MKIV J -5 Le Mans winner
- Thread starter allanfeldman
- Start date
Hi Allan & Glen
Thanks for the info. & picture.
Myself and the good lady were there all weekend but couldn't get near the car as I'm not a GRRC member. It's a shame they didn't put Dans cars on the edge of the paddock where non members could atleast of got a bit of a view!
When the car was wheeled out onto the grid on Sunday we were on the far side of Madgewick, but saw it, & more importantly Dan, on one of the big screens.
Regards Steve.
Thanks for the info. & picture.
Myself and the good lady were there all weekend but couldn't get near the car as I'm not a GRRC member. It's a shame they didn't put Dans cars on the edge of the paddock where non members could atleast of got a bit of a view!
When the car was wheeled out onto the grid on Sunday we were on the far side of Madgewick, but saw it, & more importantly Dan, on one of the big screens.
Regards Steve.
that car is fooked.....i personally don't agree with the non repair philosophy (spelling)
i just want to restore the damaged bodywork......but i'm just one voice in a sea of different opinions....it's 20 miles from my bodyshop atm....jesus, i'd do this for free!!!
leave the race damage but sort the rest!!! but i still prefer the mk2!!
i just want to restore the damaged bodywork......but i'm just one voice in a sea of different opinions....it's 20 miles from my bodyshop atm....jesus, i'd do this for free!!!
leave the race damage but sort the rest!!! but i still prefer the mk2!!
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
Well, evidently it IS going to get repaired and perhaps they will even make it run again. THAT would be nice, wouldn't it....
I wonder who it was that damaged it. Bit clumsy there, wouldn't you say?
I wonder who it was that damaged it. Bit clumsy there, wouldn't you say?
Mike
Lifetime Supporter
The video seems to contradict that assertion.
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
Well, they think it's the original engine, anyway. This should be easy to resolve; didn't these items have casting and serial numbers?
BTW, is the "original" engine the one it was built with, or the one it won with? As I recall, race cars get engines changed out with some regularity, don't they?
BTW, is the "original" engine the one it was built with, or the one it won with? As I recall, race cars get engines changed out with some regularity, don't they?
Good decision to repair & conserve, even better if they get it running & keep it that way.
I do suspect however that it may well just go back on to its display plinth, as has already been mentioned it belongs to the Henry Ford (museum) rather than FoMoCo.
Hope I'm wrong in that prediction !
I do suspect however that it may well just go back on to its display plinth, as has already been mentioned it belongs to the Henry Ford (museum) rather than FoMoCo.
Hope I'm wrong in that prediction !
There are numbers. Those numbers are recorded on documents.
I wonder why documents state that after the race the engines were tested on Dyno's and what the HP they made were if it's "never been out of the car"?
Page 605 of Leo Levine's book "The Dust And The Glory A Racing History" clearly states:
"The engine in the Gurney-Foyt car, which had produced 494 horsepower when it was built, was up to 499 at the finish, later tests showed."
I wonder how the "fact" that the engine now in J5, the chassis number of which I proved even though it's missing it's original chassis plate, is known to be the one that it won the race with as opposed to the one with "original wire ties?"
What number is stamped on the engine that is now in the car?
Last edited:
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
That is what I would think. They had records of which engine was in which car, didn't they? I would imagine they kept logs. And if they tested the engine after the race, obviously they took it out of the car to do that. Did they put it back in, maybe?
The number stamped on the engine in the car will answer that question as I have the logs and scrutinizing documents.
BTW, is the "original" engine the one it was built with, or the one it won with? post#27.
To me it would be the engine that did the winning. Therefor the engine that was in the car during the race proper, not the one used during practice days. This is just how I feel it to be, an opinion only.
Z.C.
To me it would be the engine that did the winning. Therefor the engine that was in the car during the race proper, not the one used during practice days. This is just how I feel it to be, an opinion only.
Z.C.
I would tend to agree with Jim as the engine, if tested after the race as indicated in numerous sources, would have gone back to E&F for the dyno test. Shelby or Holman-Moody would have removed it and returned it to Engine and Foundry. Likely they would have installed one of the spares in the chassis for the continued use as a display/tour/promotional vehicle.
The race team would not have done the dyno testing, the E&F group would have. And at that point, no one at Ford would have cared in the least as to what lump was bolted behind the seats!
The race team would not have done the dyno testing, the E&F group would have. And at that point, no one at Ford would have cared in the least as to what lump was bolted behind the seats!