saw this over on moparts :drool5: :drool5: :yesnod:
http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=5591860&an=0&page=0
Thanks for the link...bk
very cool :drool5: :drool5: :drool5: :drool5: :drool5:
http://www.gogearhead.com/69Daytonaracecar/index.html
Quote from: nascarxx29 on November 08, 2009, 07:27:36 PM
http://www.gogearhead.com/69Daytonaracecar/index.html
:coolgleamA: good link :drool5: ............... :2thumbs:
Thanks for the link...
If I was to ever duplicate/clone out a race Daytona, that would be it... It's SOO SOO cool.... :2thumbs:
Troy
This is my favorite wing aero paint scheme. I told mom that if we got sick of Marty being pink we could paint him up as this or the Marcis car and save the signatures on our yellow wing.
The history on this particular car seems to be slowly being rewritten.
Quote from: Aero426 on November 09, 2009, 09:58:12 AM
The history on this particular car seems to be slowly being rewritten.
I kinda thought the same thing too :rotz:
Quote from: hemigeno on November 09, 2009, 09:58:59 AM
Quote from: Aero426 on November 09, 2009, 09:58:12 AM
The history on this particular car seems to be slowly being rewritten.
I kinda thought the same thing too :rotz:
please enlighten us :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
Doug knows a lot more than I do about the situation, but suffice it to say that the "race" history of this car in Daytona trim might be hard to verify if the car was being used by Chrysler as part of the 1970 new car show circuit. Cotton definitely built the car, but for whom and for what purpose - that's what is being re-written.
:Twocents:
So that car and this one in this pic that is said to be from the 71 Chicago auto show could be the same?
Use the slider thing daytona is in the middle.
The only issue is the claim of 1970 race winning history and whether it actually raced as a Daytona or not. Once again, I'll make the comparison that a P51 Mustang that got shot at in WW II is going to be worth more than a P51 built at the end of the war never firing a shot.
Chrysler commissioned Cotton Owens to build a show Daytona which was used on the 1970 show circuit (Chicago, Detroit, etc.) What donor car was used in the build (new, used, crashed) is not known. Photos exist of it at Chicago in 1970, and as we now see at a 1971 show as well. The fellow (Andy) who hauled it for Chrysler and took care of it at the shows is still around. He says he went through a few clutches in it. The thing also has a choke on it which a race car would not have. Andy's position has been that if it was not on display at a show, the car was in a warehouse in storage during 1970.
After Chrysler was done with it, it was donated to the Darlington museum in the early 70's. Cotton retreived the car around 2004 and subsequently sold it. It has now changed hands again to Canepa - he got a pretty fair deal on it at auction.
A little bird just whispered in my ear to look at the trunk photo. It has street Daytona wing braces, which you would never see on a race car. The track cars had tubular braces. Also do not see the wing safety cable as mandated by rule in 1970. Where is the rules mandated drive shaft loop? No car would get on track without that, but a show car would not need it.
Side glass was not legal at the time of the 1970 Southern 500. If it was rebuilt at the end of 1970 as claimed, it makes no sense to put the full glass and inside door sheet metal back in. That's a lot of work for a show car.
Make no mistake, it is a real Cotton Owens built Daytona. It's a fantastic car. My opinion is that it is not possible this car is the Southern 500 race winner.
💩
:popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
Quote from: moparstuart on February 12, 2010, 10:44:54 PM
:popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
Pass the butter please Stuart :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
:popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 12, 2010, 10:25:21 PM
Secondly, this same car was the first car to exceed 200mph in a NASCAR sanctioned race - at Talladega. However, for it to be an "official" record, it has to be done with timing equipment, run both directions, etc. Therefore, Chrysler engineers built the #88 car and set out to "officially" claim the 200mph record for the recordbooks. This is all well documented on the cottonowens.com website. They used Buddy Baker as the driver because he was Cotton's driver and therefore a "factory" driver. Chrysler promoted the 200mph record with the #6 car, because it was an actual race car, and indeed because it did break the 200mph barrier. This is also well documented by Chrysler and you can even find an ad from that era on the website - http://cottonowens.com/photos3.html
Welcome back to DC.com
Could you provide us with any newspaper or print media report from the period that states that the #6 Daytona achieved a lap of over 200 mph during a race at Talladega in 1970? A lap over 200 in race trim would be a pretty big achievement and would certainly be publicized. I checked your website and did not see anything to support this claim. The Champion Spark Plug ad simply shows one of the #6 Daytonas with the speed of the #88 test car puiblished.
Your above statement infers that the the #6 Daytona set a race record BEFORE the #88 Daytona set the 200.447 official record - and that the #88 was built in reaction to formally set the record. That is not how it happened. The #88 set the record three weeks before any racing took place at Talladega in 1970.
💩
That would not make sense to alter the wing braces,safety cable,driveshaft loop and side glass all for the sake of showing the car as a race car? It would seem that to have left those items alone in order to show the alleged race heritage that the car had would have made it more authentic to show off? :shruggy:
Stranger things have happened I guess and to semi quote Joe Dirt..."What makes the suregrip in a Dodge work???...I dont know...it just does"!!! :icon_smile_big:
Don't take this the wrong way because I am NOT the guy who is qualified to comment on the heritage of this car one way or the other, but, something I am qualified to comment on is that using auction companies and collector car brokers write ups as proof of anything is pointless. They just rehash what the consignor tells them to and they rarely if ever check that it is factual.
💩
As I said, I wasn't commenting one way or the other just saying that the other sources you used wouldn't be my first offer as evidence. Now the sources you just listed would be ones that I would consider as having more weight.
Again....
Whether it's real or not, cheap or expensive, his or hers,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, It's just plain bad#$@ looking !!!!!!
Troy
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 13, 2010, 07:58:25 PM
I do have a program from Cotton's induction to the IMHOF in 2008, and his bio states "first car to exceed 200mph in a NASCAR sanctioned event."
I also have the original Stock Car Racing issue from August 1970 which depicts the #6 Dodge under large a large "200" - "Buddy Baker Tells it Like it is at 200 mph" - shown on the website at http://cottonowens.com/stockcarracing.html
So if the Talladega IMHOF is willing to state that as a fact, and Stock Car Racing also - then it would pretty much have to be accepted as fact, don't you think? And Chrysler as well who promoted it. None of these respected entities would depict the #6 car with the 200mph record unless it actually happened - otherwise that would be just a tad deceptive.
The August 1970 issue of Stock Car Racing that you mentioned does not say ANYWHERE that Buddy ran 200 in the #6. The cover is indeed deceptive unless you read the caption inside the front cover. It states the photo is from the 1969 Texas 500, and that the 200 numbers are "emblematic" (their words) that he was the first man to run 200 in a stock car. However, the actual interview in the magazine clearly states Buddy ran the #88 test car to get the record. There are no published professionally taken color photos of the #88 on the record run. It would seem that SCR used an existing photo of Buddy's #6 from the Texas race as a matter of conveinience.
As to the credibility of the IMHOF statement, I would ask "Who supplied the bio information?" That statement would have to originate from some published report or press release from the period.
Again, do you have anything in print from 1970 that states when and at what speed the the #6 went 200 in a race?
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 13, 2010, 06:44:46 PM
This is a great comprehensive story of the car...
http://www.rmauctions.com/FeatureCars.cfm?SaleCode=RW09&CarID=r081&fc=0
Owens and Baker started 1970 off strong, starting their Daytona qualifying race from the pole and finishing second to Charlie Glotzbach but an ignition problem put them out of the 500 itself. Problems dogged them at Rockingham and Atlanta but Baker in the #6 Charger Daytona were the class of the field in the Alabama 500 at Talladega on April 12, leading 101 laps until a spin and a fire put them out of the race.
It was in this race as Baker was leading the field that he accomplished the feat which will forever make this car famous: recording the first NASCAR race lap at over 200 mph.
The accomplishment was heavily promoted by Chrysler, even more than the continuing successes of the Chargers and Superbirds, because it was a singular accomplishment. It led inevitably to another of Bill France's competition building innovations, the carburetor restrictor plate, which has forever limited superspeedway speeds to well below 200 mph.
Baker drove Owens' #6 Charger Daytona to a second place finish in the Firecracker 400 at Daytona in July, to fourth at Atlanta in August, sixth in Michigan on August 16, fifth at the Talladega 500 August 23.
With this car Baker then won the Southern 500 at Darlington on September 7 by a lap over second place Bobby Isaac. On the same weekend Cotton Owens was inducted into the National Motorsports Press Association Hall of Fame at Darlington.
The auction company publishes what the owner represents to them, with a minimum of fact checking. RM originally publicized that this car was the one Baker set the 200.447 mark with. When the owner of the real #88 car informed them of the error, they amended that to the 200 mph race lap statement. Aside from that this is a wonderful description of a wonderful car, how is one to know this particular car is THE one that ran all these events, as Cotton Owens Garage had more than one Daytona. I believe the gist of the auction description and races it ran was similar to the one you used to sell the car on Ebay several years ago.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 13, 2010, 09:42:33 PM
Why don't you call Mr. Cary Estes, the author of the article written for the International Motorsports Hall of Fame:
http://cottonowens.com/IMHOF08.html
Mr. Estes is a freelance writer and press release writer who has done work for the IMHOF. Reading Mr Estes 2008 press release would lead me to believe he is referring to the 200.447 run in the #88. Back in 1970, Chrysler issued press releases of the #88 run were issued "from Cotton Owens Garage", even though COG really had nothing to do with the record run other than "loaning" the driver. It would be easy for Mr Estes almost 40 years later in 2008 to not know that the #88 was not actually prepared at COG, and get this wrong in a modern article. Although a very accomplished writer, Mr. Estes is a young man, and probably not old enough to have first hand information on the subject.
