wheel arch from the car I'm restoring and they perfectly matched the black 356's wheel arches. My left fender template exactly matched the left fender of the running car....as did the right template and fender.

JOP asks a valid question: should I go with the OEM difference or make the right fender match the left? My thought is to go with what is original as the black 356 has it that way also. Any thoughts?

JP

[Jack Staggs]

Ps did you get yourself a Artic overal so you can stay out working in the garage the whole winter

Like this one?:
http://moots.com/wp-content/uploads/Randy-Snow-Suit-A-Christmas-Story-2.jpg

[Phil Planck]

John
I have been away on a hunting trip with no internet access for 10 days. You sure have made a lot of progress in those 10 days. Nice work on that lower, front fender repair section. I like that new nose a lot. May have to consider that option, as I still have a lot of nose repair ahead of me. Thanks for posting the progress.

Phil

[JTR70]

JOP asks a valid question: should I go with the OEM difference or make the right fender match the left? My thought is to go with what is original as the black 356 has it that way also. Any thoughts?

JP

I would recommend shaping both sides to original specs/dimensions. Though most people would never notice, guys who know these cars and know what they are looking at might find your fenders slightly odd or "just not right" for some reason. They might not be able to put their finger on exactly as to why but it just seams slightly out to the eye. Hope this made sense...

This historical racing coupe is a good example. To the causal observer the body appears stock but you'll notice that the front fender arches have been opened up a bit more.

very subtle but it is different once you see a comparison shot of a stock "A" fender opening. Just my 2 cents... Justin

[Trevor]

Ps did you get yourself a Artic overal so you can stay out working in the garage the whole winter

Like this one?:
http://moots.com/wp-content/uploads/Randy-Snow-Suit-A-Christmas-Story-2.jpg

It's just not Christmas unless I watch that movie at least once.

You'll shoot your eye out!

JP - I'd say make them match.

[bbspdstr]

Yep, make them match. To bolster Justin's point about anomalies, here is a picture of a Porsche replacement fender over an original on a 356. Which is correct? The car is a C-2 Cabriolet, so I matched that opening even though it was different from other 356s I referenced.

I am guilty of saying too many times "Ya can't see both sides at the same time" but I firmly believe Porsche INTENDED to be symmetrical in it's construction of all 356s, even with minor differences one to another.

[Phil Planck]

My passenger fender was made by Fay Butler during the ECH several years ago in Mass. He made templates from a NOS fender he had. Here he is demonstrating his wire edging machine:



Here is that fender during installation on Foam Car:




I modified his fender to match the rocker.

Phil

[John Pierce]

Phil, That is one neat machine. It looks like the repro fender fit your car very nicely.

I am still torn whether to make each fender front symmetrical as Bruce suggests. Stylistically that makes sense. I think Justin is saying to go with how it originally was on the car. I've now seen two Karmann cars now where the front is asymmetric. I guess it boils down to what one considers OEM.

[tperazzo]

Hi John,
If it helps you can mail me your templates and I'll compare with my Karmann too. My drivers side is original and accident free. Passenger side is re-done by me.

I need to update my post but I've spent a lot time making sure there is one continuous arc along the whole side of the car. I hate it when the front fenders look like wings bulging out.

You may be more concerned near the bumper area and wheel cutouts if I remember right.
Either way best of luck and don't rush it.
Tom

[Jack Staggs]

Speaking of anomolies, and since no one has mentioned it yet, I would like to suggest that on original cars that I have observed over the years, generally the leading edge of the rocker panel turns in at a greater radius at the front, in those first few inches, than the overall curve of the rocker. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 1/4" or so at the tip. Looks kinda funny, but when I see uniform curvature there, I strikes me as a replacement rocker. Any thoughts by others?

[bbspdstr]

It was said to me early in my career that to be "original" when painting engine tin, one had to miss some spots and shake some lint and a hair into it, as 356s were NOT ever perfect and a restoration where everything IS 'perfect' is wrong.

It has been said by many (including me) that "no two Porsches were ever exactly alike." That truism gives us restoration wiggle room now and yet still frustrates us when we consider the overall precision the cars represent.

I will restate my earlier contention that those who built the 356s would have been more precise IF the company which employed them were not in the business of turning a profit instead of a perfectly symmetrical car.

-Bruce

[S.J.Szabo]

I always thought it is the anomalies that prove "hand-built" fabrication.

On the other hand, "over restoration" is a large, deep pit surrounded by a slippery slope. Frankly, once I got past the realization that a truly accurate resto would be a rusty hulk in five years, I stopped considering that moral conundrum.

But that's just me, suffering from an abhorrence of sloppy work/doing the same job twice (or more).

[JTR70]

This discussion of asymmetrical sides and "only being able to see one side of the car at a time" reminded me of an old story my mentor Greg had shared with my father and I back in the late '80's. I can't remember the make or model of the car but it was definitely an American sedan from the late 60's. It was a re-spray job for Greg in the 70's when he was still doing body work. As the job proceeded he noticed that one side had a chrome strip and the other did not. At first he thought it was a prior repair and the chrome on that side was omitted. But as work progressed it became clear to him that no holes were ever drilled for the chrome on one side and therefore never installed. This meant for whatever reason this car left the factory, was sold new at a dealership, purchased by at least one owner and never detected. Even the current owner hadn't noticed until Greg made him aware of it. How's that for getting away with asymmetrical sides?