32 replies to this topic

[Nev]

OK - I know Jaguar's XJ13 (and the 1954/5 Kieft 2.5 litre C/Climax GP car) never got as far as a race in period, but can the collective wisdom of this forum confirm whether or not this also applies to any of the following cars?

 

1960 Walker-Climax

 

Cooper-Alfa Romeo T86C

 

Cooper 91

 

1972 Eifelland-Cosworth

 

Tecno E731

 

Lotus-Cosworth 86

 

Lotus 88

 

[Vitesse2]

The two Coopers were never completed. The 1972 Eifelland (a modified March 721) did race - but are you perhaps confusing it with the unbuilt 1973 one? The Walker was abandoned in favour of a Lotus 18. The Tecno was ditched after only running in practice for the British GP. The Lotuses never raced.

 

http://www.forix.com...neverraced.html

[Jimisgod]

More recently... http://www.f1technic.../mclaren-mp4-18

[Nev]

Thanks Gents - I do have to come clean here.

 

I am planning the first shakedown runs of my Jaguar XJ13 recreation this summer. The car is an exact (as far as humanly possible) recreation of the 1966 pre-crash car and is powered by the only surviving complete quad-cam prototype engine built as a sister engine to the one first installed in Jaguar's one-and-only "original". Jaguar's car will almost certainly never race (and probably should not be allowed to) wheras my recreation/facsimile may be able to. The only thing that stands between me and the ability to be considered for a FIA HTP (Passport - which would make my car eligible for appropriate events) is the fact the original never turned a wheel in anger. It did hold the UK closed lap record for more than 30 years until beaten in 1999 by the MacLaren road car, but never raced. I would dearly like to see my recreation squaring up to the likes of the Mk1 GT40 and Le Mans Ferraris in open combat one day. Appendix K, which says which cars are eligible for a passport, is very clear in that the original car on which a recreation is based on, has to have competed in period.

 

Hence my question about other cars (some of which may be classed as recreations using some original and period components). For each of the cars in my list, I am therefore asking myself the following:

 

Did the car compete in period? If "no", did it actually exist as a car in period?

If the car didn't compete in period, can the car be seen competing in historics today? If "yes", is it racing with a FIA HTP? (almost certainly the case if it races in European events).

 

Our own MSA, with its team of experienced and knowledgeable technical staff, recommend granting HTPs on behalf of the FIA. The MSA is bound by the rules laid down in the FIA's Appendix K and have to make judgements and recommendations based on this document. Unless I can demonstrate that exceptions have been allowed, my argument falls at the first fence.

 

Your help in assisting me achieve my dream of seeing my recreation square up to those mighty GT40s and sublime Ferraris would be greatly appreciated. I know the XJ13 doesn't have the benefit of the best part of 50 years continuous race development and is likely to be humbled (at least initially), but I would dearly like to see the car sharing the same piece of tarmac as these wonderful cars nonetheless. Can you please help answer these questions for the cars listed below?

 

1954/5 Kieft 2.5 litre C/Climax GP car

Did not exist in period yet can be seen competing today.

 

1960 Walker-Climax

Vitesse2(Richard?) tells me the car didn't race. Did it exist as an actual car in period?

I believe the car is regularly seen competing today.

 

Cooper-Alfa Romeo T86C

Vitesse2(Richard?) tells me the car was never completed. Did it ever race in period?

I believe it is now racing and certainly competed in the Grand Prix Masters race, part of the 2004 Oldtimer Grand Prix on the Nürburgring (with a bored-out Alfa Montreal engine fitted).

 

Cooper 91

Again, Vitesse2(Richard?) tells me the car was never completed. Did it ever race in period?

The car raced recently at the Goodwood Revival. Does the car have a HTP?

 

1973 Eifelland-Cosworth (not 1972 - thanks ...)

Did it ever race in period?

Has raced in Grand Prix Masters in recent years.

 

Tecno E731

Did not complete a race. Only got as far as practice.

Raced in the 7th Grand Prix de Monaco Historique in 2010.

 

Lotus-Cosworth 86

Never raced in period although it was tested (as was the Jaguar XJ13 at Silverstone in 1967). 

Ran up the hill at 2012 Festival of Speed. Does it have a HTP?

 

Lotus 88

Never raced in period?

Ran up the hill at the Festival of Speed in 2011. Does it have a HTP?

 

 

 

Edited by Nev, 09 April 2015 - 18:07.