Also, Mr. Estes does not differentiate whether Baker's record was set during a race or the Chrysler test that the #88 ran. He simply says it took place at the "NASCAR sanctioned event." Chrysler and the #88 were there with the blessing of NASCAR. If the #88 set an "official" record, how could it not be NASCAR sanctioned?
The August issue of Stock Car Racing (page 15) does make mention of the fastest race lap speeds in the Alabama 500 at Talladega. Since you have this copy yourself, you can follow along. It clearly says that Baker turned the fastest competition lap in NASCAR history at 198.260 prior to lap 12. For those who do not have the copy, here is the paragraph from SCR.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/Mustang%20Parts/TMP47.jpg)
Furthur along in the same page, it reports that Cale Yarborough eclipsed Baker's one lap race record speed with a 199.080, on lap 22. Bob Carey's excellent 6 page race report makes no mention of any 200 mph race lap, but does mention Baker's spectacular fireball DNF with a blown engine. Since Carey was tuned in to the fact that record laps were occuring, he would have reported anything that broke 200.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/Mustang%20Parts/TMP48.jpg)
The April 1970 Alabama 500 at Talladega was the last chance for a 200 mph race lap. When the teams returned for the Talladega 500 later in the year, speeds were considerably slower due to the mandated removal of all side glass, and the implementation of the carburetor restrictor plate. The pole speed in the second race was down to 186 mph.
Game, set , match.
Doug (Aero 426)is one of the most knowledgeable wing car guys I have ever met. He really knows his stuff.
And, as is often the case, he knows it better than the folks who actually lived the history (not to mention their grand kids). Modern vintage NASCAR enthusiasts like Doug pay slavish attention to details and facts that guys who actually raced the cars never took pains to remember. The cars folks like Mr. Owens raced were simply tools of the trade and taking the time to memorize rivet patterns or welds just wasn't part of the equation. But, the Devil is in the details. Details like the presence of windows in Canepa's car and the lack of Grand National spec support stands or safety lanyard for the wing speak volumes. Those details strongly suggest show car rather than (winged, at least) race car--let alone Southern 500 winner. The only real way to know for sure is comparison photos of the actual Southern 500 car from the day that match critical and unique features on Canepa's car today. Memories just don't suffice--even first generation recollections. Race cars back then were not built to cookie cutter standards (as they are today in NASCAR). Each chassis was in many ways unique and represented the evolution of knowledge that each team had about what it took to win. Most teams in the 70s seldom had more than three cars in a given season and if they were all lined up and looking pretty they would vary greatly in detail from car to car. So until convincing proof of this sort appears, the Canepa car, while still way cool and a veritable time machine, cannot be conclusively said to be the Southern 500 car. And it certainly is not the/a record setting 200 mph lap car.
💩
BTW - any questions should be directed to Cotton himself. He'd be glad to reminisce with you and he can set the matter straight once and for all. His phone number is posted on the website. Give him a call. I'm sure you'll find something to disbelieve even if you hear it directly, because Doug didn't say so.
💩
It's called research. I'm sure everyone has "misremembered" something only to catch it (or get caught) later on. A perfect example played out right here on this site when a new member asked if his car could be an original Dick Landy drag racer (after contacting DLI and was told that Dick Landy never raced a 70 Charger). Other members started posting pictures, race results, and magazine articles of said car. It was enough for Landy to rethink his position and inspect the car in person which verified it.
I realize that race teams usually had several cars and over the years facts get blurred (purely because of the sheer number of different things going on - including rule changes). For a guy whose passion is studying race history (especially a specific car or race), documenting and disseminating information is a way of life. Photographs, video, and documented eyewitness accounts are an invaluable part of preserving history (the way it really happened). I don't think any of the questions that Doug asked have been sufficiently answered. I build web sites for a living and I could make one say anything that I want. It doesn't make it true - or an infallible source of information. If there are some documents to set the record straight I'd love to see them. Perhaps, a public discussion (like this) could turn up some information that was thought to be lost? That is, if the people involved can remain amicable and "play nice".
Troy
That's why it's so important for someone to finish Cotton's biography while paperwork and photos are still accessible. Just going by word of mouth makes it too easy for things to get fuzzy and I think we all suffer from "the older I get the faster I was" syndrome.
Thats why its important to interview and compile and share info from these living resources. :Twocents:
💩
The presence of the windows in Canepa's car is very significant. As Doug has pointed out, by the running of the 1970 Southern 500, NASCAR had outlawed the use of side glasss. This is not in doubt and not subject to forty year old recollections. It is just a fact, like water is wet. As Doug has pointed out, putting windows --back in--Canepa's car would have been a big job. NASCAR cars of the day featured sheet alloy pop riveted in place of flamable stock door panels. Putting windows back in Canepa's car after the Southern 500, as is suggested, would have required drilling out scores of rivets, removing the panels, installing full window glass and regulators and roof rail weather stripping, and then re-riveting the panels back in place. No small job, that Why would one do that---since--as is without dispute---side glass was outlawed by NASCAR forever more and a car with side glass could not have passed tech inspection? That kind of defies logic. Could have happened, but not likely. The use of a street wing and wing supports, as mentioned also strongly suggests that Canepa's car did not race as configured. That doesn't mean it was never a race car. Just not a winged Daytona, or at least not the Southern 500 car. The term "show car" may be at the root of some of the misunderstanding. Dedicated, purpose built show cars were years in the future in 1970. When a show car was needed in those days, often a tired old race chassis--that had seen better days--would get fluffed up for the purpose. The pictures in this thread of the #6 show car (with windows) fit the bill. And, the car pictured appears identical to Canepa's car in fender configuration, too. Coincidence? As mentioned, the ONLY way to document exactly what race an old stock car was actually raced at is generally photos from that race that show details that match a present day chassis. The teams just didn't keep records of that nature for any given chassis. Not even Holman Moody--agruably the largest racing concern in that day. Fuzzy recollections just don't serve. Even first hand ones. Based on Doug's research as posted ffrom period magazine reports, the 200 mph issue is resolved.
The car is still a neat piece. And one that I'd love to have sittingin my garage. In light of the spec racers that pass for stock cars today, it is a precious piece of racing history and a direct connection to days that are no more. More's the pity.
I'm not claiming to know enough to call anyone wrong here, but - is it feasible that maybe they just rolled down the glass for a while?
NASCAR wasn't as hardheaded about precision-following the rules in those days. It stands to reason that as long as raising up the glass was totally outlawed, then the window glass & mechanisms would disapear soon enough anyway as teams rebuilt their cars from wrecks.
Just a thought.
💩
💩
It would seem that there are more things that point to the car not being the actual #6 track car than the opposite. Just it being the show car is cool enough though and I dont think anybody disputes that. :cheers:
(http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj215/A383Wing/GIF%20Icons/reading.gif) (http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj215/A383Wing/GIF%20Icons/popcornsoda.gif) (http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj215/A383Wing/GIF%20Icons/drinking.gif)
💩
I'm not sure but doesn't NASCAR not acknowledge anyone going 200 mph in an actual race until the 80's?
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 14, 2010, 05:34:02 PM
CH5M - you are confusing things.
No one ever said the car was preserved exactly as it was raced. It was just an actual race car that was later made into show condition. Some things were changed from race trim. Some things were left off. It was wrecked and put back together for show, not as a historical representation. Is that hard to understand or believe?
Once again, are we done with the windows?
Are you suggesting the car was built from the ground up to be a show car? They did not build show cars back then. Are we looking at the same photos?
You're right, they didn't keep records much. So the only evidence presented thus far is from the owner/builder of the damn thing. And the pretty darn convincing photos. And why would Darlington museum want to keep a show car instead of the actual 500 winner? What would have happened to the actual 500 winner then?
You're figured it all out - the original 500 winner was crushed and instead they kept the show car for 40 years. Of course!
Sorry no confusion here.
And no emotion either.
I am (like Doug) just a guy who is interested in keeping NASCAR history accurate (lord knows that Brian X. France has no interest in doing so).
As posited, it seems likely that the well know (and photographically documented in this thread) #6 show car was an original race chassis that was hastily put in Daytona trim with a street wing and stands for show car use. I would guess that the car was probably originally a Charger 500. But Doug will be a better judge of that than I.
And, BTW, the fact that the #6 car was in the Joe Weatherly Museum for years and years means ... ahem,
not much. Sadly many, many of the cars that used to be on display there were replicas or homages. The supposed Jim Reed Chevy "Southern 500 winner": fake, the Fireball Robert's '63 "Southern 500 winner": homage (actually A.J. Foyt's Banjo Mathews '64 H&M Galaxie rebodied by Ken Myler to reprise Fireball's car); The Johnny Mantz "Southern 500 winner": fake; The 1964 Joe Weatherly Marauder; an homage (actually the car
was Weatherly's
1963 Southern car, raced by Dieringer and Wade after being up graded to a '64) and so on and so on. The cars in the museum in Talladega are even more suspect The Donnie Allison Torino Talladega, for example, was actually Bill Dennis', Junie Donlavey---Pistone built--- (not H&M) Truxmore Mercury Cyclone (rebodied by Elmo Langley, btw); The supposed 200 mph Baker "record" Daytona; an homage (the real car was given to and last raced by Don White in USAC and is now undergoing restoration; the museum car was a cheated up Glotzbach Charger that NASCAR had banned which was dressed as a Daytona for museum use by Chryco). And don't even get me started on some of the other "museum" cars ( like those at Alex Beam's shop and the N.C. HoF). So, as you can see, spending time in a museum doesn't mean much at all. It certainly doesn't mean that a car displayed there is what it purports to be.
