Le Mans Classic 2004

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Hello,


Just want to post this thread that continues our conversation :

http://www.gt40s.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=44783&page=0&vc=1&PHPSESSID=#Post44783


Passionnately,

 

[wpeter]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

To call J11 and 12 replicas is not a true statment. It is true they were never finished but it is also true that the tubs were built at the same time as J5,6,7,8,9and 10. The Agapous took 2 of the unfinished tubs and ran without a top in the Can Am series. I suspect that if needed later, 11 and 12 would have been finished by Holman or Shelby as "real" cars.
Regarding the FIA papers Tom applied for and received them based on his car and not some fabricated BS about owning one of the original 8. The FIA is trying to institute a system to differentiate between original, untouched cars and built up cars. They have 2 different types of papers. I don't know why, maybe pressure from owners of "original" cars.
By the way, does anyone think that a craftsman like Phil Remington would "crush" the floor of J5? The floor was cut out and a 1/2" pan put below the seat to get the clearance. The only car with the Gurney Bubble was Gurney's car and that is why the interior was cut out. After the race, a number of the cars were painted red and a Gurney bubble was attached. Ford used them for promotions. J7, the one that Andretti crashed, was scabbed together with plywood so it could be rolled around at Ford dealers etc.

 

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Hi,

I agree with Bill, J-11 is not a replica though it is not a period race car. What is important in this case is that the chassis was built with the others in 67.

The entire material constituing the chassis is genuine and it gives authenticity to the car. But authenticity does not make all the value, this MK IV could not pretend to the same value as the historic racers. I think that the value of this car is about 1/2 less than the others ( the fabulous J-6 excepted ). Hopefully the car was not assembled by Sbarro or other "sulphurious" car builders !

What is also important to know is which parts this car is made with ?

Very interesting thread about the Le Mans 2004 cars, do you know which chassis were entered ?

All the best

Danny

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

"J11" and "J12" are by definition replicas as they weren't built by Kar Kraft and their tubs were simply unused spares with no period history at all. J10, which although it is currently being restored as a MK-IV, WAS raced as a Can Am and would therefore be eligible for current FIA papers as a GS7. After speaking with Keri Agapou I now believe that a substantive portion of the remains of J10's tub exist.

The FIA has NOT issued any "Replica FIA" papers to date. Although they are considering issuing them they have not yet approved them. Under current FIA regulations "J11" and "J12" would not be eligible whereas J10 would be. (As a GS7)

Bill are you sure "J11" has FIA papers?

As for J5 it was John Collins who crushed the tub and the evidence of that crushing is clearly visable.

 

[wpeter]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Jim,
Who's Definition?
The Agapous still have one car and claim the other was stolen. If that is true, how is it that there is a tub being turned into a MK4? I know that tub and it is not original. Can't be.
Tom says he has papers and I have no reason not to believe him.
As for J5, you are just plain wrong. I have been all over the car and there is no "crushed" area under the seat. It is as I say, cut out with a pan put in to drop the bottom of the floor the 1/2 inch thickness of the tub.Want to see the pictures?
Danny, the MK4 at Lemans was Tom Malloys car, J11. I don't think they would allow it to run there and at Goodwood if they considered it a replica.
Bill

 

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Hello,

I will try to help you with FIA.They created recently created 2 sorts of "FIA Pass" :

1st one is called "Historic", delivered to a period race car once tha owner prooved the complete list of owner with Bill Of sales, letters, ... any major documents

2nd one is called "Classic", delivered to any PERIOD car but not race cars that are upgraded to race specification.

THE PROBLEM is that they are now delivered by the country's federation and v

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Bill
Keri Agapou has sworn in a signed affidavit that your statement is not correct regarding J10's tub.

The current FIA regulations requiring an original chassis plate, still affixed to the chassis by the original mfg. would IMO make it impossible for "J11" to get a valid set of current FIA papers.
Do you think I'm wrong about this? Are there exceptions to this that would make "J11" eligible? I think the only case that a car without it's original chassis plate still affixed would be eligible for current FIA papers would be, as in the case of J5, a car which already had FIA papers and lost it's chassis plate after receiving them. As "J11" never had a chassis plate affixed by it's original mfg. as it was never an original MK-IV mfg'd by Kar Kraft, but simply a spare chassis I don't think this would apply.

