I'm confused.... At 1:49, they talk about the "tubless" tires... Not 10 seconds later, it is stated that it has a "tube inflated inner tire"... Can someone explain what the difference is?
Yes, it has the outer low lbs tire, AND a seperate inner tube, almost like two tires..if the outer one goes, it still has the inner tube to continue traveling and get you back to base..like a modern day "fix a flat"
I love that they used the theme music from "Exploration Northwest" at the beginning of the video. I so remember that show when I was a kid!!! http://www.donmccunelibrary.com/sounds/xnwsong3.wav Mike
Coming along just fine..been a lot of work tracking down the orginal engineers, sales people, documents etc etc..getting a lot of Video and conversations with people that were involved with it back in the day... It will be presented in Monterey this year in sync with Lamborghini's 50th celebration event. I am looking forward to it very much.
when you say presented at pebble...which show are you eluding to? i would be surprised if this car would get an invite to the concours d'elegance.
Peter, Pebble Beach's entry criteria requires that a vehicle's provenance be clearly established & authenticated and Sandra Kasky Button does a great job establishing same. Quail Motorsport follows a similar criteria. Concorso Italiano is the most liberal of the three allowing pretty much anything that wishes to pay the entry fee. A lot of research has been ongoing by multiple parties & some well-known historians into the provenance of the "Cheetah". We are told early in this thread that its Lamborghini link is "the fact that Lamborghini, paid and commissioned for the design", but reports from the very engineers involved in the vehicle's design (all of whom are still around, and recall small details including possession of the original blueprints) indicate that it was the other way around, and in fact the creators of this vehicle approached & went after Lamborghini to have them become a benefactor or sponsor of the vehicle's production realization. As they have told a noted long-term historian, the Cheetah was already designed & built (based on the FMC design which the progenitors had been involved in) before Lamborghini ever heard of it. The Lamborghini badges & decal were applied in San Jose according to one of the vehicle's engineers, in preparation for the presentation to Lamborghini. It would be nice to see a document from Automobili Lamborghini SpA expressly requesting the design & production of the Cheetah to clear this discrepancy up. This is important because the MTI Cheetah is a USA-built vehicle with a USA engine and really has no link to Lamborghini other than being shipped to the factory & displayed on the Geneva show stand in hopes of an alliance between MTI & Lamborghini. Received wisdom indicates that Lamborghini agreed to put it on their show stand only for purposes of assessing if it would generate interest. As we all know there was no interest in the vehicle and the partnership never materialized, similar to the failed Lamborghni - BMW alliance for the M1. Its worth noting that the presentation of the Cheetah at Geneva prompted a lawsuit from FMC making MTI & Lamborghini joint defendants in a copyright infringement claim. None of this detracts from the fact that this is a cool off-road prototype, but given its known provenance, to call it a Lamborghini when it was built in the USA & exists with a USA motor is a stretch. Again, if documentation proves that it was specially commissioned by Lamborghini PRIOR to design & build, then I'm very happy to defer my conclusions & refer to it as the Lamborghini Cheetah. I can see why you made this post earlier in the thread. http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=141130840&postcount=51 When this vehicle was offered to myself & my client 6 months before anyone posting here heard of its existence, none of the aforementioned was the reason we passed on it. It was for the simple physical reasons that no title existed for it, and a request to show identification markings/stampings/plates was not met with any success. It was very important to us that we established that this was indeed the same vehicle that went to Geneva. We were simply unsuccessful in establishing the vehicle's identity, so we passed. Perhaps that has all been cleared up now, and if there is to be disclosure as requested by some, then we will all be able to share in same. Meanwhile, it is my belief that Lamborghini "helped themselves" to the concept, returned the vehicle to MTI, and post-Mimran came out with the LM001 prototype below. Image Unavailable, Please Login
The LMA prototype followed, also an all-Lamborghini creation, now a front engined vehicle for stability, and the real godfather of the production LM we know. Image Unavailable, Please Login
The LM004 prototype was the real Wild Thing, all 7 liters of its monolithic engine capable of propelling it just about anywhere! In the end the engineers calmed down and opted for the Countach engine in the first production vehicles. Image Unavailable, Please Login
A few point/counter points to think on: Quail is like all others, a for profit venue. There are multiple vehicles there each year that are NOT INVITED, but are displayed by various vendors and manufactures. I have NOT been invited to show the car there, that is correct. However I am also not the person that is taking care of where and when it is displayed...so at this point your guess iss as good as mine. It is quite obvious that the LM002 got its DNA from the Cheeta..however you want to look at it..is each persons own choice and decision. In Lamborghini's OWN factory release quarterly magazine they just put out, (I am out of town or I would copy and post the article...maybe someone else can)..they did a fairly center piece large article on the LM, featuring a very very nice Gold in color vehicle. Near then end of the article the reference the Cheeta as its footprint..but go on to put in print that the one and only know Cheeta was destroyed in a accident during testing in the desert. So it appears to me they have knowledge of and are recognizing the existence of such vehicle and the roll it played in the development of the LM. I do not understand that, as Joe says, that it is just a "cool off-road" vehicle, why he would have even have wasted his time with talking to any of his customers, the owners of the vehicle etc etc in the so called time it was offered to him prior to me??? I mean if you truly think it has no value in the Lamborghini world...why even bother trying to verify its numbers etc etc. and why do all this "after the fact" research now...just to come on he and poo poo it..a little self serving IMO. When the time comes, everyone can make their own minds up to it's value and historic relation to the Lamborghini brand...OR WE can just delete and erase all the thousands and thousands of words in print' with multiple pictures and years of reference to it being the "First" prototype Lamborghini LM...after all so it be said by Joe...so it should be written... I will also clearly state here, I have no intention of keeping this vehicle when complete. I will show it, display it and then it will be offered for sale. I am not a collector. I have no desire to put this on display and look at it...let someone else do that..and there are many that have expressed interest in it to date...but nothing will come of it till I have finished what I set out to do...which is restore as best that can be done, document it from start in San Jose to now...and let the buying public make the decision on the vehicle then.