[Vitesse2]

I'm sure we had a discussion about the Walker-Climax a long time ago - but I can't find it. The car certainly existed in 1960-61. However, I did come across this 2004 thread full of pictures by Peter Morley, which would seem to indicate that it never even got painted in period: http://forums.autosp...9-walker-climax

 

There's a long thread on the Kieft, which includes the information that the chassis was completed at the time (post 16). But I don't think it met the Godiva engine for a long time afterwards.

 

http://forums.autosp...ft-gp-car-races

 

As for the Coopers, just a guess, as I don't really follow what goes on in Historics, but maybe what is masquerading as a T91 is one of the T90s or a cobbled-up T86? DCN's Cooper Cars specifically says no T91s were built, not least because they couldn't interest any private buyers - plus they had no money to run a works team. The T86C-Alfa never raced - it was tested at Silverstone by Lucien Bianchi in 1968, but it had a 2.5 litre engine from a T33 sports car fitted rather than the intended 3 litre V8, which was never delivered and later turned up in the McLaren M7D, The T86C, which had been gathering dust for a year, was sold by BCA without an engine in June 1969. Two T86B-BRMs and the two T90s were sold at the same auction.

 

I'm confused by the 1973 Eifelland though - surely it never got off Len Terry's drawing board? The period history of the 1972 Eifelland is on Old Racing Cars - it's March 721/4.

[D-Type]

I suspect that the apparently ineligible cars may have been competing in races that did not require an FIA HTP.  For example, races at Goodwood do not and

entry is by invitation.

[Lee Nicolle]

As I have probably said before there is a LOT of historic cars with little credibility. Effectively built from some cast off parts, of from basket case wrecks.Look at Alan Browns site for 5000s to see how many more cars there are now! I believe Can Am is much the same too.

 

With a known product that was never raced in period because the original was wrecked in testing, or the team ran out of money I can see no reason why they should not be raced IF sufficient evidence is available re the cars[s]. The Kieft is one of those as are I sure a few others.

 

Nevs Jag while a replica is it seems a recreation of a car that is no longer in that form and has all the original parts such as engine & etc. If it was built with a common V12 Jag no. But the proper engine yes. Like many of us following that thread I have been very impressed with the work, research and originality. The original did compete, abliet as a speed record car so should be elegible.

 

Though in saying this it is a can of worms to an extent. The original car does exist, though in much modified form. As is the case of many as I have said at the top.

 

In classic speedway, at least here in South Oz you have to apply to the club to build a replica. And prove the original is lost, or very maybe exists in a very modified form for a different era. Not the be all and end all but an excellent start.

There has been replicas built around an original engine, the spare front axle and a [rare] set of intake and carbs. That was by the owner as the car is represented.

Many race cars [for any category and discipline]  have been so  modified as to be a replica if ever rebuilt to original. This mainly applies to chassis cars and spaceframes. Though restoring those can be a drama as many of those frames are rusted out and by the time you have replaced half the tubing are nearly replicas anyway.

[Stephen W]

Currently there are C-Type Jaguars being used in comepetition that are 'tool room copies' of originals yet they are allowed in.

 

Several formula cars have been built from spares or 'recreated' and are allowed to race.

 

Several formula cars have genuine claims to the same chassis number. Yet they would all be allowed to race.

 

Unfortunately the cat is out of the bag, or the horse has already bolted, or whatever phrase is appropriate. There has not been a strict enough control over what can or can't be raced. 

 

I always maintained that 'replicas' should not be allowed to race against genuine historics but should have their own race. Unfortunately that too has long since fallen by the wayside.

 

[uechtel]

You would have to specify how much of a car would have to be original parts to make the difference between "genuine" and "replica"...

 

The wrong thing in my opinion to have historic cars "ambitiously" competing. They should be used for the fun of the drivers and the spectators, and of course the drivers can demonstrate the potential of their cars and driving abilities. But "real" competition inspires owners to develop the cars beyond the former potential and with doubtable methods at the cost of autheticity. Isn´t it much higher "historic" value to see an Emeryson, an Ensign or a RAM at the end of a field of historic Grand Prix cars than at the front?

[Sharman]

I can hear Jenks turning.

[Nev]

I can hear Jenks turning.

 

Although I may use terms such as "replica", "recreation" etc., I am under absolutely no delusion that my car can ever be more than a "facsimile" as defined by the great Jenks (see below). For this reason, I will often describe my car as a facsimile.

