TVR Griffiths 200/400 and their Chassis Numbers

[jellison]

Originally Posted by Sheets Body Shop

well i hope that worked. thank jelly. If the photo works i will show two more. The first one doesnt really show very much. Yes the car looks very bad, but I have been many restorations and with it being fiberglass makes me feel a little at ease. Im not too worried about the chassis because it does look and feel solid. Ive been waiting for about 8 years to start this project and I see a lot of potential. Now I also need to know for sure what gear-box the 400 uses. If its a T-10 Borg-Warner, I have one in another car. If not I need to start looking for something else and a 66 289hipo, correct?

Sheets

The rear end shot worked just fine - so what you did with that pic was right.

I'll PM you and drop you my mail for a proper chat.

The Griffs had the T10 or the Ford Toploader. I went with the Toploader on mine (chap that was starting the restoration had a T10 - but it looked huge so we past and got a Close Ratio Toploader from a Low mile road Tiger - only car the CR gearset was in as Standard!!! ).

Yep 66 or earlier Hipo to be correct (and HiPo heads from same time), if you want to stay 100% period. Alot put the 302's with alloy heads in which is hardly deviating much (likely what we are doing for racing in the UK, but I have the 289 HiPo and the right head - well most of the whole engine - but all dismantled).

I have see worse pics of Griffs. I'll put a few of mine up in its late US decaying state!

[Sheets Body Shop]

This is pretty much the way it has looked since my father and I purchased it. Although the guy that we bought it from didn't know what it was, he was basically using it for a dumpster next to his garage. In the drivers side picture you can see where they have covered up the lower air vent.

I have never even seen a Griffith in person, so most of my information is coming from here and griffithyears.com.

Most of the Griffiths that I have seen have a orange section on the tailights, mine doesnt. I know that may not be a big deal, but its strange.

The roll bar seems thicker than any "factory" pictures I see. It seems they constructed it very well, as I will feel much safer driving it. Im glad that I dont have to install a roll bar.

I dont understand what a real Griffith's steering wheel is supposed to look like. Or what brand or type.

When they made the hideous hood scoop they also covered up the awesome louvers or heat extracts on the "bonnet". I'm sure I can re-cut the louvers as they didnt do a good job of covering the inside. This is all if I can even save the whole bonnet. It really is the worst part of the car. So if anyone has a bonnet for sale and is serious about sending it to the states, let me know. Again thanks everyone for being so helpful.

[jellison]

Looks rough but alot worse have beenn restored.

You should go to the gathering in Ohio Mike Mooney is setting up for the Griff's in the US. Contact Mike M. He is also getting close to having the tooling finished to build the Griff again in the US (B2 version by him and his team). They have all the panels / bonnets presumably.

http://www.griffithyears.com/id11.html

Just found out it seems my car has not bee road worthy since about the mid 70's!!! SO only roadable for the first 10 years of its 44 years - CRAZY.

Mid 80's not running - but largely in one piece!

SAD





Seems the last owner had it for an age (mid 80's till sold to person that has dione the bulk of the stripping and refurbing before I bought it from him in France. Last ownersaid the chassis was not in good shape + some idiot had tried adding a live rear end to it! JESUS........ SO he ordered a new DG chassis and it was dilivered to him but he decided he did not have the time / cash to start / finish the build (much like the last owner after him) - I will not let that happen

[Heightswitch]

I have read this post with interest.

Couple of points I would like to make:

It does seem as though the Fia have been on a witchunt regards the griffith. this for the most part as someone who hopes to race this year has often steered me away from anything to do with Fia racing.

There seems to be some interesting points being quoted from american books regards the cars build quality. at the risk of upsetting the american contingent it should be remembered that the first griffith was a Grantura MK3 with a very badly transplanted engine and box. in terms of re-engineering the americans would like to think they did this when infact the reality was that a chassis was specially prepared at Blackpool and sent across to the states. The american books also fail to mention that Blackpool personel followed to the states to help with development of the initial chassis.

