50 replies to this topic

[Paul Rochdale]

http://cgi.ebay.co.u...963441262639781

Anyone want to guess what this was once? Make?

[2F-001]

Well, certainly none of the marques suggested there as possibles (which didn't exist, anyway, in the timeframe cited in the ad). Hard to imagine the seller had actually seen any of those before writing that!
Is that a Ford pre-xflow motor beneath those DCOE-style carbs. If the scrutineering tag is genuine (!970, does it say?) that must increase the chances of someone recognizing it.

[Vitesse2]

The date on the tag would fit the big end of season ER Hall Trophy F3 meeting at Brands ...

http://www.formula2.net/F370_GB49.htm

Edited by Vitesse2, 16 May 2011 - 20:40.

[2F-001]

I wonder what else was on the bill at that meeting?
(I don't think that would get past the scrutineers for the F3 race - although I suppose that tag might be a souvenir retained long after an engine transplant.)

[Mistron]

I've been watching this one as it looks like an interesting project. A web search took me to the same race, but the race number doesn't tie up.

I wondered about it being a fairly obscure early F Ford (maybe even a home build). wasn't the formula Ford festival about that time of year? could the F3 race have been a support?

[Bloggsworth]

Look like Cooper or Lola front wheels. The rear diaphragm behind the drive shafts suggests early 60s design as do the drum brakes. Square tube chassis suggests possibly "home-made" ( I don't use that pejoratively ). The front wishbones remind me of a Lola FJ/F3. LH gearchange is unusual, and is that a Renault split gearbox I see before me? Are the top links at the rear forged - They seem to have a square cross-section, unusual for a single link. Ford engine of course.

The price is a bit steep for an unknown.

Edited by Bloggsworth, 17 May 2011 - 17:07.

[cheapracer]

That car would be like brand new again if you just replaced everything.

[2F-001]

1970 pre-dates the Festival though, Mistron.

Surely, both FF (even the brief pre-Kent engine era at the beginning) and one-litre F3 were single-carb formulae?

Edited by 2F-001, 17 May 2011 - 17:53.

[Bloggsworth]

1970 pre-dates the Festival though, Mistron.

Surely, both FF (even the brief pre-Kent engine era at the beginning) and one-litre F3 were single-carb formulae?

Formula Junior wasn't......

[2F-001]

Yes, so I'm still wondering if that scutineering tag is a souvenir of an earlier life for the chassis, perhaps.

18th Oct was quite a seriously big meeting: two heats and a final for the final round of the Shell F3 series, with a fairly stellar field (as per the list in Vitesse's link); final round of the Brit saloon champs and a similarly star-studded FF race incorporating the Johnson Euro Trophy. Autosport doesn't seem to report on any other events for that meet (even belatedly the following week); anybody got the programme?.

Edited by 2F-001, 17 May 2011 - 18:18.

[ianselva]

1970 pre-dates the Festival though, Mistron.

Surely, both FF (even the brief pre-Kent engine era at the beginning) and one-litre F3 were single-carb formulae?

Its not a FJ engine its a 120E 1500 cc engine. Of course that may not be the engine it competed with.

[2F-001]

Well, yes, that was the point I was making.
(The 120E is what I might think of as the 'pre-crossflow' - or have I got that wrong?)

Seems just as likely to me that 18th Oct does not relate to Brands Hatch meeting.
Mallory and Croft both had Libre races on their cards that day (and Mallory had a Monoposto Formula race too).

Edited by 2F-001, 17 May 2011 - 18:33.

[2F-001]

It seems to have the traditional A&A type front uprights - with trunnions - and the lower mount for the spring/damper moved inboard a little (presumably to lessen the falling spring rate in bump); don't recognize the rear uprights (Do you think they might be fabricated rather than cast? Or perhaps originally from a larger car?).

With those points, the rear drums and the forged, rather than tubular, links at the back, does this suggest some FJ heritage?

