The Cheeta LIVES!!

Todd you are correct, the 1981 LM001 prototype had a 180 hp 5.9L (360 ci) AMC-built V8, a 5896 cc engine, as presented in the vehicle at the 1981 Geneva Auto Show (alongside the new Jalpa).

This is stated by 2 noted Lamborghini Historians close to the factory at the period, Rob De La Rive Box, and factory associate/official works biographer Dr Stefano Pasini. The engine's specification is published in full Stefano Pasini's acclaimed book on the history of the firm, Automobili Lamborghini 1963 - 1998, and many other places besides.

Additionally, I have corroborating information that explains that the reason an AMC engine was used was because of the French family Mimran's connections with controlling shareholder at the time, Renault.

In case anyone is not sure who Stefano Pasini is, here is a link:
I libri che ho scritto

The factory have hired him more than once to write their own history.

The published specifications of the engine used in the LM001 are as follows:

Type-AMC V8
Capacity-5900cc
Compression-8.4:1

 

The answer is no, and Raymond's assertions have to do with how the company's history was affected, as recounted by Dr Stefano Pasini in his book (below). In the end, there are others that claim that Lamborghini at least stole the 'idea' from the hapless project, if nothing else. Lets just say it wasn't a shining moment in the history of the fabled sports car manufacturer from Sant Agata.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Since you mention my name: Bear this in mind - sometimes in business, it is wise to nominate an unidentifiable third-party to carry out contacts &/or inquiries on your behalf. I find you tend to receive a more objective & unbiased response when the source of the inquiry remains a neutral party or one whose name is not known to you.

If by "builder" you are referring to Rodney Pharis, he has been contacted by many people in the past year in regards to verification of this vehicle, more than one of them on my behalf.

Furthermore, the real issue some are having is not so much the authenticity of the material he has (that is easy to ascertain), its is whether this vehicle is the same vehicle as that which was shown at Geneva. The physical burden of proof is, and always will be, on those that make that claim.

The truth is, if you read this thread from start to finish, it is littered with contradictions, errors, and... well, for example: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/141158716-post63.html

Clearly you state these are "teaser update pics as we move along with this project..". Turns out, they are pics from the period, and there is no way you did not know that, or, at the very least should have known that. That is not even the wheel that is available. How do you explain that? You have been asked, but have still not answered.

 

Peter,

Thank you for reminding us why I obviously have any interest in this vehicle.

Please allow me to tell the story in my own words:

In November 2011, one sunny Southern California day, I was outside in the garden pruning my wife's roses, when I was interrupted by a phone call. I noticed that it was a Michigan phone number. The gentleman who introduced himself as Carl Van R----- was not known to me, so as I always do when I receive a phone call from someone I don't know, I sat down & took notes so I could do some research later. The caller introduced himself as a person in partnership with someone in possession of the 1977 Cheetah. He stated that his purpose of calling me was the fact that he had been on the internet, and he had concluded that I was the party that could help him & his partner sell the aforementioned Cheetah and realize its true potential. Fair enough, I thought. I asked the gentleman to send me some pictures of the alleged Cheetah, any historical documents, records & receipts, and of course, the car's Title and/or ownership documentation. This is my standard request for any car, by the way. Before I hung up, I specifically recalled emphasizing to the caller to ensure that the pictures included any & all identifying markings, stampings, numbers & ID plates. I made it clear that our conversation was pointless without unimpeachable documented corroboration, and I made him understand that this was even more true of a historical vehicle of considerable renown, such as he was suggesting he wished to market.

A week went by. Nothing. I decided it wasn't a complete hoax, so I decided to follow up and call. Yes, he was working on the pictures. I repeated what I would need to see in the pictures, plus, all the other forms of corroboration I'd need to see as mentioned above.

Another week went by. Nothing. Then suddenly one day, I notice an e-mail with half-a-dozen pictures as shown below. Here is the e-mail:
On Nov 14, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Carl Van R----- wrote:
Joe,
Here are a few photos of the finished Lamborghini Cheetah prototype. Feel free to share them with whom you wish.
The Cheetah will be for sale. Please let me know how you would proceed and at what value.
Keep in mind that this vehicle does not exist according to all internet information.
I have verified this is the only one in existance according to the the designer who I have had many conversations with. His name is Rodney Pharis and he was president of MTI when they partnered with Lamborghini on this project.
Please note that some information found about the Cheetah is noy true. One being it was made of fiberglass. It is steel and aluminium.
The Cheetah runs great and has 1320 miles on its original Chrysler 360.
Hope to hear from you soon.
Carl
616-836-xxxx

These are the same pics that are now on Lambocars (Mark Smeyers & I have confirmed we got them from the same source, you can see his watermark on them), and have been supplied to at least half-a-dozen other people known to me. Pics of a brown truck, that did not look exactly like the Cheetah to me. Close, but, the wheel design was different, the rear overhang different, wheels not centered in he rear wheel well, rear track width significantly wider than original, and these were observations I made from a brief review of the images by comparing them to a significant library of the original thing which I possess. What to do?

