LeMans Cars

Awesome Shaguar, D Types rule

 

D-types are great - very nice indeed. They are so small in person! I like the C-type very much as well, but my true love is the XK-SS. Why do I always like the rarest cars? I saw an XK-SS in person - I think it was at Gregor Fisken in London - many years ago, and... WOW.

 

Are you sure of the chassis number? (I can't read the plate.) XKD-574 was destroyed in the fire at the Jaguar factory in February 1957. I hate to start another one of "those" threads, but the chassis did not survive.

 

I still don't get some of you Americans thinking. The car has a genuine D-type chassis, a genuine D-type engine a genuine D-type hood ... and it is a replica???

Why does a car have to have the same engine it left the factory with to NOT be considered a replica? Remember a D-type engine is simply a 3.8 straight 6 engine as fitted to the MkII Jaguar with a wide angle cylinder head. Some had fuel injection fitted and later on the racing E-types (I think) had alloy blocks. But I am pretty sure a D-type is still the production based block ... thus any old Jaguar 3.8 litre engine is valid for a genuine D-type as a replacement.

If a car has a genuine engine replaced with another genuine engine made by the original maker it does not become a replica. It just is not the same as the build sheet for the car, that is all.

If you buy a 360 Ferrari and the engine blows and the cheapest way of fixing the car is to buy a brand new engine from Ferrari and replace the original engine ... that car is STILL a 360 Ferrari and not a replica. It is just a 360 Ferrari with a new engine.

Back to this D-type. If the body has been remade then the body is a replica but that does not make the whole car a replica, simply the car has been rebuilt with new body, replicating the original as close as possible.

You Americans make it seem that if the tyres are replaced the WHOLE car becomes a replica ... crazy. It is still a genuine car with just new tyres.

Cars are made out of many parts, to keep cars going you have to replace some of those parts. Manufacturers of cars even help us by making replacement parts (these are called spare parts, and if you go down to your local Ford, etc. dealership they even have staff working in the spare parts department). They are thus 100% genuine and original parts made for that make of car that you own ... and using them does not turn your car into a replica.

Pete's so confused with the American viewpoint ...
EDIT: The interesting thing about this car is again it was reported to being destroyed.

I know the car that did win the '55 race only actually raced once as the same collection of parts. This car was then hacked about and used as a test rig for the E-type development (I believe). Many years ago somebody clicked on how special the chassis was and then went about putting all the parts that it raced at Le Mans in 55' with back together ... now I doubt whether they got everything dead right, but lets say the engine was reunited with the same chassis, etc. Thus this was another car considered lost ... and now found again

 

I thought all D-type's exhausts exited out the side? ... or though they might have been more enclosed by the body work ... ?

Pete's rambling

 

Pete:

Here's a different word for it then.

Bitsa.

As in, bits of this and bits of that...

 

What engine number is the car running? The chassis plate shows E2085-9 which was the original lump in XKD 574.

 

Like that term and far better than the incorrect term of replica. Replica means that is 100% a fake (have a look at a dictionary term for the word).

Yep that D-type is a bitsa

Pete's happy

 

with all my sheet metal and aluminum panel beating experience, it would be great to find someone who is restoring a car like this and offer to help. whatever the Jag is , it looks nice to me, thanks for the pics.

 

Pete,
Some americans are very anal. As I'm sure are some australians. You just have to be tolerant of some people. I really don't care if the chassis number was destroyed in the factory, or what chassis # the car has. This is a beautiful car, and jaguar just doesn't make them like they used to.
Jim

 

Wayne,

Either your eyes are really good, or mine are really bad -- and I suspect the latter. I glad you can see the numbers, because I absolutely cannot.

Pete: as you are so taken with bluntness and honesty, I'll tell you frankly that if your reading comprehension and knowledge ever come within shouting distance of your opinions you might be worth listening to -- so far you're not. Most serious historians regard the chassis as the key ingredient of the car...and contrary to your statement, this does not appear to be an original. The destruction of the original is well-documented. My own opinion -- based only on a guess and an interest in D-types -- is that this is probably a Lynx tub. Lynx Engineering is not Jaguar, so if I'm right then I have my own word for this car, presented as the real thing.

That interest in D-types, by the way, dates from the mid-1950s, when I worked during high school summer break for the Jaguar distributor in the Midwest U.S. The owner raced two D-types, and finished third at Sebring in one, not bad for an essentially amateur driver. I followed the careers of a few D-types from that era, including one I personally know was destroyed and scrapped in New Orleans; not even the chassis tag survived. Friends later went to the junkyard and confirmed that there NOTHING is left of the car. Seems odd then that it is now living in Europe, fully restored. One has to ask, "From what?" (And this is far from the only such case.)

