What's this and how do I forge one
#1
Posted 23 April 2002 - 22:01
1. What's this?
2. What does it tell me about the car it's attached to?
3. How easily could I fake one?
Many thanks
Allen
Advertisement
#2
Posted 24 April 2002 - 02:38
2) You might be able to use the regristration number to search the NZ MVDI for the car, might get you the history of the car. But if it's been unregistered for a long time it might not be available.
3) Good luck trying to fake it!
What kind of a car does it come from?
#3
Posted 24 April 2002 - 05:22
Vehciles had to be licensed (registered) in NZ every 12 months, and a new sticker was issued at that time. The fee covered, amongst other things, compulsory third-party insurance IIRC.
A little something in the back of my mind seems to recall that 'E' stickers were for trailers.
#4
Posted 24 April 2002 - 06:10
1) I think it is a (as the writing suggests) New Zealand driver's licence to USE a motor vehicle from 1972-3 - not a vehicle registration.
It looks to me like an old paper licence that has been either laminated or stuck onto the car with some transparent plastic tape. I think that there are tears at 1/3 and 2/3 distance that suggests it has been folded over to fit in a wallet.
I have no answer as to why it was attached to the car, nor why it is laminated except for maybe posterity.
In Oz we have 'classes' of drivers licence, these designate what vehicle weight, passengers, etc one is endorsed for, I think this is the same.
2) What it tells you about the car I would say is limited to the likelyhood that it was driven in New Zealand...Somewhere.
3) As for faking one, do you have the original item or just this pic? It shouldn't be too hard i would think, as photoshop and printers can perform all sorts of wizadry these days, and this thing clearly predates photo ID's, holograms, and Personal Computer's.
D
#5
Posted 24 April 2002 - 06:58
Originally posted by Daveofoz
1) I think it is a (as the writing suggests) New Zealand driver's licence to USE a motor vehicle from 1972-3 - not a vehicle registration.
It looks to me like an old paper licence that has been either laminated or stuck onto the car with some transparent plastic tape. I think that there are tears at 1/3 and 2/3 distance that suggests it has been folded over to fit in a wallet.
I don't think it's a driver licence; in NZ, until recently, licences were actually for the lifetime of the owner or 50 years, which ever came first. When I got mine in 1995, it was'nt due to expire till 2045. They don't look anything like that sticker, and I've seen quite a few including older ones than 1972. However, the "whatever it is" is valid for one year only. However, it may be some kind of special licence, perhaps a competition licence?
#6
Posted 24 April 2002 - 07:02
It is attached to the metalwork of a F5000 car that may have been raced in the Tasman series in 1973. If it is genuine and hasn't been transfered from somewhere else (like a trailer or a wallet), it would appear to show that the car is genuinely ex-Tasman. Which is why I asked how easy it would be to fake one. I've been asked to help authenticate the car.
The tears at 1/3 and 2/3 distance are fascinating. I hadn't spotted those. As metal doesn't fold, this suggests this has not always been in that position.
I'm beginning to smell a rat here.
Any other comments or suggestions?
Allen
#7
Posted 24 April 2002 - 07:51
So I have to say, up front, that I have no knowledge of NZ licensing/registration.
However, Dave McKinney does have such knowledge, and he has bells ringing that the big "E" relates to a trailer.
The thought came to me that perhaps a racing car could be "flat towed" as a "trailer" on the road, and therefore registered as such (a long shot, perhaps); or that maybe the trailer's registration label could be attached to the car carried on that trailer.
In the days when I had racing cars and trailers in Australia, the trailer registration label was carried in a metal frame bolted to the trailer. It was quite common for people to steal these frames, with the labels attached, to put on their own trailer - cheaper than paying the rego fee, you see.
Attaching the trailer's label to the car on the trailer could be a way of avoiding this possibility.
As I said, just some thoughts that came to me.
I would be among the first to want to see a fake history debunked, but would hate to see Allen dismiss the car as a fake if this is not the case.
#8
Posted 24 April 2002 - 09:30
The ease with which the plate on a motorcycle, complete with its less-than-detailed registration sticker, could be transferred from one machine to another was a godsend to an impoverished student trying to support an AJS 650 and a Montesa trials motorcycle! The bike stickers carried no letters; at least they didn't in 1974 when the photo of my old Matchless in the photo album was taken.
