50 replies to this topic

[Lola5000]

I've put an offer in on a historic race car in the States,it has the orginal chassis plate and about 60% of its orginal parts,but............ another car has the tub/chassis.
No interest in racing or applying for a log book,so which car has the right to call itself the orginal?

[Doug Nye]

Presumably you based your offer upon what you thought the car to be worth without its original tub or chassis?

Every saleable artefact has a market value. In collectible terms an assembly featuring the original chassis structure would be more desirable than one without, yet in useability terms an assembly with a fresh chassis structure might well appeal more to the user fraternity. Generally speaking, collectible values are historically higher than mere useability values. It's a case of old, historic, original, uncompetitive - versus fresh, taut, quick, competitive. It's collectible original artefact versus competitive piece of useable sports equipment. Market reaction dictates true achievable price.

DCN

Edited by Doug Nye, 18 June 2011 - 08:00.

[Lola5000]

Presumably you based your offer upon what you thought the car to be worth without its original tub or chassis?

Every saleable artefact has a market value. In collectible terms an assembly featuring the original chassis structure would be more desirable than one without, yet in useability terms an assembly with a fresh chassis structure might well appeal more to the user fraternity. Generally speaking, collectible values are historically higher than mere useability values. It's a case of old, historic, original, uncompetitive - versus fresh, taut, quick, competitive. It's collectible original artefact versus compeitive piece of useable sports equipment. Market reaction dictates true achievable price.

DCN

its a car I've always wanted,as I said no interest in racing it,its well above my driving ability.
Price/value of no real concern,its more which car would be considered the correct article.

[layabout]

I've put an offer in on a historic race car in the States,it has the orginal chassis plate and about 60% of its orginal parts,but............ another car has the tub/chassis.
No interest in racing or applying for a log book,so which car has the right to call itself the orginal?

To some extent it may even depend upon the car. An original D-Type tub certainlycarries more weight than the tub of a Lola T332---a somewhat disposable commodity. There's an article on this subject in the May Sports Car Market magazine, entitled: "Continuous History Car vs. Original Component Car? You decide". You may want to have a look:

www.sportscarmarket.com/columns/legal-files/2479-dual-identity-cars

[arttidesco]

If price and value are really of no concern then if I had the money, which I don't, I'd go for doing the proper thing by getting the vehicle with the chassis plate you have bid on and reuniting it with the original tub/chassis.

If as you say your not worried about using it for competition you will have killed two birds with one stone, got the vehicle you want and eliminated a replica/ tribute car/ fake/ weapons grade racer / key fob special in the process.

The key to the solution is that as you say it is 'a' car you have always wanted and currently 'it' is actually 'two' cars.

Edited by arttidesco, 18 June 2011 - 00:14.

[GMACKIE]

It is important to be clear about the description of the cars involved, and don't try to 'create' a car that never was.

A few years back, after my Formula Junior went to the USA to live, I sold some odds & ends that were the 'left overs' from the restoration. The buyer wanted them for 'spares'.

Recently, at an Eastern Creek historic meeting, I saw a car that the owner [the chap who bought the 'left overs'] claimed to be 'my old car'.

When he reallised who I was, he was a bit embarrassed. I have no idea of the current situation, however there can only be ONE of a particular car.

[Lola5000]

If price and value are really of no concern then if I had the money, which I don't, I'd go for doing the proper thing by getting the vehicle with the chassis plate you have bid on and reuniting it with the original tub/chassis.

If as you say your not worried about using it for competition you will have killed two birds with one stone, got the vehicle you want and eliminated a replica/ tribute car/ fake/ weapons grade racer / key fob special in the process.

The key to the solution is that as you say it is 'a' car you have always wanted and currently 'it' is actually 'two' cars.

In the prefect world yes,but its a little bit hard to buy a car of a public museum.

[Lola5000]

It is important to be clear about the description of the cars involved, and don't try to 'create' a car that never was.

A few years back, after my Formula Junior went to the USA to live, I sold some odds & ends that were the 'left overs' from the restoration. The buyer wanted them for 'spares'.

Recently, at an Eastern Creek historic meeting, I saw a car that the owner [the chap who bought the 'left overs'] claimed to be 'my old car'.

