Chevron B19

[allenbrown]

Stuart, you are confusing authenticity of specification with authenticity of the car itself.

A river changes its course slightly every year but is still the same river. I am told that every atom in my body has been replaced in the last seven years but I'm still the same Allen Brown. I definitely don't look the same as I did twenty years ago, that's for sure!

Are you suggesting that a brand new B23 built today to exactly the original specification and by a Chevron Old Boy is more authentic than a B23 built in 1973 and used and abused ever since but surviving intact to this day.

[driftwood]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

Are you suggesting that a brand new B23 built today to exactly the original specification and by a Chevron Old Boy is more authentic than a B23 built in 1973 and used and abused ever since but surviving intact to this day.

now that is the crux of the argument- how much of the B23 from 73 still exists in the car today? was it always a chevron b23 sports racer or a skoda in its lifetime?
has the B23 been parked up since 74 season in a museum?
are all the right parts from 73 factory build still in the correct place?
However the car b23 chassis number ??? still has the original line of provenance to its day of leaving the factory but may not contain most of its parts
however the new in 2010 car built from the original drawings and jigs by the fair hands of the chevron employee from the 1973 build programme will be more authentic in its mode of construction and parts fitted and location BUT its not an original car if its built in 2010

[p261brm]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

Stuart, you are confusing authenticity of specification with authenticity of the car itself.

A river changes its course slightly every year but is still the same river. I am told that every atom in my body has been replaced in the last seven years but I'm still the same Allen Brown. I definitely don't look the same as I did twenty years ago, that's for sure!

Are you suggesting that a brand new B23 built today to exactly the original specification and by a Chevron Old Boy is more authentic than a B23 built in 1973 and used and abused ever since but surviving intact to this day.

No of course not Allen, personally the continuation cars were the biggest mistake ever in being allowed to happen, FIA meddleing, muddleing Alter, upgrade, re-chassis as long asthe original components are kept to prove the provenace, just do not try telling me it is 'The car' You Allen are self re-generative the car is not.

[p261brm]

Originally Posted by driftwood

BUT its not an original car if its built in 2010

Precisely,
Addendum, new components in particular suspension, will never survive, a race car is at best the 'chassis' completely replace that with a new 2010 built one, end of. And the claims and price should reflect that fact.

[driftwood]

I see whare you are going with teh chasi replacement part BUT there are cases where it is simply not possible to keep old 40 year old chassis in the car and rebuild around it and there comes a point even the chassis is a consumable component but sadly there are villans out there who will rebuild old chassis as another car and spin a yarn to sell it while what is meant to be the 2original" car with plate is in there garage

AGREE entirely about this "continuation" nonsense and the FIA meddling
again this is where i see a grading system being introduced for a car however if the cars where worth very little we would not be discussing this but as they are making ludicrous sums of money its a big problem and many owners are deluding themselves on a cars provenance to justify the money they have spent

[p261brm]

Originally Posted by driftwood

I see whare you are going with teh chasi replacement part BUT there are cases where it is simply not possible to keep old 40 year old chassis in the car and rebuild around it and there comes a point even the chassis is a consumable component but sadly there are villans out there who will rebuild old chassis as another car and spin a yarn to sell it while what is meant to be the 2original" car with plate is in there garage

AGREE entirely about this "continuation" nonsense and the FIA meddling
again this is where i see a grading system being introduced for a car however if the cars where worth very little we would not be discussing this but as they are making ludicrous sums of money its a big problem and many owners are deluding themselves on a cars provenance to justify the money they have spent

Catching up on the hand bag incident bin busy putting a B21 ready for testing.
So Allen by your premise, the two B16 spyders reportedly in the USofA have all the provenance of the 'original' transfered to them, on account I cut the original up because Peter the one severely 'bent' the original past the point of no return, or does the Smith/Welpton B21/3 have the provenance on account a few remains were sold to them? In spite of Josephine one can have one's cake and eat it.

[allenbrown]

What nonsense. That's not remotely what I'm saying. The car (or cars) you're talking about were built long after the B16 Spyder ceased to exist and have no connection except (maybe) the bodywork. What I'm talking about are cars with continuous history.

[p261brm]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

What nonsense. That's not remotely what I'm saying. The car (or cars) you're talking about were built long after the B16 Spyder ceased to exist and have no connection except (maybe) the bodywork. What I'm talking about are cars with continuous history.

