1971 Miura SV Jota at Auction

4892, a favorite of mine... Rossa Granada and Gold over the Senape (I think) leather color combo is so unique and gorgeous!

 

#4892 is not a real Jota. There is an abuse of terminology and name that I personnaly deplore from RM auction and/or its present owner.

Only because it was modified by factory back in '74 it is considered as SV-J, nothing else.

It is clearly explained in the only website providing true detailled description about Jota and SV-J.

This website is hold by my friend Fabrice Auxiètre, owning the last one #5100 factory produced with all Jota factory options/upgrades (excepted big fuel tank) : http://www.miura-svj.com/

if you have comments feel free to discuss about here...

 

Hmm, I have always wondered why this car has`nt been sold, the potential customers on a car like this seems to be briefed on SVJ cars maybe. #4990 was sold pretty quickly, as a comparison.

 

So...it's a factory recreation? Or modification?

 

Great site Olivier. However, even though my name is Paroutaud I neither speak nor read French.

Oh well...

Fred

 

Click on the British flag and it will convert to English.

Cheers Jim

 

That's supposed to be Tabacco.

As I write in my book, everyone has an opinion on the so-called SV-Js. It all depends on how you see it and where one's loyalties or affiliations lie. One could easily take the position that there was really only one true Jota, and its gone, and all the rest are simply partial copies in the spirit of the real thing. After all SV-Js are 'unofficial' cars modified by the works after their original production by Bertone SpA as SVs. Look at their chassis identification plates and you wont see anything pertaining to Jota, just an plain SV ID plate. Ive seen, inspected & driven several of them and I can tell you that mechanically they are essentially SVs.

Having said all that, I can see why some find these pseudo-competition cars done by the factory to be very cool and are prepared to pay more to get them.

 

Regarding Jota's. I have worked on three of them in my life, and restored 4892, as a ground up restoration. The one thing that has become crystal clear to me is the obvious differences that are not mentioned in books, or literature. The SVJ bodies are shaped differently than SV's. The front fender shapes are different. It will take a very close examination of two cars side by side to recognize the differences ( SV compared to SVJ). I have made templates for reconstructing SV noses, so the proper shape can be achieved, but these templates don't fit the SVJ bodywork. That also confirms the different shape. In the case of 4892, when the car was stripped of paint, there were seven layers of paint on the car, all different colors, so the true colors could easily be identified, right down to the base color. It was also obvious that this car never had any body damage, therefore the nose shape being different confirms the above. The other obvious difference is that the thickness of the aluminum on the Jota is much thinner than on production SV's. With all this said, I would find it hard to believe that 4892 was delivered back to the factory at a later time, as stated in a previous post, and have the body work replaced with thinner aluminum, just to achieve the Jota look? This makes no sense. It is all too easy to drill new holes, install rivets, and do fender cut outs, install a different headlamp treatment and driving lamps, but why change the body, if there was no previous accident? SVJ's also have a number of other differences, but these are more trivial such as the carburators have a different model number on them, as compared to S or SV's. The list goes on.
Gary Bobileff

 

I agree with this thinking. Anyway the bottom line is that 4892 is certified by the factory itself as being one of their Jotas, and if I wanted one that would be all that mattered to me.

 

You are so kind to share your awesome skill with us, thanks a lot Gary !

Fabrice Auxiètre holds all period factory statement for each of the 6x SV-J.

This SV-J is recorded as having been converted in 1974 at factory and not in July 1971 and according to him, is the less desirable SV-J because it was only recognised by factory as an SV-J only back in the 80's, not before.

You can trust him as he is the older SV-J owner, he owns #5100 since may 1979 and 2 others SV-J "passed through" his hands...

 

so has any of this info changed your mind on 4892?

 

Hi Gary,

Very interesting and important details here. It would be revealing to know what was the first color behind all these layers, on those thin aluminium bonnets..

Philippe M.
S2 7987
www.lamborghinimiura.com

 

Hi Olivier,

On the letter from the factory dated August 5 1974, in short it is written that Miura SV mod Jota chassis 4892 was built July 1971...

Philippe M.
S2 7987
www.lamborghinimiura.com

 

yes... built as an SV in July 1971, that's what I said...

 

+1.

Very interesting post by Gary BTW, thanks for the info.

 

It's often impossible to untangle these webs from the factory scribbles on a buildsheet. Then...there are the factory letters, which can be accurate, or not, depending on a number of factors.

Just a guess that no matter how much detective work goes into this -- by either side -- there will likely never a real answer.

my guess, my .02, and nothing else

Cheers,

Fred

 

In 2007 Gary was at this show with his client who had this car, the blue Miura and a very original low mileage Mangusta.

So are these the before pictures of car that's now up for sale?

http://www.conceptcarz.com/events/eventVehicle.aspx?carID=987&eventID=173&catID=1292

Bob S.

 

But recognized in 1974 by the factory as a SVJ, not in the 80s as you wrote...

Philippe M.
S2 7987
www.lamborghinimiura.com

 

Hi Bob,

Yes, it's Larry S. car before restoration.

Phililpe M.
S2 7987
www.lamborghinimiura.com

 

And one can well imagine the fortune the PO spent having it "customized" like that.
It didn't look like cheap modificiations. A strong financial case for sticking to stock for cars like this.

Bob S.

 

correct, that's the 1st "complaisant" factory statment... another one more completed was done in the '80s...

 

Well, heard of it but never seen it.. can you share with us? With these kind of things anything is possible but it's possible that everything is not definitive... hope you get what I mean :~)

Philippe M.
S2 7987
www.lamborghinimiura.com

 

Olivier:

Can you share this 2nd factory letter that you describe as "more completed" and "was done in the 80s"? Have you seen this letter yourself? Who is it written and signed by, and what date in the "80s" was it written? What does it say?

You state in an earlier post that the car was "only recognized by factory as an SV-J only back in 80s, not before". Well, clearly the 1974 letter proves your theory is wrong.

Also, if the other half-dozen or so SV-Js are considered real Jotas, your initial statement that "#4892 is not a real Jota" has no basis because this car is certified by Automobili Lamborghini SpA itself as being an "SV Jota" built by them.

Whether it was made in 1971 or 1974 (the year after Miura production ended) is largely immaterial in my opinion, as I consider the first half of 1974 to be the end of the era of the Miura, certainly its pre-Countach era, strictly speaking. An SV modified by the factory to Jota specs in the first half of 1974 is as "real" as any other SVJ, because in 1974 Countach production had barely begun with just 27 cars made the 2nd half of that year. Whether you believe the 1971 date (in which case it is the 1st SVJ built) or the 1974 date (in which case its the last SVJ built), the car is pretty special and it does come with factory confirming documentation, while some SVJs we have looked at do not.

 

The "first" factory letter is dated august 74, it doesn't mean the car was "rebuilt" as an SVJ in august 74, it could have been early 1974, or late 73, during the "production" period....

Philippe M
S2 7987
www.lamborghinimiura.com