| Author | Message | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Junior Member Username: Psk Post Number: 201 Registered: 11-2002 |
Wayne, Sounds right to me. I have heard that they will not let it be used at high speed any more, and I believe this has something to do with the wheels ... and this makes sense based on what you posted. Pete ps: Whoops about getting Norman's last name wrong ... but it was from hazy memories  | ||
| L. Wayne Ausbrooks (Lwausbrooks)
Intermediate Member Username: Lwausbrooks Post Number: 1086 Registered: 8-2002 |
I have no idea how accurate this account is but it is pretty much exactly the way I've always heard the story: - The story of the XJ13 - By 1955, it was becoming clear that the XK series engine that had brought so much motor racing success to Jaguar was becoming less competitive, particularly at Le Mans. As a result, it was decided to build a completely new engine that would be a race winner. This was conceived as a 5 litre V12 unit which was intended to be suitable for use in a road car after it had been proved at Le Mans. It was to be installed in a mid-engined sports racing car and work on the chassis and body started around 1960. the placing of the engine in the centre of the car was intended to bring 2 benefits. First, the bonnet line could be lower so as to improve aerodynamic efficiency. Second, the change in weight distribution provided opportunities for improved handling. However, during this period, the company's attitude to racing had changed and so progress on the new model was slow. As a result, it was not until 1966, that the car was built and ready for testing. It might have been possible to use it to contest Le Mans in 1966 or 1967, but any thoughts of doing so were put aside by the merger between BMC and Jaguar - the move that created British Motor Holdings. The future was far too uncertain to allow the company to mount a major racing programme and so the XJ13 was put to one side for several months. It must have provided a continuing source of frustration, sitting in the corner of the factory, yet the coompany was worried about there being any possibility of news of its existence leaking out. At the time, the six cylinder E-Type was very successful. It seemed likely that potential E-Type customers would delay their purchase if they knew of the existence of a mid-engined, V12 machine and so Sir William Lyons instructed that the car was not to be circuit tested. Norman Dewis was Chief Development Tester for Jaguar and he recalls that his boss, Bill Heynes, suggested that the car should be given a run in spite of Sir William's instructions. "He thought it was a shame to have the car sitting there and not take it out so he suggested that I should take it to MIRA one Sunday morning. He also said that if Sir William found out about it, I would be on my own. So, early one Sunday morning, the XJ13 was taken to the Motor Industry Research Association test centre near Nuneaton. The maximum speed achieved that morning by the XJ13 was 175 miles an hour on the straight with the car lapping at 161.6 miles an hour - an unofficial lap record. Dewis was summoned to Sir William's office some days later. Sir William chastised him in no uncertain manner for disobeying his orders., but he could see that Dewis was enthusiastic about the car and demanded to know what the result of the test had been. Two weeks later, the XJ13 returned to MIRA for another test session, this time with Sir William watching. Norman Dewis remembers that although the performance was good, the handling needed a great deal of development work. Sir William told him that development could go on, but only at weekends. For the next twelve months, the team spent Sundays at MIRA, working on the handling of the car. In order to check on the way it would perform on a real racing circuit, the XJ13 was subsequently run at Silverstone and achieved creditable times when compared with the racing cars that were competing then. Even so, it was not really fast enough to be a Le Mans winner without considerably more work and Sir William Lyons was still following his maxim of not entering races unless he knew he could win. The problem was that to have completed the necessary testing and development work, Jaguar would have had to divert effort away from the production cars, so the XJ13 was put away once again. According to some, this was a sad decision since it is believed that the car could have been capable of beating the GT40 on which Ford lavished so much money. But the work put into it was not for nothing. Many of the lessons learnt in developing the engine were incorporated into the V12 unit that was introduced into the E-Type in 1972. That link was not lost on the publicity people and they decided to use the XJ13 in the opening sequences of a film to announce the new V12 E-Type. On the 20th January, 1971, the XJ13 was once again taken to the Motor Industry test track near Nuneaton, this time with a film crew recording the event. The car was driven past the camera at high speed to produce a dramatic opening shot for the film. Norman Dewis remembers the day well "We spent the whole day on the high speed circuit and in the afternoon, the film people said that they needed just