 

However ... 

 

The one-and-only genuine XJ13 will almost certainly never race (and should never be allowed to in my opinion). Who amongst you with any trace of petrol in their blood would not relish the prospect of hearing Jaguar's quad-cam V12 at full cry and finally seeing Sayer's sublime form jostling amongst a field of the cars it was designed to compete against? The original car can't do this - a facsimile perhaps could? Oher facsimiles can and do legitimately race against "originals" (however, please see Jenks' definition of "original" below - are any of these cars actually "original"?) - so why can't I? Incidentally, when I say "I", I mean someone with the necessary driving skills, sympathy for these historic machines and appropriately-sized cojones (probably rules me out).

 

Jenks said ....

 

"Original

 

Almost impossible to find anything in this category. It would have to have been put in store the moment it was completed. Possibly the Trossi-Monaco special in the Biscaretti Museum comes as close to an original racing car as it is possible to get.

The “old-car” industry frequently uses degrees of originality, such as “nearly original”, “almost original”, even “completely original”, but all such descriptions are meaningless as they cannot be quantified. A racing car that has only had a new set of tyres and a change of sparking plugs since it was completed is no longer “original”. Many components have remained “original”, such as gearboxes, cylinder heads, axles and so on, and reproduction parts are made to “original drawings” and “original material specification”, but this does not make them “original” parts, nor does a complete car built from such components qualify as “original”, regardless of what the constructor or owner might think. Such a car is nothing more than a “reproduction” or “facsimile”. 

 

Genuine

 

This is a much more practical description for an old or historic car and can be applied to most racing cars that have had active and continuous lives, with no occasions when they “disappeared into limbo” or changed their character in any way. Most E.R.A.s come into this category as they have been raced continuously, which has meant the replacing of numerous components as they wore out, but the car itself has never been lost from view, nor has its basic character and purpose been altered over the years. Even such a well-known E.R.A. as “Romulus” is not “original”, as it has been repainted, reupholstered, new tyres have been fitted and new components have been used to rebuild the engine; but it is unquestionably “Genuine”.

 

Authentic

 

This term is used to describe a racing car that has led a chequered career, through no fault of its own, but has never disappeared from view. The “Entity”, which is best described as the sum of the parts, has always been around in some form or other, but has now been put back to the specification that it was in, either when it was first built, or some subsequent known point in its history. An example would be an old Grand Prix car that was converted into a road-going sports car when its useful racing life was over, over the years having the racing engine replaced by a touring version, and eventually being allowed to deteriorate. It is then rescued and rebuilt as the Grand Prix car, with its racing engine replaced, but with new radiator, fuel tank and oil tank, new wheels made, new bodywork, instrument panel, seat, upholstery and so on, all of which were missing. The “Entity” that started life as the Grand Prix car never actually disappeared, so the end result of all the labours can justifiably be described as “Authentic”. There is no question of it being “Original”, and to describe it as genuine would be unfair to its sister cars that remained Grand Prix cars all their lives, even though such things as radiator, fuel tank, seat and so on had to be replaced due to the ravages of time and use.

 

Resurrection

 

Some racing cars, when they reached the end of their useful life, were abandoned and gradually dismantled as useful bits were taken off to use on other cars. Eventually insufficient of the car remained to form an acceptable entity, even though most of the components were still scattered about. There have been numerous cases where such components that still existed were gathered up to form the basis of a new car; a new chassis frame and new body were required and, from the bare bones of the ashes or the original, another one appears. It cannot claim to be the original car, and certainly not a genuine car, nor an authentic car. At best it is a “Resurrection” from the dead, or from the graveyard.

 

 

Re-construction

 

This can stem from a single original component, or a collection of components from a variety of cars, but usually there is very little left of the original racing car, except its history and its character. From these small particles a complete new car is built, its only connection with the original car being a few components and the last-known pile of rust left over when decomposition set in.

 

Facsimile

 

Purely and simply a racing car that now exists when there never was an original. If a factory built four examples of a particular Grand Prix model, for instance, and there are now five in existence, then the fifth can only be a facsimile, fake, clone, copy or reproduction. If the fifth car was built by the same people or factory who built the four original cars, then at best it could be a “Replica” of the four original cars, but such a situation is very unlikely. There are many reasons for building a facsimile, from sheer enthusiasm for a particular model to simple avarice, and it is remarkable how many facsimiles have been given a small piece of genuine history in order to try to authenticate the fake, and thus raise its value.

