ZZ2 - What's REAL, What's NOT .... or MAYBE!

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

I think there are two major problems with HCs, firstly as my maths teacher used to state "I want to see the working out" - secret squirel systems do not invite open discussion - and secondly a fair number of HC owners now feel they have the definitive article, the car as it stands today is absolutely as it should be - it must be ,I have the HC to prove it. As the good Doctor above proves you can get HCs even when the the car has an engine it never ran and stands on tyres it was not built to use. Surely these papers could (and as far as I understood should) have been a major force for the good of historic racing, a major opportunity has been missed.....

The trouble is that the HCs have now attracted some semblence of authority which is to a certain extent without foundation. I would love to be able to buy an Historic Racing Car which came with a set of documentation listing (a) the full details of what I'm buying, (b) the ownership trail, (c) a complete competition history, and (d) a £100,000 discount!!!

[driftwood]

I recall Jeremy visiting my premises 5 years ago inspecting a 26R i had for sale for a punter and commenting
" i am not here to prove that this car is a real car ie 1 of the 23 or 53 built but to ensure it is built to the GTS spec/rules for that category for that era "

he did find 3 minor points he did not like and needed changing to get its FIA papers ie alloy bellhousing rear lights and seat these where done and car had papers and eventually sold

personally i felt it should also have been demonstrated the car was kosha with lineage of history owners etc ( i had my doubts) it had a HUGE void in years of "wilderness"

I also find it "offensive" at the fee the FIA demand to have papers and the length of time it takes- what do they do for this fee?
They also have never made a data base of each car type chassis number to make sure there is no duplication!!
I do believe that 2 cars in 2 separte countries have had papers granted in the past

I have a car that has raced for 10 years with 3 different motors and 3 different totally bodywork- If i acquire papers in 1 spec and decide in 2 year stime to rebuild car in a different body or motr spec i will have to be unpleasantly relieved of another extortionate fee and wait for my grandchildren to leave school before the papers are granted when simple amendments should be made and 1 inspecton fee apply to alter the papers

Sadly as Mr H has said a major opportunity was missed and something akin to the CAMS format should have been adopted

Steve i can offer you a car with 3 out of 4 what order would you like it ?

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by driftwood

Steve i can offer you a car with 3 out of 4 what order would you like it ?

Let's start with (d) please!

[John Turner]

[allenbrown]

There are two quite different sets of papers.

The HTP says your car is in original specification; this document is typically required if you want to race and is relatively cheap. I suspect this is what Jeremy was doing for Drifty's 26R.

The Heritage Certificate (HC) says your car is an original car; this document is not required if you want to race and is relatively expensive. This is what Dr Lienau has been granted on his B19.

The old FVIV did aspects of both; so does the CAMS format I believe.

The ORC dossier does give both the ownership trail and a complete competition history but not the £100,00 discount!

[Dr. Alexander Lienau]

I fully agree that orc can be a great help to research the history of a car and the research of ORC will be in many cases necessary to get the FIA HC papers. I could imagine that the FIA people themself will ask ORC in one or another non open way to keep their own research methods secret.

In my case it was very often not easy to get access to old car magazines even if they are in the very big liberary of the german ADAC because I only got access there after a very hefty complain to their president!

[Chris Townsend]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

Thanks for that Drifty. I did not intend any slight on HCs as I think they are an excellent service and I have always been supportive of what Jeremy has achieved. The only point I was intending to make is that the FIA won't do the research for you; they just do due diligence and then agree it (or disagree, as the case may be). What Chris and I do is fully research the car and document all the facts. It's a complimentary service.

No, it's a complementary service! We do charge!
Not least because we have to get access to those libraries, in some cases acquire large holdings of our own material, and in my case at least learn Italian in order to read Autosprint [as well as to appreciate da Ponte's librettos better, but that's a side issue]

I would say that it must often be difficult to exercise due diligence, especially as, in preparing an ORC dossier, there's no guarantee of achieving a complete result in researching the history of a car - especially not in the time frame that the owner often, quite reasonably, expects. Unlike Drifty I would not say that I could readily identify the history of any car that's out there. I could get a lot of hearsay about some of them but even some bullet-proof paper trails that accompany some restored cars are not all they seem. It takes months, if not years, to find owners and documents for some cars - if you can find it - and the 'truth' of a car's history is often a compromise between recorded fact and intuition. It's rare that a history is transparent, and I wonder how much time and effort the FIA can really devote to independently auditing a car's history.