When he reallised who I was, he was a bit embarrassed. I have no idea of the current situation, however there can only be ONE of a particular car.

Sounds like the majority of F5000's car floating around today.

[xj13v12]

Sounds like the majority of F5000's car floating around today.

Quite a few Lolas perhaps but certainly not "the majority of F5000s".

[Andrew Fellowes]

There is an example that may be of interest,
Peter Westbury's BT36 was involved in the famous Crystal Palace burst water main incident. He rebuilt his car with a brand new chassis with the same AM number to match the Carnet.
He later repaired the first chassis and rebuilt it racing it at the start of the following season 'till his new car was ready. As I understand it one car has the original plate and new chassis and the other has the original chassis but no plate.
In this case I'd follow the chassis plate as that car raced in 1971, the rebuilt entity didn't race 'till 1972.

[cheapracer]

This one?

http://cgi.ebay.com/...nk:top:en#v4-37

[cheapracer]

... however there can only be ONE of a particular car.

Yeah sure, just like there can only be one axe

Edited by cheapracer, 18 June 2011 - 07:35.

[GMACKIE]

Yeah sure, just like there can only be one axe

Exactly........and it belonged to my Grandfather.

[Doug Nye]

Yeah sure, just like there can only be one axe

Not where old racing cars are concerned. In the Westbury case both chassis might have shared the same plate identity - doesn't matter a jot whether it read 'AM22' or 'Helen' or 'Buttercup', whatever - just the same identifying ID. But what remains inseparable from the original chassis, crashed and repaired, is its history of having been the frame which Peter crashed at CP and had repaired thereafter.

His replacement chassis then has the inseparable history of having been precisely that, the frame he used for a while AFTER the CP incident. There are innumerable instances of this having happened, and of pious subsequent owners claiming hotly that they "own the history" of a car identity, as if by purchasing the replacement assembly their interest has magically erased the actual history of the previous stack of bent (and perhaps now straightened-out) bits. This simply cannot be so.

History is a constant not within our gift.

The Maserati Tipo 63 V12 crashed by Walt Hansgen at Le Mans in 1961 was a Cunningham car with its own ID. After that incident a longer-wheelbase chassis was used in the 'rebuild' process and then returned to Cunningham in America, bearing the chassis number and ID and (crucially) the Customs carnet paperwork of the - in reality - discarded original.

Many years later the remains of the original passed from Maserati's mortuary store into private Italian hands. When what remained of the American LWB replacement car emerged in another owner's hands the owner of the SWB original car detonated, threatening legal action and exclusively claiming 'the history' of that chassis ID.

The reality was that he was trying to claim ALL of that history, including the record of the LWB replacement frame, to which in truth he could have no claim. There are two of those cars sharing that same literal nomenclature. That doesn't sit well with a computer age in which a chassis serial is read once by the database without benefit of human funderstanding that two separate entities could both have the same number ID attached to them. But it happens to be fact. One of those frames has a history up to and including Le Mans 1961. The other entity has a history beginning post-Le Mans 1961. So what's the problem - other than for people who cannot grasp that? In which case the ONLY problem is their limited understanding .

Further examples involve the wonderfully divisible Jaguar D-Type with its virtually unique chassis structure in which the forward frame carrying engine and front suspension has to be united with a monocoque centre section supporting rear axle and carrying bloke and fuel tank for it to form a self-propelled mobile entity.

Remove the forward frame from the tub and each D-Type half is rendered immobile. Neither half is capable of its designed function separate from the other.

But combine matching front frame from one original Jaguar-built D-Type, with the tub and rear half of another, and you have what is actually a dual-identity D-Type whose major-component history involves two separate original identities. When we reunited XKD606 it involved purchase and swop-around of two existing car assemblies, reuniting relevant frame with relevant tub - and ditto with others with which I have been involved. It can be a real conundrum, and even then there is the second-level consideration of which front frame is actually the (or a) Jaguar-made original, and which monocoque is the (or an) original, and so on. But that's when historical verification becomes REALLY complicated. Big fleas have littler fleas upon their backs to bite 'em...

DCN

[cheapracer]

The only thing that's being proven here, and on shaky ground, is that a chassis number can/should be tracked.