Facsimiles have been built of just about everything from Austin to Wolseley, some being so well made that it is difficult to tell them from the originals. Some owners have been known to remain strangely silent about the origins of their cars when they have been mistaken for the real thing. Other facsimiles have been declared openly and honestly by the constructors, such as the facsimile that has been built of an A/B-type E.R.A., or the series of facsimiles of 250F Maseratis that have been built. The trouble usually starts when the cars are sold to less scrupulous owners, who first convince themselves they have bought a genuine car, and then try to convince the rest of the sporting world. The disease is very prevalent in the world of museums, on the assumption that the paying public are gullible.

 

Special

 

This name applies to one-off cars that are the product of the fertile brain of the constructor. It is probably true to say that no special has ever been finished! It may be finished sufficiently to allow it to race, but inevitably the constructor will be planning further modifications while he is still racing it. If the special builder ever says his car is finished, it will usually indicate that it is now obsolete and he is starting on a new one. The rebuilding or restoring of a special to use as an Historic racing car, by someone who is not the original constructor, can mean either that the car is rebuilt to a known point in time that appeals to the new owner, or he can continue the process of development where the originator left off.

The nice thing about specials is that they are a law unto themselves and do not need to be put into any sort of category. A special can be totally accepted as “Genuine, authentic, reconstructed or facsimile”.

 

Duplication

 

This is a disease which started many years ago within the ranks of the lovers of Bugatti cars. Unscrupulous people dismantled a Grand Prix Bugatti into its component parts and with the right hand sold an incomplete car as a “basket case” and with the left hand sold another incomplete car as a “box of bits”. The two buyers eventually found suitable second-hand components to replace the missing parts, or had new bits made, and we ended up with two Grand Prix Bugattis where there has only been one. Naturally each owner claims “authenticity” for his complete car. The Bugatti Owners Club – and the majority of its members – strongly disapprove of this practice.

Unfortunately the disease has spread to many other makes, especially those that were built in large numbers. At best this whole business borders on fraud.

 

Destroyed

 

A simple enough word that applies to a racing car that has been involved in an accident or fire in which no tangible components are left in recognizable shape or form.

 

Scrapped

 

This usually applies to a car that is taken out of service by a factory team and either deliberately destroyed so that nothing is left, or useful components are removed and put into store and the rest is thrown on the scrap heap for crushing or melting down. There have been cases of a chassis frame being rescued from the scrap heap and used to re-create a new car. In no way can the new car be described as genuine. If the factory scrapped a car and removed its number from their records, than that car has gone for ever, and a nebulous collection of old and new components can hardly justify the claiming of the scrapped number.

 

Broken up

 

Similarly, if a factory records that a car has been broken up, it should mean exactly that. It has gone for good.

 

Converted

 

There have been examples of a Type A model being converted by the factory into a Type B and then a Type C. The particular car as an entity never disappeared, though it might be difficult to recognize that the Type C was once a Type A. It is virtually impossible to re-convert such a car back to a Type A, no matter how desirable it may be. The perfect example is the E.R.A. that started life as R4B in 1936, was converted to R4C in 1937, and then into R4D in 1938 and was much modified again in 1948. The car still exists as R4D, with a well-documented continuous history, and is as genuine as they come but it can never revert back to R4B."

Edited by Nev, 10 April 2015 - 14:45.

[f1steveuk]

The Ferrari Spazzaneve springs to mind, although I am not sure it has raced recently in Historics. More in line with the Jaguar, wasn't there a two seat sports car based on a GT40 that was built, but never raced (V50 or something, I recall a balck and white newspaper article on it).

[Nev]

The Ferrari Spazzaneve springs to mind, although I am not sure it has raced recently in Historics. More in line with the Jaguar, wasn't there a two seat sports car based on a GT40 that was built, but never raced (V50 or something, I recall a balck and white newspaper article on it).

 

Thanks Steve. However, the Ferrari certainly falls into the special category of "Development Car". Such cars are accepted nowadays as long as they are the genuine article. Replicas/recreations/whatever of such development cars aren't allowed.

 

I don't know of the other car you mention?

Edited by Nev, 10 April 2015 - 17:51.

[Ray Bell]

I'm pretty sure there was an open-top GT40 raced at the Nurburgring 1000kms quite early on...

Is this the one you mean?

