Barn find .. TWO cars ..once in a lifetime

Hello Board,

I'm a "newbie" here... found your site after a couple of people emailed me with the links..but wanted to address a few things, which ARE of importance for the general hobby. I'm not here to start another feud or cloud this board, but a few things do need to be said. Simply while the fraud in the hobby has manily been centered with "original" or "musclecars" in reality it affects EVERYONE, whether you are into period rods, musclecars, or old race cars...If people don't self police themselves and make a point to keep ANY historical record straight whether it be about a FC or just an old rod, then the integerity of the hobby gets compromised and everyone looses.

The old 1968 race car all of a sudden becomes "the 1968 DH FC" or the period steet rod becomes some car which Von Dutch worked on or was in some issue of "Rod and Custom" ..See my point...The amount of money involved in the hobby today means we ALL have to stamp out fraud whenever it occurs...

To address the 1968 DH FC...there are numerous threads discussing this car..I would encourage anyone with even the slightest interest to read them...A direct comparison was made using Tom's car as it is today with period pics he says are the same car...These are the same pics he claimed "proved" he had "a or the 1968 DH FC." The direct comparison speaks for itself....they AREN'T the same car...There are at least 5-6 SIGNIFICANT differences between ANY period pics and TC's FC...There was also a very lengthy researched timeline by a noted collector outlining the history of the 1968 FC...ALL of the research points to there being only 1 1968 FC and Tom's car NOT being it....

Also while there are pics (obviously) showing people associated with DH with Tom's car...they are simply that..ANY remotely common sense individual would recognize that...To illustrate..I can have a pic of me standing next to a likeness of a T. Rex but that dosn't mean that T Rex is real...it just means I had a pic taken of me next to a likeness of one...

The biggest reason this topic continues to come up and needs to be re-hashed it seems every 6-12 months is simply this...Tom's car has been shown to NOT be what he claimed...claims he exhalted since at least 2001 (the car was unveiled publicly in 2003 at Enghlishtown when the pics he posted here were shown), used on his site, allowed fellow car guys to believe, and MOST importantly he smeared or allowed others names to be smeared in it's defense...This is irreprehensible...It isn't discussed on his site any longer as a DH FC, or any of the other known sites simply because just about EVERYONE (save a few "hardcore" SYC guys..and even they know..as evidence by emails...) knows the real story...So he tries to bring it up elsewhere where the story isn't as well known...There was even an attempt to make a claim about a 1965 Chevelle being an "A/FX car.." another totally baseless claim which ANYONE could see...

Does this board need a feud or a discussion about a lawsuit, which was NEVER germane to the topic..."Do you own the car you have claimed to..had business cards made saying you do, and publicly posted you do?"...all awhile smearing others who disagreed....an EMPHATIC NO...but does it then need someone continuing to make claims about a VERY historic FC, which they don't own..all awhile attempting to change or deflect the real issue..about their claims and car...NO...

I will be more than happy to publicly discuss ANY detail in a compeltely civil manner, concerning this issue...Along with other people, I have posted much info to refute the claims of Tom's car being real...No one has any "axes to grind" or hidden agendas..Just want to make sure ANY record discusses the WHOLE story, and not just someone's feable attempt at self promotion...

Please go to www.dickharrell.com and register and go to forumns...and then "photos" and look for threads on the 1968 FC..Also by all means go to www.yenko.net and read discussions there...BTW..any post you find that do NOT have a person's name with them....they are probably mine...Not sure why that is Read all of this stuff and make your own minds up...

Greg Carlson

 

BTW...the Nova is a very cool car...I'd love to own it myself...The problem is though..as a poster asked..."Is it real?" If a record isn't made of cars like this, especially since not as much is known about old race cars as "original" musclecars, it could very easily all of a sudden be "real." A neat car which looks great though.