Eventually engines and boxes were supplied to Blackpool and the complete cars assembled there then shipped over to USA. there were some issues with porous fuel tanks and general dealer PDI type stuff but to say the cars were taken down and re-built is pushing the truth a bit far.

regards series 200 and 400 griffiths from memory I am pretty sure that the 400 griff was never homologated at all as a seperate model from the 200. the 400 was infact classified as a continuation of a 200 under the 100 model rule. The only homologation papers that exist are for griff 200 models. the 400 is an extension of the 200 homologation.

I have been following these cars for many years and it does make me laugh when people talk of originality and historic significance. The only 2 Griffiths which I would rate as largely un-altered were Lawrence Baileys old orange car which even ran the original single circuit brakes (probably a lot to do with the cars eventual downfall) and UYN 999 campaigned by a certain well known 70 year old racer Top man.

Fia is sadly a cheque book led world these days which mean that the poorest racers IE me look to do other things.

My car is a more original griffith than anything else on a circuit at the moment but it isn't real!!

My car has its original brazed 68 Chassis
original bodywork all be it with griffith bonnet and the obligatory wider rear arches. The suspension, running gear have allbeen re-built in the most authentic manner by me in a single garage over the last 4 years.

Now the rub. Would my car be eligible for HTP registration with the Fia?

Whats the more original car?

A new body and mig welded chassis with an original US postal service Identity

A 68 Vixen converted to a griffith 400 using all of the historically correct parts and original body / Chassis

A brand new HTP car.

The reason I have never went the HTP route is generally because i fear that my car would be royally snubbed.

I have never masked the identity of my car or tried to pass it off as the real thing. I would like to think that I still have built a car to race in the correct ethos of Historic racing... IE to race something that is actually OLD and not something that just Looks OLD !!!

[John Turner]

Welcome Heightswitch; great first post. So does yours carry the original Vixen chassis no, then, and if so, what is it?

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by John Turner

Welcome Heightswitch; great first post. So does yours carry the original Vixen chassis no, then, and if so, what is it?

Yes if you look carefully at the bulkhead you will see its original cruddy shot blasted chassis plate which wears the mark VX 155.

As an aside the detail is in the door hinges. An S1 vixen is always identifiable as a Vixen because it is the first year that TVR steered away from its own hinge and went to 100e ford pop hinges.

a MK3 Grantura is more easy to fake but there are people who can tell the difference.

Now should I try to HTP my car??

N.

[terence]

Not unless you want to modify the Bonnet/Rear wheel Arches etc plus of course it a little on the young side being a 68 version,the cut off is 65 belive it or not.

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by terence bower

Not unless you want to modify the Bonnet/Rear wheel Arches etc plus of course it a little on the young side being a 68 version,the cut off is 65 belive it or not.

But 68 is a lot older in real terms than all the other US postal service cars out there.....

and only 1 year younger than that 67 tuscan you have

I'll stick with where the car is welcome me thinks.

N

[terence]

67 Tuscan ??? Sorry,but I dont make the rules,they are there for everyone to read though.

[DaveGT6]

Heightswitch,

What series or championship are you planning to run your "Griff" in when you have it finished? TVR series or other?

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by DaveGT6

Heightswitch,

What series or championship are you planning to run your "Griff" in when you have it finished? TVR series or other?

Yes the car will run this year in the Dunlop TVR challenge. hopefully we may get to do some historic racing this year in the CSCC as well if funds allow.

I note this weekend you will be at Snet. I am spannering for my old mate Geoff this weekend. pop over and say hello.

N.

[jellison]

Hi Neil.

You found you way to THE Griff thread of the Moment eventually

FIA (as you know) is just a ban in the proverbial from what I can see (cheque books and cheating).

Hope the car goes well in the TVR Series, at least there you can progressively upgrade the car as you see fit as you get the hang of it and racing. i.e. Slicks, Supertuned engine (and HUGE WINGS) just kidding in that last point!

