Some pics that might be of interest.

I have posted some pics in the UK section including quite a few vintage from when I was running my 'shop. Please feel free to check it out.
Cheers, Al.

 

Hi John, sorry I have no idea how to replicate the pics here, rather technophobic!
The TdF copy is what was supposed to be 0647GT - actually 1051GT, I was somewhat naive when taking the job on and it bit back!
I'll try to post the full story in this thread.
Thanks, Al.

 

Here goes, the story of the TdF copy and the loss of my business!
I ran a small but (I like to think) very high quality restoration & refinishing shop in South Wales. Quite happily working along with a couple of projects at any one time not needing to advertise, doing work for 2 large scale but very private collectors in Wales. Sadly late in 2004 one of my patrons passed away, I had the 'brainwave' of putting an advert on ebay for our services, wondering how widespread interest would be; the results were phenomenal! Within a few months we were in larger premises, with new equipment and more staff. One of the enquiries we had was from a gentleman in Sheffield about rebuilding a 250 TdF that had recently been rebodied. Having been to Sheffield to view another couple of jobs I came away thinking we had 'bagged' probably the most important customer I could possibly have imagined - having seen some of his collection which appeared to include a GTO, another TdF, Daytona, Lusso and a 250TR copy.
The first job we took on for this client was the 250TR copy as the rebodied TdF was not ready to be delivered.
All of this owners' cars were described to me as being 'the real mccoy' except the TR, indeed he took pains to relate the history of the GTO, the 2nd TdF and 0647.
I am convinced the reason I was picked to do the cars was simply that I ran a small scale operation, was not particularly used to Ferrari's, and probably came across as being in awe of this customer (which is certainly true).
When 0647 arrived I was pretty shocked by the standard of work carried out on the body, checking back through our records we spent 767 hours correcting work and properly gapping, levelling etc before we could begin any preparation.
The chassis had been crudely painted in a synthetic chassis black which all had to be stripped away. It was while doing this that I came across '1051' stamped on the l/h chassis rail just to the rear of the fron l/h shock absorber mount. Unfortunately by this time I had already begun publicising the rebuild (with the full co-operation of the owner) to try to raise the profile of my company. At this point in the rebuild I simply kept quiet and dropped off the publicity realising that something wasn't quite right but not knowing exactly what the position was. (It was also obvious by this time that the chassis plate carrying the 0647 numbering had been welded into place and filled to hide the welding).
By this time other work from the original ebay ad had started to dry up, and having completed the Lusso for this customer and him having seen the standard we were capable of he sent down another 4 cars to keep us going - by this time we were working almost exclusively for this customer alone.
I did tackle the owner about the provenance of 0647 and recieved the reply that the title was his irrespective of what the car actually was.
The upshot of all this is that I was asked to collect some original 50's paperwork that the customer had bought on ebay relating to 0609GT - a long since sold low roof Boano.
On delivering this to Sheffield it became clear that the customer was planning on 'adapting' the numbers to read 0647.
At this time I forced the issue that we had been underpaid for the work we had done for this customer and basically he withdrew his custom. When the car (0647) left us it was painted, all suspension, steering, brakes and running gear built and ready for trimming.
I will always stand by the quality of work we were able to achieve, ultimately my business failed because I put myself in the position of being reliant on one client.
However, I firmly believe that 0647 has been done specifically to decieve. I know that the customer bought 1051GT as a donor car (with an inside plug engine) and I know that the chassis of that car is what is purporting to be the chassis of 0647GT.#
Whether he actually owns any of the remains of 0647 I really do not know, but personally I doubt it, the engine in 0647 is definetely the one from 1051 - it is still stamped between the distributors despite the main engine number reading 0647.
As a subnote, the subcontractor that used to undertake my mechanical work (supramanic) took over the work and a couple of members of my staff. This only lasted for 3 months - it was he who took the car to the FOC and apparently took the glory for the quality of work!
What I have no explanation for is the info in John Starkey's book which has been quoted extensively in connection with this car.
Please let me know your thoughts,
I can also supply info on 1751GT and what I think it is and what it purports to be.
Thanks for your interest.
Al.

 

Hi Boudewijn, any ideas on how the car got described as it did in the Starkey book? I don't know if this was cause and effect - i.e whether the car was described as saved and this is what spurred my former client to do what he did, or was this a case of misinformation to the author?
Certainly from what I understand Ed Niles has made it clear that NO CAR has the original frame, the engine may be in existence somewhere, and what title my client had or had not I really couldn't say.
But the car that appeared at the FOC was 1051GT rebodied.
Thanks for the interest, Al.

 

The accuracy of that body looks pretty poor - particularly the front end which is very 'pointy' or 'drawn' and with the headlamps at differing levels within the aperture, is this just the angle of the pics or did it strike you as being a bit rough and ready?
This is in no way a comment on how the car might look now - I carried out over 700 hours of corrective work to the body built on 1051GT, just a query on whether all body constructors are as rough as my experience of them!

 

Very fair comment's, the braking system when it arrived with us was partly disassembled but was on drums. What the car has been on in the past is anyone's guess.
I fully accept, and now know, that areas of the chassis are a dead giveaway; this is a byproduct of me not being that familiar and certainly no expert on Ferrari's. Also I accepted the car for what I was told it was and was not looking for issues connected with the chassis.
The body was new and pretty bloody awfull - it occupied most of my time!

 

Would I ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am hoping to get something re-established if there is enough interest. But on a much smaller scale - less risk and stress.
Thanks for the positive comments.

 

Hi Tom W, yes - 1051 is on drums with a dual circuit master cylinder. She also had an inside plug motor (now forged to read 0647GT! - I don't know if you have checked out the earlier explanation?)
Although she is a much earlier car than yours she sounds like almost identical spec?
Also, looking at yours on the PF register site (thanks to Darren, John V & Marcel) yours looks super - please don't be tempted to do any 'restoration'.
Thanks, Al.