one more shot. This involved another five laps of the track." The car was taken out again and this almost brought about the end, not only of the car, but also of the driver. Travelling at high speed on the banked circuit, the load on the wheels was dramatically increased by G forces. it proved to be too much for the rear, offside wheel which collapsed under the strain. This happened while Dewis was driving near the top of the banking at 140 miles an hour. It began to career off the banking towards the infield and Dewis remembers turning off the ignition and crouching down under the scuttle. "I clipped one of the barrels on the infield and then the car turned end over end twice before rolling twice," recalls Dewis. "Fortunately, when it stopped, it was on its wheels and so I was able to get out and wait for help to arrive." The car was a complete wreck. Under normal circumstances, that would have been the end of the story, with the car being broken up for scrap. By some chance, it was in fact returned to the factory and stayed in a corner for almost two years before the decision was taken to restore it. Fortunately, the wooden formers that had been used to build the original body had survived. Abbey Panels, the company that had made the original body panels, were able to fabricate new ones and the restored body began to take shape. The wheels were a different story, however. Two of them had been almost completely destroyed in the accident and the patterns used to make them had been scrapped. Eventually, it was found that the damaged rims could be removed and replaced with a modified outer section from a Concorde undercarriage. Today the car still remains in the museum and is still awe-inspiring for a lot of Jaguar enthusiasts!! | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 665 Registered: 10-2002 |
Pete is correct. I've seen the car and Norman and they're both very much alive. | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Junior Member Username: Psk Post Number: 197 Registered: 11-2002 |
This is not 100% correct regarding the XJ13:
This accident did not kill the driver: Norman Lewis I believe, and Jaguar rebuilt the original many years later and it is drive-able. Thus 1 original XJ13 exists. Pete | ||
| Terry (Dogue)
Junior Member Username: Dogue Post Number: 198 Registered: 9-2001 |
Yes it does have a V12 in it and I am pretty sure it is fairly authentic. I will email him today and see if he has any history he can send. He paid 100k for it at an auction last year. Here is the Auction description, Sorry no photo. "This is an accurate superly executed re-creation of the original XJ-13.In 1965 Jaguar had decided to re-enter into the Grand Prix racing circuit at Le Mans.The dominant force at the time was the GT-40's of Ford.Designed with the intention of competing strongly in this field Jaguar spent millions of dollars building the XJ-13.Fitted with a 12-cylinder engine,fuel injected and a ZF transmission.Fitted with onboard brakes this is different than all Jaguar braking systems. The original car was being tested at speed in england when either a wheel separated or a tire blew.The car crashed at close to 200 MPH killing the test driver and destrying the original.To further add insult to injury the rules for Le Mans were changed and the car did not qualify for the new classes to be raced.The XJ-13 program was doomed and the rest is history. This is chassis #1 of six cars built by Robert Ashe of New Zealand.Mr Ashe has produced some of the finest re-creations of great British Racing cars in th e world. Built completely by hand it is the finest example in the world and is correct in all details. The car is street legal as it is fitted with wipers, turn signals and lights. Mr Ashe sold these cars new in the 90's for $330,000.00. This car has 75 miles on it. It has never been raced and has recently been serviced by our mechanic . The car is ready for a new owner that would like to own on e of the graetest Jaguars in theie history." I was incorrect in my last post, but the description corrects my inaccuracies. | ||
| Ron Thomas (Ronsupercar)
Member Username: Ronsupercar Post Number: 469 Registered: 5-2002 |
Terry, The XJ13 has to be one of the most beautiful Jags ever produced. I've seen a picture of one once and fell in love.. Did you friend go with the V12 engine back there? Please post pics if you have them.. | ||
| Terry (Dogue)
Junior Member Username: Dogue Post Number: 197 Registered: 9-2001 |
I have a friend that has a replica of a XJ13. It is fantastic, all aluminum and every detail looks correct. It was made by a swiss company that (supposedly) purchased the molds from Jaguar in the 80's. They supposedly made only 5 of these replicas. In Scottsdale there is a very prestigous vintage car rally called the "Gauthier Rally" that is very strict about replicas, but they allowed this one to be displayed when they saw how nice it was. Unfortunately the owner is battling cancer, when his condition improves I will get some photos and post them. | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Intermediate Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 2044 Registered: 2-2001 |