As for J5 why don't you post pic's of the under seat area, from the inside of the cockpit, that John Collins said he crushed to give Dan a bit more headroom to see if he did or didn't?

Hope All's well and that the FIA does change their policy and give you papers under their proposed new program.

Best
Jim

Danny
That change is not yet in effect.

PS. "Danny, the MK4 at Lemans was Tom Malloys car, J11. I don't think they would allow it to run there and at Goodwood if they considered it a replica"

Goodwood has allowed pure replica's to run. The Sharknose 156 for example. The Auto Union Mountain Racer for another.
When did "J11" run at Godwood?

 

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Hello,

I will try to help you with FIA, as far as I know for my own cars, they created recently 2 sorts of "FIA Pass" :

1st one is called "Historic", delivered to a period built race car once the owner prooved the complete list of owners with bill of sales, letters, ... any major documents.

2nd one is called "Classic", delivered to any PERIOD car but not race cars like a MK III, that are upgraded to race specification.

THE PROBLEM is that sometimes some cars ( replica ), even badest ones obtain FIA pass. Due to frendship agreement and money.
In the case of Tom's car if he prooved to FIA that he bought the car assembled around the original J11 chassis, it is absolutly legal and normal that he obtained them.
By the way, I think that the car is legitimately entered in Events under FIA Law.

J-11 is definitively not a genuine race car but a genuine GT40, that's simply what FIA reconized.

All the best.

Danny

 

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Sorry, previous post was complete ... new user that will try to learn fast !

Jim,

The FIA From January, 1st, 2004 delivers "Historic" or "Classic" pass.

I obtained one "Historic" for a period race car in April.

I Hope this could help.

All the best

 

[wpeter]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

For those interested in it, here is a picture of J5's floor with pan inserted under drivers butt. As for afidavits etc. It seems a major amount of money can change peoples memories. Did you hear the one about the Ferrari that was sold in Europe as an extension car and when it got to the US it miraculously grew a chassis plate?

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Bill
When was that photo taken? When George cleaned up J5 or was it from earlier on?

Either way you seem to be quite right about how extra headroom was provided for Dan.

As an aside do you remember the threaded rod that sticks off the bulkhead at the level of the drivers neck? Do you have any idea as to what that was for?

As for J10. In addition to Keri's affidavit he also told me the name of the CO., (Thompson? UK) who repaired the tub and that much of it remained after the crash. Do you have first hand knowledge that this is not true or are you assuming that, as I did before I talked to Keri,that the earlier reports in various books, that the remains had been stolen, were correct?
When I spoke to Keri it very much seemed that he was being truthful and that changed my mind about J10.

As for that particular Ferrari, as after massive forensic investigation, that was shared with Ferrari S.P.A. they decided to list it, as it exists today, as an original chassis on their web site with it's original chassis number and cast parts to enable it to be restored from the original molds, it would seem that someone likely didn't realize exactly what they were selling.

I'm also in the process of registering my 166S 002C with Ferrari S.P.A. so that it may be put in my "Ferrari Garage" on their web site along with my P 3/4 0846 which has been there for several years.
As you can see from the following email contrary to what some have alleged this is a rigorous and thorough process.

Dear Mr Glickenhaus,

We would like to inform you that we have received the complete brochure of your car.

We would kindly ask you to provide us with some digital pictures of the car, if possible, so to forward them to the competent department for classical cars. Once these data have been entered, the car can be visualized in your ‘Ferrari Garage’.

We thank you for your patience and would like to underline that these are not standard procedures. Being yours a unique car, we need to work in a very scrupulous way.

We thank you very much for the kind cooperation and remain at your complete disposal for further information.

With kindest regards,

Ferrari Customer Care

Best

 

[Mike Dozier]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Jim

I'm afraid you're in the minority on this one.
"J-11" and "J-12" are not replicas under most
accepted definitions. The verb replicate means to recreate.
And since those chassis were made at the same time as the
others, they're not recreated, like Shelby's famous "lost"
Cobra chassis. or the McCluskey coupes.

Bare in mind that Ford/GM/Chrysler all sold chassis-in-white to ANYONE with a checkbook that wanted
to race NASCAR, TRANS-AM, or NHRA. These chassis were completed into real period race-cars by chassis builders
who assigned their own numbers (NO VIN's were assigned
to chassis-in-white by the OEM). I hope you are not implying
that these racers constructed by a myriad of private
shops are not legitimate Vintage race cars.

