Features VINTAGE SPRINT CAR PIC THREAD, 1965 and older only please.

The Dunseth car was basically a new car built with the spare Cheesman frame.

 

Jimmy Reece Jimmy Bryan



http://stores.ebay.com/Greenfield-Gallery

 

Given the number of "re-creations" being built these days the provenance of vintage race cars will become a major problem in future years. Very few builders kept records or permanently marked chassis or engines.
I have two vintage cars. One has no paper trail at all; it appears to be of 1977 to 1979 vintage and without any documented history so we call it the Mongrel.
My other car is an Edmunds coil car with dash tag [LWM-393] which I purchased without running gear from the original owner's grandson. This was verified by Mr. Edmunds and I'm restoring it with the original body panels, decals, dents, and all.
Would the car have more value if I turned it into a "tribute" car of a more famous Edmunds coil car? Probably but IMHO that wouldn't be right.
No matter how much you loved a particular car it is FRAUD to present a re-creation as that car.

Chuck Schultz
Winfield, Illinois

 

Tonite's specials..Rich

 

Heres a few more...Rich

 

Hey guys this shot might clear up the confusion... Rich

 

Hey guys, Take a peek at this...the 1953 Hoosier Hundred program.
HG

http://indianaracing.net/lib/pdf/Hoosier-Hundred-1953.pdf

 

Started sorting through old slides from the Ken Felker collection. Ken took all of these as an amature photog. As you can see he got around, and this is just a small sample...

 

That 1953 program scan is pretty neat. I have Hoosier 100 programs from '57,'59,'61-'64,and '68.

 

Chuck,
Not sure exactly what you are saying, but if you are saying that all cars should be specifically and obviously presented for what they really are than I agree with you and it would be silly and incorrect to try and represent (or let the public assume) a 'recreation' (a car built of a variety of assembled parts some authentic, some perhaps from the original car but most often the majority of modern fabrication) as an 'original' car. (Original meaning a car having the 'original' frame, engine and drive train).

While 'tribute cars' seem to make no bones about being a purely modern construction using all contemporary parts while paying respect for a historical racecar and or driver I find that 'restorations' seem to fall into the grey area of correct lineage. And quite often when examining the components of what appears to be a 'restoration' we find that it is really a recreation, lacking the 'original' body, frame or engine.

Two specific examples of the 1926-29 rear drive Miller 91 ci that are considered the cream of the crop upon closer examination (often when they go to auction) to be wonderfull recreations and not restorations.
Mr Davis' recently auctioned Perfect Circle Miller 91 began its current incarnation as an original supercharger intercooler and Mr Davis had a car built around it.
Mr Rasansky's beautiful Boyle Valve Special is also a recreation (not a restoration) using an authentic (not the original) 91 ci Miller engine (engine #6 of 7 made) and a correct (but not original) transmission and rear end.
Neither of these cars have ever been falsely represented by their owners as 'originals' but often the car buff assumes incorrectly that they are.

Sadly, of the 9 or 10 original Miller 91 rear drives none are known to exist having been transformed and parted out countless times over the years.

Without the recreations, replications or tribute cars created by current enthusiasts the vintage exhibition laps would be pretty slim pickens.

As you say Chuck, the cars should be properly presented and enjoyed for what they are.

Hope to see you at one of the upcoming vintage meets.

Carl Schulz
Indio, CA

 

Carl:
I think we are in substancial agreement. The vintage scene would be much poorer without those re-creation and tribute cars. Unfortunately some of them are not clearly identified as such. There was even a report a few years back of a "genuine" Indy roadster arriving at an event only to find an identically painted re-creation already on display.

It is my opinion that at least 50% of the chassis should be traced back to the original for a car to be presented as a restoration. Given the way engines were swapped about back in the day I'm less concerned with them "matching" than I am the chassis.

As my HAMB handle suggests, I'm in the gear business. Right now we're replicating some no longer available F1 parts. It is quite a task to study broken bits and photographs and end up with useable parts. My hat is off to anyone who can build an accurate re-creation but lets make sure that we never allow them to be confused with the real cars years in the future.

The folks actually making the replacement F1 gears and I will be attending some events this summer in search of interesting projects. I look forward to meeting you.

Chuck Schultz, PE
Chief Engineer
Beyta Gear Service
Winfield, Illinois

www.beytagear.com

 

Ron, Rabs and Gene,thanks for all the great stuff tonite!