<< Bloggsworth said: "The price is a bit steep for an unknown." >>
I wonder if that suggests that someone actually knows what it is?! Mind you, it's eBay, so anything's possible...

Edited by 2F-001, 17 May 2011 - 18:58.

[Bloggsworth]

With a 1,500cc engine and a 1970 Tag, it could have been raced a a monoposto under 750MC regs.

[D-Type]

Well, yes, that was the point I was making.
(The 120E is what I might think of as the 'pre-crossflow' - or have I got that wrong?)

Seems just as likely to me that 18th Oct does not relate to Brands Hatch meeting.
Mallory and Croft both had Libre races on their cards that day (and Mallory had a Monoposto Formula race too).

Now there's a thought! I think this car would have complied with that year's Monoposto Formula

[2F-001]

I suppose it might equally have been running in a Libre race; but just for the starters, in that Mallory Mono race, 2nd and 3rd were taken by B. Toft with "1.5 Anco-Ford" (which I don't recall) and R. de la Rue with "1.5 Apogee-Ford 1A" (a car for which I remember the name and nothing else). Ring any bells with anyone?

Looking at the report for that meeting, I have a feeling it was one I was at; I'll ask my father to check our stash of programmes.

[Tim Murray]

IIRC the Anco was front-engined.

Edit: confirmed

Edited by Tim Murray, 17 May 2011 - 19:41.

[Richard Young]

How about a mucked-about JW4 Formula Four device ? Front suspension looks similar, but there are definite signs of 'bodge' about the rear end, while the radiator also looks as though it wasn't part of the original.....
And......Drum brakes at the back ? Strange........
Just a thought.....

[Bloggsworth]

How about a mucked-about JW4 Formula Four device ? Front suspension looks similar, but there are definite signs of 'bodge' about the rear end, while the radiator also looks as though it wasn't part of the original.....
And......Drum brakes at the back ? Strange........
Just a thought.....

The givaway as to age is the diaphragm behind the driveshafts - This is Lotus 18/20/22 vintage. It is unlikely that one of the big manufacturers would have produced a square-tube chassis, they may be stiffer but they weigh more.

It was unusual of cars of that era to have a top link. IIRC Lotus, Lola, Merlyn, Elva etc., used the drive-shaft as the top link, but the uprights were made for top links on this car. I see that there are 24 bids, so either loads of people know what they are looking at, or are prepared to take a punt...

Edited by Bloggsworth, 17 May 2011 - 21:54.

[cheapracer]

It's not complicated, it's a poorly engineered home built special, not Colin Chapman's mythical long lost secret prototype hidden by workers during the 1962 Norwegian invasion.

[BritishV8]

The most interesting thing about this car is how absurdly over-priced the bidding has gone. I think it's a badly home-built Formula Ford built with a view to the original circa-1967 rules (hence the 1500cc block and non-crossflow head), and later modified (with dual DCOE carbs, etc.) for a hillclimb or gymkhana. My guess is that the builder sourced a few parts (rear uprights, for example) from a wrecked Formula Junior. The RAC tag could be a joke or seller's ploy - it came from another car, as obviously, did the wheels and tires.

[Bloggsworth]

Note that the water still circulates through the chassis tubes. I can't off-hand think of a single FF car which had drum brakes, which is one of the reasons I think it was an FJ car. The front tyres are Dunlops from the early 60s.

Edited by Bloggsworth, 18 May 2011 - 08:10.

[Sharman]

Note that the water still circulates through the chassis tubes. I can't offhand think of a single FF car which had drum brakes, which is one of the reasons I think it was an FJ car. The front tyres are Dunlops from the early 60s.

My vote goes to Monoposto frightened by FJ

[2F-001]

FF still permitted fluids transported via the chassis tubes later than 1970, but - agreed - the rest of it doesn't fit. Mind you, we don't know how many configurations this thing had been through.