the 206 Dino was billed as a mini P4. As for carpenter's P4s, he was using a noble kit from the UK Norwood had some really nice P4 replicas he built that sold for around $300k, much nicer than carpenter's | ||
| nick m........ (Nickm)
Junior Member Username: Nickm Post Number: 199 Registered: 8-2001 |
PS: Horsefly, I drove out & looked at the car and paid for it, didnt have the time to bring it back with me. I'll be going back to Phoenix this weekend to load in onto a trailer and take it home. I'll take a better look at that tag once at home as it was pretty dirty, see what it says. Ive tackled some pretty big auto projects in the past, this one should be no biggie to make it look nice. We'll see. | ||
| nick m........ (Nickm)
Junior Member Username: Nickm Post Number: 198 Registered: 8-2001 |
PSK, Not an original P3 frame! It suposedly has a Ferrari frame, I will look into this later to make sure. John Carpenter (in Phoenix) made some very nice P4's in the early 90's and used a GT/4 frame. This car looks like it may have been a car that Carpenter made, not positive though. I'll also check this out later. I have a Sports Car International Magazine (Feb. '92) that has a very nice 6 page article on the cars Carpenter used to build. In the article it says that he sells the completed P4 copies for $155K. (with a 308 GT/4 V8's). I have no Idea what they may sell for now. I think this one will end up looking nice when completed. Just trying to have some fun here. | ||
| Mike Dawson (Miked)
Junior Member Username: Miked Post Number: 78 Registered: 2-2001 |
A Dino 206 SP, just one of many fantastic Ferraris owned by James Jaeger (co-founder of Cincinnati Microwave). Other cars in his collection can be seen at http://ohioconcours.com/h98f.htm   | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Junior Member Username: Psk Post Number: 189 Registered: 11-2002 |
Terry, Thanks for the pictures of the P3/P4 spyders thus the replica's 'overall' shape is not too bad. I can well understand anybody wanting a replica of something this rare, infact I have thought of it myself. In the end the quality of the replica will come down to the time spent getting the details right, and looking at the ebay pictures there is a lot of work to make that replica something that NickM will be proud of. The english one in the Classic and Sportscar magazine would fool many people, especially as it has an exotic v12 (from a Lambo motor) sound. A XJ13, P4 and a GT40 replica would have to be the pick of the replicas ... and perfectly understandable. With the GT40 you could make a car so close ... without having to ruin an important real car. The XJ13 would be close to impossible to get the little details right as I am sure Jaguar will not let you measure the ONLY one ... and same goes for the P4. The magazine one got so close because David Piper was a great guy and allowed the owner to have a look at his real one, and also gave him lots of advice. 10 points to David Piper for that ... but I imagine if you were the 1000'th person to give him a call, er, he may loose a little interest Arlie, Aluminium is usually lighter than fibreglass ... but heaps more expensive to make bodies out of. Fibreglass has a huge advantage in that it takes the knocks much better than alloy ... so due to modern racing being a contact sport, you do see alloy used as much anymore ... just a 2 cent comment. Pete | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 656 Registered: 10-2002 |
Arlie The P3 and P4 doors were and are fiberglass. The nose and tail of both the coupe and the spyder were alum. Piper made some fiberglass noses and tails as over the years as he got tired of fixing alum. as did Pensky/Donohue for their 512M but the factory cars were alum. You're right about the alum. body I'm fiitting. Best Jim | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 814 Registered: 5-2002 |
PSK, Jim can correct me if I'm wrong, but his ORIGINAL P4 (or parts thereof) came with a fiberglass body on it because that's what they used for racing. According to one of Jim's previous postings, his aluminum alloy body was never installed by the factory, but came with the car and bounced around with the frame for many years. He is currently installing it. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 813 Registered: 5-2002 |
Nick M, glad to see that you bought that car. It wouldn't matter to me if it wasn't the REAL McCoy either. The REAL P3/4 is unobtainable, so nothing wrong with having fun with that car. According to the E-Bay photo of the engine compartment, there looked to be a data tag of some sort on the passenger side. What does that tag say about the car? And who made it? I am not a purist myself, but a fan of unique and weird vehicles even if they are kits, provided they are NOT Volkswagen rebodies. YUCK! Is the windshield on that car free of cracks, and where on earth could you get a replacement? Let me know what you find out about that car. There may be another one out there, and I wouldn't mind finding one. (Or the one you have, IF you resell for ???) | ||
| Terry (Dogue)
Junior Member Username: Dogue Post Number: 193 Registered: 9-2001 |
Jim, Thank you for the correction and compliment on my drawing. Between you and Wayne, I am sure to learn something here everyday. I was trying to show the differences of the 206S vs the P3 with photos swiped from barchetta.cc | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 652 Registered: 10-2002 |