If a chassis plate and an odd tub and bodywork and engine from other cars can be considered as XKD-574 by Jaguar historians, so be it. Andrew Whyte was finishing the definitive history of Jaguar race cars before his untimely death, and I believe I'll go by what he wrote about 574.

(Edited to add for the benefit of jimangle and a couple of others: with the values of these cars, these differences are quite important -- being anal has nothing to do with it. You're telling me you enjoy looking at the cheap Rembrandt copy on my wall every bit as much as the original.)

O.G.

 

Speaking of LeMans cars last night I drove J6 up to a Party with Champion Racing. JJ Letto, Waltor, Dave, etc. were there as was their RS8 which will be running this weekend at Lime Rock. I had a long talk with Rod Baymaster (Audi Sports) and showed him my car. It was very interesting to compare it to the RS8. The Rs8 is one of the greatest endurance racers of all time and you can buy one. Humm. (Asking 675K) What do you guys thinK?

 

Do it Jim. Let's see, $675k for a proven race car that is the most successful car recently at Le Mans, or 600k Euro for something that hasn't been entered into competition and won't be homologated for street use.

If you really want to have fun, get an EXP Speed 8 and have the full Audi set.

 

The speed 8 is IMO one of the most beautiful as well. Now that's one VW should put on the street instead of the New Bug. Driving J6 at night is a trip. Even the low beams light up the night. The high beams " turn the night time into the day"
Best
PS. Final proofing coming along.

 

Help for OG's eyes.

 

Erik.

Oh. I was looking at the data plate with all the glare -- didn't even see the other numbers. Old guys, especially this old guy, sometimes need a LOT of coffee first thing in the morning.

And Jim, you know there's someone in your area who owns an R8, as well as a great collection of recent LM cars? E-mail me if you aren't familiar with him.

Thanks.

 

Pete - although I generally concur w/ your musings, I think your way off base w/ this one. You cannot damn those of us who have a problem w/ giving a car a specific s/n when there appears to be ample evidence that it was completely destroyed in 1957.

For example, if some enterprising person were able to get their hands on a Ferrari tipo 111, 2-liter 4-cylinder motor, a tipo 510 chassis and have a Scaglietti sports racing-type body made, that person would have a beautiful car that generally meets the specifications for a 1955 Series II 500 Mondial. Good for him - he has a bitsa that will be a lot of fun. No foul.

BUT, if he also stamps the serial plate and telaio w/ 0512MD, then he has taken the identity of a S.II 500 Mondial that was completely destoyed (cut in half when it hit a house and killed the driver) in June 1955. He is calling the car something that it is not - it is not 0512 and never was. THAT's where we have a problem.

Disclaimer: I don't know jack about Jaguars (other than haveing briefly owned a 1972 XKE v-12 that liked to flood) and have nothing educated to say either way about the beautiful car in the pictures above.

 

I agree with Old Guy (that you, Fred L.?) that this car is a Lynx or similar "reconstruction". There are enough details about the car (trans tunnel being one, exhausts another) that are just a bit "off", and all the shiny alloy inner panels suggest recreation. I own one unpainted aluminum bodied car and keeping it shiny is a lot of work. I doubt that the owner goes after the spare tire door inner with a buffer but then, who knows.

There are a couple of D-types in this situation. I believe (but cannot say for sure because my memory is imperfect) that Terry Larson actually bought a SECOND D-type that claimed the same chassis number as his car, and combined the REAL parts to make one real car out of them. I know that the ex-Masten Gregory C-Type was made (by Gregory) by putting two crashed C-types together.

Jim, if you bought one of the Audi's and got papers from the factory and the team, at least in 40 years you wouldn't have to endure the abuse on the internet. On the other hand, there will surely be some wag that disputes it.

 

OG:

No problem. The time difference between us means I was on my last cup of coffee when you were on your first. BTW, if I remember correctly, you do make really good coffee.

Glad I could help.

Erik

 

If that's the car on page 112 of Phillip Porter's "Jaguar Sports Racing Cars";
then you'll enjoy the last sentence of the caption next to the picture of the burnt out ruins of the car, consisting of the chassis, drivetrain and engine: "As far as is known, this D-type has not yet been rebuilt. . ."

BTW, the dust jacket says Porter "lives in a Tudor farmhouse in Worcester****e"