 

Is there any sort of standard for calling a call a restoration vs a clone vs a tribute etc? I think somebody should start to establish rules and start documenting these cars so that younger generations know what they're buying when the time comes.

 

Thanks for taking the time to reply Chuck. Maybe will see you at Milwaukee Millers in July.
btw: Mac Milller had an interesting blog about this subject - here's a link to it if you want:
http://macmillersgarage.webs.com/apps/blog/show/538818-vintage-race-cars-

Well off to bed for these old bones, towing the BVS tribute car to Havasu 95 Speedway for a two day vintage meet with Western Racing Association and West Coast Vintage Racers.

 

There is, currently, an ongoing discussion among collectors, builders and historians concerning the identification and classification of vintage racing cars. This discussion sometimes has gotten rather "heated" among the "real" owners and the replica car owners & builders.

I am a builder of "replica" racecars, including Indy roadsters. I have, also, been involved in the restoration and maintanance of many real vintage race cars, including Indy roadsters, so I have a good knowledge of the nature of the business from both perspectives.

While this article is written in response to the dealings I have had with the Indy roadster collectors and builders, it, certainly, applies to the hundreds of sprint, midget and early "speedway" cars that run in vintage events throughout the country.

I am in full agreement that all vintage race cars should be correctly identified and classified.

Reproductions and replicas are welcome at most "meets" including Milwaukee, Loudon, Michigan, California, Texas and the Darlington event. I don't think that I would take a replica to Monterey or Pebble Beach.


There are three distinct types of vintage race cars. Here is the way I define them for my purpose


#1. Original Cars and "real cars"
Top of the line is the "original", unmolested car, equipped with its complete original frame, complete original bodywork and its originally installed engine, restored and presented in its original paint in "as raced" condition and preparation. These cars are fully documented from builder to current owner.
Also in this category are the many "real" cars that still exist. These cars are displayed, run and represented as the real car as identified by their paint job and other exclusive features of the original car. These cars range from 100% real, original cars down to real cars that were mutilated into supermodifieds in their later lives. These "supers" were identified and salvaged by collectors and restored to their original configuration. Much of these cars has been lost, destroyed and mutilated beyond repair.
Some of these cars contain no more than 25% of the original car that they represent. Many of these "real" roadsters were salvaged supermodifieds with original frames so cut up and modified that new frames are required. Most "real" owners get the new frame builder to incorporate, at least, a few pieces of the original frame tubing to legitimize their claim to the "real" car.
Most all of the "real" roadsters are restored with new fiberglass and/or aluminum bodywork. Much of the original bodywork is missing, hacked up, modified and/or damaged beyond repair. I have, personally, built over 40 new sets of Watson roadster bodywork over the past 15 years, some for replicas, some for the restoration of "real" cars and some for A J Watson, himself.
Many of the "real" roadsters, especially the salvaged super modifieds, were acquired minus their OFFY engines. While virtually all of the "real" cars have OFFY engines, the origin and linage of these engines can be rather vague. Some "real" cars have their original "real" engine, some have a "real" engine and some have engines that were assembled from miscellaneous spare parts. Historian, Gordon White, has good records of which serial number OFFY engine was purchased by which car owner for installation in which car.
Most "real" car owners have full documentation and photo presentations of the history of their cars to back up their claim to ownership of the real car.
In my opinion, for a "real" owner to claim a "real" car, the car should, at minimum, have its original frame, original bodywork and original engine.
These "real" cars can be some of the most misrepresented cars in the vintage business. Most are over restored, far beyond their originally "as raced" condition. Some of these "real" cars are very close to recreations or reproductions. I would suggest that each of these "real"cars be evaluated and assigned a "percentage of reality" rating but I doubt that many of the "real" car owners would cooperate in a "reality evaluation" of their cars.




#2. Recreations and Reproductions
Known, newly constructed cars built, as close as possible, to represent an original existing or "no longer existing" real car. These cars feature new frames and bodywork and original period engine, driveline and suspension, steering, brakes, wheels & tires. Having some part or parts that were actually used on the "real" car adds a few "points", I suppose. Original style paintwork and upholstery are also featured
An odd little "continuation of production" classification is part of the "recreation and reproduction" group. A.J. Watson is the only open wheel guy left, who could claim "continuation of production", but I've never heard him use the term. I have heard comments by some of the "real" owners that the cars A.J. has built in the last 20 years are not real Watson roadsters but I'm not gonna be the guy who tells A.J, to his face....