Terry The shot of 0846 from the front is when it was a P3, Note the buldge for the webbers. The shot of 0846 from the rear is from the Targo Floria where it crashed out. At that time, note the rear deck without the buldge, it had been converted to a P4 with Lucas mechanical injection. 0846 is now being restored with a NOS coupe body by me. Your drawing of 0850 is very nice. Arlie If you search and look at all of my P4 threads you'll see the the subtle differences between the P4 rear window and the P3. Look at the intergrated rear window moulding monolithically raised from the rear deck, rather than as a seperate surrounding piece as on the P3's, on my P4 which is an amazing detail. Nick No part of that car is original nor is the body even close. I could list endless examples but I'll start with one: Look at the nose of your car. Look at the nose of my car in the photo Terry posted. On the top edge of the nose inlet what duct are you missing? If your nose was cast from an original nose it would have that duct. Pete Your comments on the pedal boxes are correct: "God is in the details" as Michangelo said... Best Jim | ||
| Terry (Dogue)
Junior Member Username: Dogue Post Number: 191 Registered: 9-2001 |
I may be wrong, but I think P3/4 spiders had a very similar appearance to the 206S (e.g. minus back "fastback" window). And there were 3 (I think) Berlinetta 206S's that did have a similar fastback look. The front is much different with the grill opening and the hot air exit is a much different shape. Also the bonnet opens differently. Spider P3 converted to P4 specs s/n 0846   412P s/n 0850 (front details)  206S s/n 010 (front details)  206S s/n 014 (berlinetta)  206S s/n 016 (3/4 view)  | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Junior Member Username: Psk Post Number: 188 Registered: 11-2002 |
NickM,
Er, Hmmm if that car had an original P3 frame then you have just become a millionaire. Please have a look at Jims P4 and compare Ferrari made Jims P4 out of round tubes not square section and his front pedal box area does not look anything like your cars. Plus if it was a real frame it would not have a kit car body on it ... but be sold as a frame or have a rebuilt alloy body on it. Thus what Ferrari is the frame supposeably from? I do not want to be the bearer of bad news but that does not look like a Ferrari frame to me ... but I have been wrong before. Good luck with making it in to what you want. Pete | ||
| nick m........ (Nickm)
Junior Member Username: Nickm Post Number: 193 Registered: 8-2001 |
Hi Horsefly, Im the guy that bought that p3/4. Drove out to phoenix monday evening to pick it up. It needs some work (no biggie for me) but will end up looking very nice when finished. The owners (car dealers) bought the car from a dealer that went out of business. They bought a bunch of cars at one time, and are just reselling them to make some $$. I think that this p3 is a car that John Carpenter used to build and put a GT4 engine in. It has details on the body that look too authentic for it to have not been copied off an original p4. It is a really nice body that just needs some attention. Im going to do a bit more research. I do know that is has an original Ferrari frame. It's actually a really cool car in person, the photos didnt do it justice. We'll see what happens, I may get the body all squared away, put a sweet paint job on it, get a proper interior in it then resell it to someone so they can just pop an engine of thier choice in it and have some fun. I have an article in a Sports Car International on John Carpenter and his p4, says an original p4 sold for $10 mil. So wonder what a very nice copy would sell for??? | ||
| Douglas A Hunt (Boxercrazy)
New member Username: Boxercrazy Post Number: 33 Registered: 11-2002 |
ARLIE,i think those p3/4 kits were/are? made by NOBLE out of england a while ago,as in years maybe. i dunno,i always thought kits were cool as long as you didnt claim them to be something they were not(as in real!!) i am NOT a fan of those testarossa/other fiero/firebird/vette kits though,but for a while i was awestruck by corsons boxer kits(only cause i think the boxers are the sweetest)and the daytona kit on an early vette was cool(only if the dash and everything was changed). i do have a ford 390FE engine sitting in my dads garage though,just in case i ever run across a cobra kit that someone didnt finish :-) douglas hunt | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 812 Registered: 5-2002 |
Pete, I checked the photos closely and I see what you are talking about. The P4 actually has a rear window of sorts to add to the streamlined effect. Now I'm wondering what a P3 rear cover looks like. | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Junior Member Username: Psk Post Number: 187 Registered: 11-2002 |