Exactly, nonsence, but unless I have seriously missed something, that is just what has been intimated; a car survives for a number of years, with the history, provenance, intact, given various replacements, wishbones etc, then the chassis is replaced completely, you Allen infer that car's history is intact, and I say, provided the old chassis is kept and passed on after the car has been passed on through sale, and should include the original defunct chassis the provenance is still there in the defunct chassis and some credance is still there. without that scenario the car is not and can never be The 'car' Jack drove.

[henk4]

So when does a car cease to be a car? What is the determining factor?

[allenbrown]

Straw Man Argument. Defined as: an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

You are either misunderstanding or wilfully misrepresenting my position.

Philosophers have been debating the nature of identity for thousands of years; whether the identity of an object is dependent on or independent of its component parts. That debate is highly unlikely to be concluded by this thread. Mr Justice Otton understood these issues when he made his judgement on Bentley "Old Number 1" 20 years ago and what he wrote then on historical continuity and physical originality is well worth reading. He found that the car was "authentic", not "original", which is exactly the point I am making.

[p261brm]

Allen you are not a fool, nor am I, I do not for one moment intend or infer an insult to your inteligance, please do not offer one in return; one difference between us, an opinion. Men straw or otherwise of no importance. Henk asks the question; my opinion, when you scrap the chassis, you are effectively scrapping the car; apart from the magical chassis plate. As I understand it, Allen's opinion to be, the car's history, provenance and authanticity continues as a natural progression.
My reason for my opinion, having spent a lot of time re-searching car's for sale, on behalf of a client with a view to purchase, a subtle difference when you put your opinion on the line and most would agree I'm sure, backing it, with some one else's up to two hundred and fifty grand. For my part during my search some of the stories were way beyond any invented by Hollywood. A number of cars for sale have bits of paper galore, though to these eyes, that built em maintained em ran em in period, I rest my case, even the magical plate was fake.

[allenbrown]

You continue to assign an "opinion" to me.

Let me ask you a question. If the chassis is the car, as you seem to be saying, then in the case of a car getting a new chassis and leaving its old chassis behind, do you claim the history stays with the discarded chassis? So could that old chassis be built up into a complete car and be, in your opinion, "real"?

[driftwood]

I would say if teh car ha snew chassi added and owner retainms old chassi regardless of condition shape thecar is the real deal
however as we know a certain car has been rebuilt with numerous new parts the ID passed to the new chassis parts and is inteneded tobe thecar
the old pile of crap parts are now being reassembled in Bolton fashion and wants to claim a title to the original chassis number
whats the real car?

I view the rebuilt car as the car with ID titleetc as owner at the time was repairing retsoring maintaining his race car and old pile of parts are now "scrap"

Some one has wilfully sold them as a "Chevron B19" decades later and here in ies 1 problem!! new owner seeks clarification on what he has and there is a n obvoius trail leading back to Bolton BUT no ID tag here lies another problem this pile of parts as original as Bolton could produce and im sure the welder can recognise his welds to chassis wishbones etc its Id has moved onto the new parts

This is of course different to the numerous crashed rebuilt cars that have been repaired in times of hard and fast race programes

we do agree that certain cars where crashed and scrapped in period and now all 3 exist around the world
SADLY the fkwits in FIA allows papers to be given to these cars which is tantamount to accepting fruadulant £50 notes can be legal tender!

[p261brm]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

You continue to assign an "opinion" to me.

Well Comrade, it's either an opinion or the Gospel according to.... which you and I are entitled too, personally just the opinion will suffice.

Let me ask you a question. If the chassis is the car, as you seem to be saying, then in the case of a car getting a new chassis and leaving its old chassis behind, do you claim the history stays with the discarded chassis? So could that old chassis be built up into a complete car and be, in your opinion, "real"?

The chassis seems as good a place as any to start to build a car, pretty sad car without one. No good having all the other original components in a big heap on the floor.
Depends on what you describe the car as, when, or if the car is offered for sale. Is it a claim for authenticity? a natural progression transformed from what was a B16/19/21/23 to what one would be today? does the car still have the majority of the component parts as original, museum piece or a live useable racing car, representative of an in period car? Not with vented disc's ride heights of 50mm in place of 4" and 4½" ignition systems and so on. I am aware all these details are subject to the various series organisers, perhaps this is where it all goes pear shaped, yes and I agree with Drifty if for the safety aspect the original replaced chassis should be kept along with any other components, otherwise you have no continual history, and the buyer in my case will certainly question the vendors claims to this or that, believe me, I know there is the danger of some unscrupu-lous dodgy dealer produces two out of one, in this scenario enter Mr Brown or perhaps even Mr Owen with his undisputed, authentic original chassis book, Steve Sheddon stuck the original book containing all the tyre numbers ,compounds, distances run results from 1973 under my nose, authentic pencil written stuff only really of interest to those who created the history for others to write about. Also and more importantly proof of claims, buyer to vendor 'have all the sttings for this car'? 'Oh yes, don't need em written down, have all in my head' tit syndrome, provenance as far as I'm concerned.

