47 replies to this topic

[Bill Harding]

T290/DFV HU1 is a headline entry in the Bonhams auction at Goodwood Revival .
Obviously a very desirable car for Le Mans Classic etc.
I have tried to verify any period history for it but with no success, perhaps someone can fill in the gaps???
How many T290s were built with DFV engines??

[Allen Brown]

To be eligible for Le Mans Classic, wouldn't it have been necessary for to have raced in DFV specification in period? The only races I have seen claimed for it are one at the Nurburgring when it had a FVC - and I should add that I doubt that was HU1 at that race - and some unspecified Interserie races again with an FVC.

Like you, I have been unable to verify any of its period history.

Some T290s remain a mystery but I have yet to see any evidence that any T290 was built with a DFV engine. A T292 was, but not a T290.

[arttidesco]

The blurb here states quite categorically that HU1 T290 the car Bonhams are planning on selling was Bonniers spare car at Le Mans.

I thought Bonnier was running T280's at Le Mans in 1972 including T280 HU1 was the #7.

What sticks out unless I am completely mistaken is that the T290 in the Bonhams pictures has T292 body work could that possibly have been available as early as June 1972 at Le Mans ?

Is it possible some one has got their numbers and bodywork all mixed up ?

[E1pix]

The only races I have seen claimed for it are one at the Nurburgring when it had a FVC - and I should add that I doubt that was HU1 at that race - and some unspecified Interserie races again with an FVC.

Allen, was the FVC the 2-liter Cossy?

What sticks out unless I am completely mistaken is that the T290 in the Bonhams pictures has T292 body work could that possibly have been available as early as June 1972 at Le Mans ?

Is it possible some one has got their numbers and bodywork all mixed up ?

You're right, that is certainly not T290 bodywork.... the T292 wasn't built until early in 1973, perhaps they tested the new bodywork at LeMans in '72?

I had also though the T290 was a 1972 model, not a '71.... so something's amiss, and it could be me.

Edited by E1pix, 09 September 2011 - 00:11.

[arttidesco]

Allen, was the FVC the 2-liter Cossy?

120.6 cu in

[E1pix]

120.6 cu in

Must I do the math?

Sounds an awful lot like 2 liters to me. Thanks!

Edited by E1pix, 09 September 2011 - 01:05.

[BT 35-8]

The standard Cosworth FVC capacity is 1790 cc .

[arttidesco]

The standard Cosworth FVC capacity is 1790 cc .

I only got seriously interested in the sport in '73 but you are quite correct the original FVC was 1.7 something litres, not sure why that specific capacity was chosen, and later it was taken up to 1,976 cc.

[E1pix]

I only got seriously interested in the sport in '73 but you are quite correct the original FVC was 1.7 something litres, not sure why that specific capacity was chosen, and later it was taken up to 1,976 cc.

Whew! Thought the memory — and the math — had both failed me.;)

My earliest knowledge of the 2-liter Lolas was in an SCCA Club class called B Sports Racing here in the US. I love the T292 through T296 cars, fabulous, beautiful.

Later, they ran Can-Am II in their own class, though rather sparsely.

The only thing that may have sounded sweeter was the 1,300 cc Cosworth in C Sports Racing. Tuned to the hilt for that level of competition. Miss that. [EDIT: Model number of the 1.3?)

Edited by E1pix, 09 September 2011 - 03:24.

[horizon]

Whew! Thought the memory — and the math — had both failed me.;)

My earliest knowledge of the 2-liter Lolas was in an SCCA Club class called B Sports Racing here in the US. I love the T292 through T296 cars, fabulous, beautiful.

Later, they ran Can-Am II in their own class, though rather sparsely.

The only thing that may have sounded sweeter was the 1,300 cc Cosworth in C Sports Racing. Tuned to the hilt for that level of competition. Miss that. [EDIT: Model number of the 1.3?)

BDJ

[E1pix]

That's it, Thanks for the recall!

[Tomas Karlsson]

T290 is a 1972 model. If this is the first T290 it sure has the wrong type of bodywork.
The car was not used for testing of the three-litre configuration, but was used as a mock-up for the first promotion pictures of the World Championship team.

When you read things like this you start to wonder how Bonhams handles history:
"Later that year the car was intended to be raced at the 24 hours of Le Mans, but sadly Bonnier lost his life just prior that race."