I've seen it but worse in classic motorcycle racing, I have seen on a number of occasions a bike being rebuilt using only the 5" long steering headstock with it's ID number still intact and then the bike in it's entirety being renewed, and I mean every single component including the entire frame (sans that headstock) and claimed as the original.

As soon as you change spark plugs it's no longer original but apparently everything other than the ID numbers are "consumables" just like those spark plugs.

[arttidesco]

In the prefect world yes,but its a little bit hard to buy a car of a public museum.

In which case if I valued the car so much but could only purchase the replacement chassis with the desired chassis number rather than the original chassis sans number the decent thing to do would be to buy the replacement chassis with the number you value and donate the chassis ID to the original chassis, that way the museum chassis has it's ID back and you have a nice replacement. I guess if the replacement chassis has it's own, for example race winning, history it's still going to be complicated unless you accept in this case, as Doug points out, that you cannot have the whole history of a chassis ID in one car.

[rbm]

Always a difficult question, what actually makes an individual race car original?
is it the chassis?
is it the drive train
is it that special engine
or is it a percentage of the original?

back in period, you bent a chassis, you replaced it, you destroyed the engine, you replaced it, spread the gearbox down the track, you replaced it, knocked of a corner or two...

on the Revis 500, only the front 12 inches of the chassis are 'original', back in the winter of 1951, Reg Bicknell hack sawed the back of the chassis off and threw it away and started again, is it original is it not? if that rear of the chassis was just lying around it could easily be put back together and would contain more of the original chassis.

Richard

[GMACKIE]

I still feel that there can only be ONE of a particular car. Any other[s] may be a copy, replacement, replica, or whatever you like to call it. Who decides which is the ONE is another matter.

[Doug Nye]

Quite right - but as demonstrated above there can be two (or more) that lay claim to the same identity. It's the identity duplication in period which screws us up in later years - until we unravel the real story. And then we might start talking about chassis 034, 034(2), 034(3) etc in the attempt to keep tabs on reality.

And that - of course - is the very last thing that racers in period usually like to face up to...

DCN

Edited by Doug Nye, 18 June 2011 - 23:09.

[werks prototype]

Quite right - but as demonstrated above there can be two (or more) that lay claim to the same identity. It's the identity duplication in period which screws us up in later years - until we unravel the real story. And then we might start talking about chassis 034, 034(2), 034(3) etc in the attempt to keep tabs on reality.

And that - of course - is the very last thing that racers in period usually like to face up to...

DCN

Ah!......elegance, at last.

[lazzHAR]

Quite right - but as demonstrated above there can be two (or more) that lay claim to the same identity. It's the identity duplication in period which screws us up in later years - until we unravel the real story. And then we might start talking about chassis 034, 034(2), 034(3) etc in the attempt to keep tabs on reality.

And that - of course - is the very last thing that racers in period usually like to face up to...

DCN

Well put , that is the correct path to reality.... find all the cars history and be satisfied where the car as you buy it fits in and don't hide anything you find out , after all

it is all part of it.

larry k

[arttidesco]

Quite right - but as demonstrated above there can be two (or more) that lay claim to the same identity. It's the identity duplication in period which screws us up in later years - until we unravel the real story. And then we might start talking about chassis 034, 034(2), 034(3) etc in the attempt to keep tabs on reality.

And that - of course - is the very last thing that racers in period usually like to face up to...

DCN

To be fair to international racers in period it is not their fault chassis numbers had, and probably still have, to be registered well in advance of crossing international borders which is what has led to some of the identity duplication, but I am sure that is not the whole story

[uechtel]

http://en.wikipedia....Ship_of_Theseus

More than 2000 years discussion and still no final answer...

Edited by uechtel, 19 June 2011 - 19:34.

[Allen Brown]

I still feel that there can only be ONE of a particular car. Any other[s] may be a copy, replacement, replica, or whatever you like to call it.

In that case you need to read Doug's excellent posts again.

Also read the Ship of Theseus which I see has just been posted. That explains the paradox.

[Doug Nye]

But EVERYBODY knows it's a definite maybe...