The windows thing is the clincher, for me. I can't imagine anyone taking valuable shop time to put windows back in that car for any reason. No reason to do so since it couldn't be raced with windows due to the NASCAR rules change. (and, of course, if the windows were simply rolled down, the team would have had to of found a way to roll down the
wing windows and trim, too). And who would care about taking the time to retro fit windows in a show ccar. Not John Q Public--the intended audience. Since the show car's existence seems to be traceable to about the same time (does anyone know when it first appeared on the scene?), and since that car appears to be identical to Canepa's car, the conclusion that the cars are one and the same isn't much of a stretch. But---again--the only way to know for sure will be to compare period photos of fixed details (not easily changed things like roll cage bars, etc.) with the show car or the Southern winner (where-ever that car may be today).
No one has said anything about Mr. Ownes destroying a car.
The conjecture is about just which car Canepa now owns.
And that car doesn't appear to be the Southern 500 car.
Interestingly, if the conjecture is true, this won't be the first time that Canepa (or the other bucks up California guys who are now getting interested in old GN cars) has been snookered. He currently purports to own Richard petty's "Riverside winning" 1969 Torino. Sadly the real car was destroyed by Richard at Asheville/Weaverville in May of 1969. That car was
created (along with a number of other homages) in Gastonia, NC.
The really are coming out of the wood work, aren't they?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200437736430&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT
Bobby signed it (and that other turd that just went through the Mecum auction in FL). That makes them real, right?
💩
💩
I have enjoyed having lunch with your Grand Father and Mr. Moore (at the Peach Blossom) on a number of occassions. And I've interrviewed Mr. Ownes on a number of other occassions. Both he and Bud are legendary. And both of those men are humble. Well met, to coin a phrase. Talking with them about the old days is a treat. A great pleasure.
While there is nothing more that I like than discussing old stock cars. I am not sure that what we are having is a discussion.
But it does remind me of one of my favorite movies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjEcj8KpuJw
I am happy that you are satisfied with your beliefs about the Canepa car.
Not everyone else is.
This is definitely and interesting discussion to watch, anyway. I don't know what to think myself.
Everyone seems to agree that Cotton didn't build an all-new GN chassis just for the show car. And everyone agrees that a GN chassis would not have been thrown away in that era unless it was structurally smashed up and/or outdated. So if it's not the Southern 500 chassis under there, then that means two things:
#1 - some other existing real GN chassis disappeared from the vicinity of Cotton's operation at that time.
#2 - the real Southern 500 car's chassis continued on with some other life after this car went to the show circuit.
If the show car is not the real Southern 500 car, then is there any other support for either of these two points?
So let me get this right ....... some things don't add up!
anyone got any hard dates for these events?
QuoteRace History
Cotton Owens Dodge Charger Daytona driven by Buddy Baker
Daytona, qualified 2nd, — DNF
Rockingham — DNF
Atlanta — DNF
Alabama 500, led for 101 laps, first race lap at over 200 MPH — DNF
Firecracker 400 — 2nd
Atlanta — 4th
Michigan — 5th
Darlington Southern 500 — 1st
Charlotte — DNF
When did the Canepa car get put in the Darlington museum "where it sat for 40 years"?
Out in '05 - 40 years earlier would be 1965, that doesn't work. Did I get the quote wrong?
The claim that the car was rebuilt as a show car
after the 1970 NASCAR season - for the 1971 "new car" show season.
Then what car was on display at the "new car" show in Chicago in February of 1970? Same month as the Daytona 500 that the same car sat on outside pole?
There was a race WINNER from every race. Where are all of them? Easy - fixed/changed/modified/updated to race again or scrapped.
Old auction.
http://www.gogearhead.com/
http://www.gogearhead.com/69Daytonaracecar/index.html
1969 Cotton Owens/Buddy Baker Dodge Daytona HEMI NASCAR Race Car
The Original '69 Dodge Daytona Hemi built by legendary NASCAR hall of fame member Cotton Owens and piloted by Buddy Baker to more than 200mph at Talladega International Speedway! Cotton picked this car up from the Darlington museum, where it had been resting for more than 40 years. This car was recently sold on eBay by GOGEARHEAD.COM for an incredible NO RESERVE price of more than $800,000.00 to a satisfied collector in California.
SOLD FOR $801,109.00 on eBay
Sorry for chiming in on this thread so late... the weekends don't often afford much "online time" for me.
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 15, 2010, 03:15:59 AM
So let me get this right ....... some things don't add up!
anyone got any hard dates for these events?
Excellent question, and it gets to the heart of the matter since we know the location of the "show car" from the (February) 1970 Chicago auto show.
Here are the 1969 and early 1970 Grand National race dates at tracks 1 mile and over. You can check them out on Racing-Reference.com if you'd like:
9/14/69
Talladega 500 -- #6 did not race
10/12/69
National 500 (Charlotte Motor Speedway) -- #6 started 5th, finished 3rd, led 80 laps -- pole speed was 162.162mph
10/26/69
American 500 (North Carolina Motor Speedway [Rockingham, NC]) -- #6 started 6th, finished 3rd, led 34 laps -- pole speed was 136.972mph
12/7/69
Texas 500 (Texas World Speedway) -- #6 started 1st, finished 8th after a crash -- pole speed was 176.284mph
*end of 1969 Grand National season*
1970 Grand National season
1/18/70
Motor Trend 500 (Riverside International Raceway) -- #6 was driven by Sam Posey, started 9th, finished 28th after engine problems -- pole speed was 112.06 (NOTE - I'm assuming that the "1969 Dodge" listed on the entry list was a Daytona)
2/19/70
Daytona 500 Qualifier #2 -- #6 started 1st, finished 2nd, led 13 laps -- pole speed was 192.624mph
2/22/70
Daytona 500 -- #6 started 2nd, finished 27th after ignition problems, led 1 lap - pole speed was 194.015
I've long been fascinated by the #6 car that was displayed at Darlington, and I think there was a discussion on the old board about the car when Cotton pulled it out of the Museum. There were some pictures posted back then that showed the tube frame in the engine compartment that had various clues of its former race history, and I don't think anyone questions that the chassis - at one time or another - probably saw duty on the racetrack. I do not, however, think it can be said with absolute certainty that it saw duty in Daytona trim. If it did, it would have been in the first few races the Daytona saw action in - and almost certainly not the 1970 Daytona 500. None of those races saw speeds approaching 200mph.
I have tremendous respect for Cotton Owens, have met him a couple of times, and don't begin to say that I have a clear recollection of what happened over 40 years ago. Heck, I was
three in the spring of 1970! However, a few logical gaps exist in the argument being made that this particular chassis has race-winning and record-setting provenance. Given the facts/records and timeframes, some statements made just don't make any logical sense. A wise man once said regarding opinions, "you're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts."
BTW, Troy (the owner of our forum here) has already cautioned us about trying to play nice. Good advice. Even if we don't all agree, perhaps we can disagree without being disagreeable.
:Twocents:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 14, 2010, 09:52:15 PM
Unfortunately for you I have a picture of the #6 car at Darlington Speedway. On the track, posing for a photo, not in a race. It is a postcard from 1970. The car looks EXACTLY like the one in question. It looks exactly like the race car because it IS the race car.
Could you please post this picture here, or on your website so we can take a look?
Here's a few pictures of the #6 throughout the '69 year I take it......
(http://images114.fotki.com/v633/photos/4/40875/672969/bb69-vi.jpg)
(http://images114.fotki.com/v646/photos/4/40875/672969/69bakervi-vi.jpg)
QuoteSo Cotton took the wrecked #6 and made that into the show car. Just look at the photos under the hood and under the chassis - does that really look like a show car and not race setup? Really? You are a fool if you can't accept the reality that is so plain for everyone to see
I'm a little confused here...when exactly was the wreck turned into a show car? What "show car" is on display at the Chicago auto show in February 1970? It sure looks like the car Canepa is selling. But according to Canepa's website, they say the car was last raced in October of 1970 and "The car is not restored but thoroughly cleaned, detailed and all mechanical components checked. It is as it was last raced in 1970."
So, did Cotton build the car that was at the show in February 1970? Would you build a show car and then race it later? If not then it couldn't be the 200mph car could it? Or are there two "show cars"? Either way there is some dishonesty here somewhere. If the car was built from a wreck, how can Canepa say it's not restored? :scratchchin:
Has it been established that it did 200 mph? I mean of course, aside from Buddy saying so. I am not saying the car didn't run 200 mph at a NASCAR sanctioned event but it isn't like Buddy had a speedometer in there so his saying it doesn't make it a fact. It could have happened several times but I ask again, isn't the first time that NASCAR acknowledges anyone as doing a 200 mph lap in the 80's? I'm pretty sure they give credit to Benny Parsons as being first in a qualifying run and someone else for the first race lap not too long after. Or am I wrong here, is there other documention which proves otherwise? Proves as in the timers for the sanctioning body officially recorded it not proves as in any of the race teams claiming it.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 14, 2010, 06:28:17 PM
What have you proven?
Show me an example of another car being the first to go 200 mph in a NASCAR event. Obviously there must be a shred of evidence somewhere. If not the #6, then who? If not this car, then where is the real one?
By what has been published from the period, a formally recognized 200 mph lap in a NASCAR race did not happen. Can you provide proof beyond the 2008 press release? Quote from: therealmoparman on February 14, 2010, 06:28:17 PM
Show me where the real Southern 500 winner is. By your logic, the real car was eaten by llamas and a show car was quickly constructed to go in the museum.