At Le Mans Bonnier raced the two T280 and he crashed in HU2 #8.
The Bonhams car wouldn't have been a good reserve car, since it was a two-litre (or 1,8). The Bonnier team didn't have enough funding to support reserve cars or even have time to build them. The racing teams of the early 70ies are quite a bit different from the mega-teams of today.

[Bill Harding]

Thanks for the input, I am more confused now than I was before!
I also did not think that a T290 ran with a DFV and in the pictures this car appears to have T292 bodywork?
I wonder what the letter of authenticity says????

[Tim Murray]

I'm no expert, but I have read that the T280 and T290 shared the same basic chassis, etc, with the only difference being the T280's DFV engine. So, if the Bonhams blurb is correct and the car was fitted with a DFV when first constructed, surely it would have been given a T280 designation?

[Allen Brown]

120.6 cu in

The Wikipedia piece about the FVC is utter nonsense. The FVC came out in 1970 as a 1790cc engine at the suggestion of Chevron. It was an FVA block but with the 77.62mm stroke of the BDA which is why it ended up at about 1790cc. Cosworth felt the bore couldn't go any higher than the FVA's 85.7mm but Alan Smith managed to make a 1900cc in 1972 and then a 1930cc version in 1973. Mader and Smith also produced 1973cc versions in 1973 but these were overtaken by the BDG and the Schnitzer BMW. The Hart 420S comparison on Wikipedia is a bit ridiculous as they weren't contemporaries. And of course most 2-litre Can-Am cars used an FVC from 1977 to 1981 - with BDGs and Harts in the others - so there's nothing at all remarkable about the Osprey.

[Allen Brown]

I'm no expert, but I have read that the T280 and T290 shared the same basic chassis, etc, with the only difference being the T280's DFV engine. So, if the Bonhams blurb is correct and the car was fitted with a DFV when first constructed, surely it would have been given a T280 designation?

There are other differences but the point here is the lack of any contemporary evidence that any T290 was fitted with a DFV. Bonhams' top man on these cars did not have a hand in the catalogue entry so I can only assume that the blurb is primarily from the vendor.

The letter of authenticity may merely give the data of build and first customer of HU1 - Lola records typically don't contain much more than that. If the letter mentions the DFV, it would be very interesting to see.

[Giraffe]

Lola Heritage.....

http://www.lolaherit...gister/t290.htm

[arttidesco]

The Wikipedia piece about the FVC is utter nonsense. The FVC came out in 1970 as a 1790cc engine at the suggestion of Chevron. It was an FVA block but with the 77.62mm stroke of the BDA which is why it ended up at about 1790cc. Cosworth felt the bore couldn't go any higher than the FVA's 85.7mm but Alan Smith managed to make a 1900cc in 1972 and then a 1930cc version in 1973. Mader and Smith also produced 1973cc versions in 1973 but these were overtaken by the BDG and the Schnitzer BMW. The Hart 420S comparison on Wikipedia is a bit ridiculous as they weren't contemporaries. And of course most 2-litre Can-Am cars used an FVC from 1977 to 1981 - with BDGs and Harts in the others - so there's nothing at all remarkable about the Osprey.

Thanks for the lesson in FVC lore Allen

[Red Socks]

Must nearly be time for an angry post from the owner!!

Edited by Red Socks, 09 September 2011 - 09:59.

[Bill Harding]

Must nearly be time for an angry post from the owner!!

Or Bonhams Top Man on the subject???

[Doug Nye]

Maybe he's working on it...?

DCN

[Red Socks]

Hmm , so here we have for sale a car which seems to have the wrong bodywork and the wrong engine. However it has the critical racing paperwork-which we assume is the same as the car-which permits it to race and thus have significant value.

We presume that the RACB when they inspected the car and presented it to the FIA for approval in September 2009 had some evidence to the contrary of my previous assumption.
We must assume that the vendors or their agents will be posting this very shortly.
In its absence we must assume that at the very most the car will only have another four years racing in an HTP scenario as on re-application for the 2016 season one presumes that the FIA will come to its senses and decide that it was hoodwinked last time but not again-so death of HTP.
Alternatively the FIA may wake up sooner rather than later and withdraw the HTP tomorrow.
Maybe it'll all come out right because all of a sudden Goodwood will allow much later cars which don't need HTP.
Problem solved.

Edited by Red Socks, 09 September 2011 - 17:07.