 

Hi everybody am Kim Howie. I own the 70 Camaro Streetfreakmustang is talking about I noticed you wanted pictures of Tom Clary's funny car before it was redone. I think that's good question I would like to see the same thing on the 69 funny car. When I restored my 70 I put tons of pictures of but have never seen any of the 69 before it was done, show me pictures to prove it.

 

They are posted on the Dick Harrell website.

Pics of DH 69 Camaro taken in 1976. I bought this car in 1975 from Mike Bell. Mike bought the car in the early 70's in Kansas City. He painted the car the candy colors and you could still see the Fred Gibb logo and names under the paint. I planned to race the car in the Econo Funny class in NHRA, but the class never materialized. I sold the car to a guy in Missouri in August, 1977 and he sold it to Carl Blanton in Tulsa, OK. He must have been the guy that sold the car to Bob. I remember seeing the car raced at Tulsa, OK under the name Family Affair. I was racing an ex top fuel Woody Gilmore rear engined dragster at the time. Glad to see that Valerie ended up with the car after all of these years. I met Valerie in St. Louis at the funny car race in 2004.
Attached Thumbnails

 

<TABLE class=tborder id=post4547 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD class=alt2 width=175>Bob Gibson<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_4547", true); </SCRIPT>
Forum Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 62


</TD><TD class=alt1 id=td_post_4547><!-- icon and title --> The Real Dick Harrell 69 Funny Car
<HR style="COLOR: #000000" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->To all that don't know the history of Valerie's car, I may be able to help...
In the later 70's I read an ad in the back of National Dragster about a 69 Camaro Funny Car that was For Sale from a guy in Tulsa Oklahoma, I called the guy about the car, he told me all about the detail and also told me the car was the ex Dick Harrell F/C... This was interesting to me at the time because I was a big fan of Dick's during the last years of his life.
But as far as the car went I actually was only looking for a good quality Funny Car to race and the car not only was in real nice condition but was affordable too... so I bought it,
At the time there wasn't such a thing as Nostalgia Drag Racing so it's history didn't mean that much...

I ran the car that summer with the name "Family Affair" on it, the car was 100% original condition except for the paint job... it had a decent metalflake orange paint job with green & red stripes, during the upcoming winter I bought a couple of gallons of cheap paint stripper and set out to strip the old paint off so I could repaint the car for the new year.
This stripper was pretty weak stuff, it would only take off about one or two coats of paint at a time, so I thought I'd go ahead and use it knowing it wouldn't hurt the gelcoat once I got down to it...

Well during the stripping process I got down to Dick's original paint job, without a doubt it was Dick's paint job... you could easily tell where the orginal Dick Harrell lettering had been sanded away on the upper rear 1/4 panels.
I never finished stripping the car because it was a few weeks later that I found a newer funny car for sale, so I put the 69 up for sale (big mistake) I ended up selling the car to a local racer named Mike Dyke, Mike took the car to a local body shop and they painted the car blue with some cheap looking stripes,
Mike bracket raced the car around Centrail Illinois until he moved to Las Vegas, he took the car with him and sold the car to a guy in Vegas...
Valerie located and bought the car back...
Bob
<!-- / message --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

I don't know how i misssed this post,, Killer cars,,

I wish i would find one deal 1/2 as good as that.. That one takes the cake in my book..

Nice find

 

Great story Bob, makes for some very interesting reading. As Kim posted, would be neat to see some "as found" pictures, indicating the car was indeed one of Dick's.

 

Heres Don Hardy himself inspecting the car.He built it.

 

Kim, You need to be commended for showing the "as found" pics and the many pics of the car during the restoration. You went above and beyond what was needed.

 

Please note: The car Don Hardy is inspecting and verifying is Val's 1969 Car.

 

Keeping this discussion on the topic of the trademark issues and tribute cars, where is the "owner" of the Nickey trademark? He jumped all over a guy on Ebay for building a model of this Chevy II by using the Nickey decals that were available on the aftermarket. To me he should be asking to remove the logo from the doors just as anyone else with a trademarked name should.