It may not exist, at least in the form of a car skinned today as a '69 Charger. Chrysler displayed a #6 Daytona on the auto show circuit as early of February 1970. I have the photos. They are clearly from 1970. I certainly do believe that Frank Wylie or Gale Porter asked for a car to be prepared for the auto shows - just not at the end of 1970. I believe the same car was used during the major 1970 auto shows and promotional appearances, and was also used for Cobo in 1971, and later donated to the Weatherly Museum. It does not make sense for a second #6 show car to be built just for Cobo '71.Quote from: therealmoparman on February 14, 2010, 06:28:17 PM
Your logic suggests that Cotton destroyed all the other race Daytonas, including the winner of the Southern 500, perhaps his favorite accomplishment of all time. He destroyed that car, built a "show car," and instead put that in a museum at Darlington for 40 years.
Destroyed is not the term I would use. With the loss of factory funding for 1971 (and the Daytona not being legal) , it was necessary for teams to recycle their cars into 1971 models. Some cars were sold off to lesser teams. Some 1971 cars were new. These cars were weapons and tools of the trade. Although not impossible, it would be very unusual for a team to keep a year old car as a momento when it was worth something as a working race car - especially with the loss of factory money. A fine example is the Pete Hamilton 1971 Plymouth from COG. It was converted to a 1972 Charger, and later to a Magnum. NASCAR teams did this out of necessity.
As to the #6 Daytona that exists today, I personally believe it is the Chrysler show car from 1970 and 71 donated to the Weatherly museum. There is no doubt it is an Owens built car.
💩
I believe Mythbusters needs to be contacted.
Quote from: superbirdtom on February 15, 2010, 12:13:51 PM
I believe Mythbusters needs to be contacted.
:yesnod: :popcrn:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 12, 2010, 10:25:21 PM
Lots of modifications were made to make it a car suitable for the show circuit and the museum.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 15, 2010, 12:12:38 PM
They showed the car they raced. RACE CAR = SHOW CAR.
According to your earlier comment, it had to have "lots of modifications" for show duty... Are you suggesting that they alternated back and forth between the two "formats" depending on whether the car's presence was requested by Chrysler at an auto show?
:shruggy:
Here is what I believe I've learned:
Buddy Baker won the 1970 Southern 500 in a Cotton Owens Dodge Daytona.
On 3/24/1970 Buddy Baker officially went 200.447 MPH in the #88 Dodge Daytona, driving counterclockwise only. To get the official record he didn't have to get back in the car and drive it clockwise too.
A Dodge Daytona in Cotton Owens/Buddy Baker livery was at (a) manufacturer's car show(s) in early 1970 (i.e. while the 1970 models were being displayed).
Buddy Baker went 198.260 MPH in a Cotton Owens Dodge Daytona at the 1970 Alabama 500 in a competition lap.
💩
I have a question regarding the picture of the car on Cottons site posted and the one posted saying it is from the 70 show.
Were the decals and Cotton's name & other names added or changed from what the car showed in 1971?
Because the front fender in the picture of the 70 show one has some different and or less decals and does not have the list of names.
Yes I know they could have been added or changed but when did this happen was the show car changed between 70 and 71 or was this added later?
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 15, 2010, 01:20:55 PM
The pictures of the Chicago show in Feb 1970 - if accurate - only prove that the car was shown in Feb 1970, then raced that season, then shown again at Cobo in Jan 1971. Then museum. Then retrieved. Then ebay. Whitworth. Canepa.
Notice the pics at Chicago, pics on Stock Car cover, and pics as retrieved from museum all look very similar, except for the visible decal changes on the fender, and the sponsor changes on the quarter.
So the car raced in 1970 in various livery and setups. What a concept in NASCAR! After the car wrecked at Charlotte, on Oct 11, 1970 it was returned to COG, where it probably sat for a few weeks. Greg Porter called and said they needed a car to show at Cobo in Jan. Cotton fixed the one that was wrecked at Charlotte. Obviously they would have repainted it. Put new decals on it. And put carpet in it, etc. Made it into a car to be shown, not raced. They retired it.
Mystery solved!
But the car raced at Daytona (or the Southern 500) doesn't match the one shown in Chicago. The one shown in Chicago and Cobo DOES seem to match the one from the museum.
💩
It makes a lot more sense that this "crashed" race car .....
Quote
12/7/69 Texas 500 (Texas World Speedway) -- #6 started 1st, finished 8th after a crash -- pole speed was 176.284mph
*end of 1969 Grand National season*
Was turned into a "show car" for Chrysler Corp. and used for the '70 & '71 seasons strickly as a "show car".
The same car CAN NOT be at Daytona and Chicago in February of 1970.
& it would be easy to confuse the dates of turning a wrecked racecar at the end of the season into a show car for Chrysler. 1969 VS. 1970
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 15, 2010, 01:31:54 PM
What do you mean they do not match. What is different about them, other than the decals and livery.. things that constantly changed. As previously stated.
They looked different every time probably. Doesn't matter. In the end, the race car was repainted, re-decaled, and carpeted, and windowed, and probably armor-alled for crying out loud.
Why are you so confused?
I am not at all confused. The car in the top photo (auto show) looks nothing like the car in the middle photo (Daytona 500) or the bottom photo (Darlington). The 1970 Daytona race cars have fenders that have been cut on, flared and massaged. Look how the Daytona 500 and Darlington noses are drooped. The Auto Show car looks much more like street car fenders. The Darlington car has no glass, which, again, not only was it illegal at the time, it would be a laborious process to reinstall later for a 1971 auto show when the car was now two model years old.
The Chicago Auto Show took place within ONE WEEK of the Daytona race track photo. Given the visual differences and lead times of moving cars around, it is obvious these two are not the same car.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/TMP42.jpg)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/TMP43.jpg)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/BakerDarl1-1.jpg)
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 15, 2010, 01:57:35 PM
Again you are confusing things by your pure conjecture and speculation. Because you say "it makes a lot more sense" even though you weren't there, don't know a thing about racing in 1970, nor how bad that car was wrecked, nor whatever happened to it.
You can't prove a thing you say.
Ryan, you are going to have to come up with something better than belittling people. People are asking you repeatedly to present physical proof of your claims. Those claims of the extensive race history started when YOU sold the car to Ralph Whitworth. I really do not believe you have the physical evidence to back up your claims.
Moreover, I have to ask you this... You have sold the car, and collected the better part of a million dollars years ago. Why is this topic so important to you now that the car is two owners down the road?
Your grandfather is a good man and your family has the utmost respect within the community. Nobody is suggesting anything otherwise.
from Motor Trend Feb 1970...Texas 500 coverage...
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 15, 2010, 02:09:51 PM
Also, where do you get the Daytona pic and how can you verify the date?
The photo vendor is Tom Reel from South Bend Indiana. Although the photo is labeled, it is obviously not the Firecracker 400 in July as side glass was not legal then. Thus, it can only be from February of 1970. It is from a photo sequence of several cars show coming in off track to get tire temps taken.
Again, applying some common sense regarding the dates and photos of the cars, the Chicago Auto Show car and the Daytona car cannot be the same car.
Cotton is still mad about this. Baker had the race in the bag.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120456;image)
Quote from: Aero426 on February 15, 2010, 02:37:47 PM
Cotton is still mad about this. Baker had the race in the bag.
Cotton himself told me what he did with that car after the wreck... and it was NOT turned into a showcar!!!!
Anyone have pics of the "show car" at other venues? Cobo Hall '71?
In an effort to compare still pics to raceday pics to create/verify a timeline.
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '69 National 500. From
AUTO RACING Jan. '70 pg 46.
Quote10/12/69 National 500 (Charlotte Motor Speedway) -- #6 started 5th, finished 3rd, led 80 laps -- pole speed was 162.162mph
I'm all for trying to keep dates, pictures and numbers straight up.
FWIW, the picture of the Owens/Baker Daytona on page 1 of this thread from the 1971 Chicago Auto Show at McCormick Place would have been after the 1971 Detroit Auto Show. It doesn't bear on this discussion except that one can show the car was displayed there after Detroit. I'm sorry if I missed the picture of 1971 Detroit, if there was one. Was there one?
Dates of Chicago auto shows from "Worlds Greatest Auto Show-Celebrating a Century in Chicago":
1969 March 8-16, 1969
1970 February 21-March 1 1970
1971 February 20-28 1971
I don't have the dates of the Detroit auto Show in front of me.
Dates of 1970 Nascar races from "Forty years of Stock car Racing-Volume 3":
Feb. 19, 1970 125 Mile Qualifier#6 Baker/Owens raced
Feb. 22 1970 Daytona 500 #6 Baker/Owens raced
March 1 1970 Richmond 500 Baker #6 not on list of qualifiers or finishers
March 8 1970 Carolina 500 # 6 Baker/Owens Raced
Again FWIW:
For the 1969 Detroit Auto Show you can find pictures of David Pearson's 427 Torino, Pete Hamilton Charger 500 and a Sox and Martin B-body car there on display.
For the 1970 Detroit auto Show you can find pictures of the David Pearson Torino Talledaga, Duster 1, Herbert Platt and George Montgomery cars there.
For the 1969 Chicago Auto Show You can find Pictures of the Duster 1 and Sox & Martin B-body car there.
For the 1970 Chicago auto Show you can find pictures of the Sox & Martin 'Cuda there.
For the 1970 New York Auto Show you can find pictures of the Don Grotheer 'Cuda there.
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 15, 2010, 02:54:27 PM
Anyone have pics of the "show car" at other venues? Cobo Hall '71?
In an effort to compare still pics to raceday pics to create/verify a timeline.
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '69 National 500. From AUTO RACING Jan. '70 pg 46.