[arttidesco]

Hmm , so here we have for sale a car which seems to have the wrong bodywork and the wrong engine. However it has the critical racing paperwork-which we assume is the same as the car-which permits it to race and thus have significant value.

We presume that the RACB when they inspected the car and presented it to the FIA for approval in September 2009 had some evidence to the contrary of my previous assumption.
We must assume that the vendors or their agents will be posting this very shortly.
In its absence we must assume that at the very most the car will only have another four years racing in an HTP scenario as on re-application for the 2016 season one presumes that the FIA will come to its senses and decide that it was hoodwinked last time but not again-so death of HTP.
Alternatively the FIA may wake up sooner rather than later and withdraw the HTP tomorrow.
Maybe it'll all come out right because all of a sudden Goodwood will allow much later cars which don't need HTP.
Problem solved.

IIRC Frank Williams once said assumptions are the mothers of all very strong expletive ups

The best we can do is highlight anomalies and hope those involved take note.

If the car is going to be on public view at Goodwood I very much look forward to seeing it, any tips on where I ought to be looking for the chassis plate ?

[Red Socks]

Shelby American World Registry, 1997, Page 329:

"P/1048: Production racing coupe completed 5/24/66. Purchased by Umberto Maglioli (Como, ITL) and raced under the banner of Scuderia Brescia Corse; painted red. 7/10/66 Trento-Bondone (Casoni, 7th); 8/7/66 Enna (Casoni-DNF); 9/11/66 Zeltweg (#8 - Casoni - 7th); 10/16/66 Montlhery (#36, Vaccarella/Casoni-crashed); 6/25/67 Rheims (#24, Magioli/Vaccarella, DNF); 8/6/67 Enna (Vacerella-1st); 10/9/67 Innsbruck (Magioli-4th). Purchased by Willie Konig (GER) '68. Norisring (Konig-DNS); 10/12/69 Montlhery (Rouget/Bayard-DNS); crashed in practice. 10/19/69 Casablanca (Rouget-crashed); 4/26/70 Montlhery (Greiller/Geurie-DNF); 5/3/70 Magny Cours (#64 Greiller-DNF); 7/14/70 Magny Cours (Greiller); 8/9/70 Mont Dore (#176); 8/23/70 Magny Cours (#176). 10/25/70 Montlhery (Rouget-DNF); Caught fire and totally gutted at LeMans '71 (the last GT40 raced at LeMans). Purchased (still as burned chassis) by Jean Claude Geurie (FRA) '71; rebuilt over the next year, finished in metalliclight green. Purchased by Michel Dagorne (FRA) '72, purchased by Jean Pierre Van Den Doorn (l'etang La Ville FRA) '73. Sent to Franco Sbarro (Tuileries de Grandson, SWI) for restoration 12/79. Sbarro sold the original GT40 P/1048 to Guiseppe Lucchini (ITL) '80. It carried a repro FoMoCo chassis plate. Three years later Sbarro shipped a newly constructed GT40 to van den Doorn which carried the original GT40 P/1048 chassis plate. Lucchini subsequently commissioned Ronnie Spain to inspect his car in Italy. Spain suspected that the car Van Den Dorn now had after Sbarro's "restoration" was likely not the original. His inspection of Lucchini's car verified it as being the original car owned by Van Den Doorn. Spain provided a report on Lucchini's car's authenticity and information was also supplied to Van Den Doorn, who subsequently instigated a suit against Sbarro. Van Den Doorn was awarded a Lola T-70 replica, another Lola replica, and cash as compensation from Sbarro (as well as retaining the Sbarro built "P/1048" car). Lucchini is now recognized as the legal owner of P/1048. Van Den Doorn has possession of a Sbarro reproduction which apparently still carries the number P/1048. Has reportedly been for sale, represented as the original."

The allegation at the time was that the other Lola replica referred to above was a T290

Edited by Red Socks, 10 September 2011 - 17:56.

[arttidesco]

The Lola T290 seems a very odd car to replicate, compared to say a Ford GT40 or a Lola T70, if the car offered at Bonham's is the Sbarro T290 replica mentioned above this might explain why no one has heard of T290 HU1 with a DFV up until now.

The Blurb on classicandperformancecar certainly mentions Sbarro and a 'Paul Van Dorn' in connection with the car that appears to be offered for sale at Bonhams in para's 15 & 16.

I wonder what Ferinand de Lesseps listed as the owner of the T290 HU1 on the Lola website has to say about all this ?