It must really P*ss you off that you make you car like an FIA car of the last few years, re the bonnet and rear wings and 8" wheels only for them to change the rules (not that you were trying to be and fia true Griff) - you could turn your into a cheater car with a clone Griff plate etc. But that would not be playing Cricket!

Is it running yet - looks v.close.

Jelly

[terence]

In truth the rules have never been changed,just that so many have bent them in the past and now the FIA have said "Enough".A decision I'm sure will be welcomed by most.

[jellison]

Originally Posted by terence bower

In truth the rules have never been changed,just that so many have bent them in the past and now the FIA have said "Enough".A decision I'm sure will be welcomed by most.

You would not be saying that if you had a race Griff.

Basically they will now get mugged by similar engined cars, and E-type.

Hardly fair. As you know I amd no fan of the fia stuff. E-types have huge bubble arches now and they never had them in period - maybe they are next. Cobras had huge arches so can run the huge tyres - but why anyone woul want to run a similar sportscar with the same power and weight when one can run hugely wide tyres and one can't - they is just stupid and not my idea of racing.

Anyway lets not keep coming back to the fia CRAP.

This is a Mega car and we need to be talking about THE Car not some Dull rules.

Lets see some picture by people that have them and or chassis no's etc as the thread was setup for. I'll do a few more later.

[John Turner]

Thank you, Jon; I was beginning to think that there was a conspiracy of silence regarding chassis nos!

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by John Turner

Thank you, Jon; I was beginning to think that there was a conspiracy of silence regarding chassis nos!

Well so far in about a thousand posts all you have is a vixen one

Interestingly I have a mate in the states who is well on with the re-build of some mortal remains which when complete will see another griffith on the road. he is now tracing the cars full title along with the full owner history back in the USA.

What will be fun is when his car is registered back to the road and details sent to the griffith registry. I wonder what the owner of the original 65 racing car in europe will then do??

Please don't ask me for any details since I don't have the chassis number concerned.

Like Jelly I think the Fia rules are somewhat of a farce and have lost the ethos of racing something that is actually old. I built the car I always dreamed of owning, largely myself, The way I wanted it to be. In a way I am a bit of a heathen since I altered a car that is arguably rarer than a griffith.

The pre 65 rules apply to original cars so surely my 68 car should in theory, if I altered it to meet the new regs pass as an HTP replica??

Now let me get something clear with the rules.

A 68 car built as a replica may or may not be an HTP car we need to ask?

a 65 car which was destroyed in 66 and was re-built with new body and chassis and re-registered in 67 as a 67 car can when it suits the end means be classified as a 65 car!

A brand new car can be given an HTP as a replica of something that was a pre 65 car

Its all pretty confusing!!

N.

[terence]

Originally Posted by jellison

You would not be saying that if you had a race Griff.

Basically they will now get mugged by similar engined cars, and E-type.

Hardly fair. As you know I amd no fan of the fia stuff. E-types have huge bubble arches now and they never had them in period - maybe they are next. Cobras had huge arches so can run the huge tyres - but why anyone woul want to run a similar sportscar with the same power and weight when one can run hugely wide tyres and one can't - they is just stupid and not my idea of racing.

Anyway lets not keep coming back to the fia CRAP.

This is a Mega car and we need to be talking about THE Car not some Dull rules.

Lets see some picture by people that have them and or chassis no's etc as the thread was setup for. I'll do a few more later.

I beg to differ,IF I had a Griff,it would not be bent in the first place
I have had more than my fair share of building them

[terence]

Originally Posted by Heightswitch

a 65 car which was destroyed in 66 and was re-built with new body and chassis and re-registered in 67 as a 67 car can when it suits the end means be classified as a 65 car!

A brand new car can be given an HTP as a replica of something that was a pre 65 car

Its all pretty confusing!!

N.

I fully agree that its confusing. If you are reffering to the car I had advertised,the reasoning behind that is that its history IS fully documented by TVR themselves,it hasn't been dragged out of a scrapyard and been rebuilt as a replica,not like many LCs "works" Bs and Healeys etc.