So, I called up the Michgan gentleman again. I said to him that I never got any pics of identifying markings, stampings, numbers & ID plates, and I never got any Title and/or ownership documentation, historical documents or records. How come? The gentleman assured me that he was working diligently on the aforementioned items.

I thought that it was weird, that someone should seek me out & call me up, ask me to help them market something significant, and upon requesting specific items which he agreed were essential, he then fails to address any of them. Strange. I remember thinking: "Something stinks in Denmark, and its not the Cheese". Maybe my requirements were too much? Oh well, I thought, this is no different from the guy who keeps writing me telling me he has Countach number one, but pics show it to be some kind of LP400S of little significance, and whenever I ask for corroboration there is precious little in response. I get this type of stuff fairly often, and I have to remember I have some extremely wealthy clients who pay me a lot of money to be super-skeptical. I mention this so there is some understanding that without the basic requirements of due diligence, my acceptance of this vehicle was a non-starter for me or any of my clients, even though I had one party in mind that I thought it would be a good fit for if I could verify its identity.

A few more weeks go by. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Then, just as I had forgotten about all this, less than 2 months later, this thread was started by the OP, and suddenly all the questions are answered and will be revealed later.

Given this background, I think its clear why I should have any interest in this vehicle, whatever its identity. Now you all know the full story of my involvement, the best I can tell it.

Ladies & Gentlemen, please carry on with the Cheetah Show.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I think you have mixed up your vehicles!

I think you are speaking of the Cheetah. The LM001 is not the Cheetah. Are you aware what the LM001 is?

It was built by Lamborghini at Sant Agata under Mimran in 1981 and is a genuine Lamborghini.

 

L@@K GI Joe fans cobra had it for many years, sat in Pops garage with the Mach 5, found by Alfred who needed parts for the bat cave car,, really its stuff of pure FUN and Yes Its LAMBORGHINI they paid for it or the courts have yet to decide that I guess. The matter of fact is there is a Cheetah Loose its now on my bucket list to get a ride in. Oh and I have ridden in the original Batmobile that just sold so there...

ROCK on peeps this is good reading for sure.. Cant wait to see it and really ROY I WANT A RIDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I will even pay the gas how is that for you.

 

Thank you for approving my story.

Best,

 

Very simple: because it was conceived, designed, and built by Lamborghini under the roof of its own factory at Sant Agata. We are not talking about outsourced later production.

 

The universally-accepted expectation of the expression "teaser update pics" would be current progress shots. Not reproduced pics from the original period. The latter would be blatantly misleading when combined with the words "teaser update pics".

 

Lets stay on topic. No need to get personal. Many people have questioned post 63 http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/141158716-post63.html as being intentionally misleading. Lets give you the benefit of the doubt as you say it was not. If anyone else reading this thinks "teaser update pics" can mean period pics from 30 plus years ago, please say so, and then we'll be learning something new. I hope you can at least see how many are concerned...

As for books, as you can see in the Ferrari Supercar section, my new book on the 288 GTO just went to the publisher this past Friday. 5 years of work. Man, what a relief!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Again, we are getting off-topic. The LM001 compared to the Cheetah does not have its identity questioned by anyone, its heritage is all Lamborghini, that's all I'm saying. You didn't realize I was talking about the LM001 and you responded "100% correct" so, are you saying the Cheetah had an AMC engine at Geneva? Just curious.

 

Can you share images that show any & all identifying markings, stampings, numbers & ID plates that show this is the Geneva vehicle?

Can you share any & all historical documents, records & receipts that show same?

Can you show the video too?

People would be very interested & appreciative. Lots of assertions & claims, very little to actually back anything up, I hope you understand this.

 

So far, all visible parts shown on this vehicle do not match with the Geneva vehicle. So the only parts that could still be possibly connected to the Geneva vehicle is the frame (not including the roll cage) and engine. I will not include the suspension because of the much wider track. I do not see that as 85% of the total vehicle but maybe there is more under there than we know. But there is just no way that you can state that any of the body pieces, roll cage, front and rear bumpers, gas can mounts, wheels, suspension or pedals are from the Geneva vehicle. The only external pieces I see that match the original is the tail lights and light grills (chromed from black).

 

+1