DCN

[xj13v12]

Lola5000, you are entitled to buy anything you want for whatever purpose you desire. If this is the car I think it is, it was a body hanging over a bar somewhere and later someone decided it was enough to build a car under. I don't know about 60% of original parts, could be another car entirely. Factory team cars used to throw away suspension parts so often you could account for 360% of original parts if you wanted to collect and count them that way. For monocoque cars I maintain that the tub carries the bulk of originality but once damaged and replaced IN PERIOD the continuing car carries the history. Of course if the damaged tub can be salvaged and repaired it can claim the history UP UNTIL the crash. This is when it gets messy as the complete detachable rear of a typical F5000 being suspension, transaxle and engine is a pretty significant portion of a race car. One of the problems with current restoration thinking is to simply build a "fresh" tub for the car and therefore IMHO reducing the historic value of the car, albeit this is sometimes necessary for safety purposes if the car is intended for racing. Doing this for important Grand Prix and LeMans cars is bordering on sacrilege but not such an issue for a F5000. There are still old damaged tubs lying around but the identity of the same car has already been replicated, sometimes more than once and sometimes in period. It is on this basis that more than one car can carry an historic racing identity, occasionally split into pre-crash and post-crash. Not an entirely satisfactory solution but probably the best available, a bit like Churchill's view on democracy.
The earlier comment about changing chassis numbers due to international movements is far less problematic and was not so prevalent as to cause confusion about more than a small number of cars and chassis tags are a very small part of identification so long after active racing, virtually useless once a car has been restored.
Provided the car in question is not claiming false history now or in the future it will join a growing list of cars sharing identities or being look-a-likes carrying original style componentry and perhaps some parts from an original car.
One solution would be to crush any and all replaced parts after a restoration, especially tubs but they make nice wall art. The other solution would be for honesty and integrity to self regulate the whole shooting match. Unlikely once money and passion are involved, so I content myself that by enlarge historic motorsport attempts to give an honest demonstration of what once was. If the majority of people sharing their interest approach it that way it is probably the best we can ask for.

[GMACKIE]

That pretty-well sums it up, xj13v12.

A good example of what sort of reputation can [quickly] be obtained was shown to me back in 1988. It was at an Historic race meeting at Oran Park, when I picked up a 3/8" bolt from the edge of the track [I usually walked around the track before a meeting]. Fearing that it may be a vital suspension part that had fallen out, I handed it to Don Black, who said that he would make a P.A. announcement. "If nobody claims it", said Don, "we could send it over to England, and they could make an Historic Race car out of it".

Don had a good sense of humour, and the remark was 'tongue-in-cheek, however it showed the way that people were thinking - even back then.

[Allen Brown]

Lola5000, are you thinking of buying the car being advertised as Lola T330 HU14A? If so, do you realise that that Lola T330 HU14 is alive and well in the US with its original tub and, as far as I'm aware, even its original transmission. And its original chassis plate.

As far as I can tell by reading the adverts, the only part of "HU14A" that was originally attached to HU14 was a set of bodywork, and cars in those days would have had many sets of bodywork. A team like Haas/Hall would have taken at least a couple of sets to each race in case of damage. If HU14A has other "original components" you need to ask specific questions about them and then confirm those facts with the current owner of HU14.

I accept the point that the monocoque is a significant part of a car but that doesn't mean that you can build up a car from every single discarded component. A car built up from a set of bodywork alone would, in my opinion, have absolutely no claim whatsoever to the history of the car.

[SJ Lambert]

I've put an offer in on a historic race car in the States,it has the orginal chassis plate and about 60% of its orginal parts,but............ another car has the tub/chassis.
No interest in racing or applying for a log book,so which car has the right to call itself the orginal?

G'day Lola5'

For what it's worth, without getting long winded about it, I reckon the car/any car built on the original tub/chassis is the car that prima facie is the car that has the right to call itself the original.

Isn't the definition of a car effectively suspension and other running gear/drivetrain assembled on and in a chassis? Without wanting to be trite - the chassis is the essence of a car as far as I'm concerned.

James

[David McKinney]

So how do you regard a car whose chassis was damaged and replaced in period, and continued to race with the original components (and probably with the same team)?

A fake?