A tribute car was okay to do 20 years ago, but now these names are trademarked just like Coke, Pepsi, Ray-Ban, etc. These owners of the trademarks have the right to charge people who use their name, just as Valerie has the right to when someone puts the Dick Harrell name on their car, hat, shirt, or whatever. I build model cars as a hobby also, and when the Snake & Mongoose funny cars were re-issued a few years ago by Monogram there was one major item missing from the decal sheet: the Coca Cola logos. Coca Cola would not give them permission to use them in a model kit without getting a royalty from the sale of these models. That is a crock, but that is real life. Slixx Decals has gotten out of the NASCAR decals for the current drivers because it costs too much for trademark issues which eventually has to be passed on to the consumer. Who would want to pay $25.00 for a set of decals to go on a $10.00 model car? This is why the diecast world has taken off. You can buy a diecast cheaper than building the exact same thing out of plastic.

Another thing about trademarks on race cars, every single named person or business on the side of that car can be held liable in a lawsuit over an accident or whatever involving that car. This happened to Huston Platt when he crashed his car into the stands at Yellow River Dragway near Covington GA on March 2, 1969 killing 11 people. The dragstrip owner, Platt, and CocaCola were sued in the deaths of those people. Why was Coke sued? They supplied the parachutes that were on the car when it wrecked and scooped up the spectator on the side of the strip when the chutes opened! Thus killing that spectator and causing the car to go off uncontrollably into the stands killing another 10 people and injuring another 40+. The dragstrip never opened again and I think Coke and Huston Platt were cleared of any wrong doing as it was determined that the spectator found in the chute of Huston's car was the cause of the wreck from a video supplied by a spectator showing the guy going back to get his beer. So in the scheme of things this is why the owner's of the Lead Sled, ZL-1 #1, the 70 Camaro pro stocker, and any other documented Dick Harrell race car need to have permission to use that name on the side of the car whether they race the car, or not. The Ramchargers Demon f/c has been restored for years w/o the Ramchargers name on the sides because the owner does not have permission to put it on there, and/or will not pay the trademark fees involved with such a car.

BTW, TC and KH, Val's car is documented by an extensive photo history back to the owner who bought the car from Dick, up until it was painted last year. Kim if it wasn't for ME and Tim you would have never proven that your car ran with both the Dick Harrell and Fred Gibb names on it at the same time. Remember my picture from Bristol 1970 and the video stills from that race showing Dick working on that car? (BIG GRIN RIGHT NOW)...................RatPack..............

 

Troy, interesting reading in regards to trademarks, glad you went into such detail. Hopefully Valerie will read your comments, or better yet, you can explain it to her. You see, even though advised not to, for several years she has been using the Fred Gibb mark, the Yenko mark and the Nickey mark with out permission, nor compensating the owners of these marks.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
For some time now Pulde, and now you, has been going on and on about how any name on a car involved in an accident is liable. At the track there are racecars with 25, 50 maybe 75 brand name stickers on the car. Do you really believe that these companies would be so free to hand out their company stickers if they were liable? For a company to be held liable, their product would have to be shown to have been the cause, or at least involved, in the accident. <o></o>
<o></o>
If Dick Harrell is on the side of the car, who they going to sue, Dick Harrell? If you say Valerie, that does not make sense either. In today’s world, such lawsuits are big $$$, often 6 sometimes 7 figures. For a nominal fee she will allow you to use the Dick Harrell name. If liable, not good business sense.<o></o>
<o></o>
Face it, trademarks are about $$$, plain and simple, and Valerie is no exception. Nothing wrong with that, all part of the world we live in, just quite beating around the bush and admit it.

