Countach, the ultimate supercar

Either say what is not correct, or shut up, my opinion. Naming it is surely not a matter of excessive time spent, typing of a few words is a matter of a few seconds.

Sometimes (not necessarily here) it even turns out that a "not correct" is based on wrong assumptions.... .

Cheers, Bernhard

 

I did not need that much time for this post. It would cost much more time to dig in my archives, to think about the photos and papers that I saw etc. to provide all the information that you may request. Understood?

 

I did not expect such from you as I know that you are a very polite person.

You helped with a little repair on my QP in Austria 2014. Now you know who I am.

 

Please see this as a constructive criticism, nothing else!
We are here to share our passion and knowledge for these beautiful cars. Imo we should help & learn from each other. There are so many interesting details and stories about this brand and everybody should be able to understand and profit from somebody else knowledge.

The circle of experts are very small and many of them are here registered. So work together and not against each other.

My best,
Leo

 

Oh, hey, nice to meet you here also!

Please do not take my maybe somewhat harsh comment as a personal offense. You might know that one thing in the "scene" (in particular in Germany) that I really do not like, is to be (more or less) knowledgable, but to hold back substantial information supporting a short general negative comment one makes about a car of someone else. I do not mind critics (e.g. on my cars), but prefer these substantiated.

I am sure that you also would not really like it, if I would approach one of your cars, make a brief comment "not correct" to the public, and then simply walk away, even ignoring questions about what is deemed not correct ... .

Nevertheless, sorry!

Cheers, Bernhard

 

Leo, I appreciate your comments.

C.

 

No excuse necessary. It's the problem of pseudonyms...
Thank you for your reply.

I did not experience that in Germany. But others did.

Yes.

BTW I saw the interior of your Espada in the Espada thread, very nice colour!

 

Many thanks .

I am wondering in the moment whether I should make the lower armrest covers in the doors not correct. Namely by avoiding to cut three holes into the nice new leather in visible regions and putting ugly black rubber plugs therein. Correct would be to glue such plugs into such holes, preferably like the factory did it, i.e. with glue squashing around the plugs onto the surrounding leather ... . Just as correct would be to use two fixing points (thus two holes/plugs) only, instead of the designed and provided three (like the factory sometimes did). I also take the non-correct approach to bend the brightwork parts to fit at least somewhat well (where it factory originally stood off).

What I want to say is that "not correct" even in the optical finish can be a very very difficile issue and will often need detailed discussion ... , aside the fact that the factory actually did things on some days like this and on other days like that (including use of minor parts), some days even using a large hammer .....

Cheers, Bernhard

 

Are you saying this Countach originally was not?

 

No. I am not sure regarding 1120292.

I only meant: yes for some LP400, no for others. As BJJ stated, the factory worked differently from day to day. I guess that some LP400, whose rear light covers fitted well to the body, did not receive caulking treatment while others did. The only way to finally judge is to look at period photos of exactly the car in question.

I saw old photos of 1120292 some years ago (documentation is good for this car), and I don't remember well, but IIRC, you could guess by looking on these photos that the caulking around the rear lights of 1120292 is like it originally was built.

Maybe I made a note in my files. I am not at home, thus I can't check now. The car is located not far away from my hometown, and I am planning to see it soon. If I will not forget, and if the documents will be present, I can check again, should I go there.

C.

 

Now THAT was a "lengthy" post. But I do not see any benefit from it apart from making friends with the expression "idle chatter". Let me give an answer while coffee is getting cold.

Peter did not want to know about the caulking issue "I raised". His statement came before post 22339, and if I raised something, it happened in post 22339.

Marcel asked Peter what he means, and did not get an answer (for me that is ok, I do not have a problem with that). Rest assured that if Marcel wants to know something from me, he will not ask via this board.

Joe wanted to know... that's correct.

I think that this issue has been settled in the meantime, and you seem to agree. However, let me point out that I can't think about Countach issues all day long, and I don't want to, by the way, especially not during work.

So why did I "finally (!)" come back for post 22361? Because Cannonball had a sharply formulated question. He focussed on that issue (quite the contrary of "idle chatting" - I like that expression, thank you for that) and I thought that I owe him an answer because he really wanted to know something. And, last but not least, when I saw his post 22360, it was a good moment to answer because I had some free minutes to do so.

Yes, it is a low resolution image, and I still do not get what Peter wanted to say, as Marcel does not get what Peter wanted to say. Btw, there is another possible fly-in-the-ointment as the exhaust tips themselves - being of Countach "S" type - might be incorrect for the LP400. At least, for early LP400, the exhaust tips would look differently.

Possibly - I am not sure and that might be another reason to further investigate - this kind of exhaust tips is correct for late LP400.

As it is very difficult to get the early version of the exhaust system, I could very well live with the exhaust tips on 1120292 even if they were incorrect (IMO a real fly-in-the-ointment issue).

As for Bernhard (BJJ), I am fine with him. I know him personally and he has proved to be very (!) helpful. Your post 22363 is a perfect example for "idle chatter".

From my side, this case is settled now. Feel free to answer but don't expect any further answer from me about that issue, should your future posts not be as focussed as Cannonball's question.

 

Cannonball, it's me again... during a phonecall with me, M.B. (Marcel) mentioned that he now remembers that the second owner of 1120292 told him that the caulking already had been on the car (around the rear light covers) when he - the second owner - bought the car with ca. 8.000 kilometers. So we - Marcel and I - concluded that the caulking probably is original for 1120292 as this corresponds to what I (not perfectly) remember from seeing the old photos that are coming with the car.

Furthermore, Marcel said that he now, after reflecting, believes to know what Peter K. meant concerning the "missing areas" (that Peter K. mentioned in his post 22338). Marcel remembers that the second owner told him that he had removed a part of the caulking so that water drops don't stay "inside". Don't ask me if this makes sense, but we think that this is the reason why Peter K. - correctly - believed to see "missing areas".

 

Anyone know where is the whereabouts or have a recent picture of a Countach QV (U.S) spec in Pearl White, Pearl White wheels and blue interior ?

I have a friend of mine who rented it in 1986 in Hawaii, would love to send him a recent picture of it.

 

That makes sense. Hope your coffee continued to stay warm!

 

No need for a spare, it'll never be driven anyway.

 

That is interesting. It is nearly impossible to find out, if they did that already with the LP400, because it is very difficult to find detailed very old photos of LP400's. Without such a photo, we can't judge. I only can say that some LP400 originally were built with caulking and some without. I fear that the LP400 history will remain incomplete at this point but we can live with that.

 

Some LP400 did receive caulking treatment, some others did not.
Some had thicker caulking, some thinner caulking...

IMHO, caulking should not be considered when buying such cars nowadays.

Here, a few period pics...
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

+1 thank you for your input

Only if you know that your car had it or not, it should be made as original. But it still can be done after purchase and finally, it's not that important at all, just nice to know.

 

Yes, of course. When you know it, better make it perfect.
The rear lamps of #1120082 had caulking, as far as I remember.

Exactly.
A very special car as well.
Image Unavailable, Please Login