[henk4]

Next question, if the chassis is the determining factor, when does a Lotus 25 cease to be a Lotus 25? (or the same question for a Chevron B26)

Last year we visited Simon Hadfield's workshop and when showing us around he pointed at a Lotus 11 being restored, where he was replacing certain parts of the chassis, but trying to keep as many original parts as possible. In this case I think it can be generally accepted that the original car was still there, but let's assume that the this is a continuing process whereby the replacement of original chassis parts will go on (as they wear out). So precisely at what moment in time will this particular Lotus have completely lost its original identity and turn into a piece of nondescript metal?

I am also aware of cases of some B16s running in the CER (either carrying impossible or fake chassis numbers) where the owner claim to have the original chassis stored away somewhere at home, and running a completely rebuild car. Is this one allowed to carry the identity of the original chassis? For me personally I don't mind if it is being used in a race, but then trying to sell the copy as the original car is a bridge too far.

Another case comes to mind, the 1971 Le Mans winner sits in the Porsche museum with its magnesium chassis badly corroded. (It was also at the FoS this year, but stationary). Would I accept a copy of the car with the original body and a replacement (steel?) chassis as a good rendering of the winner? Yes I would, because it can recall the memories of those who saw it race, and what is underneath is not particularly important. Trying to sell the copy as the original in this case would of course be impossible, but I think this example supports my point of view. Interestingly Porsche themselves converted one of there cars to look exactly like the 1970 winner, and are not always keen on telling that the original car is in the USA (and that they failed to buy it some years ago, when it came on the market).

[p261brm]

[QUOTE=henk4;2645971]Next question, if the chassis is the determining factor, when does a Lotus 25 cease to be a Lotus 25? (or the same question for a Chevron B26)QUOTE]

A B26 under refurb at this time, and the current owner is desperately trying to keep the car as original as possible, eventually as you have posed the question, more replaement work will have to take place and this owner will as others do, have the removed original panels kept, to as it may be, clutter up the garage, shed, it matters not one jot, the provenance is continuous and can be substantiated. Simon Hadfield will do his upmost to keep cars he gas under his charge as they should be, provenance intact. Porsche 917's? as a continuation car? do not think so, have that sort of money you will have enough to purchase a real one, one David Piper has built a copy out of all the genuine original parts he had lying about, or Stubby built it; in fact it was more original than his original he bought from Porsche, the front nose fixed as per original cars where as his original car the nose hinges.
I digress, How many 25's were built? not enough to prove difficult to spot the fake. The continuation Chevrons/Lolas are just that. If one of them received a genuine identification, trouble and back to the beginning.
My opinion: there must be more than just a builders plate and paperwork to prove at least a connection in the case of Chevrons berween 105 Chorley Old Road and the present day, in claims to be an original product.

[henk4]

I took the Lotus 25 as an example, because of its monocoque construction....I am trying to establish the definition of when and how a car ceases to be the car as it once was constructed....is there an "official" point?
I know what Simon is aiming for, yet, even within that objective, it could be possible that he will have to replace all the tubing that made up the original chassis. (I have an academic, and not a technical background, so that may transpire in my search to establish what determines what a car is and I have used some examples to indicate the grey area we are trodding upon)

Porsche did not build 917 continuation cars. For the 1970 car I talked about, they most likely used #1, (The Geneva showcar) reconstructed/painted it to look like the 1970 winner, and renumbered it to#9. The original car #23 is in the US. The 1971 winner is still as it is, badly cooroded, but as I said, I would not mind if they put the existing body (or a copy) on another frame just to have a moving car showing the livery of the 1971 car. (it is after all still the car that holds the Le Mans distance record)

[p261brm]

Originally Posted by henk4

Porsche did not build 917 continuation cars.)