Chris

[slowwe]

I have been reading the learned posts from various contributors and confess to being more confused than helped. I may be being simplistic here but from my non-specialist point of view, if the chassis I bought (amongst what Driftwood disparaging calls my box of cast off bits) did a number of races in its day (and was then replaced with a new chassis) then it seems logical that the history of those races belongs to the chassis that actually competed.

In which case it would be perfectly reasonable for me to label my car with the chassis number it bore during the period it operated - because it is actually that chassis. It would be wrong for me to claim my chassis/car did the races AFTER a new chassis was bought - just as it would seem to me to be wrong to claim, of the new chassis, that it did the races BEFORE it was bought - because it patently didn't.

As with all race cars that are raced hard, body work damage and potential replacement of all or some of the panels is a virtual inevitability so bodywork is hardly likely to be continuous or to be the soul (sorry cant think of anther word) of the car. So it seems to me that the chassis represents the essence of the car.

I am not trying to make any claim for my car, and I am not tracing its history for commercial reasons - I was simply trying to establish what the car was like when it actually raced so that we could re-build it as close to that state when it is completed.

If Driftwood rejected the car on commercial grounds thats understandable - but my interest is purely personal and out of love of the car and authenticity.

[driftwood]

you have lost the plot completely !!
i rejected the car because it is NOT the car anymore the plate went to another chassis from the man who owned it- commercial gain does not enter the argument !!!
the old pile of parts (that is what they are its a fact not a disparaging comment are not a car) has no ID tag it was not assembled missing many parts panels dash switches etc etc

if you wear womens clothes yr not a woman
If u have a sex change yr no longer a man but you once where and
that is what the pile of parts is-it was once a chevron B19 race car that once wore the ID tag B19-10
If the car was crashed wrapped around a tree you would not even consider using the chassis or rebuilding it there is no difference to a crashed car or a pile of old parts in a box
Theoriginal numbered car has evolved by the then rightful owner into a newer set of parts just as it would have done IF the original parts had been wrecked

Buddy its your money your spending feel free to rebuild the car but it will always be a questionable car so remember that when you come to sell it ot look to get HTP papers all the previous names owners races etc passed to the other car

The money you have invested so far plus what you will spend would have been better spent buying a car with ID tag history and no doubts over it

If you had gone and bought a continuation car new you would know what you had from the begining

When the car was for sale at 30 bags of gold think why the usual suspects did not buy the car?

[driftwood]

1 The FIA spend fk all time looking for info they want you to provide then accept it reject it
2 The 26R inspection was the old/original FIA papers hence why i sadi 5 years ago keep up Mr Brown
3 Mr Turner do not encourage Wilkinson!
4 An OC dossier can assist in a cars worth but set a price of £100 000!

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by driftwood

how many March F1 741 cars did Brambilla have 1 or 12?

The strangest thing is Brambilla never drove one that looked like Roy Lane's hillclimb car, and there are two '741s' like that over the pond.
Then again they are joined by an 'ex-Brambilla' 761 that claims a chassis number from a 761 Brambilla never drove.

The biggest problem with this what is/isn't original issue is trying to label the cars as original/continuation or whatever - the reality is there are an infinite number of degrees of originality, so it will never be possible to pigeonhole every car.
Many problems were created when the authorities insited that a car had a number and history, as we are all aware there are plenty of cars where that will never be known for sure.

A system that just recorded the facts is the only truly effective system:
e.g. record what is known about the various components and leave it upto the guy writing the cheque to decide what it is worth.
An original (in the real meaning of the word) car with proven perfect history will be worth more than one with no known history.

As Simon says there are plenty of cars that existed in several iterations, simply stating that the only one that is 'real' is the last version can in itself lead to a car losing its originality e.g. a car that was updated during its life, when it is restored back to original specification it is by definition less original than if it had been left alone, and could well be less original than a car built up from components discarded during one of its updates.

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by driftwood

if you wear womens clothes yr not a woman
If u have a sex change yr no longer a man but you once where and
that is what the pile of parts is-it was once a chevron B19 race car that once wore the ID tag B19-10

Well if I can borrow Simon's 'Devil's advocate' mantle briefly, I'd have to say this analogy doesn't work for me. If I was stripped of my flesh, organs and muscle, I'd be left with the skeleton, ie the bit upon which all the rest was hung. In my book, if the human body is analagous with a racing car, then skeleton = chassis (or, later, tub). Thus, whether I wore a woman's clothes, or had a sex change wouldn't alter the fact that my 'bits' (or not, as the case maybe) would still hang on my original skeleton. So, that actually makes the opposite case for me.