[Tim Murray]

Thanks Steve. However, the Ferrari certainly falls into the special category of "Development Car". Such cars are accepted nowadays as long as they are the genuine article. Replicas/recreations/whatever of such development cars aren't allowed.

Interesting - so is the March 2-4-0 six-wheeler considered a 'development car'? My understanding is that the chassis raced in recent years with the six-wheel bits fitted is not one of the chassis actually fitted with the six-wheel bits for testing in period.

[Nev]

Interesting - so is the March 2-4-0 six-wheeler considered a 'development car'? My understanding is that the chassis raced in recent years with the six-wheel bits fitted is not one of the chassis actually fitted with the six-wheel bits for testing in period.

 

This is the relevant section:

 

2.2.7 Development cars

 

           2.2.7.1 Original racing cars and GT Prototype cars which were made for period FIA Competition, conforming to the Internationally recognised regulations of the AIACR or FIA Appendix C or Appendix J, but which, for some reason, did not participate in international Competition.

 

2.2.7.2 The continuous history of their existence must be proved.

 

          2.2.7.3 The HTP must be approved by the HMSC before being issued.

 

Does this apply in this case?

[Tim Murray]

Nev, my understanding again is that the only parts on the current car with provable continuous history are the bits that turn it into a six-wheeler. The provenance of the rest of it seems very unclear. The consensus in this earlier thread was that the chassis was not one of the four March chassis fitted at various times in period with the six-wheel bits:

http://forums.autosp...heeler-a-dummy/

[f1steveuk]

I'll look for the GT40 thing, it certainly didn't look like the GT40 it was based on, and of course may simply have been a rebody job, but I shall look

[tsrwright]

Where and when did Jenks say that?

[Dick Willis]

I have been re-reading my Motor Sport mags of 1980 and our UK friends will remember the debate about copies/replicas was in full swing at that time with countless letters to the editor following numerous comments by DSJ whose point of view on this subject has been alluded to earlier in this thread. The greatest outcry at that time seemed to be centred around the second JCB Ferrari Dino which was finally cleared to race by the Historic Committee in mid 1980 but it seemed that the approval was only for the remainder of 1980, did it subsequently continue to race thereafter and where is it now ?

[Nev]

Where and when did Jenks say that?

 

Jenks' 1987 book “Directory of Historic Racing Cars.”

 

[Supersox]

It does seem to me that there is a huge difference between a car which can claim some connection to the original car-a one off- and this XJ13 replica which is in effect brand new,  not only that, but the real car exists and its owners, who probably would get an HTP, choose not to race it.

The prevailing replica regulations-GT40, Cobras etc-provide for cars to the same specifications as cars with International history-this car does not comply with that rule.

The prevailing test car regulations -Walker, Keift etc- provide for cars without history in period but which have survived-this car does not comply with this rule either.

There are plenty of opportunities to race this car all over the place where replicas. lookylikies and other old/new modsport/saloons run,even at Spa in Barery Sidery-Smiths race for BSCC just not under Appendix K and quite honestly I cannot think of one reason why it should be allowed to get an HTP.

[Gary C]

How about the 1968 Lotus 58? Was meant to be driven by Jim Clark directly after Hockenheim, Graham Hill gave it a go later in the year but didn't like it. Then put aside by Team Lotus, to be re-built y Bob Dance et al much later. There's a glimpse of it in my video clip:   and here too: 

Edited by Gary C, 11 April 2015 - 15:53.

[Nev]

The prevailing test car regulations -Walker, Keift etc- provide for cars without history in period but which have survived.

 

You are entitled to your view Supersox but the reality is not as black-and-white as you paint

 

I do feel it is unfair that replica Jaguar D-Types, Jaguar C-Types, GT40s, Cobras etc get to play with supposedly "original" cars and I can't but that's how it is (at present anyway). Aside from this, there are examples of unfair application of the prevailing rules which does wind me up a bit ...

 

For example ...

 

One thing I do want to ask is about is what you refer to as "prevailing test car regulations". This is a genuine question and I would like to know the answer to it. I assume you mean "Development Cars" as defined by the FIA in Appendix K. "Original racing cars and GT Prototype cars which were made for period FIA Competition, conforming to the Internationally recognised regulations of the AIACR or FIA Appendix C or Appendix J, but which, for some reason, did not participate in international Competition."

 

Tell me Supersox, for cars like the ones you mention, how can they have complied with these "internationally recognised regulations" if they weren't actually assembled as complete cars in period? -  or in at least one case, where the car only existed on the drawing board?