[SJ Lambert]

So how do you regard a car whose chassis was damaged and replaced in period, and continued to race with the original components (and probably with the same team)?

A fake?

No, I'd regard that as the real thing, Lola's question implies choose an original out of a car with it's original tub versus one without, but a fair few original parts. Putting 60% of the original parts onto another car with "another car" having the tub, makes one car a car with 60% of the running gear off the original on it and the original running without 60% of it's original running gear.

There can be only one original.

In the example given, I say the original is the car built on and around the original chassis.

I guess I'm a chassis guy.............

[Andrew Fellowes]

David poses a question for which the Peter Westbury case I'd suggest is the same.

Peter owned and raced Brabham BT36-5 in 1971 replacing the chassis mid season and selling the car as BT36-5 to Nick Koob at the end of the season. The following year he built up the repaired original chassis, raced it once when it appeared as an unknown BT36 and sold it on but subsequent owners of both cars now claim they have the car sold to Nick Koob described as BT36-5. (One has had yet another new chassis.)

In my view PW had only one BT36-5, sold to Nick Koob, the second car wasn't created 'till 1972 it has all the spares from 36-5 and the original chassis but it is just that and no more. It had no chassis number but shares the same AM number. I cannot see how this could be called BT36-5?

[David Birchall]

Is this the car we are talking about:
http://cgi.ebay.com/...id=242100484478

[Allen Brown]

That's certainly not the car I was talking about.

[jj2728]

The last 'period' photo is Mid-Ohio.

[Wirra]

I've put an offer in on a historic race car in the States,it has the orginal chassis plate and about 60% of its orginal parts,but............ another car has the tub/chassis.
No interest in racing or applying for a log book,so which car has the right to call itself the orginal?

To provide an opinion on the original question;
- Neither, both are hybrids.
- Each can claim to be a unique car 'as raced at a given time' or contain components which were used at a given time/meeting.
- One can claim to have 'continuously carried the log book'

[xj13v12]

Not the car I was thinking of either. Looking at all the photos I would say that this car definately has claim to be an original regardless of what other car carries that chassis tag. A lot of work required of course but that is very near a complete car with all major components attached. A very good find if you have the skill to rebuild it. Bodies may or may not be part of the original package but if it fits well and shows wear marks where it attaches I would think they might be a good indication of original history. USAC and USRRC stickers are a great source of identity. At our current dollar rates that is probably a fair purchase at a bit under the asking price, albeit you can easily spend $100k or half that on such a restoration even though major components are all there. Very dependant on the internals of the engine and transaxle. Good luck!

[GMACKIE]

Lola5000, is this the car that YOU want? Can you agree on a price? Is it within you budget? Are you happy to call it something other than the 'original' car, and enjoy it for what it is?

What others think, or say, should not be the most important factor.......if YOU are happy, go ahead and grab the car.

[xj13v12]

Lola5000, is this the car that YOU want? Can you agree on a price? Is it within you budget? Are you happy to call it something other than the 'original' car, and enjoy it for what it is?

What others think, or say, should not be the most important factor.......if YOU are happy, go ahead and grab the car.

I would say that this is a\THE genuine car as it is so complete. More like 90% rather than 60% and a body is the most expendable and easily replaced item anyway closely followed by nose box and front wings. This is the type of car that puts a lie to some other entity claiming originality. It would be interesting to know exactly when it was parked and when some other car appeared, or indeed why another car appeared given the completeness of this and the fact there is no crash damage.

[xj13v12]

Lola5000, is this the car that YOU want? Can you agree on a price? Is it within you budget? Are you happy to call it something other than the 'original' car, and enjoy it for what it is?

What others think, or say, should not be the most important factor.......if YOU are happy, go ahead and grab the car.

I would say that this is a\THE genuine car as it is so complete. More like 90% rather than 60% and a body is the most expendable and easily replaced item anyway closely followed by nose box and front wings. This is the type of car that puts a lie to some other entity claiming originality. It would be interesting to know exactly when it was parked and when some other car appeared, or indeed why another car appeared given the completeness of this and the fact there is no crash damage.

[David Birchall]

I hope people are not assuming that the car that I posted the link to is the car the thread is about. Only Lola5000 can confirm that.

