 |
|
18 Jan 2019, 22:14 (Ref:3877086)
|
#946
|
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 25
|
If you are looking to buy this car as a Fia car, i suggest you examine the papers before you buy. I don't think they will be current.
if you want a Fia car then you need to talk to Nigel Reuben at http://www.nigelreubenracing.com
CRT 999C could be converted to Fia spec at a cost.
The John Spires Fia car JFR 600E (which was the last of the 10 Martin Lilley built Griffs) has just sold at Silverstone auctions for £165 000. It has a Nigel Reuben rolling chassis and bodywork.
|
|
__________________
Keith Walker
|
19 Jan 2019, 10:52 (Ref:3877163)
|
#947
|
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,976
|
The FiA have just inspected a very original Griffith for reference.
It'll be interesting to see if they see anything similar on an current race cars
|
|
__________________
Joe Allenby-Byrne
trading as Zefarelly since 1985
|
19 Jan 2019, 11:12 (Ref:3877169)
|
#948
|
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 25
|
What Griffith was that then?
|
|
__________________
Keith Walker
|
20 Jan 2019, 17:51 (Ref:3877353)
|
#949
|
Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 32
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by zefarelly
The FiA have just inspected a very original Griffith for reference.
It'll be interesting to see if they see anything similar on an current race cars 
|
🤣🤣
|
|
|
22 Jan 2019, 11:39 (Ref:3877669)
|
#950
|
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 303
|
I would correct that, what is interesting is to see a leaf spring car for the engine bay picture of the Griffith Homologation and in fact the Willment Coupe CSX2131 if taking the origin of that pic to the full extent....
Then I would say, how is it possible the 400 runs on the homologation of the 200? Aren't they different and not just bodywork? If so that isn't covered by the special body rule of Appendix J of period.
Added to that, would the TVR crew put together a base of documentation and period pictures of the cars in order to truthfully detail what these were back exactly?
But a car just came up on bringatrailer.com which is supposedly a standard 200 road car from 1965, an interesting car for suspension, parts and all to look at. I won't say it's perfect and period as it's had a life but at least it shows what they may have truly looked like.
Last edited by Duddha; 22 Jan 2019 at 11:48.
|
|
__________________
"I remember when sex was safe and motor racing dangerous." - Jack Brabham
|
23 Jan 2019, 19:01 (Ref:3878008)
|
#951
|
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 332
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddha
I would correct that, what is interesting is to see a leaf spring car for the engine bay picture of the Griffith Homologation and in fact the Willment Coupe CSX2131 if taking the origin of that pic to the full extent....
Then I would say, how is it possible the 400 runs on the homologation of the 200? Aren't they different and not just bodywork? If so that isn't covered by the special body rule of Appendix J of period.
Added to that, would the TVR crew put together a base of documentation and period pictures of the cars in order to truthfully detail what these were back exactly?
But a car just came up on bringatrailer.com which is supposedly a standard 200 road car from 1965, an interesting car for suspension, parts and all to look at. I won't say it's perfect and period as it's had a life but at least it shows what they may have truly looked like.
|
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. and you at first glance appear to have very little knowledge!! I am not sure where any relevance to transverse leaf springs relate to any TVR !! You must be dreaming or getting yourself very confused.
|
|
|
23 Jan 2019, 19:43 (Ref:3878028)
|
#952
|
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 496
|
I suggest you go and take a look at the TVR Griffith 200 homologation form. One of the two engine bay images clearly shows a leaf spring. The other image is of the same car - in reality the Willment built and raced Daytona Cobra - from the opposite side. These images have nothing at all to do with any Griffith, wherever they might have been built.
Having done that maybe a polite apology might be in order?
|
|
|
23 Jan 2019, 20:03 (Ref:3878034)
|
#953
|
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 332
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield
I suggest you go and take a look at the TVR Griffith 200 homologation form. One of the two engine bay images clearly shows a leaf spring. The other image is of the same car - in reality the Willment built and raced Daytona Cobra - from the opposite side. These images have nothing at all to do with any Griffith, wherever they might have been built.
Having done that maybe a polite apology might be in order?
|
I think anyone banding around theories about transverse leaf springs on Griffiths should be apologising Mr H. The post reads to me like a conspiracy theory.. Perhaps the intent is lost in translation! Its a funny old world the world of Historic racing and their seems to be cliques of people who have strong opinions about cars which they have limited knowledge.. I sense a clique here! If a Homologation form is incorrect then this evidently will be an error within that organisation which seemingly makes up rules on cars to suit themselves. A further lack of knowledge perhaps to have let such an obviously incorrect photograph appear on a document?? Granted I don't know a lot about E-types and Ferraris but I do know lots about TVR's Some of my dearest departed friends built the cars that some people have strong views about.. Its great to see competitive Griffiths to an agreed historic standard racing up at the front against Ferraris, E-types, Cobras et al. I shall retire back to my clubman Garage.. No wish to muddy any waters however this thread is about Griffiths rather than Willment Cobras... as you say it is very important to ensure that period details are correct.