[Allen Brown]

Ferdinand de Lesseps has been racing a T290-DFV in CER events for several years. Is he the man who bought the advertised car from Jean-Pierre Van Den Doorn in 2007?

[arttidesco]

There has been an amendment to the description of Lot 220:

Lot Notice:
The letter of authenticity from Lola UK is not present.

Does anyone know how one goes about getting to view the cars for auction ?

I wanted to check the cars offered for auction at the FoS, but could find not even find where Bonham's were located.

[Bill Harding]

There has been an amendment to the description of Lot 220:

Lot Notice:
The letter of authenticity from Lola UK is not present.

Does anyone know how one goes about getting to view the cars for auction ?

I wanted to check the cars offered for auction at the FoS, but could find not even find where Bonham's were located.

Well that is a surprise!
I am amazed that an Auction house like Bonhams can offer a car like this without doing any research as to it's provenance.
The car has featured prominently in their pre-auction publicity and they potentially stand to make a huge amount of money from any sale.
They owe it to their clients to provide an accurate and documented history.
Since it appears that no T290 ever ran in period with a DFV how can it have FIA HTP Papers???

[arttidesco]

Well that is a surprise!
I am amazed that an Auction house like Bonhams can offer a car like this without doing any research as to it's provenance.
The car has featured prominently in their pre-auction publicity and they potentially stand to make a huge amount of money from any sale.
They owe it to their clients to provide an accurate and documented history.
Since it appears that no T290 ever ran in period with a DFV how can it have FIA HTP Papers???

And by the same token get a lot of egg on their faces when important authentication papers are not present as first described.

I wonder if the FIA HTP Papers are for a 2 litre or 3 litre car ?

Ah! The world of auctions there must be some tall stories to tell.

[Doug Nye]

There are also some very short ones to tell. In my long experience Bonhams seek very energetically to verify a vendor's description of their entered Lot. Occasionally both misunderstanding and misinformation are encountered. By the time of Sale the situation will have been verified. If people here are interested just check the Bonham's on-line catalogue for updates and Saleroom Notices. Of course I declare my interest as a Bonhams consultant.

DCN

[Tim Murray]

Well, the sale is the day after tomorrow, and, as far as I can tell, the only bit of the Bonhams blurb that has changed is the bit about the Lola authentication letter not being available. It still contains such statements as

'Examples of the ultra-rare, period-correct DFV-engined Lola T290 come to the market only very infrequently and are keenly sought after when they do ...'

Hardly surprising, if there never were any?

http://www.bonhams.c.../19289/lot/220/

[Red Socks]

And by the same token get a lot of egg on their faces when important authentication papers are not present as first described.

I wonder if the FIA HTP Papers are for a 2 litre or 3 litre car ?

Ah! The world of auctions there must be some tall stories to tell.

Definitely for a DFV car. My pound says they will be withdrawn within the month.

[Bill Harding]

Definitely for a DFV car. My pound says they will be withdrawn within the month.

So then what happens?
Do Bonhams refund the purchaser if he buys a car and the papers are withdrawn??
With reference to Doug's post, in this case Bonhams have clearly not "energetically" verified anything at all. Except that they do not in fact have a letter from Lola!

[Giraffe]

Of course I declare my interest as a Bonhams consultant.

DCN

So therefore it is good to know that Bonhams are aware of what has been discussed here on TNF, and will no doubt take this into account.......

Edited by Giraffe, 15 September 2011 - 07:32.

[Rob Miller]

Interesting.

We now have a 3 litre 2 litre Lola to match the 2 litre 2.7 litre Maserati.

[Nordic]

Does anyone else think it odd that this car has only two race entries to its name? most of these 2 litre cars were thrashed round Europe.

Seems slightly sad that it was never used as intended.

[arttidesco]

Does anyone else think it odd that this car has only two race entries to its name? most of these 2 litre cars were thrashed round Europe.

Seems slightly sad that it was never used as intended.

I don't believe the full race participation records for all T290's are definitively known and it is quite possible not all of them will ever be known.

If the T290 HU1 did indeed belong to Team Bonnier it might have been kept out of action simply because it was part of the Bonnier estate at the time of his death in June 1972.

Seems curious that the car is said to have been sent to the USA by Team Bonnier without any details of what happened to it there before returning to Europe at the end of 1973, maybe a deal did not go through, or the new owner got cold feet, or the car was simply waiting to be properly disposed of by the executors of Jo's estate.