[xj13v12]

I hope people are not assuming that the car that I posted the link to is the car the thread is about. Only Lola5000 can confirm that.

No we are all guessing but the examples shown are interesting.

[cheapracer]

I still feel that there can only be ONE of a particular car. Any other[s] may be a copy, replacement, replica, or whatever you like to call it.

Who decides which is the ONE is another matter.

The guy with the wallet.

[GMACKIE]

Unfortunately, you are probably right.

[TEDD]

I've put an offer in on a historic race car in the States,it has the orginal chassis plate and about 60% of its orginal parts,but............ another car has the tub/chassis.
No interest in racing or applying for a log book,so which car has the right to call itself the orginal?

So what is the car / and or parts you are interested in?

Edited by TEDD, 21 June 2011 - 09:18.

[Peter Brennan]

I've put an offer in on a historic race car in the States,it has the orginal chassis plate and about 60% of its orginal parts,but............ another car has the tub/chassis.
No interest in racing or applying for a log book,so which car has the right to call itself the orginal?

IMHO having the original chassis plate does not constitute a car,you need to firm up the the line of history of your prospective purchase. The parts, 60% of what,valve springs and wheel nuts? I think you need to advise the forum further. Cheers

Edited by Peter Brennan, 21 June 2011 - 09:35.

[Red Socks]

David poses a question for which the Peter Westbury case I'd suggest is the same.

Peter owned and raced Brabham BT36-5 in 1971 replacing the chassis mid season and selling the car as BT36-5 to Nick Koob at the end of the season. The following year he built up the repaired original chassis, raced it once when it appeared as an unknown BT36 and sold it on but subsequent owners of both cars now claim they have the car sold to Nick Koob described as BT36-5. (One has had yet another new chassis.)

In my view PW had only one BT36-5, sold to Nick Koob, the second car wasn't created 'till 1972 it has all the spares from 36-5 and the original chassis but it is just that and no more. It had no chassis number but shares the same AM number. I cannot see how this could be called BT36-5?

Hooray at last some sense.
Components don't have history-cars do. No one ever raced a chassis. The entity took part in a race not some nebulous bit. AM or RF numbers are not chassis numbers they are component numbers used to identify a component not a manufacturers chassis identity.
The history is contained within the whole car owned by one person. If you buy one car you can only sell one car-and only once. This twaddle about ladder chassis car then tube frame cars is rendered absurd by the arrival of the alloy monocoque.How many times have I seen an''original' tub now rendered to flat panels in a comp shop attic or basement because the rivet holes have ovalised and the glue has come unstuck.Is anyone seriously suggesting that these panels can be remade into a car with history.
Doug elsewhere and Andrew above use the word that counts.Replacement. One has gone and a new one has replaced it and takes with it the entity.

[arttidesco]

One has gone and a new one has replaced it and takes with it the entity.

Not quite so, in the case of the McQueen 908 02 022 which was given a different chassis number 02 018 (?) and sold on. The replacement chassis for 908 02 022 with the allegedly original 022 fuel tank is not the chassis the McQueen / Solar Productions used to film Le Mans, the chassis sold off with the number 908 02 018 is.

The history of a chassis is not transferable with the chassis plate even if the chassis is replaced, I think DCN is credited with saying something to that effect elsewhere in this forum.

[GMACKIE]

When you started this thread, Lola5000, did you have any idea how big this 'can of worms' would be???????

Have you bought the car? If so, enjoy it for what it is, [or whatever you make out of it], and ignore the bull-s..t!

[Lee Nicolle]

This will always be a can of worms. A lot of racecars of whatever description are wrecked as current racecars and are retubbed, reshelled etc as it is far more practical and commonsense to do so. Later [often still in period] these cars are repaired [and often updated] and continue to be raced but then all the hoo ha happens because of which is the correct car etc. Lets face it with big dollar racing there is probably 20% more cars than original because of the above scenario.
5000s are being rebuilt from adbandoned tubs that were 'ratted' to build Sports Sedans, Sports Cars etc. And these are are often cars that were written off in period.
Here in Oz the restorations of some top tin tops are really little more than the log book as to get the car back to original means replacing most of the car! And 'pucka' race cars are probably even worse.