Quote10/12/69 National 500 (Charlotte Motor Speedway) -- #6 started 5th, finished 3rd, led 80 laps -- pole speed was 162.162mph
Greg Kwiatkowski who owns the #88 Daytona in the Detroit area has a color photo of the #6 show car (he says it appears the same as in Chicago) at that venue. Hopefully he can find the photo in his piles of stuff. Greg recalls that the Detroit Auto Show was in the fall (November of 1970), and not the spring of 1971.
Quote from: richRTSE on February 15, 2010, 02:34:21 PM
from Motor Trend Feb 1970...Texas 500 coverage...
these are good pictures !! :yesnod: never seen that #6 with a wrecked front before :coolgleamA:
lots of intresting stuff going on in this thread Guys , :popcrn: :2thumbs:
Quote from: hemigeno on February 15, 2010, 02:43:17 PM
Quote from: Aero426 on February 15, 2010, 02:37:47 PM
Cotton is still mad about this. Baker had the race in the bag.
Cotton himself told me what he did with that car after the wreck... and it was NOT turned into a showcar!!!!
Are you allowed to tell us what Cotton did with this car? (Was Buddy still able to sit down afterwards?)
💩
QuoteOutside Pole Position of the 1970 Daytona 500
from Canepa Design -
http://www.canepacollection.com/detail-1969-dodge-charger-daytona-5111490.html
If the 125 Mile qualifier for the Daytona 500 was on Feb. 19, 1970, the Daytona 500 was on Feb. 22 1970, the 1970 Chicago Auto Show was Feb. 21-March 1 1970, the picture previously shown on this thread of the 1970 Chicago Auto Show with the Owens/Baker car is in fact at that show-then either there were at least (2) #6 cars at one time or they had to shuttle the #6 car up to Chicago after cleaning it up for only part of the show. Getting a car into a crowded show for part of a show doesn't seem likely.
In regard to the 200.477 MPH, Larry Rathgeb's data sheets for the #88 car's speeds are shown on page 107 of Frank Moriarty's book "Supercars" and Buddy Baker is shown on page 108 with the #88 car and the chalk marked speed board showing 200.447. If the Baker/Owens car duplicated that exact speed, someone needs to be picking Lottery numbers too because they are just too lucky.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 13, 2010, 06:44:46 PM
This is a great comprehensive story of the car...
http://www.rmauctions.com/FeatureCars.cfm?SaleCode=RW09&CarID=r081&fc=0
Owens and Baker started 1970 off strong, starting their Daytona qualifying race from the pole and finishing second to Charlie Glotzbach but an ignition problem put them out of the 500 itself. Problems dogged them at Rockingham and Atlanta but Baker in the #6 Charger Daytona were the class of the field in the Alabama 500 at Talladega on April 12, leading 101 laps until a spin and a fire put them out of the race.
It was in this race as Baker was leading the field that he accomplished the feat which will forever make this car famous: recording the first NASCAR race lap at over 200 mph.
The accomplishment was heavily promoted by Chrysler, even more than the continuing successes of the Chargers and Superbirds, because it was a singular accomplishment. It led inevitably to another of Bill France's competition building innovations, the carburetor restrictor plate, which has forever limited superspeedway speeds to well below 200 mph.
Baker drove Owens' #6 Charger Daytona to a second place finish in the Firecracker 400 at Daytona in July, to fourth at Atlanta in August, sixth in Michigan on August 16, fifth at the Talladega 500 August 23.
With this car Baker then won the Southern 500 at Darlington on September 7 by a lap over second place Bobby Isaac. On the same weekend Cotton Owens was inducted into the National Motorsports Press Association Hall of Fame at Darlington.
it is this post that you (therealmoparman) said is a "great comprehensive story" that infers this to be the car raced in Daytona and a 200+ mph run.
Here's a couple of pictures of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '69 Texas 500. From AUTO RACING Mar. '70 pgs 39 & 41.
Quote12/7/69 Texas 500 (Texas World Speedway) -- #6 started 1st, finished 8th after a crash -- pole speed was 176.284mph
I don't know enough about the NASCAR cars, but would this have been built at Nichels or COG? I mean from body in white to race chassis...
Did COG number their chassis like Nichels did?
What is this car's number?
Does anyone know if there are serial numbers on the trunk gutter of the car currently in question? Like, might it have started as a street car somewhere, or did it start off as a body in white?
The Dodge Boys - 1970
http://onebadwheel.com/nascar/200-mph-qualifying-runs/
"Baker was the first person to eclipse the 200 mph mark. His fastest lap during that testing session in his winged Dodge Daytona was 200.447 mph. Five months later, along came the restrictor plate for races at Talladega.
It was 12 years later that Benny Parsons became the first NASCAR driver to top the 200 mph mark in an official qualifying run. His Pontiac won the pole for the Winston 500 at Talladega on May 2, 1982 with a speed of 200.176 mph."
Don't know how trustworthy a website onebadwheel.com is.
💩
💩
The picture on page 1 of this post of the 1971 Chicago Auto Show shows 1971 model cars around the #6 Daytona. The pictures on page 3 of this post show 1970 model year cars around the #6 Daytona. No car company displays their showroom 1970 cars for customers out when they have 1971 new cars to sell.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 15, 2010, 03:52:25 PM
The date on the Chicago show must be wrong. It has to be 1971.
1971 February 20-28 1971
It cannot be 1971 with all these 1970 new cars being shown.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120414;image)
I don't know the lead time for contributions to Auto Racing in 1970, but there is a the Dodge Chargers column in every issue.
from February 1970:
from June 1970:
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '70 Atlanta 500. From AUTO RACING Jul. '70 pg 17.
3/29/70 Atlanta 500 (Atlanta International Raceway) -- #6 started 3rd, finished 20th (ignition) led 88 laps -- pole speed was 159.929 mph
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-08&series=W
This isn't claimed to be the Canepa car, where is it today/what did it become?
& it looks like a single #6 was used on the nose in '69 & dual numbers in '70 :scratchchin:
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '70 Alabama 500. From
AUTO RACING Jul. '70 pg 41.
QuoteBobby Isaac, who had won the pole position with a record shattering speed of 199.658, finished second almost a full lap back.
4/12/70 Alabama 500 (Alabama International Motor Speedway) -- #6 started 5th, finished 12th (spin/fire) led 101 laps -- pole speed was 199.658 mph
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-10&series=W
A couple of clearer shots of the "spin/fire" appear earlier in this thread. :2thumbs:
Still looking for more archive type pictures
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1314.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/BakerDarlington.jpg)
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '70 Rebel 400. From AUTO RACING Aug. '70 pg 44.
5/9/70 Rebel 400 (Darlington Raceway) -- #6 started 6th, finished 15th (engine) -- pole speed was 153.822 mph
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-13&series=W
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e67/75414/buddybaker69.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e67/75414/big04.jpg)
Here's another picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona apparently from the '70 Atlanta 500. From AUTO RACING Aug. '70 pg 39.
The article is about "The World's Fastest Stock Car Drivers", the car pictured is sponsored by Jack Spiller's DODGE Inc. Marrietta GA. (same as the Atlanta 500 car).
The article describes an interview with Buddy Baker taken place amongst the cars being "prepared for the Alabama 500". "Just a few days before, Buddy Baker went into the record book as the first man in history to drive a stock car around an oval race track faster than 200 miles per hour." They only refer to the car as a 1970 Dodge Daytona, and list three lap speeds: 200.096, 200.330, & 200.447 mph.
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '70 World 600. From AUTO RACING Sep. '70 pg 35.
5/24/70 World 600 (Charlotte Motor Speedway) -- #6 started 10th, finished 23rd (crash) led 1 lap -- pole speed was 159.277 mph
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-16&series=W
Baker ran a COG 69 Dodge in the 1970 American 500.
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-47&series=W
Was this a Daytona?
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona (behind Glotzbach & Allison) from the '70 Motor State 400. From AUTO RACING Sep. '70 pg 41.
6/7/70 Motor World 400 (Michigan International Speedway) -- #6 started 5th, finished 7th -- pole speed was 162.737 mph
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-19&series=W
I'm sooooo confuzed....... (http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj215/A383Wing/GIF%20Icons/nuts.gif)
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '70 American 500. From AUTO RACING Feb. '71 pg 47.
11/15/70 American 500 (North Carolina Motor Speedway) -- #6 started 9th, finished 5th -- pole speed was 136.496 mph
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-47&series=W
Quote from: A383Wing on February 15, 2010, 10:41:12 PM
I'm sooooo confuzed....... (http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj215/A383Wing/GIF%20Icons/nuts.gif)
me too :yesnod: :smilie_help: !! awesome pictures though :yesnod: :drool5:
Cotton Owens entered the #6 Dodge in 18 of the 48 races for the 1970 season.
Sam Posey drove the #6 Dodge at Riverside (race #1 on 1/18/70) for the Motor Trend 500.
Buddy Baker drove the #6 Dodge for Cotton Owens in 17 races for the 1970 season.
Race History associated with the Canepa car.