We don't really know if that scute's tag relates to the car or not (it and its string look fairly well preserved if it's stayed on the car all that time compared to the condition of the rest of it). If it had remained on the car, might one assume that was it's last outing or the only one the owner had kept? If I can dig out the programme for the Mallory meet on that date (which had Mono and Libre races), it might give a clue as to some possible identities (by race no, capacity etc) and it would also give the names of the scrutineers if they were, in the event, as stated. I know nothing of the Croft event on the same day (with a Libre race) beyond the race reports in Autosport. Still pretty vague, but an interesting exercise nevertheless, if only to discover whether it's something I saw race!

Tim mentioned the Anco being front-engined (I only mentioned that and the Apogee because they appeared in the results for a Mono race on that date). I'm beginning to recall the Anco now - my mind's eye sees something blue and yellow and fairly well finished; however, looking at the race report again Ian T stated that the Apogee was front-engined too, so it certainly wasn't that either!

Edited by 2F-001, 18 May 2011 - 08:29.

[Peter Morley]

Tim mentioned the Anco being front-engined (I only mentioned that and the Apogee because they appeared in the results for a Mono race on that date). I'm beginning to recall the Anco now - my mind's eye sees something blue and yellow and fairly well finished; however, looking at the race report again Ian T stated that the Apogee was front-engined too, so it certainly wasn't that either!

Marcel Roks had the Anco Mk2 Monoposto for sale a few years ago - blue & yellow rings some bells.

As for the car in question, I would think Monoposto is most likely, built using some older bits like the Cooper front wheels and presumably the hubs.
It has a cast adaptor plate which is pretty unusual, there weren't so many people connecting Renault boxes and Ford engines and it's not a Lotus adaptor, says INGA on the box apparently if it said ERSA you might understand the crazy price.
Other observations:
I don't think anyone really used square tube before the late 60s, certainly can't recall a square tube Junior (except for Lotus 18 lower tubes).
Rear uprights are rather large for a Junior/F3 car - more like 70s F2/F3 size and they look to be square so coudl well be fabricated.

[Stephen W]

The price is a bit steep for an unknown.

Totally agree but that is what happens on Ee-Buy-Gum.

Surely, both FF (even the brief pre-Kent engine era at the beginning) and one-litre F3 were single-carb formulae?

Of course that may not be the engine it competed with.

If the car had another life hillclimbing/sprinting then i wouldn't expect it to have kept either a FF or F3 single carb engine.

It's not complicated, it's a poorly engineered home built special, not Colin Chapman's mythical long lost secret prototype hidden by workers during the 1962 Norwegian invasion.

It looks to me like a home-built special using a second-hand parts bin and would more than likely have started out as a monoposto. Several of these cars eventually filtered down into the lower capacity classes in hillclimbing/sprinting.

[Bloggsworth]

If I could be bothered, I'd go and have a look; but it must be at least 6 miles away.....

[Ted Walker]

Idiot !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jatwarks]

Who would leave a label tied right by your hand? It would irritate the hell out of me there.

At best it's been moved for the photo, at worst it's been added.

[Allen Brown]

Just because we don't know what it is, doesn't mean the bidders don't know what it is.

[arttidesco]

Just because we don't know what it is, doesn't mean the bidders don't know what it is.

Such is my faith in TNF that if it is not known here what it is then I'd be most surprised if the bidders 'know' what it is, it would be interesting to find out what they 'believe' it is

[Bloggsworth]

Still receiving bids today...

[David Birchall]

If I could be bothered, I'd go and have a look; but it must be at least 6 miles away.....

And over two 'ills

[Bloggsworth]

And over two 'ills

As I have no intention of buying it I would only be satisfying my curiosity and wasting the seller's time.

[Sharman]

Such is my faith in TNF that if it is not known here what it is then I'd be most surprised if the bidders 'know' what it is, it would be interesting to find out what they 'believe' it is

nah 'snold racin' car innit an' vem (b)wankers in ve citi'll buy anyfink like 'at

[Peter Morley]

As I have no intention of buying it I would only be satisfying my curiosity and wasting the seller's time.