N.
|
|
|
23 Jan 2019, 20:46 (Ref:3878039)
|
#954
|
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 496
|
The homologation form would have been self compiled by the manufacturer. It was then ovestamped by the ASN, in 1965 that would have been the RAC. The simple fact is that TVR used the engine bay images lifted from the Willment Daytona Cobra. Which had, and is therefore visible, a transverse leaf spring. Most probably TVR were looking to show a Ford V8 with 4 Weber IDAs as evidently they had not built one themselves. It is just incompetence that led to the photographs being badly cropped and showing rather more. None of the above is conspiracy, nothing there shows a clique, it is simply factual reporting.
As I have always understood things internet groups work best when there is a robust attitude to the post, not the poster.
|
|
|
23 Jan 2019, 21:19 (Ref:3878046)
|
#955
|
 Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2008
|
Attleborough- 5 minutes from Snet! |
Posts: 12,048
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield
As I have always understood things internet groups work best when there is a robust attitude to the post, not the poster.
|
Indeed. It’s in the FAQs under ‘Posting Guidelines’.......
|
|
__________________
Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere. (Einstein)
|
24 Jan 2019, 07:58 (Ref:3878116)
|
#956
|
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,976
|
Even in B&W it's pretty bloody obvious the car in the engine bay photograph is a totally different colour, and forgetting the leaf spring entirely the chassis bulkhead and steering column are completely different. I've only ever owned one TReVor but can spot that, I'd have thought a marque expert would have a pretty good Awareness of the only defined period documents on any one car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield
The homologation form would have been self compiled by the manufacturer. It was then ovestamped by the ASN, in 1965 that would have been the RAC. The simple fact is that TVR used the engine bay images lifted from the Willment Daytona Cobra. Which had, and is therefore visible, a transverse leaf spring. Most probably TVR were looking to show a Ford V8 with 4 Weber IDAs as evidently they had not built one themselves. It is just incompetence that led to the photographs being badly cropped and showing rather more. None of the above is conspiracy, nothing there shows a clique, it is simply factual reporting.
As I have always understood things internet groups work best when there is a robust attitude to the post, not the poster.
|
|
|
__________________
Joe Allenby-Byrne
trading as Zefarelly since 1985
|
24 Jan 2019, 09:11 (Ref:3878133)
|
#957
|
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 303
|
I do have very little knowledge, I apologize for being right...
Pictures will speak for themselves, have your look at 206 GT on the FIA Historic Database, where these pictures originate from and a full scan of the RAC/MSA copy of the Homologation they have in house for records.
CSX2131 and Willment Coupe engine bay basically, according to my Cobra knowledge, additionally, upper right corner of first picture and you'll notice the leaf spring.
|
|
__________________
"I remember when sex was safe and motor racing dangerous." - Jack Brabham
|
24 Jan 2019, 17:56 (Ref:3878297)
|
#958
|
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,976
|
Looking at the bottom photo again, the TVR is in the background!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddha
I do have very little knowledge, I apologize for being right...
Pictures will speak for themselves, have your look at 206 GT on the FIA Historic Database, where these pictures originate from and a full scan of the RAC/MSA copy of the Homologation they have in house for records.
CSX2131 and Willment Coupe engine bay basically, according to my Cobra knowledge, additionally, upper right corner of first picture and you'll notice the leaf spring. 
|
|
|
__________________
Joe Allenby-Byrne
trading as Zefarelly since 1985
|
25 Jan 2019, 14:55 (Ref:3878558)
|
#959
|
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 385
|
The blank homologation form provided by the RAC Motor Sport Department in period required a photograph of the engine.Given a generic engine was used it seems if none were available to the manufacturer on the day he would reasonably use a photograph of the correct engine from another source.Which is obviously what has happened.
Photographs showing the exhaust manifolds and inlet manifolds were separately required. These items put together produced the specification for the motor for the car.
It seems to me that in this case the ''claimants'' for the car have taken more than the engine picture and claimed the entire engine bay,inlet and exhaust systems.
Quite clearly this is an error and needs revisiting by all parties ASAP to clarify.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|