Cotton Owens Dodge Charger Daytona driven by Buddy Baker
race #3 - Daytona 500 qualifier #2 on 2/19/70 (Daytona International Speedway in Daytona Beach, FL - 2.500 mile) – started 1st and finished 2nd
race #4 – Daytona 500 on 2/22/70 (Daytona International Speedway in Daytona Beach, FL - 2.500 mile) – started 2nd and placed 27th DNF (ignition)
race #6 – Carolina 500 on 3/8/70 (North Carolina Motor Speedway in Rockingham, NC - 1.017 mile) — started 4th and placed 33rd DNF (lug bolts)
race #8 – Atlanta 500 on 3/29/70 (Atlanta International Raceway in Hampton, GA - 1.522 mile) — started 3rd and placed 30th DNF (ignition)
----- sponsored by Jack Spiller's DODGE Inc. Marrietta GA
race #10 - Alabama 500 on 4/12/70 (Alabama International Motor Speedway in Talladega, AL – 2.660 mile) – started 5th and placed 12th DNF (spin/fire)
----- sponsored by Eberhart Nunn DODGE Inc. Anniston, AL
race #24 - Firecracker 400 on 7/4/70 (Daytona International Speedway in Daytona Beach, FL – 2.500 mile) – started 8th and finished 2nd
race #31 – Dixie 500 on 8/2/70 (Atlanta International Raceway in Hampton, GA – 1.522 mile) – started 2nd and finished 4th
race #34 – Yankee 400 on 8/16/70 (Michigan International Speedway in Brooklyn, MI – 2.040 mile) – started 7th and finished 6th *
race #38 - Southern 500 on 9/7/70 (Darlington Raceway in Darlington, SC – 1.366 mile) – started 2nd and finished 1st
race #44 – National 500 on 10/11/70 (Charlotte Motor Speedway in Concord, NC – 1.500 mile) – started 3rd and placed 26th DNF(crash)
* I couldn't find a Michigan race result with a 5th place finish ... so I used the race that fit the time-line
Were all of the #6 Cotton Owens Garage cars for the 1970 season Charger Daytonas?
How many chassis were used for the 1970 season?
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 16, 2010, 06:02:52 AM
...
How many chassis were used for the 1970 season?
And was the Canepa car any one of those chassis's or the show car?... Seems that's the question in debate? As we all know, there was always multiple chassis available at any given time...
Troy
Though it is hard to tell for sure, and it is a small detail, it appears that all of the race photos of the #6 show a car with some front fender flaring.
The show car does NOT have the same front fender flaring.
Significantly, nor does the Canepa car.
Quote from: C5HM on February 16, 2010, 08:02:14 AM
Though it is hard to tell for sure, and it is a small detail, it appears that all of the race photos of the #6 show a car with some front fender flaring.
The show car does NOT have the same front fender flaring.
Significantly, nor does the Canepa car.
In fairness to the Canepa car, it does...
Troy
It has a small flare, some of those pics show a car with a lot bigger flare.
💩
Quote from: Ghoste on February 16, 2010, 08:53:37 AM
It has a small flare, some of those pics show a car with a lot bigger flare.
And some show a similar smaller version as well........
I found these photos on a blog, someone posted pictures from the Wally Parks Motorsports Museum. Left fender looks exactly like the Canepa car, but the wing looks a little beat up. Same car? They call it a replica. Website says :
"This 1970 Dodge Charger is an exact replica of the car that Buddy Baker raced in the 1970 NASCAR season. The Dodge Charger was the first car to break the 200 mph barrier at Daytona with a 200.47 lap on March 24th 1970."
http://speedhunters.com/archive/2008/10/31/museums-gt-gt-nhra-wally-park-motorsports-museum.aspx (http://speedhunters.com/archive/2008/10/31/museums-gt-gt-nhra-wally-park-motorsports-museum.aspx)
(scroll down almost to bottom)
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 08:56:24 AM
Everyone repeat with me
Ryan,
I am going to ask for the last time that you check the condescending attitude at the door. Please refer to the PM I sent you yesterday.
There are a lot of questions asked that you have ignored, many of which are in direct contradiction to the claims you have made about the car's history and race provenance. Until you satisfy those questions and proffer a logical explanation, a conclusion cannot be drawn by anyone (much less those of us who look directly at the physical/empirical evidence).
💩
Let's start with this one:
Quote from: Aero426 on February 15, 2010, 04:03:44 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 15, 2010, 03:52:25 PM
The date on the Chicago show must be wrong. It has to be 1971.
1971 February 20-28 1971
It cannot be 1971 with all these 1970 new cars being shown.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120414;image)
How can the car have won the Southern 500 if it was already on the showcar circuit in February of 1970?
💩
Quote from: hemi68charger on February 16, 2010, 08:56:52 AM
Quote from: Ghoste on February 16, 2010, 08:53:37 AM
It has a small flare, some of those pics show a car with a lot bigger flare.
And some show a similar smaller version as well........
Yes, that's what I mean, it appears that more than one chassis was used. Not surprising or uncommon at the time. In any case the racing provenance of the Canepa car still seems to be in question to me. Cotton Owens record speaks for itself and his due respect and and place in motorsports history are undeniably assured but the questions surrounding this particular chassis leave me baffled. Attempts to prove the legend that is growing around seem to only be answered with a sort of "it is because I say so" form of evidence.
I'll probably regret posting this but it seems like we keep going back and forth over the same ground and it's descended into a stalemate.
My opinion based on the evidence that has been given is that the Canepa car was built from a chassis that was in the COG stable and was probably raced. I do not believe it is the car that it is being portrayed as. I think it was thrown together with a variety of parts around the shop to keep Chrysler happy while the COG continued on with their actual business of racing. It's just my opinion but I haven't seen anything yet to make me think otherwise. I tried to keep an open mind and stay on the fence in the beginning but I guess I see the questions and logic in the arguments of "Doug's cult" ::) as being more forceful.
Quote from: Ghoste on February 16, 2010, 09:20:44 AM
Quote from: hemi68charger on February 16, 2010, 08:56:52 AM
Quote from: Ghoste on February 16, 2010, 08:53:37 AM
It has a small flare, some of those pics show a car with a lot bigger flare.
And some show a similar smaller version as well........
Yes, that's what I mean, it appears that more than one chassis was used. Not surprising or uncommon at the time. In any case the racing provenance of the Canepa car still seems to be in question to me. Cotton Owens record speaks for itself and his due respect and and place in motorsports history are undeniably assured but the questions surrounding this particular chassis leave me baffled. Attempts to prove the legend that is growing around seem to only be answered with a sort of "it is because I say so" form of evidence.
I'll probably regret posting this but it seems like we keep going back and forth over the same ground and it's descended into a stalemate.
My opinion based on the evidence that has been given is that the Canepa car was built from a chassis that was in the COG stable and was probably raced. I do not believe it is the car that it is being portrayed as. I think it was thrown together with a variety of parts around the shop to keep Chrysler happy while the COG continued on with their actual business of racing. It's just my opinion but I haven't seen anything yet to make me think otherwise. I tried to keep an open mind and stay on the fence in the beginning but I guess I see the questions and logic in the arguments of "Doug's cult" ::) as being more forceful.
No one's perfect on recollection and Sherlock Holmes'ing, but Doug is one of the foremost individuals with NASCAR / Grand National data on a larger-picture scale concerning the aero-warriors.
For the amount of money that this thing's going for and the amount it went for previously, it HAS to stand up to scrutiny and not just hearsay or first hand recollection to a certain degree... I would think there would need to be documentation. After all, the guy who paid $800,000 plus for it years back, didn't he get any factual and verified documentation?
Regardless, it is one Mean Lookin' Muther.....
Troy
Here's another picture, looks like the same car that was said to be at the Wally Parks Musuem. Has the same wing paint damage...
obviously this is not the same car...right?
Its a car that I'd love to have parked in my garage that is for sure. Heck I'd be happy with any Daytona let alone one this one.
Now in my opinion and its not even worth the paper you'd print this out on is that it is a show car built on a race car chassis. Now is it the one that one Darlington? I think not based on the timelines. Does this mean that the chassis it is on never raced? Nope.
Memories fade over time, photo's represent. I can't count the number of times that someone has said that they used to have a car just like the one I have but it was a HEMI 440. Does this mean that all the factory documentation that states they never built such a thing is wrong and that the person I met at a show is correct? I think not.
Quote from: richRTSE on February 16, 2010, 09:34:13 AM
obviously this is not the same car...right?
This one can't be the same car its missing a center hood pin, as well as a different grille cut out, window clippings and a few other differences.
How long ago was the photo taken at the Wally Parks museum? The other cars parked next to it look like Juliano's cars. Appears to be the Diamantte next to it.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 09:20:16 AM
1. You cannot say for certain when that photo was taken.
Perhaps I cannot, but others can. I'll leave the date and location explanation to them, but I am convinced it's February 1970... and until we get over the timeline hurdle, the rest of the discussion is moot. That does not mean I don't still maintain the utmost respect for Cotton Owens as a gentleman, his Grand National racing history, and his contributions to the Chrysler Aero car program. In fact, he's one of my all-time favorite NASCAR personalities, evidenced by the fact that no less than three pictures of the #6 Daytona hang on my office wall.
Quote from: richRTSE on February 16, 2010, 09:34:13 AM
obviously this is not the same car...right?
Nope that is a modern homage.
Quote from: hemi68charger on February 16, 2010, 09:28:58 AM
For the amount of money that this thing's going for and the amount it went for previously, it HAS to stand up to scrutiny and not just hearsay or first hand recollection to a certain degree... I would think there would need to be documentation. After all, the guy who paid $800,000 plus for it years back, didn't he get any factual and verified documentation?
Regardless, it is one Mean Lookin' Muther.....
Troy
Troy,
And maybe that is also why a discussion about a car that ended last year (this thread) was suddenly brought back to life. If someone is looking at purchasing the car perhaps they are asking these questions and looking for documentation. Apparently the first Buyer that paid $800K+ was fine with the lack of documentation and was OK with "I said so".
In today's era of documentation, matching numbers, and more information available than ever before, I as a buyer would demand some type of evidence backing up a claim for any car that was purchased based on historical significance or rarity.
Have you ever bought a used car from someone and took everything they told you at face value?
I think this is a beautiful car and a great example of a period correct car.