I think Barry Lake is on the right track about legal requirements for racing cars, as it always struck me as odd that many carried full-sized registration plates attached to bulkheads and panels inside the body. I wish I could be more specific but it is a while ago now...
#9
Posted 24 April 2002 - 09:34
#10
Posted 24 April 2002 - 10:32
As for dishonest usage, there would have been nothing to stop an unscrupulous person taking it out of his wallet and sticking it on a car which he saw in a workshop in the UK or the US - if he was so inclined.
I don't know whether it would be possible to tie the licence number in with a specific vehicle (or trailer) at 30 years' remove - and if so, and if my trailer theory is right, you might very well end up finding it was registered to Avis Rental Cars Ltd or something equally helpful.
If you would care to contact me direct, Allen, with the car's claimed antecedents, I might be able to help
#11
Posted 24 April 2002 - 10:33
Originally posted.....
Something that annoys me in situations like this is when people who know little or nothing on the subject jump in and confuse the issue.
So I have to say, up front, that I have no knowledge of NZ licensing/registration.
However, Dave McKinney does have such knowledge, and he has bells ringing that the big "E" relates to a trailer.....
Agreed... we often see fairly knowledgeable people put forth suggestions and then later posts make wild guesses that start others on tangents... it always pays to read the whole thread.
I had written: "I do think, however, that there was a requirement for a kind of government registration of cars that raced in NZ. But whatever way it goes, as has been intimated, the right answer will come from someone who is familiar with New Zealand legal requirements."
Then I looked and two later posts had come on the thread with the confirmation of this...
I don't think too much credence can be put on the two folds or tears... a delay in affixing the sticker could readily account for that.
#12
Posted 24 April 2002 - 16:17
My thoughts as well Ray. Equally, with those adhesive stickers you were often left with a raised fold or two if you didn't get the sticker on absolutely flat the first time. Subsequently, the printed label part in the fold would disintergrate/flake and you would be left with it looking like it was torn or had been folded for a while.Originally posted by Ray Bell
...
I don't think too much credence can be put on the two folds or tears... a delay in affixing the sticker could readily account for that.
Neil
#13
Posted 24 April 2002 - 20:14
I'm sure the 'E' stood for 'Exempt' which meant the car did not have to comply with all the warrant of fitness regulations; things like lights, horn, wipers etc. It would only apply to a car that was not going to be driven on the public roads.
In a close-up shot of the March 701 that Amon raced in New Zealand in 1971 the 'E' sticker is clearly shown attached to the side of the screen, so that confirms that even cars imported for a short time had to be registered while they were in the country.
#14
Posted 24 April 2002 - 20:31
I would be very, very, careful on this one...
DCN
#15
Posted 24 April 2002 - 21:13
Which is exactly why I started this threadOriginally posted by Doug Nye
I would be very, very, careful on this one...
The history offered on the car seems to hold together well but the sticker seemed too good to be true. If it had always been on the car, then its history would never have been in doubt and yet it was bought as a "mystery" car only two years ago. Other evidence offered so far to support the identification claimed includes finding one colour paint under another colour paint and I have never been convinced by that sort of thing since being asked to authenticate the ex-F1 McLaren M4B a few years back. That wasn't, of course, the real car and not even a very good fake. Frankly, I felt insulted that the owner believed such a poor effort would have fooled me.
Returning to my mystery red car, the sticker itself looks like it is original but it could have been added to the car more recently. The border around it that Daveofoz and Doug have picked up on is most odd. I can question that with the owner.
My conclusion so far is that it's too early to reach a conclusion. The car must stay in my "mystery" section until more compelling evidence comes to light.
David - I will send you details but I'm sure you'll understand that I don't want to identify this car in a public forum.
Allen
#16
Posted 24 April 2002 - 21:17
A car is being prepared for a race meeting, it's been shipped into the country, the race is this weekend, there are a zillion things to get sorted including new tyres from Goodyear, a fresh set of gears are arriving at the airport tomorrow, the miss in the engine that couldn't be sorted at the last race, there was a couple of ball joints needed replacing and the spares are almost as bad, so it's been decided to get a pair of fresh ones from Graeme Lawrence's spares, but Graeme went to a launch with his sponsors and couldn't be contacted...