What Richard says about his chassis 'owning' the race history before the new chassis was acquired has a logic about it. It's sure as hell true the new chassis cannot claim that particular part of the cars racing history. Now to move this on; my view is that each case should be taken on its individual merits. Insofar as Richard's B19 chassis is concerned what state is it in? If it is so substantially damaged that it is driftys 'pile of bits', and therefore needs so much new material built into it that hardly any of it constitutes the original, then, when completed, at best it is a replica. On the other hand if it is a complete chassis which requires a bit of straightening, then, it at least, can claim to 'own' part of the car's history. Mind you that then begs the question why the car needed a new chassis. Do we actually know what/when and how the original car needed to acquire its new chassis?

Finally, I've mentioned this elsewhere before but in Doug Nye's book 'Powered by Jaguar' he discusses the fact that more Lister Jaguars exist today than did in period, albeit using various bits of in period used or discarded parts, not least of which were the bodies, and says '... regardless of its true provenance, every one of these cars has a value as a dynamic item of Historic motor racing 'sports equipment'. It is a view - if nothing else, it tells us these issues can rarely be addressed in simple terms.

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by driftwood

3 Mr Turner do not encourage Wilkinson!

Drifty old bean, I don't need encouragement!

[Simon Hadfield]

I think Peter and John have got it, ee cummings has seen it but its slipped from his grasp.....The problems begin when the restorer chappie's sales pitch includes the concept that "all that stands between you and world domination is a new/stiffer/better made/more modern material chassis" and perfectly restorable chassis are discarded....(and dont get me started about where the new stiffer chassis now needs better suspension etc thread could go!)

[driftwood]

perhaps i should have said discourage him!

John i know what you mean re man woman skeleton but as an example the B19 21 23 chassis is the same part so are uprights

so what IF i had a B19 chassis from chassis 1 ( discarded cos the pro driver said it flexed at Monaco in 72 costing him half a second a lap ) had the wishbones from b21 and uprights from a B23 with mish mash B19 21 23 body parts ALL inter connectable what do i have now and dont start singing the Johnny cash caddilac song

Th ebottom line is teh B19 usa owner when he rebuilt his original car with ne wparts really should NEVER have sold off the pile of discarded parts and they should stay with the car
i sold a 783 had new tub i gave the bent alloy panels to the new owner so he had the "history" of why i had new tub
i rebuild my Gp 6 car and the old parts i take off sit in abox to show anyone what i replaced and why

[driftwood]

Peter re march 741- i was using that to stir up trouble as it is a classic case 2 cars built and monza gorrila shunted many times !
only man who can tell you what is what was the No1 mechanic ie did he scrapp every tub into skip with snips or did he repair some tubs to re uses or take home for rainy day?

to be frank there are some cars that you take 2 steps back from and smell the air over
741 761 B19 B16 are just some examples of buyer beware

would you buy a used ford mondeo from me at half the std price if it was a category ??? write off and had rebuild repiant? NO u would not so why do folk go spending the same money with dubious cars when they can walk up the road and buy Kosher car with no stigmas smells or ambiguity

i can only think of fool and money easily parted

[Steve Wilkinson]

Let us take for granted that there is more than one way we can end up with two cars that have a claim to one chassis number.

What is the best way to ensure that (a) these two entities can co-exist, and (b) they can quiet rightly both lay claim to the original chassis number?

What is needed is an acceptable standard by which such 'shared' history can be allocated. A sort of X and Y differential that would be date specific for that car. It would have to be unique for the chassis number and as John has already said "my view is that each case should be taken on its individual merits". This may well make for a more complex situation for the researcher but at the end what are we trying to achieve?

Do we not all want to see "correct" historic racing cars competing? Surely that should be the goal not to construct an approximation of a car that uses for example a different engine to the one originally raced.

[Simon Hadfield]

But to extrapolate your analogy if you cut the VIN number out of one Mondeo and weld it into the shell of another you can use the same documents and carry on as if nothing has happened? A ringing endorsement!

[Simon Hadfield]

Steve shoots and scores... the best summation so far. I find it very interesting that I started out as Devils advocate and am now enthralled with the debate and where it takes us.

[Delbert]

Do we not all want to see "correct" historic racing cars competing? Surely that should be the goal not to construct an approximation of a car that uses for example a different engine to the one originally raced.

In a perfect world yes BUT I live on planet Earth.
With the gradual creep of "widely used upgrades" such as BDG's from FVC's largely because there weren't any FVC's available (admittedly none of the drivers minded having a better engine I am sure). How do you ever reverse the trend?
I would like to do things like the 3 & 6 hr historic V de V & Historic Le Mans but I respect & accept the rules under which they race and know my B19 doesn't qualify, .