Just my :Twocents:
Scott
💩
Quote from: 70Sbird on February 16, 2010, 09:40:15 AM
Quote from: hemi68charger on February 16, 2010, 09:28:58 AM
For the amount of money that this thing's going for and the amount it went for previously, it HAS to stand up to scrutiny and not just hearsay or first hand recollection to a certain degree... I would think there would need to be documentation. After all, the guy who paid $800,000 plus for it years back, didn't he get any factual and verified documentation?
Regardless, it is one Mean Lookin' Muther.....
Troy
Troy,
And maybe that is also why a discussion about a car that ended last year (this thread) was suddenly brought back to life. If someone is looking at purchasing the car perhaps they are asking these questions and looking for documentation. Apparently the first Buyer that paid $800K+ was fine with the lack of documentation and was OK with "I said so".
In today's era of documentation, matching numbers, and more information available than ever before, I as a buyer would demand some type of evidence backing up a claim for any car that was purchased based on historical significance or rarity.
Have you ever bought a used car from someone and took everything they told you at face value?
I think this is a beautiful car and a great example of a period correct car.
Just my :Twocents:
Scott
Hmmm, seems like there are at least 800,000 reasons why we are revisiting this. Perhaps the first buyer is pissed that he took a bath on it last September and has asked why? Or maybe the current owner wants reap a huge windfall after 5 months of ownership and he is asking how?
Just my :Twocents: as well. :shruggy:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 09:20:16 AM
1. You cannot say for certain when that photo was taken.
Sure I can. Compare the two photos. The white fabric covered pole is immediately to the right of the Daytona in both photos. The top photo is from a group of original Chicago Auto Show slides I have I received almost 30 years ago from a man who attended. It is clearly 1970 by the cars and signing.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/TMP42.jpg)
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120414;image)
Quote from: Aero426 on February 16, 2010, 09:46:08 AM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 09:20:16 AM
1. You cannot say for certain when that photo was taken.
Sure I can. Compare the two photos. The white fabric covered pole is immediately to the right of the Daytona in both photos. The top photo is from a group of original Chicago Auto Show slides I have I received almost 30 years ago from a man who attended. It is clearly 1970 by the cars and signing.
OK, this may be no big issue, but what is the small circular decal clearly present in the February 1970 auto show car shown in Doug's posting above on the drivers side vent window, and what appears to be the same decal also in the same place in the photo of therealmoparman sitting in the car on the COG website?
Quote from: 70Sbird on February 16, 2010, 09:40:15 AM
..
Have you ever bought a used car from someone and took everything they told you at face value?
...
Scott
Scott, sure I have... But, I have never paid over 3/4 of a million dollars for one car either, not that I ever could. I'm with you about the former owner. It's his money. Like I preach all the time, if both parties are happy, then so be it.. It's all good. With our production-based cars, it's pretty easy to verify what it is to the level of certainty one's looking for ( is it an original Daytona, Superbird, RoadRunner, R/T, etc?, is it an original black car, etc, etc, etc).. But, when you're buying a car to a large extent because of it's "history", then it's harder to verify....
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 09:12:22 AM
Please - which questions have not been answered to your satisfaction? Please, one question at a time.
Sure, please comment on this photo from the Don Moody collection. Do you know when it was taken?
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/BakerShowCar.jpg)
Quote from: 69_500 on February 16, 2010, 09:38:11 AM
How long ago was the photo taken at the Wally Parks museum? The other cars parked next to it look like Juliano's cars. Appears to be the Diamantte next to it.
On display from Aug 2008 to February 2009
http://stylingperformance.search-autoparts.com/stylingandperformance/Industry+News/New-Exhibit-Saluting-the-60th-Anniversary-of-NASCA/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/534319 (http://stylingperformance.search-autoparts.com/stylingandperformance/Industry+News/New-Exhibit-Saluting-the-60th-Anniversary-of-NASCA/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/534319)
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 09:20:16 AM
1. You cannot say for certain when that photo was taken.
Well actually you can. The big sign in back saying "1970" is kind of a give away.
Another FWIW, the book "Worlds Greatest Auto Show Celebrating a Century in Chicago" Says that McCormick Place in Chicago burned down in a massive fire 4 weeks before the 1967 show there. The 1967-1970 Chicago Shows were moved back to the International Amphitheatre. The 1971 Chicago Show was moved to the new McCormick place.
The referenced book has hundreds of pictures of the Chicago show over the years. None of the Owens/Baker Daytona though. The picture of the Owens/Baker Daytona on page 1 of this thread matches the pictures of the taller ceiling and window walls of the 1971 McCormick Place.
As for the 1970 car show pictures. I've seen a lot of pictures of the New York and Detroit shows, I don't believe the 1970 pictures on this thread were taken at Detroit or New York, based on the ceiling grid and lights there.
Then the 1970 pictures of the Owens/Baker Daytona have a ceiling grid and fabric on the columns that seems to match Chicago in 1970. I would offer that it is possible that someone could find a picture in 1970 of another auto show with a similar ceiling grid and fabric on the columns. The ceiling grid, 1970 cars around the Daytona, dates of shows/races, and the 1970 sign on the wall of the pictures make a pretty convincing case for the Owens/Baker Daytona being at a show in early 1970.
Someone "bucks up" could probably go to the Chicago Auto Trade Association and find pictures they may have. My guess is this will be "solved" before that happens.
The 1970 car show pictures will be the item that places the car and date.
I found this video of the museum car on you tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC7wzPv5qR4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC7wzPv5qR4)
If you compare some of the details of the video car to the Canepa car, to me there is no doubt its the same car, although Canepa's claim that it is not restored isn't quite accurate. Here are pictures of the interior, the one with carpet is from the video of the museum car, and the one without carpet is from the Canepa ad. Some differences, but not doubt to me its the same car. Same with the engines shots. Definately the same car.
And obviously, the Chicago Auto show pictures are from early 1970. So I guess the question I have is could that show car be a completely different car from the Canepa car? Because if they are the same car, and the show car was shown from early 1970 through part of 1971, then the race history claimed by Canepa can't be true. If they are two different cars (which I'm starting to think is the case), then where is the original show car now?
Rich
The "unrestored" touchups that have taken place in the car combined with a sudden need to have a race pedigree firmly attached to it make me think that it is question two of my 800,000 reasons post. I think the current owner is looking to make a huge return on selling the car.
Quote from: richRTSE on February 16, 2010, 10:54:09 AM
So I guess the question I have is could that show car be a completely different car from the Canepa car? Because if they are the same car, and the show car was shown from early 1970 through part of 1971, then the race history claimed by Canepa can't be true. If they are two different cars (which I'm starting to think is the case), then where is the original show car now?
Rich
The man who hauled the show car around for Chrysler in 1970 is still alive. His name is Andy Agosta. He will tell you there was only one show car, and that Cotton indeed built it for Chrysler to use on the show circuit.
It is important to note that my recollection of the claim of extensive race history as a Daytona (by this one and only car!) began when the car was first offered for sale in 2006.
So are you saying the museum/Canepa car is the same car as the 1970 show car then?
Quote from: richRTSE on February 16, 2010, 11:17:59 AM
So are you saying the museum/Canepa car is the same car as the 1970 show car then?
In my opinion (generally worthless) all of the verifiable facts and documentation point that way.
That would be my worthless opinion as well (not to mention a good amount of the circumstantial evidence as well).
Quote from: richRTSE on February 16, 2010, 11:17:59 AM
So are you saying the museum/Canepa car is the same car as the 1970 show car then?
Andy Agosta believes that the #6 Daytona (the one Cotton built) that he took care of for Chrysler during 1970 was eventually donated to the Darlington museum. Following that trail would lead one to believe the car Cotton pulled from the museum in 2005 and later sold is the one Canepa owns today.
In the words of Sgt. Shultz,
"I know nuting, nuting." But, this is fun............ :popcrn:
(http://www.fiftiesweb.com/tv/hogans-heroes-2.jpg)
Of the other known race cars from the period that still survive today, how many of them have a confirmed winning history? Just curious. And i'm not talking about all of the surviving race cars but rather the ones from this same time frame. IE Superbirds, Daytona's, C500's, Talladega's, and Cyclone Spoiler II"s?
Quote from: Aero426 on February 16, 2010, 11:25:10 AM
Quote from: richRTSE on February 16, 2010, 11:17:59 AM
So are you saying the museum/Canepa car is the same car as the 1970 show car then?
Andy Agosta believes that the #6 car he took care of for Chrysler was eventually donated to the Darlington museum. Following that trail would lead one to believe the car Cotton pulled from the museum in 2005 and later sold is the one Canepa owns today.
I did notice that on the car in the 1970 auto show photo, on the driver side vent window there is a round decal that looks like the kind that goes on the inside of the window. It looks like the same one on the Canepa car, as well as the "Buddy Baker" signature and "Nascar international race car" sticker. That round sticker seems to be on the car in the photos from 1969, including the Texas 500 in '69 (the wrecked car) when they were still allowed to have side windows. After that, I haven't seen a picture of the race car with one of those round stickers. Is it possible the Texas 500 wreck (the last race of 1969) or another car from the 1969 season was the wreck that was made into the show car? I thought someone said that definately DID NOT happen, but it would make sense to me...
This is something kind of interesting. The museum car has a front suspension with the older design strut rods. These extend from the front lower control arm to the K-frame. You can see the museum car has the rubber washer type strut bushings.
The black and white photo is from the Chrysler press release, "Cotton Owens Builds a Daytona" which was also in the 1970 World 600 program. If you look on either side of the K frame, you can see this car has the latest and greatest 1970 style ball joint type strut rods with the grease fitting in them. I don't make any representions either way, just that the Daytona under construction has some updated spec equipment.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/strutrod1.jpg)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/owensbuild.jpg)
Photo John Craft collection
Quote from: 69_500 on February 16, 2010, 11:48:47 AM
Of the other known race cars from the period that still survive today, how many of them have a confirmed winning history? Just curious. And i'm not talking about all of the surviving race cars but rather the ones from this same time frame. IE Superbirds, Daytona's, C500's, Talladega's, and Cyclone Spoiler II"s?