These blokes are under pressure, so the sticker being folded and stuck in a pocket is in danger of being forgotten altogether.
Then, finally, Friday arrives and the wets still have to be mounted and the scrutineers are demanding that the blue triangle is too small and must be enlarged.... and they are asking for the sticker to be put somewhere!!
Who has it? Fred has it in the pocket of the jeans he hasn't taken off for three days, it's in awful shape, but it has to be used... so it's stuck on despite the creases, and why worry, anyway, it only has to last three weekends and the car's back out of the country.
Mail me too, Allen, if you wish...
#17
Posted 26 April 2002 - 04:10
and of course none of my observations are or were based on personal experience of any kind.;)
as an added note; in calif,the yearly license stickers used to have the release paper scored with a wavey line that partially nicked the sticker..applied once, it was fine..but if attempted to be removed,the sticker broke into suspect bits.
#18
Posted 26 April 2002 - 08:26
For it now to be attached to the "metalwork" of the F5000 must prove that it has been moved at some stage. That's not to say it came from another car. It could have been moved because the original screen got broken and once it had been removed there would be no way of re-attaching in the correct way.
Allen
No reply so far.
#19
Posted 26 April 2002 - 11:26
And Milan, I would have thought it would be difficult, if not impossible, to remove the sticker from possibly broken or cracked glass or plexi without damaging it - that solid orange section would show evidence of cracking and folding as the sticker was removed, even if the original glass to which it was attached was undamaged. And do I understand you to be saying that the glue is on the PRINTED side? After all, if it's a sticker, it is designed to stick to things - if it's 'peel and stick' then the idea was that it would be at least semi-permanent: had it been a water-soluble glue, then that would indicate it was to be more easily removed but in both cases it would essentially necessarily be destroyed in that removal. And surely if the damaged sticker was still required, as it was a current piece of documentation, it would be a simple matter to get it cancelled and replaced ....
Scenario:
"Hello Mr Official, I'm Bruce from Oz, I've just crashed my F5000 car at Puke and busted the screen. I'm going to repair the car back home, but I'll probably be back later in the year, so I'll need a new Exempt sticker otherwise I'll probably have trouble with Customs getting the car back in - here's the bits I could find of the old one. Can you replace it now, or will you need to post it to me?"
But of course he never came back that year ....
Food for thought?
Advertisement
#20
Posted 26 April 2002 - 11:41
#21
Posted 26 April 2002 - 11:53
the printed side is the sticky side this in order to stick to metalwork a clear sticker would have to be applied over the top (hence the border?)......
as far as the scratches/historical knowledge etc go......i'm in no position to comment and will leave that to the experts...
#22
Posted 26 April 2002 - 13:09
#23
Posted 26 April 2002 - 19:49
I can assure you it is not any sort of drivers licence. Driver's licences came in various styles but all were usually carried in your wallet, not stuck to a windscreen.
Vitesse2
The registration labels were designed to be almost impossible to remove. The authorities didn't want anyone swapping them from vehicle to vehicle. But it was possible to get then off. I saw it done when I had a windscreen replaced in one of my vehicles. But when it went back on the new screen it went back with the sticky side to the glass, not the way it is apparently displayed on the F5000. So, as Breadmaster says, it would have to have a clear sticky tape placed over it.
#24
Posted 26 April 2002 - 20:18
#25
Posted 26 April 2002 - 20:26
#26
Posted 26 April 2002 - 22:25
TomOriginally posted by tom neale
I can help you on the subject of copies if nothing else! This took about 20 minutes to do, it's not perfect but with more time and a better copy of the original it could be:
Welcome to TNF. I can see you are going to be very useful ;)
Allen
#27
Posted 29 April 2002 - 17:15
I was speaking to Ken Smith on Sunday.
He said, if the car is supposed to have raced in the Tasman series, he will know whether or not it is genuine.
If you can send me details I will forward them to him for comment.
#28
Posted 06 May 2002 - 04:56
I have just spoken with "the man from the government" about your sticker. Most obliging he was but unable to throw any light on the matter from the meagre details I could give him. Their on-line records only go back to 1999 but he was willing to check back through the archives if I could provide him with more information.
A chassis number or the actual registration number of the car could be the key to finding the details you are after.
If you want me to take this any further e-mail me with any more info you have.
