What's the deal with P/1029?

5

Mike Drew

A question for the experts (hoping Ronnie Spain will chime in here)

The Goodwood tally included this:

#23 -- GT40 P/1029 -- 1 MUF -- Jimi Cottingham | Smith

DSC_8228.jpg


The most recent version of the registry that I have (which is dog-eared and ancient) indicates that P/1029 was 'totally destroyed' and then 'scrapped'. No mention of, "...and the original tub was set aside to one day be restored".

So, if P/1029 was scrapped, what is this car? A collection of P/1029 parts on a newly manufactured tub? Or was it made up of whole cloth? In any event, is it considered a 'real' GT40, a.k.a. original, or is it something more akin to a Gelscoe car?
 
K

Keith

Moderator
:wrongforum:Wrong Forum. This Forum is for ORIGINAL GT40's

So the claim that it was, "one of the World's largest gatherings of GT40's ever" is looking a bit lame?

Shame.

Found this for anal collectors of data...
 

Attachments

J

Jay Cushman

No.... It truly was a great event with the second largest gathering of original GT40s that I have ever witnessed behind only Watkins Glen 1989. And you may never get another chance
 
K

Keith

Moderator
It is supposed to be limited to 1966 and previous so the later Gulf's do not qualify for the Revival. I assume they used an identity (1029) which complied with that requirement but I don't know that for sure - guessing. How they did it, (pass scrutineering) is another matter. Either way, it's not cricket in my book, because it weakens the whole impact. In any event, don't you have to be invited? Or is that the F.O.S?
 
Stephen Ducker

Stephen Ducker

awatkins said:
So, any of the rest of us 200+ SPF owners could have entered?

More seriously: what criteria do you suppose were used?
Click to expand...

Hi Alan,

In the case of a MK1 for instance, if you had a SPF with a 289, solid brake discs, original sized wheels & tyres, etc. and the relevant licences I guess you could of applied?

Three of the cars were indentifed as '1965 type' on their garages ('1965-t' in the programme) #11 & #18 both Gelscoe new builds to the original early FAV plans and #12 GT40P/1127 a Mark V chassis number but I believe on a Tennant Panels tub rather than the different, simplified, tub of the majority of the Mark Vs. So I think that explains three of the "non 1960s" cars, and atleast some effort was made to indentify them as such, although it could of been made clearer/simpler.

Kind regards Steve
 
Charlie Farley

Charlie Farley

Supporter
Sometime ago, I spoke to a team owner who is purported to have adapted the first Superformance to comply with FIA regulations, in the UK.
The bill to the owner was north of £ 45,000.00. He mentioned that areas of the chassis needed modifications and that it was quite a complicated endeavour.
When I was talking to him at Goodwood, I indicated to him, the chassis number in question. I asked if that chassis had undergone the same level of modifications and he said " Nope ". Maybe sometime recently the FIA have themselves relaxed the rules... Who knows.
 
K

Keith

Moderator
Charlie Farley said:
Sometime ago, I spoke to a team owner who is purported to have adapted the first Superformance to comply with FIA regulations, in the UK.
The bill to the owner was north of £ 45,000.00. He mentioned that areas of the chassis needed modifications and that it was quite a complicated endeavour.
When I was talking to him at Goodwood, I indicated to him, the chassis number in question. I asked if that chassis had undergone the same level of modifications and he said " Nope ". Maybe sometime recently the FIA have themselves relaxed the rules... Who knows.
Click to expand...


So essentially he had paid £45,000 for something that the owner of the car in question didn't have to? Was he slightly miffed?
 
A

Allan Feldman

If the cut off date was 1966 what was a rebodied 1967 J car J-9 Can Am G7A doing in the Whitsun Trophy? Just to say I was glad to see it run. But why not have a race ran at the Revival and call it the 'Racing into the Future' and therefore do away with the 1966 cutoff date!
Goodwood have an event in March 2014 where 1970 and 1980 cars will be allowed!

Regards Allan
 
Last edited:
A

Seymour Snerd

Lifetime Supporter
allanfeldman said:
But why not have a race ran at the Revival and call it the 'Racing into the Future' and therefore do away with the 1966 cutoff date!
Goodwood have an event in March 2014 where 1970 and 1980 cars will be allowed!
Click to expand...

Best suggestion I've heard! 1966 is a really awkward time for a cutoff in the development of road racing.

What's the March 14 event?
 
5

Mike Drew

Jay Cushman said:
It was clearly a superformance car. CV joints and all. No relationship too 1029 except a incorrect paint job.
Click to expand...

Hmm. The plot thickens. Just saw that '1029' is shown on the Racing Icons website as undergoing restoration. Is this the same car as the one that was at Goodwood? Was the car at Goodwood purported to be the genuine article instead of SPF?
 
S

DaveM

Mike- don't know how P/1029 was presented to the organizers or scrutineers, but the official Goodwood program just lists it as 1965 Ford GT40. Of course none of the replicas was differentiated on the program nor chassis # listed. Only the display cars had chassis listings. Anyone notice this at the bottom of the race entry page?
"NOTE; Where betting takes place, bookmakers will pay first past the post irrespective of objections"
 
A

Allan Feldman

My main objection to non original cars are the commercial sides aspects . Would you pay the same money to see an original pop group and a tribute act?
Its the deception (even not intentional that I do not like). It happened in the past with the confusion with the Ford press car GT40P/1008 being brought in as a MKII Ford when the real Le Mans winner GT40P/1046 was unavailable.
Let me say I am no snob I like all Forties replicas or not!!!
But please do not say the likes of Glescoe are more original than originals that have replaced parts. They say power corrupts well money seems too if the GT40 original cars were not valuable this sort of thing would not happen?. Probably because of a lack of interest. But if your paying top prices for entry to an event that states a defined cutoff date of 1966 and will not let any of the Gulf spec cars enter unless the retro grades specs to pre 1966. Yet lets cars not built until after 1966 indeed into the 1980's and beyond. Please tear down the pretense of pre 1966.
I am sure no one has the heart in the future to remind that 6 year old when he/shes older that they saw the 1966 Le Mans winner when its GT40P/1008!! That's what really makes me angry!
Its inevitable that some sort of compromise will have to be found as original cars become too vaulable to race and continuation car replace them.

But why not have a race ran at the Revival and call it the 'Racing into the Future' and therefore do away with the 1966 cutoff date!!??

As for the March 2014 two day event its for members of the GRRC club by invitation only and at a price. With 1970 and Group C 1980 races. With points for house teams gain by the drivers and attendees. See the Goodwood website for more details.
Regards Allan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top