 

Tom I dont care about your fight with Dale P., Tim L., Val H., and others but I think its rude that you guys brought the fight here. STLGASSER was right when he said that he came to this site to get away from everyones bitchin and Im sick of it as well because I was baned from your site for posting something and it was editted and I asked why, then I was locked out. I think its because of the Kirby car but I dont care what happened in the past, I was just pissed that you claim to have a real car and when the Kirby car came out you and Dale P. said it wasn't a real Harrel car. I beg to differ because Jim's car was like a time piece and it still had the faded Dick Harrell on the rear. But thats doesn't matter now and I think you guys need to take this discussion somewhere else. Thanks, Mark (396L35)

 

Rat Pack I have 15 pictures taken by Jon Asher With Freds & Dicks name on the car. Jon Asher took the pictures which were in Rodder & super Stock may of 1971. What you did prove was that Dick worked on my car and I thanked you for that. The pictures I have were given to me by Jerry Burford who worked for Fred Gibb several years. I even have a picture of Jon Asher taken the actual picture that is in the maz. Somebody took a picture of him taken the picture Cool. Huh!! That picture I got from Bill Portfield when i bought the car from him in 1994.

 

Mark, Tom, Tim, Dale, and whoever else....

I completely agree this is a topic which shouldn't permeate every car oriented website with BS and negativity...As I wrote earlier the biggest problem with a car like the Nova (Chevy II) which was posted earlier isn't that it is a "tribute" or clone which IMO is or should be flattering..it isn't that the car is a killer car which I'm sure generates much interest whereever it goes...it is simply all it takes for a car like this to become a problem in the hobby is someone making a claim it is real or even implying it could be...

Let's face reality...we have all seen cars sell today for big money which 10 years ago would have been scrutinized harder...(just look at 90% of the COPO Camaros and what has been accepted as documentation today...a POP which could have been made in 1969 or 1989 or 2005 and no way to tell the difference and some very aributrary body numbers and guys paying 150k???? Where is the logic in that???)

We have also seen what happens when someone makes a claim, it goes unchecked, and then is proven to be a lie...This does nothing but hurt the hobby...and the hobby isn't limited to just "original" cars or old race cars..So if someone post a very cool car which is done as to replicate a historical car...it needs to be discussed..it needs to be noted as a clone, and it needs to be differentiated so there is NO chance of any reasonble person being duped..It sucks that some negative spill over happens, but that is going to happen..As afar as trademarks..it is an unfortnate part of the hobby today...When websites or people started to try to profit in ways off these cars and the money grew exponentially...stuff like this was bound to happen..

 

Again Troy I thank you !!!

 

Kim,

As I've posted and said earlier...your car is a very cool ride, one which while I do not agree with the color..it shouldn't and doesn't matter and ANYONE who bashes it solely on that is a moron IMO..You have done what I would have expected was common sense for ANYONE in the car hobby ....even a neophyte,and that is DOCUMENT your car through pics and research...The1969 FC Val owns is the same way..DOCUMENTED with pics, solid recollections, and a solid paper trail..it like your car is beyond reproach

IMO it would be very cool to see Val's 1969 car, Porterfield's ZL1 #1, Boje's (at least for the time being..lol) '67 Lil Hoss, Matt Murphy's Kirby Team car, your 1970 car, and a few others square off somewhere...I'd be on a plane for that one..

 

Mark, in regards to Jim’s car, you are missing the whole point, at least where I am coming from. The car is a very neat piece, as you say, a timepiece, with a lot of history. But the part that escapes me is why you and a few others are so intent on calling it a Dick Harrell car. Jim had other major sponsors, such as Broemer (spelling ?) but it is not called the Broemer car. Yes, it no doubt had Dick Harrell on the side, but it was, and always will be Jim Kirby’s car. That is very cool, a piece of Missouri drag racing history. I think you are doing Jim, the car, and racing history a disservice by not calling it the Jim Kirby car. But, I will be the first to admit, since it is not my car, not my call.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
A good example is the ’70 Clyde Morgan funnycar, being discussed on yenko.net. Even though sponsors included Dick Harrell and Fred Gibb, it was Clyde’s car, thus will always be known as the Clyde Morgan car.

 

Way cool. I'll be sure to look for them at Good-Guys.