It is clear the grids are reducing with the current rules, if you then ask people to take a purist approach and buy new engines etc the grids will be a purist's delight of 2 or 3 cars. I don't think that is what we want either. There again you could build a continuation chassis and stick an FVC in it - which is better an "old chassis" with the "wrong" engine or a "new chassis" with an "right" engine?

I just know someone is going to say "neither"!

[driftwood]

There are at opresent 3 races series plus Vdev endurance to run group 6 sports cars in in euroland
1 Orwell Supersports probably the series with the cars "stretched" out in spec
2 CER Classic endurance racing was upto 1972 with ni bimmers or BDG motors cut off but now open to 76? and free on the motors of this period
3 Masters Proto 70`s following the theme of CER

Each category has pros n cons and maybe never the Twain shallmeet but IF your going to run acar it will be best to run it to the letter of the rule and if you race Orwell and they have "freedom" to run period built engines in any chassis thats fine but it has become a bit silly with many cars running NEW cast BDG alloy block motors latest parts valve spings cams AND electronic ignition to the point where we see 300 bhp motors when in period 250 bhp was "de rigeur" and the 90`s saw at best 280bhp before the pin fell out of the hand grenade
Many FVC & Chevy Vega powered cars had BDG`s fitted (an easy swap over) cars with Bimmers stayed with Bimmers ( a good motor) and some Hart 420R cars ran harts or went to BDG ( simple swap over)
after the motor we now get light weight bodywork fancy dampers being fitted and i saw 1 Lola t212 running 1998 spec Brembo F3000 brakes and discs

The CER and Masters are not going to stringently Police the rules and car specs as they need "bums in seats2 to justify the race meeting
BUT something needs to be done before it all implodes- maybe the economic climate will be the catalyst to start the ball rolling on the technical parts as well as the replication of chassis cars VIN plates
But who will take up the role of this? Club organisers? FIA?

I cannot see how SW concept of fidning a way for 2 cars to co exist with " history" can work it is either the real McCoy or it is not
regardless of how the car has new chassis body etc is to a degree irrelevent so long as it is done with the owner of the the "original " car and the VIN tag carries forward
If the pile of discarded parts is left for 20 years and has the feasability to be reubilt into a car is that correct? let alone trying to caim its ID or insinuate it race din 72-78 major events drivers / results
IF the car was shunted and was beyond econimical repair how can you then take 4 tubes and the part with the stamped AM number and rebuild that into a "new" frame and then claim its previous 72-78 racing pedigree

I accept the new chassis bodied car with the plate attached is the continuation car and has never graced the events its "history " proclaims
But if you start to use the logic of the old chassis being the original car why not start welding up the blown block straighten the bent wheel wishbone re rivett the alloy panels taken of the car over the years and build another 2 3 4 "original" cars with 1 car being the car that was 2nd at Dijon in 72 the 3 cra bing the car that won at Silverstone in 73 an dthe 4th car being the car that was 4th but had pole in the rain at nurburgring in 74 with Ickx driving

Im off to build P34 Tyrrell cos i bought the cockpit section at auction 4 years ago

[Dr. Alexander Lienau]

I have enough parts (new and used) to build a second B19 in addition I have enough documentation that can be split into to half correct histories, furthermore I have gearbox and engine to chose from.

What will happen, when I build a second B19 Chassis No. 10.

I think there is absolute no way for a second No. 10 because the reason why Chevron gave the orginal cars Chassis No. was to count them. To have two No. 10`s is not logic and not right.

The FIA with the HTP opened the door to finish all frauding if you like to go racing. I think they were tired to listen to all the lies concerning "history". You can be happy with continuation cars or not, but it is a little bit of a split character to be against continuation cars, but to accept split histories of original cars.

The FIA way is not so bad: HC as a certificate for owners of genuine cars

HTP for racing with cars in historic specification (new, half old, more old, near original etc).

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by Dr. Alexander Lienau

I think there is absolute no way for a second No. 10 because the reason why Chevron gave the orginal cars Chassis No. was to count them. To have two No. 10`s is not logic and not right.

The point is it is a fact that such things happened, and in period as well, so it is perfectly logical.

I'm not particularly talking about Chevrons here - as far as I understand the situation with your car is pretty well known which means the facts are the facts (one tub did some races another tub did others).

If car number X did some races and was then crashed, when there was not enough time for the chassis to be repaired (or it was cheaper to replace rather than repair) the chassis plate was fixed on a new chassis and the car was raced again as number X version 2.
Then chassis X version 2 does so many races until it is crashed and replaced with chassis X version 3.