Technically they did, in converstion of coupe's into Canam cars, but my point was in the fact very few could afford the cost of a replica reconstruction, 600 man hours alone in the assembly of the engine, extremely comp;ex cars, 2.6 million US the last price quoted for chassis 20 I seem to remember, one of the reasons why Richard Attwood sold his, the other to finance the re-creation of P261/7 that was never accepted as any thing else other than a replica even if it did contain the major components entirely of BRM in period manufacture, except of course the tub, another reason for the opinion's on chassis I express, after 7 years of tending that car it remained, in the eyes of the 'educated armchair enthusiasts' a fake.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by p261brm

Technically they did, in converstion of coupe's into Canam cars, but my point was in the fact very few could afford the cost of a replica reconstruction, 600 man hours alone in the assembly of the engine, extremely comp;ex cars, 2.6 million US the last price quoted for chassis 20 I seem to remember, one of the reasons why Richard Attwood sold his, the other to finance the re-creation of P261/7 that was never accepted as any thing else other than a replica even if it did contain the major components entirely of BRM in period manufacture, except of course the tub, another reason for the opinion's on chassis I express, after 7 years of tending that car it remained, in the eyes of the 'educated armchair enthusiasts' a fake.

As far as I know, all the Porsche Can-Am cars were built after the original 25 chassis, even the PAs, so they were no conversions, but real new cars. (Interesting point here is that the P4 Can-Am conversion that failed to sell at the RM Maranello auction last year, did not receive a Ferrari Classiche certificate, as it was not offered in the same shape that it left the factory. This no doubt contributed to the no-sale of the car).

About the BRM, in 2008 I asked somebody tending the car at the Revival which chassis it was and the answer came promptly: #7 out of six built...

But before John is going to interrupt this discussion, shall we concentrate on Chevrons?

[Delbert]

There is an interesting "advert" running in motorsport at present. Clearly someone owns a Cobra and has wind of another car going to auction that purports to be said car.
(sorry if this has already been debated but i haven't read back 40 odd pages).
Perhaps this form of "protection" will become more common place. Unfortunately those trying to double their revenue from the kit in their possession are not going to advertise the fact.

I am interested in this debate as I have been thru the ringer on my B19 with the contributors in here (which i accept is fair analysis). Now i have a new project that requires a new chassis - original is getting on for 40 years old and not a realistic core for a safe racing car. BUT we will take the cast bulkheads and put those in to the new one AND I will keep the old ali shell and hang it on the wall for posterity & will go with the car should i ever sell it.

I would be interested (and somewhat fearful) of your comments.

Only a few weeks to the new season Hurrah!

[henk4]

Hi Kevin, good to see you joining the debate. In such a case I would again refer to the 1971 winning 917, of which the magnesium chassis has deteriorated beyond repair. So any public outing on a track of that car, if only a demo run, would require substantial alterations, and probably compromising its original identity. In your case, when you have some serious racing in mind, there is no point in maintaining the old chassis if it is going to last only for half a lap. So here the choice is between getting the car running and show it around as a racing car, outwardly as it once raced, OR keeping the original chassis but hanging the total car on the wall. I would prefer the first option, as it is the only way to see it as it once was intended for. (I take it for granted that with modern technology applied, the ultimate result will possibly be an even faster can than in period, but that's not uncommon in historic racing).

[p261brm]

[QUOTE=henk4;2646235]
About the BRM, in 2008 I asked somebody tending the car at the Revival which chassis it was and the answer came promptly: #7 out of six built...
QUOTE]
I had ended my association with the BRM in 2007, though not with Richard. P261/7 was built for JYS, written off at Spa. Same reason for not extending 917 or Ferrari of one particular car an interesting on going litigation case. nuff sed.

[allenbrown]

Kevin, I would say that the important things are to be open about what you're doing (check) and to keep or physically scrap any significant components that you are unable to reuse. The provenance remains intact as long as no significant 'discarded' component, such as a chassis, ends up in somebody else's hands.

[p261brm]

[QUOTE=Delbert;2646328Perhaps this form of "protection" will become more common place. Unfortunately those trying to double their revenue from the kit in their possession are not going to advertise the fact.
QUOTE]

And that says it all, the be all and end all of not only Chevron's, and the reason for my personal view any car not built at 105 Chorley Old Road is not a Chevron.

[Delbert]

thank you for the feedback. It is an important topic but it is a shame that so few enter the debate. Again it is unlikely to be wide ranging as there will always be those who seek to profit from such practices.

CER list is out for Paul Ricard and there is a great new addition - the Duckham Special in the hands of a useful Frrnch driver. The rise of 3.0l cars is a bit like a Cold war! still will make for great racing (I hope)