 

they can be summed up in 2 words..... BAD A$$!

 

So let me get this straight....According to Valerie's lawyer I have to pay the FORD MOTOR COMPANY (or the builder of any vehicle) a portion of the sale profits if I sell a car with their trademarked name on it? I'm going outside right now (as all of you reading this should) and rip all of the logos off of my rides before I get in a lawsuit...............

 

Greg why would not agree with the color that I have the car??

 

I am actually going to agree with you Tom which is surprising to say the least...lol I think too much emphasis is/was being placed on how the original Ebay add was worded...It was worded to sell the car..The car IMO is better described as a Jim Kirby car...Which is the way I think MM has described it...The issue there was someone trying to profit off the noterity of DH to sell the car..not that it was anything wrong with the car or that it wasn't real or that it didn't have some direct lineage to DH..just setting the record straight with respect to the history..

 

Yep..you pretty much hit the nail on the head. Many of us in the hobby hope the Yenko family does not get any ideas, or this could just be the beginning.


"re-god-damm- diculas" isn't it. LOL<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

 

Kim,

I haven't seen your car in person obviously, yet have seen many pics of it in different light...the car looks to have more of a purple appearance than any period pics of ANY of the DH cars (whether his or "team cars") I've located...I know you mentioned you found paint in areas where it should be original and used it, but I'm sure you know paint has evolveded 400% since 1970..and you were assuming someone hadn't repainted that area of the car..Not to mention on the darker colors even the primer and prep can affect the color hue..ala Forest Green...grey primer..a much lighter color than the original factory hue

I personally would have taken the many period pics, compared the car and its' hues and tried to duplicte that color..I think it would have been a much closer match...Still a neat car..

 

Greg..what about the colors and lace work on the '69 funnycar. In the pictures I have seen, the color looks closer to Kim's (purple) then red, and the lace work is not close to the original car, nor even Porterfield's, which looks to be right on.

Not that any of this really matters, but as long as everyone is commenting on how other's cars were restored, figured might as well cover them all.

 

Tom,

I really don't think that was the purpose of the lawsuit or one of the consequences...The purpose as I understand it, was to stop someone from using the name of her late father to profit off of without Valerie having some say so....Whether it be Rick Hall, Porterfield, you, or anyone ...I really don't think Val Harrell expects to make money from her dads name..just to have some legit control over HOW it is used..As can be seen by Porterfield having it back on his car and others being able to display it..The same as anyone would want or expect...Would you want to see your late fathers name being used in a non-flattering way or being used by someone to turn an ordinary car into something it isn't (probably not the best question...lol


Please don't try to make it appear as trademarking these semi/famous names was Val's idea...

 

ban these new fuckers and lock this damn thread!!!!!!!

 

I haven't honestly looked at the '69 car....I haven't seen really any good pics showing the lace or the car in anything other than flourescent light..

The cars all did go through repaints when they were new..look at the actual 1968 car..3 primary color schemes, with details different in all 3..(pinstriping, underlining of letters, placement of sponsor decals, etc.)...So hues can and did change....I would bet during the '68 racing season each time the car was resprayed the hue got darker...simply because of the successive layers of old color...

All I'm saying is based solely on what I've seen of Kim's car..it to me looks like it is more of a purple hue than any of the period pics...Could that be the original color..sure..Maybe it was sprayed and the color wasn't right so they respayed it and the area Kim found paint was in an area where they figured noone would see it..so why bother??

The thing to remember here is I think you have to restore these old race cars to the most commonly seen schemes...This is one reason I would have used the period pics..taken them to a competent painter and tried to develop a combination which was as close to what was seen..preferable in natural light...

 

No offense but why ban us..We are simply having a civil discussion about these cars...While we don't agree...we can all admit we have a lot of collective knowledge and might actually comment on something "you" guys find interesting...

My comment would be ...as long as we aren't cursing (as you did) or causing problems...just don't read the thread..