Arlie, Compare the pictures of Jim's P4 versus the 206S, you will note that the P4 is filled in with a perspex (assumed) rear window to improve aerodynamics, while the 206 it is open with a flat rear engine cover ... hard to explain, but the 206 is like a 308 road car (sort of) while the P4 is like a F40 (in concept) with the perspex rear screen. I cannot remember who sells the P4 kits that look okay, try and find a back issue of a 'Classic and Sportscar' mag ... I just threw mine out as we moved house ... Pete | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 811 Registered: 5-2002 |
For what it's worth, here's that P3/4 (?) replica on E-Bay from yesterday. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2405046234&category=6212 Strange that the auction ended after only 1 day. Maybe somebody else thought that it was a unique project and made them an offer that they couldn't refuse. Others may scoff at a kit car, but since an original P3/4 is unobtainable, a well built replica wouldn't bother me. The design is half the attraction, but purists demand a Ferrari engine. As someone suggested, why not a Ferrari engine from a later model? As for the inboard brake rotors, didn't Jaguar use that design on some models for less "unsprung" weight? Someone please educate me on the finer points of the rear engine cover on the P4 versus the Dino racecar. Also, who made, or who currently makes, a replica of the Ferrari P3/4? That E-Bay car didn't have any info on who the manufacturer was. If that car is a P3/4 replica, WHERE did they get an original P3/4 to make the molds from? Does anybody know who would let a kit car company USE their rare P3/4 for a mold making session? | ||
| Taek-Ho Kwon (Stickanddice)
Junior Member Username: Stickanddice Post Number: 92 Registered: 11-2002 |
Any questions on P cars, just let James (Napolis) know he'll show you something truly beautiful. As for the replicas, they're not for me. I'm not really against some of the recreations out there that stay true to the original, but when the wrong engine is put in there and the shell is a bad mold it kind of makes me sad. That said I've considered a wonderful recreation of a Testa Rossa (my dream car). I'll just be patient and try to save up enough money to one day afford the real thing. Everyone's gotta have their motivating factors... | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Junior Member Username: Psk Post Number: 185 Registered: 11-2002 |
Terry, I think you are right ... same as the replica that Arlie was talking about yesterday. Most replicas have the back engine cover in the style of the 206 Dino racecar, not correct like the P4 ... but they talk about P3/4's. I think this is because not many know about the 206 Dino racecar ... or a P4 is cooler (?). Anyway this replica is a cross between a P4 (side air scoop) and a Dino rear engine cover. Looks well made ... but I think it is very sad that it has robbed a REAL Ferrari of its engine ... for a kit. Thus I disagree with Andreas, to steal a real Ferrari engine for JUST a kit means that a REAL Ferrari cannot be restored. There are plenty of other engines that would work well in a kit, such as an Alfa v6 for Dino replicas (great engine and made for many modern saloons), Jaguar v12 for P4's ... or just use a v8. Ofcourse an engine out of a totally destroyed 550/575 would be okay ... as that is a modern and replaceable. I do not mind replicas, except when a worthy car is sacrificed for a pretend car. Pete | ||
| Terry (Dogue)
Junior Member Username: Dogue Post Number: 190 Registered: 9-2001 |
Sorry, I assumed that since they used a 246 dino engine that the intent was to replicate a 206S not a P4. The pictures I posted are pictures of a 206S s/n 26 (I believe). The 206S was sometimes called a baby P3. Was much smaller and had a 2 liter v-6. A very sexy car. | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 515 Registered: 10-2002 |
Now I'm confused: The car on this picture does also 'only' have a V-6. But the P4 (which the ebay ad claims to replicate) should have a V-12. What am I mixing here up? | ||
| Terry (Dogue)
Junior Member Username: Dogue Post Number: 189 Registered: 9-2001 |
The 206 is nice, but look at the real thing. note the very cool in-board brakes.    | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 514 Registered: 10-2002 |
Each to his own, but I always think if you want to go the replicar route you should at least have the prancing heart in it. So the P4 would qualify, but how much HP are you getting out of Dino? The car couldn't live up to its looks unless you use it as a base for some serious Norwood work (can you say twin turbos). The second one doesn't even mention the engine, or does it? | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Intermediate Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 2452 Registered: 8-2002 |
Ron, the first one is nice, but if you look at the second thumbnail from the top- the picture of the back of the car, it looks as if the photo was doctored... Nice car, though... The second one is nice, just not as nice as the first one... | ||
| Ron Thomas (Ronsupercar)
Member Username: Ronsupercar Post Number: 463 Registered: 5-2002 |
Not as cool, but here is another one http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2404910411 | ||
| Ron Thomas (Ronsupercar)
Member Username: Ronsupercar Post Number: 462 Registered: 5-2002 |
I know how you guys feel about kits, but this is very cool.. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2405380703 What do you think. |