Peter, As regards the LM004 (below), In 1983 the LM004 was fitted with a 7.3 litre (7257cc) gasoline engine with standard double overhead camshafts and six big Weber carburetors. Designed for offshore powerboat racing the 7 litre engine was thought to be too heavy so the decision was made to utilize the Countach 5 litre. The LM004 was tested by Britain's Autocar in May '86. To answer your question, even though it is said to no longer exist, I believe it does, just like so many important Lamborghinis. Case in point the '65 Turin Salon Miura chassis which was said to have been crushed - we found it intact. I'm not sure about the LM001 & the LMA though, those may in fact have been destroyed. Image Unavailable, Please Login
I have an interested collector and we can work a deal if you can produce the necessary documentation that verifies your assertion that Lamborghini commissioned the design & build of the Cheetah. We would need to also verify that this vehicle is in fact the same one sent to Geneva. Best,
i too think the mti cheetah is a very cool and clearly robust off-roader but short of the tamaya model box calling it a "lamborghini cheetah" , to me that is where it ends. i understand that the cheetah lends some styling to the 002 however that is similar to comparing an early volks beetle to a 76 930 turbo. maybe that is even a stretch? my question is how is this vehicle relevant to the lambo 50th and who asked for ity to be shown for the event? did lamborghini ask for it to be part of the celebration or was it volunteered? again, a very unique pc. but i just wonder how value will be created in it being a lambo? i suppose it being invited to the event by lamborghini will be a solid start!!! in any case, have fun!! pcb
Once complete and all documentation made available we can talk...but it won't be till after the show in August. I must also honor a current FROR on the completed project as well. I will ad Joe is correct about the Lamborghini insignias being added to the vehicle for the Geneva motor show...(see post #30 of this thread where I speak of it) For the most part, what Joe has posted is somewhat correct, however my/our research and documentation differ on timeline of events order...as well as there is documented evidence from the original first hand people of this project of a payment in the amount of $250,000.00 US funds paid by Lamborghini in a contract negotiated in a local Hotel in San Francisco back in the day at the start of this project. The facts of how, when and why Lamborghini was involved with this vehicle will of course be a matter of "interpretation" and any possible buyer/collector will have to take it and place their value on it. No matter how you look at it, at least IMO, it was and is a part of the Lamborghini history..the depth of involvement between Lamborghini and this vehicle will always be a matter of discussion. Each will have to value it on their own after presentation of ALL documentation.
I don't understand this at all. http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=141119762&postcount=1 Here you clearly state you OWN the vehicle, so what prevents you from giving full disclosure as is being requested by so many to simply help all understand this piece of history better?
What I said is completely different from what you said about the insignias. In fact its the opposite. Here is what you said: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=141123922&postcount=30 You state that "Lamborghini" applied the insignias without permission. That's not correct per the actual project engineer who was recently interviewed face-to-face on this psecific issue. He confirms the insignias were applied in SAN JOSE California before Lamborghini ever saw this vehicle.
Yes, I own the vehicle...but as I have stated, I have an agreement with a first in line not to discuss certain issues...it is what it is..
Actually, I think everything I have posted is correct - although I will happily defer to history anytime when authenticated documents prove otherwise. I must say at this point that the investigation into this vehicle's background has been exhaustive, and I feel sure that there are others who have expended as much effort in this regard as you have, if not, more. Your version of events is in fact contradicted by what has been recounted by the principals. http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=141120037&postcount=3 The story of Lamborghini offering money completely contradicts what the principals have recently recounted. In act, I would love to see any Automobili Lamborghini SpA letters or documents, bank transfers etc regarding this because the point is t does make a HUGE difference if Lamborghini commissioned this vehicle. So far, the evidence we have uncovered tells us that unfortunately this is not the case. If you have something to refute that, inquiring minds would love to carefully review it and make a determination as to what happened here.