#3. Replicas and "Tribute Cars"
"Replicas" are newly constructed cars using the style, shapes and design of an original type of car, but, using non original components and systems such as suspension, brakes ,engine and drive line. The various engines, transmissions, rear axles, brakes, etc. are selected because of availability, costs and convenience. Replicas are usually painted in the owner/builder's favorite colors and schemes. Replicas can range from a rather basic assemblage of salvage parts and materials to top quality, pro built cars. At meets, where they actually run the cars on the track, replicas feature good reliability, low operational cost and fun, worry-free driving, without the constant concern of damaging incredibly expensive and/or irreplacable original old cars and engines.
"Tribute cars" is a new term, for vintage style replica cars, to describe a car that pays homage to an existing or "no longer existing" real car, by using the original paint job and as many of the unique features of the original car as is possible or practical. I guess, the recreations/reproductions are the ultimate tribute cars but many tribute cars are replicas using only the original paint job.




One final term, that is used frequently in vintage racing, is the word,”copy”, such as “Watson roadster copy” and “Kurtis midget copy”. I have heard the word, “copy” used, at some point, to describe almost all recreation vintage cars and, even, many replicas.
For my purpose, the definition of the word,“copy” is a race car that was built, in the same time frame as the original car, by a builder, other than the original designer/builder, using the exact design, shapes and features of the original car, with the intent of competing against the original car in actual competition.
Probably the best examples of the word,“copy”, are “Trevis built Watson roadster copies” and “Ewing built Watson roadster copies.
There were also many Kurtis midget copies competing with the original Kurtis cars throughout the midget era.
While I understand the common use of the word,”copy”, in vintage racing , I prefer the words, recreation and replica.


A couple of comments in conclusion.
* A rule, that I observe in my shop, is that I never use any real vintage parts when building a replica. Any real vintage parts should be reserved for real restoration.
* I also never represent any cars or parts as anything more than they are.


I thank my lucky stars, everyday, for the guys, who go far beyond reason to rescue these incredibly valuble historic cars and, at great personal expense, put them on the track for all of us to enjoy. I also thank my lucky stars for the wonderful artisans and craftsmen who help to rebuild and restore the original cars and, can, also take a pile of tubing and a roll of fiberglass and build a brand new piece of vintage style, automotive art.

mac miller in INDY

 

Well said. WELL said. This should be handed out at every vintage meet. Well, at least a replica of it. Or a copy...

 

great head shot of larry dickson he spent a lot of time with our family in 1965 when he ran for George Nesler and won the URC Championship got to know him real well last time I saw him was at a combined USAC TQ race in Canada in 1977 or 78 the year he won his last USAC championship

 

There is no such thing as a "real" or "original" car in historic racing. Invariably, racing cars get "used up", and parts are replaced on a regular basis. Where do you draw a line? By your definiton, most cars racing in period were no longer "original"...

 

Call it what you will, I certainly have no problem looking at it.

 

Another of Pankrantz's works of art. While he didn't build many cars all I've seen had 4-link front radius rods while this one had hairpins for some reason. To my knowledge this car is MIA, does anyone know if it's ever been found or it's ultimate fate?

 

Big difference between an "original" car and a "real" car.
Modifications, upgrades, crash repairs, paint job changes, etc. throughout a cars racing career, certainly, negates its "originality" but not its "reality".
Infact, evolution and change is the ultimate "reality" for cars with long racing histories.
Cars are only original until they use up their first set of tires.
There are very few, if any, "original" cars in vintage racing but there are many "real" cars.
Many of these "real" cars are restored to the final year configuration of their racing career and many are restored back to an earlier year specification depending on the owners preference.

BTW, Michael, great website!

 

The last note I have for it is Sep 13, 1958 Hoosier Hundred, finished 13th (Gene Hartley), owned by Gil Morcroft at the time.

 

You betchum Red Ryder!!!
PK

 

We interrupt this program with this special bulletin:

Gable and Indy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wMAYS7LxyU

 

Thanks for the help guys.
Buildy you also have a great memory.

 

Thanks Brian. That made my night.

Getting back into a car that was in flames takes big plums.



Off to bed now.

 

Yes, thank you for posting that Brian.

Not only did that fellah get back in, but it looked like he got back in while they were still fighting the fire.

Large indeed.

 

I have an original, nothing has been changed. There are some left.

 

Cars are only original until they use up their first set of tires.

 

that was Mauri Rose.