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by terence bower

I fully agree that its confusing. If you are reffering to the car I had advertised,the reasoning behind that is that its history IS fully documented by TVR themselves,it hasn't been dragged out of a scrapyard and been rebuilt as a replica,not like many LCs "works" Bs and Healeys etc.

Ah. the old continous history debate

Thats the farce surely! How is a car built in 67 from a new body and chassis on an old identity any different to a 68 car which retains the body and chassis? re-built is re-built. simple as that.

Documented history is one thing but in terms of rules surely the date by which something was built or indeed re-built is what the rule of law regards to the Fia is?

On one hand you picked me up in an earlier post by saying my car was a tad too young and the rules are clear.

On the other hand you would like to think that a 1967 car is really a 1965 car? in terms of originality the 65 car ceased to exist in 66 / 67 when it was comprehensively destroyed. The car was not re-built. it was comprehensively replaced with 2 fundamentally big bits making up a new car which was so new it was given a 67 number.

Applying the Fia rule of law, then that car is no more eligible than mine to be a pre-65 car in Fia racing.

Everything has continuous history / having the correct continous history is another thing altogether.

The reality is that the car you have / had for sale is more of a replica than mine? by twist of fate it has a chassis number that allows the car to be accepted. It doesn't have the original body or Chassis

Wouldn't life be much easier if the fia just allowed old cars to be accepted for what they are!

My 68 car is a Griffith created using all correct parts. still has correct quills, uprights body and chassis and is probably very legal to Fia spec whilst keeping an eye on safety critical items. Again it isn't a big issue to me because I largely built it for me over 4 years. What is a shame though is that I won't be allowed to race it in Fia events because some other people have a perverse view of originality.

Now rightly or wrongly I always thought that the purpose of HTP was to give cars like mine a fair shout to be accepted for what they are instead of all the cloak and dagger that does go on?

The sad thing is the over inflated values that having a pre 65 racing car generates today which in my view is starting to actually spoil club racing. it is this money which is creating the problem where chequebooks make speed rather than driver talent. silly regs simply make it more expensive to be devious about going faster.

I dare say that we could chew the fat over this favourite topic of mine all day. The best thing we can do is continue it over a few beers at Snet. I assume you will be in the same class as my old mate Geoff who I am spannering for this weekend

As an aside. I know well the bloke who rebuilt said car in 67.
N.

[terence]

I should be coming over to Snett and would love a beer or two. I fully understand your points,and very well made but like I said,I did not conjure up the FIAs rulings.If I had there would be no such thing as a continuous classification for the likes of T70s and the like.I agree the FIA have rather negated the original idea of the HTPs,but we have already been there .

[Dinkel]

I understand your point about the Cont. cars Terry but then: for me - and I am aware I am not a 'TopGear' carnutter - it is one of the highpoints of classic racing. I saw Ollies light blue Lola running side by side with Andrews Scud. Fil. red one and it does not bother me in the slightest bit the red one is a cont. car.

Let's have fun guys. I think those Cont. series are the reason will still will enjoy classic car racing for the next 30 years.

Ta, Dinks.

[terence]

And thats exactly what the Blue Book tells us Dink,"Enjoyment" is compulsory.

[John Turner]

I really think that some of this should be on Simon Hadfiled's thread re development.

Dinkel, the thing about continuation T70's is that there are still plenty of originals racing.

Heightswitch, we did get a few chassis nos earlier on in the thread, but I must admit that acquiring any since, has been akin to pulling teeth. Shame really, because the thread has generated a lot of interest, including from owners/former owners. Let's get them documented folks.

[Dinkel]

And I know that John, but look at the costs: a Cont car is a tad cheaper.

To me: the more the better! What a brutal sight to see these beasts in action.

[John Turner]

I think that's the point; they are cheaper, with all that means to owners of the originals! And actually, although they are one of my favourite cars, I really do believe that you can have too many (of any one model) on a grid. Anyway, back to Griffs!