#29
Posted 06 May 2002 - 10:51
#30
Posted 06 May 2002 - 18:51
Thanks very much for pursuing this. As Vicuna has somehow guessed (how?!), the car in question is claimed to be the Surtees TS11 entered by ChampCarr Racing for Sam Posey in the 1973 Tasman. The Posey car is believed to be chassis number 04. The difficulty is that John Bladon also claims that identity for his TS11 in the UK at present and the car shown in these photographs is still in pieces in the US.
The US car came to its current owner via Chuck Haines who bought a TS11 from Zeke Justice of the Justice Brothers. That one may be the TS11 used by Ron Dykes, a regular Justice Brothers driver, in the 1977 SCCA Run-Offs. One of the men mixed up with Posey's 1972/73 team says the Posey TS11 was sold direct to the Justice Brothers in 1973. But that means it was gathering dust for four seasons until Dykes drove in 1977 which doesn't sound particularly likely.
Just in case this sounds simple so far ( ), the Bladon TS11 also came Haines, so we can't be 100% sure which of the modern-day TS11s came from Zeke Justice.
Apart from the discovery of a layer of red paint and the faint outline of letters that may spell McCormack (the ChampCarr chief crew) the sticker is the best evidence that the US TS11 was once the (or one of the?) Posey TS11(s).
Any help, on any of these issues, would be most gratefully received.
Allen
#31
Posted 30 May 2011 - 17:00
A final addition to this old thread after 9 years!
Thanks to Mike Feisst for taking this photo at the 1973 Tasman.
The sticker is on the left inside of the windscreen.
#33
Posted 30 May 2011 - 21:51
As a longtime graphics guy I do have some thoughts on this.
I, too am convinced that this was folded in thirds, no question in my view, and agree that was likely done to be placed in a wallet in lieu of another ready storage option — probably at an event where none of us typically walk around with much else beyond a wallet (no pun to our sport's expenses intended).
Back then, mylars and films were of comparatively poor quality, and were thick, brittle, and often affixed with heavy adhesives to be permanent — sort of similar to today's license plate date stickers. So they didn't do well in "springing back" after folding, nor did the folds themselves recover at all from the "compression wrinkles" that would occur at the folds. This meant that a decal's backing paper would very quickly separate from the adhesive as well at the folds, and in a wallet would very quickly gather dirt and dust at the folds that would then prevent proper adhesion when finally stuck onto something.
It appears to me that the person who affixed this decal started by rubbing across the top third first, then tried to "stick" the top fold from right to left, hence the fold disappeared for a brief stretch at the right side. I also think no decal-from-backing separation occurred on the right end of the top fold during storage prior to mounting. Then, as the person tried to affix the rest of it, the dusty fold wrinkles and the thickness of the material prevented further flat placement for the rest of the wrinkle. This would be permanent and attract further dirt, eventually lifting the wrinkles even more.
The bottom fold was too dirty and dusty across its entire length to prevent flat placement at all.
I do not think the panel was ever re-painted with the sticker in place. It instead looks to have been sealed, probably immediately, with clear shipping tape or the like. It seems I see serrated cut marks on the top edge towards the left side (though the serrations are a bit rounded which occurs when a serrated cutting edge becomes worn), similar to shipping tape or early examples of clear adhesive mylars or vinyls, and that dirt and/or polish has affected the entire perimeter where an adhesive edge would still remain tacky and gather up dirt, dust, polish, whatever. If one looks closely at the top edge of the perimeter tape, about 30% of the way from the upper-right corner, and also examines the upper left corner itself, one sees dark areas where the person applying the tape held the tape and muddied up the tape edges. My guess is that person first grabbed the tape with the end of a dirty finger just below the top edge's center, where similarly dirty, then applied the clear tape covering holding the other noted dirty places. There are no other similar dirty spots elsewhere on the clear tape.
Hope this helps. A higher-res photo would help, if available.
(Quick Edit) It looks like I see some signs of this being a reflective mylar as well, especially in the white, and think it would be extremely difficult to re-create as a fake. Even the kerning (letter spacing) on the letters is imperfect, as is the lettering's baseline imperfections, typical of that period's fontographic shortcomings. It could be argued that anything can be faked, but it would take a one-in-a-million expert to do this so going to these measures, and for what profit, become real considerations.
Edited by E1pix, 30 May 2011 - 22:18.