 

Go on ... educate me.

 

Neville

[Peter Morley]

There are many events that you don't need FIA papers for.

There are also events where you only need to have applied for FIA papers.

Given it can take a long time (e.g. years) to get papers that gives you a certain amount of flexibility in terms of events that ask for them.

 

It really comes down to what events you want to do (given the trouble you've gone to I would avoid the events that are full of trophy hunters).

Many organisers have a lot of flexibility (or create difficulty!) in terms of their entries, FIA papers do not guarantee an entry conversely not having them doesn't necessarily prohibit.

 

The problem the FIA have is knowing the original specification of a car that never raced (look at the unfinished Formula Juniors that have been finished recently and turn out to have been great designs), in your case that is not an issue.

Given the accuracy of your car and the fact that the original is extremely well known and documented you should get papers - there are classifications (e.g. boxes that can be ticked) such as historically significant for cars that didn't participate in the requisite events in period and the current paperwork is based on specification rather than history.

 

If your local registrar is enthusiastic about the car that will help the procedure considerably - talking to Marcus Pye for example (others are available, there's a list of registrars somewhere - possibly MSA website) will be far more informative than this forum (I think the member who used to be a registrar isn't any more).

 

if that failed then a note from Jaguar would help considerably...

[Gary C]

Malcolm Ricketts told me when we filmed the Lotus 58 that he couldn't get FIA papers for the car simply because it had never raced in period. I think the car is now back with Classic Team Lotus where they demo it now and again.

[arttidesco]

More in line with the Jaguar, wasn't there a two seat sports car based on a GT40 that was built, but never raced (V50 or something, I recall a balck and white newspaper article on it).

Are you perhaps thinking of the unraced (in period) MkIV chassis J9 which was converted to a CAN AM spec and remained unraced (in period) perhaps ?

I'm pretty sure there was an open-top GT40 raced at the Nurburgring 1000kms quite early on...

Is this the one you mean?

The Roadster Chassis GT/111 and GT/112 ?

I'll look for the GT40 thing, it certainly didn't look like the GT40 it was based on, and of course may simply have been a rebody job, but I shall look

Any luck ?

It does seem to me that there is a huge difference between a car which can claim some connection to the original car-a one off- and this XJ13 replica which is in effect brand new, not only that, but the real car exists and its owners, who probably would get an HTP, choose not to race it.

But the original car with Jaguar was crashed in the 1970's and given a restyled body and completely different size wheels and tyres which almost certainly would not have been available when the car was conceived. Neville's car which has an original 5 litre 4 cam fuel injected V12 from the XJ13 project is as close as it is possible to get to the XJ13 when it was first completed and tested by the factory.

Malcolm Ricketts told me when we filmed the Lotus 58 that he couldn't get FIA papers for the car simply because it had never raced in period. I think the car is now back with Classic Team Lotus where they demo it now and again.

As seen at Goodwood FoS

[Stephen W]

 

Can you please help answer these questions for the cars listed below

 

Lotus 88

Never raced in period?

Ran up the hill at the Festival of Speed in 2011. Does it have a HTP?

 

 

The Lotus 88B was used in practice for the 1981 British GP by both de Angelis & Mansell but was kicked out.

[dolomite]

The Lotus 88B was used in practice for the 1981 British GP by both de Angelis & Mansell but was kicked out.

The 88Bs at Silverstone 1981 were converted overnight into 87s after the first practice day, so one of them did actually race, just not as an 88....

[MCS]

...I'm confused by the 1973 Eifelland though - surely it never got off Len Terry's drawing board? The period history of the 1972 Eifelland is on Old Racing Cars - it's March 721/4....

What is the 1973 version ?

[arttidesco]

What is the 1973 version ?

 

Seems that the '73 Eifelland never got off the designers drawing board.

[group7]

From what I can gather from my 1992 copy of Spain's GT40 book, Ford GT/108, not raced in period, but has seen action in Vintage events,  and J-9, were two chassis that didn't see the track in anger. 

 

I stand to be corrected !

[StanBarrett2]

Seems that the '73 Eifelland never got off the designers drawing board.

Many of you may know of my weakness for cutaway drawings.

This piece ends saying that Len Terry produced cutaway drawings for Autosport in the 50s.

 

I have never seen 1 yet !!

 

Does anyone have a sample, or an inkling of what cutaways he may have done ?

 

macoran

Edited by StanBarrett2, 10 March 2017 - 23:20.