just playing my by now paper thin BBC video of 'The Power & The Glory', and the episode on Brooklands. It features film of CVlive Dunfee driving Old Number 1 in the 1936 (I think) 500 Mile Race. Can anyone tell me the history of this car?? I certainly remeber the hoo-hah about it about 15 years ago when it was bought by some old guy (can't remember his name!!) and then it was contested that it actually wasn't Old Number 1. The subsequent court case ruled in his favour. Where is the car now too??
Bentley Old Number 1
Started by
Gary C
, Oct 07 2003 18:05
9 replies to this topic
#3
Gary C
-
- 5,602 posts
- Joined: January 01
Member
Posted 13 January 2004 - 08:32
do we know whatever happened to Ed Hubbard??
#4
Michael Oliver
-
- 1,071 posts
- Joined: January 03
Member
Posted 13 January 2004 - 09:56
Originally posted by Henk
http://www.gomog.com...1judgement.html
What a fascinating document! I've just spent 45 minutes - when I should have been working - reading through it. As someone with a keen interest in, and experience of, chassis histories it was very interesting to see how the evidence had been gathered and the case built up to prove that it was indeed Old Number One.
I particularly like the references to those famous drivers, Tony Rolton and Red Parnell
Can anybody tell me where the car is today?
#5
Dick Willis
-
- 1,109 posts
- Joined: February 03
Member
Posted 14 January 2004 - 10:23
This judgement is a really fascinating document, if you can take the time to read it. It surely creates a precedent for establishing that a racing car with a continuous history, even though many things have been changed, is still THE car.
"Classic and Sportscar", November, 2003 has an excellent story on Old Number One.
"Classic and Sportscar", November, 2003 has an excellent story on Old Number One.
#6
Doug Nye
-
- 11,943 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 14 January 2004 - 21:33
Huh - Mr Justice Otton's now famous 1990 ruling in the 'Old Number One' case is widely derided within the historic racing world in general, and within the trade in particular...
The Japanese buyers were naive in the extreme in purchasing what they fondly imagined to be a Le Mans winning Bentley for a pretty fabulous sum of money.
They were happy to pay that sum because of the 'Le Mans' history and were in my recollection genuinely dismayed when they realised what mugs they had been - and not simply after passage of time during the contemporary collapse in market prices.
The quality of Mr Justice Otton's judgement as quoted on the website above is remarkable for its mentions of "Karachiola and Berner", Barnato's co-driver "Kitston", the racing circuit at "Monclery" etc yet also avers that even Bentley authority Hay considered that "Of the 1930 Speed 6...only the following exist on the car as it is now, namely pedal shaft, gear box casing and steering column".
The buyers were not unreasonably dismayed by that revelation - which in my recollection is pretty much what led to the court case in the first place.
Otton ruled on rightful inheritance of the nickname 'Old Number One' and with the Nips dismayed by the non-Le Mans-winning content of what they said they had bought purely as being the Le Mans winner, and the defendant fighting on the basis that what they had bought embodied the surviving vestiges of that car (and no more) the warring parties weren't even thinking in the same language - while the buyers were playing water polo, the vendors were playing rugby league.
As an example to follow, the 'Old Number One' case is an abysmal example.
DCN
The Japanese buyers were naive in the extreme in purchasing what they fondly imagined to be a Le Mans winning Bentley for a pretty fabulous sum of money.
They were happy to pay that sum because of the 'Le Mans' history and were in my recollection genuinely dismayed when they realised what mugs they had been - and not simply after passage of time during the contemporary collapse in market prices.
The quality of Mr Justice Otton's judgement as quoted on the website above is remarkable for its mentions of "Karachiola and Berner", Barnato's co-driver "Kitston", the racing circuit at "Monclery" etc yet also avers that even Bentley authority Hay considered that "Of the 1930 Speed 6...only the following exist on the car as it is now, namely pedal shaft, gear box casing and steering column".
The buyers were not unreasonably dismayed by that revelation - which in my recollection is pretty much what led to the court case in the first place.
Otton ruled on rightful inheritance of the nickname 'Old Number One' and with the Nips dismayed by the non-Le Mans-winning content of what they said they had bought purely as being the Le Mans winner, and the defendant fighting on the basis that what they had bought embodied the surviving vestiges of that car (and no more) the warring parties weren't even thinking in the same language - while the buyers were playing water polo, the vendors were playing rugby league.
As an example to follow, the 'Old Number One' case is an abysmal example.
DCN
#7
Gary C
-
- 5,602 posts
- Joined: January 01
Member
Posted 14 January 2004 - 21:44
excellent insight Doug, thanks indeed!
#8
Ray Bell
-
- 82,315 posts
- Joined: December 99
Member
Posted 14 January 2004 - 22:00
I wouldn't necessarily deride a transcript for having spelling errors in names, even gross spelling errors... after all, some clerk is merely typing from a tape recording. Though it would be nice is said clerk had been armed with some reference material...
This case, seemingly, is exactly what DSJ used to claim would be the outcome of so many people dabbling in the 'famous old car' market, is it not?
This case, seemingly, is exactly what DSJ used to claim would be the outcome of so many people dabbling in the 'famous old car' market, is it not?
#9
Dick Willis
-
- 1,109 posts
- Joined: February 03
Member
Posted 15 January 2004 - 02:06
Doug, I take your point that the judgement may have been stretching the boundaries a bit and that the trade were not happy with it, but I guess they wouldn't be as you must agree that the trade are guilty of stretching the truth as regards the provenance of a lot of cars I have seen advertised for sale in the UK.
At what point do you consider that OLd Number One stopped being Old Number One.
At what point do you consider that OLd Number One stopped being Old Number One.
#10
Doug Nye
-
- 11,943 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2004 - 09:27
Self evidently Dick I consider there were several of 'them'... Nominal identity plainly isn't the same thing as 'history' - and it's history which attracts demand and so confirms intrinsic value through being realisable in practical terms. Otton MIGHT have been correct in the narrowest view of what surviving assemblage might best deserve inheritance of the nickname ‘Old Number One’ – but any inference that this surviving heap of detritus merited the value (financial or historic) which might have been accorded to ‘Old Number One’ as ‘being’ the 1930 Le Mans winner is just a very, very poor joke…
DCN
DCN