The lack of an original OEM chassis plate, and the lack
of any race history of course affects the value of J11/J12.
But to me they are no different than the bare chassis
sold to privateers by the Big 3. So if they are finished
with correct parts...they should be allowed to participate
alongside those with a race history. Not all the chassis-in-
white made it to the race track....that doesn't mean they
aren't "real".

MikeD

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Mike
The difference to me is the only chassis' Ford sold on the day were J9 and J10 both of which were built up and raced by privateers (Agapou's) in current not historic races unlike "J11" and "J12" which were built after these cars were currently racing.
That said I think that's one reason the FIA is considering allowing cars that are identical to original period cars to race as some owners of original cars aren't interested in exposing their cars to real racing anymore esp. when the guy considering punting them for position is driving a car worth 150K vrs.one worth 10 million. (a replica 250GTO vrs. a real 250 GTO) If the FIA makes this change I wonder if owners of real 250GTO's will restrict their racing to events where only original cars are allowed.

GT40's pose the same question. If most of the field is worth 10% of the $ value of your original car with history would you be as enthuseastic about swapping paint?

Hey as I've said before I think it's a good thing that "J11"
and "JWhat" are racing esp. as J3,J4,J5,J6,J7, and J8 aren't likely to.

Best

 

[Mike Dozier]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Jim

IMHO because Ford didn't officially sell the tubs affectionately known as J-11 and J-12 doesn't mean they are
not real.

There are several instances of the US Mint
stamping coins, and then electing not to use them.
The coins were supposed to be destroyed, but somehow
"survived" and are now among the rarest/most valuable.
The fact that they were not "officially released" doesn't mean they aren't real coins.

If Ford made these chassis...then "J-11 and J-12"
are real J-cars, that simply lack the pedigree
of their siblings.....but they are siblings...not clones.
The unique construction of these chassis
should prevent any "faithful" cloning of these cars,
so I wouldn't worry about a plethora of J clones
crowding the racetracks anytime soon.

On the other hand, the MK I/II chassis has been cloned
to a status that FIA apparently "may" accept.
And if Superformance's car is accepted, the qty
of GT40s vintage raced could increase significantly.

I completely understand the concern of original
car owners over that possibility, and I don't have
a solution. As a spectator, I'd love to see 10 or 20 in a race. Maybe the answer is for original owners to race a clone and keep their originals for the show and shine events. Would that be so bad ?

MikeD

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Mike
It depends what your definetion of "is" "is". /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Those tubs are very real. There will never be any more that were built by Brunswick Aerospace. It's just for me spare tubs don't = MK-IV's. If they do for you that's fine but in the same way you don't accept my reasoning understand I don't accept yours.

As for MK-IV Clones there are several in the works. The Kirkums have told me several times of their desire to make some.

Mike Teskey is allegedly making some.

Bill (JWhat?) has said he's making some.

These will be what they will be and the originals will remain what they are and some cars will fall somewhere in between which is all fine.

As for filling the grid that is a real cunundrum with no easy answer.

Hey filling the stands is still a problem. The biggest crowd Le Mans ever saw by far was in 1967. Somehow that doesn't surprize me.

Regards To All

 

[flatchat(Chris)]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Hmmmmmm seems to be a need for a great debates section
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Mike Dozier]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

I guess I'm a simple guy....if J-11/J-12 are correctly constructed from original tubs, I don't see why they
shouldn't be allowed to race as originals. The ONLY
thing the chassis plate does is (in theory) provide
traceability, and we've all seen original chassis plate
cars where the only thing left original is the plate!
Seems hypocritical to me.

Hopefully one day I'll get to see a vintage race grid filled
with these wonderful cars (without having to travel
to the UK ) but I'm not counting on it. Too much money involved....and too much politics.

MikeD

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Mike
J11 is, and has been, allowed to race in many Vintage events.

I don't think it's ever not allowed to race in a Vintage event.

That's not the issue. The issue is whether or not, not having been in the first photo it should have included in the second one.

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

Second Photo.

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Re: J-11 PRESENTED FALSE ?

As J3 and J4 were. (Second Photo)