[Red Socks]

So then what happens?
Do Bonhams refund the purchaser if he buys a car and the papers are withdrawn??
With reference to Doug's post, in this case Bonhams have clearly not "energetically" verified anything at all. Except that they do not in fact have a letter from Lola!

Sale day arrives and I am not going to the sale so do not know what will be announced from the rostrum.
However all the questions remain unanswewred- how did it get an HTP ,and if it is withdrawn who will take responsibilty for the error of its issuance? Did the current owner buy it on the basis of its having an HTP and if so has he got recourse? How did Martin Kresci's site get it so totally wrong?
How does the Peter Organisation which prides itself on historic correctness explain the cars' acceptance at Classic Le Mans-more shoddy investigation?
All in all in it looks , after the Maserati Birdcage fiasco, that the blaggers still get away with it. Can't help wondering whether this is the tip of a rather nasty iceberg reference HTP's.
When they were introduced in 2004 they carried not chassis number or history-seems like that was the smart way to have done it.

Edited by Red Socks, 16 September 2011 - 08:27.

[Tim Murray]

How did Martin Kresci's site get it so totally wrong?

What have I missed here? The only mentions of T290 chassis HU1 I can find on the Krejčí (not Kresci) sites are the results of the 1972 Nürburgring 1000 km, and an entry in the T290 section in Racing Sports Cars. In both cases the car is listed as 'HU1??' (which must mean that Martin has his doubts about it) and fitted with the FVC engine.

Edited by Tim Murray, 16 September 2011 - 10:31.

[Allen Brown]

I think I should spring to my friend Martin Krejčí's defence here. Martin gets lots of information from current owners of cars, as I do for OldRacingCars.com, and the challenge for us both is knowing what to take on trust, what to check, and what to discard. The structure of my pages allows me to talk about discrepancies and list my sources but Martin's site, being predominately structured as race results, does not allow him a place to detail such issues. So Martin has added question marks to the information he received about T290 HU1 racing at the Nürburgring. I had other sources that cast significant doubts on HU1 being part of the Bonnier team that day (or any day in 1972) so my choice was different.

Martin didn't get it "totally wrong" at all. If he has any fault in this matter, it is that - in my opinion - he underestimates the authority that his site has deservedly developed over the years. If someone wants to know the race history of a sports car, they naturally turn to RSC which makes it tempting for some vendors to "contribute" information about their cars in the hope that he will simply reproduce it so they can then reference his site in their adverts. This is a constant challenge for anyone who publishes information about racing car history and it's unrealistic to expect us to respond with a perfectly nuanced assessment every single time.

[Red Socks]

Sack cloth and ashes time.
I took the post 3 reference by Artidesco as the T 290 #1 not the T 280 #1 that it is.
My full apologies to all.

[Michael Oliver]

Sack cloth and ashes time.
I took the post 3 reference by Artidesco as the T 290 #1 not the T 280 #1 that it is.
My full apologies to all.

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean - could you explain please? I would be very surprised if this is T280 HU1...but of course happy to see the evidence.

[Michael Oliver]

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean - could you explain please? I would be very surprised if this is T280 HU1...but of course happy to see the evidence.

The car didn't sell at the auction last night, apparently.

[MCS]

The car didn't sell at the auction last night, apparently.

Interesting - thanks Michael for the update. Were there any bids?

[Tim Murray]

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean - could you explain please? I would be very surprised if this is T280 HU1...but of course happy to see the evidence.

Michael, in the absence of Red Socks perhaps I might explain. The link posted by Arttidesco in post 3 of this thread takes you to the Racing Sports Cars page on Lola T280 chassis HU1. As Red Socks acknowledged, this is a different car to the Lola T290 currently for sale.

Edited by Tim Murray, 17 September 2011 - 20:36.

[arttidesco]

Apologies if I caused any confusion in post 3 Red Sox.

One way and another there are still many questions remaining on the car that was offered for sale.

I baulked at the 40 squid entry fee for seeing the Lola T290 HU1 but I enjoyed the French Woody Jag 1000 and some of the other novelties outside the Bonhams tent.

[Bill Harding]

If you had spent the 40 squid, I suggest that you may still not have seen Lola T290 HU1...............................

[arttidesco]

If you had spent the 40 squid, I suggest that you may still not have seen Lola T290 HU1...............................

I'll call that good Karma for want of a better explanation then