I'm sure the seller would appreciate the information if we could identify the car, knowing exactly what it is shouldn't devalue it (but is a possibility given the current bid!).

[Bloggsworth]

Late message on ebay says that there are 4 alloy wheels with the car and that the "aluminium" nosecone may turn up later...

[Bloggsworth]

Winning bid: £4,355.55

[Giraffe]

It will be interesting to see what this car becomes. It may well develop a good history.

[f1steveuk]

It will be interesting to see what this car becomes. It may well develop a good history.

Was it advertised with a "fully adjustable history"??

[Stephen W]

Was it advertised with a "fully adjustable history"??;)

Just like the "fully adjustable aerodynamic aid" the "fully adjustable history" was outlawed in the 1970s however I do believe there are some exponents still at work!

[Bloggsworth]

I think you are being very unfair on the advertiser, he makes no specific claims as to its provenence, so to imply that he may offer a doctored history is insupportable, not to say possibly libelous...

[RS250]

I think you are being very unfair on the advertiser, he makes no specific claims as to its provenence, so to imply that he may offer a doctored history is insupportable, not to say possibly libelous...

Quite correct, although I'm not sure the (possibly ironic) comments are aimed in that direction.

[Bloggsworth]

Quite correct, although I'm not sure the (possibly ironic) comments are aimed in that direction.

Irrelevant - It is how they are interpreted that is actionable...

[f1steveuk]

I think you are being very unfair on the advertiser, he makes no specific claims as to its provenence, so to imply that he may offer a doctored history is insupportable, not to say possibly libelous...

You'll notice it was asked as a question, not an accusation, or rather, you may not have noticed!

[Mistron]

it's also a gross generalisation to assume that the buyer will fabricate any aspect of the cars history. The thought may well never have occured to them quite so readily as it obviously did to several previous posters.

Perhaps the buyer might just like the look of the car for what it is, an interesting restoration project which will be fun to drive on the hills (or wherever). Perhaps they even know something that the collective minds of TNF don't.

Stranger things have happened, and I think a lot of these comments say more about the thought processes of the posters than either the buyer or the seller.

[f1steveuk]

No slight aimed at the vendor, good luck to him and kudos for finding it,

but can you seriously say that there are cars around that haven't had their histories "adjusted" to earn a bit more when sold, I suspect not. My remark was a humourous retort to the comment that the car, in the buyers hands (not the sellers) could, if they had that particular mindset, become something it never was. And remember, I worked for someone that regualrly asked me to "adjust" cars in his care to increase value, something I refused to do.

All a very long winded way of saying "lighten up" rolleyes.gif

[Bloggsworth]

No slight aimed at the vendor, good luck to him and kudos for finding it,

but can you seriously say that there are cars around that haven't had their histories "adjusted" to earn a bit more when sold, I suspect not. My remark was a humourous retort to the comment that the car, in the buyers hands (not the sellers) could, if they had that particular mindset, become something it never was. And remember, I worked for someone that regualrly asked me to "adjust" cars in his care to increase value, something I refused to do.

All a very long winded way of saying "lighten up" rolleyes.gif

Like the flowers that bloom in the spring, that has nothing to do with the case. Just because others have, it doesn't mean this seller did anything remotely fraudulent, your argument is specious in the extreme and is a sideways fling of mud in the guise of an explanation - I would stop digging if I were you.

[f1steveuk]

Just because others have, it doesn't mean this seller did anything remotely fraudulent.

Nor, if you care to read my post did I say that (though I did respond to a light hearted remark that it might become a possibilty)

Not digging, standing my ground, which is at sea level, and not assumed to be a "higher ground" like some have assumed for themselves, I shall leave this thread, and remember to post only in humourless tones, when allowed.

[jatwarks]

Perhaps the buyer might just like the look of the car for what it is.....

Perhaps the buyer is Damien Hirst or Tracey Emin!

You'll all have to think again when this wreck wins the Turner Prize and is valued accordingly.