In the meantime (or many years later) chassis X version 1 can be repaired and used again - possibly as number 1 or another number.

Each version of that chassis can be totally genuine and has its own racing history - it is not logical that someone who knows the chassis on their car was replaced claims results from races before it even existed (unless they are claiming the chassis plate is a major component of the car vital to its function).

If you happen to own the last version of car chassis X then I am sure you want to claim it is the only version allowed to be raced.
But the owner of chassis X version 1 has a perfectly valid claim to stating that his chassis is the original one (which I'm sure as a lawyer you will understand).
And the owner of chassis X version inbetween also has a chassis that was a genuine racecar and therefore also has a valid claim to a real race car.

This is the case for March 741s where one driver damaged 3 chassis, the other 2 chassis - there were 5 chassis (possibly 7) that all raced. It seems that some of these crashed chassis were repaired/rescued and reused.

Then one is later converted to a hillclimb car with a different chassis and that car still exists - applying the footprint/axe method that car is a March 741 even though it never was an F1 car and looks rather different.

There is also the case of some companies issuing the same number twice, probably by mistake but various tax rules might also have been involved.
In those, sometimes well documented, cases it is simply a fact that two cars have the same number - the difference in this case is they have two totally seperate racing histories.
But that is another perfectly logical explanation for two cars with the same number.

Teams using a limited number of chassis plates and customs carnets throughout a season also leads to several different cars carrying the same number.

In the cases where these things did not happen, such a car with unquestioned history will be far more desirable than one with several claimants to the title, but they can all be genuine (in the English sense of the word - DSJ, or anyone else, can use whatever words they like but that doesn't change their real meaning) old racing cars.

To answer Drifty's question:
so what IF i had a B19 chassis from chassis 1 ( discarded cos the pro driver said it flexed at Monaco in 72 costing him half a second a lap ) had the wishbones from b21 and uprights from a B23 with mish mash B19 21 23 body parts ALL inter connectable what do i have now and dont start singing the Johnny cash caddilac song

What you would have is B19 chassis 1 that did races upto Monaco 72, fitted with B21 wishbones, B23 uprights and B19/B21/B23 bodywork.
All of which is more original (in the English sense of the word) than a new car built by someone who owns the remains of another old car.
But it is nothing like as desirable as car number Z which was hardly used, never crashed and retains all its original major components.

Look at the price RM got for a GT40 road car that had hardly been used (e.g. extremely original), it was three times the asking price of a GT40 road car that has been prepared for historic racing (e.g. somewhat less original).

Simply record the known facts, it is the owners perogative to describe what he has in anyway he desires and how he values it - but if he tries to distort the facts that will make it rather difficult to sell to an informed purchaser.

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

But to extrapolate your analogy if you cut the VIN number out of one Mondeo and weld it into the shell of another you can use the same documents and carry on as if nothing has happened? A ringing endorsement!

As long as the shell you attach your VIN to has not been previously registered... With road cars there is a legal issue, but it is pretty clear what is accepted by the authorities.

As for Drifty's kind offer of a cheap Mondeo I think I will decline.
But there are plenty of people who would happily buy a half price Mondeo, even if it has been 'accident repaired' - possibly the same sort as was tempted to take out a mortgage they couldn't afford on their trailer park home, but there are punters for all sorts.

To turn that back to race cars, there are people who are happy with a replica whether it be a cut and shut Ferrari 250, a facsimile F1 car or a 'look a like' kit car.
It might be because they can't afford the world championship winning car, or it can be because they don't think the real thing is worth the asking price, maybe they aren't bothered whether they can race it or not - as with the cars themselves an infinite variety of reasons/stories.

[Dr. Alexander Lienau]

do not make clear history of chassis unclear.

My chassis Chevron B 19 carried from day one No. 10. I know every owner personally. The car had never a new chassis! There is absolutley no way and no place for a second Chassis No 10.

All other stories do not begin with an original owner but instead are free inventions which may start twenty years ago.

I think there are many cases where somebody used a chassis Number of a car which seemed to be lost, but was only hidden away somewhere (at museum or a collector). The fraud came to light, when the original car reappeared. If the false car has reputed a good race history in the last twenty years and was sold several time for big money, than the sellers try to make "clouds" about the complete history.

My question is, way do people do not make the history of their car public, when they are 100 % sure that they own the genuine article. The reason is, that they are sure of the opposite. As long as people/owners only talk about the history without making the number and the history publik they have something to hide. All theoretic discussions asbout how to identify a genuine car have only the sense to prepare the way for not genuine cars.