The Petty Superbirds: evidence points that two that exist today were built up in the mid-70's. The original cars were sold off or sent other places for 1971.
The Ramo Stott Superbird won in ARCA and USAC. It had two top 10's in GN racing as well. It stayed intact as a Superbird with the original driver until 1988. It's history is bullet proof.
The K & K Daytona is one of several Daytonas the team had. So it's tough to pinpoint if it won at Texas in '69. But it is known as an actual K & K team car.
Steve Atwell's #22 Allison Daytona, I don't know.
The restored #22 Allison Daytona, the car was restored as an Allison car by "paint on the roll bars", so who knows?
There are no Charger 500 race cars that exist in that form.
There are no original Spoiler II cars in that form. The Woods #21 1971 Cyclone WAS a Spoiler II in it's last life. The #21 Spoiler II that John Craft built in the 90's is an accurate homage to the Woods car, but Cale never farted in the seat.
The Petty Talladega that exists has a questionable pedigree. Ford records state all four cars he had that season were destroyed or scrapped at the end of the season
.
The #98 Benny Parsons Talladega won as an ARCA car in 1968. It has a wonderful history with Parsons and Wendell Scott, but it never raced with Talladega sheet metal.
The Pearson Talladega that exists I cannot say one way or the other.
There is a Lee Roy Yarbrough Junior Johnson car under restoration, but again, I can't say.
With few exceptions, these cars were used up, recycled and spit out when their useful life was done. If they were not scrapped, many of those remaining simply came to earth.
💩
I'm really hoping someone can fill in the complete history of the Owens/Baker car(s). It's one of my favorite cars from the era. I always liked the paint scheme. I really liked the front fenders. I also really liked the combination of Cotton Owens and Buddy Baker. If there were multiple cars to make the race dates, short track car, show car-so be it. If there was one that's fine too. Someone should be able to make a concise record of the race dates and car show dates and show what was there to make it add up. There is a lot of information out there.
:drool5:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 01:51:26 PM
Look at these pics..
One on the track has the little COG sticker in the vent window.
One with Baker doesn't even appear to have a vent window.
Are they the same car?
Thats a good question, any idea when the "on track" photo was taken? It's hard to see in the pictures, but is that what the small round decal says: "Cotton Owens Garage"?
Ok, so if everyone agrees there were multiple race chassis and no one can say which chassis participated in which race then how can the (extensive) race history of this particular car be confirmed? That seems to be the basis of the argument from my perspective. It seems Cotton made only one car for the show circuit (not a show car - made from a race chassis) and that car is the one that went to the museum and was later removed by Cotton. That car couldn't be on the race track and the show circuit at the same time during the 70 season (or at least most of it). The show pictures are obviously from the (a?) 1970 model year show so if no other cars were shown then this one had to be it. There doesn't seem to be any documented history that this car went 200 mph before anyone else - or even at all.
Remember that many people still think drivers/teams only have one car but, in reality, the car itself is just one of many pieces. If you look at it as the car being representative of the team then all the team's accomplishments could be attributed to that car - or displayed with the car. This makes sense on a show circuit.
Troy
Quote from: moparstuart on February 16, 2010, 02:11:41 PM
:drool5:
C5HM can tell you quite a bit about the Petty car and the Foyt Torino to the left of it.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120538;image)
Quote from: Troy on February 16, 2010, 02:27:22 PM
...
Remember that many people still think drivers/teams only have one car but, in reality, the car itself is just one of many pieces....
Troy
So,, Troy,,, are you telling me that this Daytona in question
ISN'T numbers-matching !!!!!!! :rofl:
Troy
Quote from: Troy on February 16, 2010, 02:27:22 PM
Remember that many people still think drivers/teams only have one car but, in reality, the car itself is just one of many pieces. If you look at it as the car being representative of the team then all the team's accomplishments could be attributed to that car - or displayed with the car. This makes sense on a show circuit.
Troy
This has happened before, and for various reasons. The #88 Daytona in the Talladega museum was donated by Chrysler as "the real car", when in reality it was another car painted up like the record setting car. The smoking gun memo explaining what happened still exists. The real car still had some value to Chrysler as a working race car, and so they donated a car that was "representative" of the achievement. I don't think anyone at Chrysler ever thought it would be a topic of interest 40 years later.
When I walked past the Baker car in 1986 at the Darlington museum, if you had told me it was the Southern 500 winner, I'd have accepted that at face value.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 16, 2010, 12:26:13 PM
This is something kind of interesting. The museum car has a front suspension with the older design strut rods. These extend from the front lower control arm to the K-frame. You can see the museum car has the rubber washer type strut bushings.
The black and white photo is from the Chrysler press release, "Cotton Owens Builds a Daytona" which was also in the 1970 World 600 program. If you look on either side of the K frame, you can see this car has the latest and greatest 1970 style ball joint type strut rods with the grease fitting in them. I don't make any representions either way, just that the Daytona under construction has some updated spec equipment.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/strutrod1.jpg)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/owensbuild.jpg)
Photo John Craft collection
rut rods
been having a think , understanding that when the #6 had a bad wreck ! it was retired to a show only car !! well sort of makes sence that there are old strut rods & stuff !! on this car now !! as i'm thinking , Cottons mob are not going to use the new type strut rods & stuff , on #6 no its to become a show car show car ! as it don't matter as long as its complete , just makes sence to use up all the older superseded suspension stuff
:shruggy: :scratchchin: :popcrn:
If the car in question became "show only", it became this prior to February '70. Therefore NO '70 race history.
If there was only ONE "show car", then the car in Chicago in 1970 is the same car that was in Chicago in 1971.
You can't have both - ONE show car with 1970 race history cannot exist. One of these stated FACTS is WRONG.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 05:55:47 PM
The Chicago car and the car as it looked from the museum look different.
If only a show car, why would it's appearance have changed? You can't replace those fender decals without a repaint. Why would it need repainting?
There is this little thing called a heat gun. It looks kind of like a hair dryer. Makes decals come off real easy. Nobody ever said the car didn't get some freshening before it finally went over to Darlington.
Also, I do not believe that style of "GOODYEAR" spelled out decal was available in 1970. That style of decal could have been applied during a quick clean-up later on.
One thing that is common to those two photos, is that they seem to be the only Owens cars with two screws in the A-post mouldings. If you check your race car photos taken at the track, you will see that they have four screws holding them on.
You are the one that stated only ONE "show car", I am only asking questions. You are stating un-wavering FACTS with no proof other than Cotton Owens says so.
You say the dates are WRONG, where is your proof?
Here is the much "ballyhooed" first built FM3 - "panther pink" 1970 Challenger R/T 440+6 convertible that debuted at the 1970 Chicago new car show. It has a scheduled production date of 2/11/70. Do you still question the pics are from the February 21 - March 1, 1970 Chicago Auto Show? Since you have added no additional information on your perception of this car's history, can you give your current thoughts?
So you're saying the Chicago car isn't the one that went into the museum (ie two "show cars")? I thought Cotton only made one?
Why can't you replace decals without painting the car? Sponsors changed relatively often correct? Surely the geniuses (I mean that in a good way) working on race teams back then knew how to loosen glue without damaging paint? I can't imagine a scenario where repainting an entire car and reapplying ALL the decals would be preferable to A) removing old decals B) painting over the old decals C) scraping/sanding off old decals and painting just the fenders (and wing).
Why would anyone want the car to be displayed differently than how it looked when it became famous?
Troy
💩
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 15, 2010, 02:09:51 PM
It is pure speculation to say which car was displayed at Chicago.
Also, where do you get the Daytona pic and how can you verify the date?
But most importantly, let's just look at the Southern 500 winner picture. See how it looks?
It didn't look like that after it was put back together after Charlotte.
Maybe they put all new sheetmetal on it. Ya ever think of that? They re-sheeted it. Painted it. Put new wheels on it. New decals. Carpet. Windows. Armor All. A cup holder. Whatever the heck they wanted.
They retired the Southern 500 winner. Made it into a car for show, not race.
FYI - "Armor All" wasn't invented yet. :hah: Just another piece of your comments with no basis in reality. :scratchchin:
ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmorAll
So this race history from your post in another thread is no longer being claimed as true?
Because if there was only one wing car, there is still the matter of it being in Chicago and Daytona at about the same time.
Here is the race history of the car:
http://www.canepacollection.com/detail-1969-dodge-charger-daytona-5111490.html
Race History
Cotton Owens Dodge Charger Daytona driven by Buddy Baker
Daytona, qualified 2nd, — DNF
Rockingham — DNF
Atlanta — DNF
Alabama 500, led for 101 laps, first race lap at over 200 MPH — DNF
Firecracker 400 — 2nd
Atlanta — 4th
Michigan — 5th
Darlington Southern 500 — 1st
Charlotte — DNF
not trying to confuse anything :-\
out of curiosity !! :shruggy: just taken these screen shots of the 1970 darlington race ,
:popcrn:
well, how about that--car being uncovered, NO fender decals. car ready on pit lane, FULL decals.
💩
just a few more details,
some stated before:
1970 Chicago car, 2 screws per "A" pillar shield, 5 rivets in drivers door handle cover
Current "museum" car, 2 screws per "A" pillar, 5 rivets in drivers door handle cover, similar in pattern to 1970 Chicago car
"Southern 500" pictured car: 4 screws per "A" pillar and six rivets on door handle cover.
:popcrn:
The famous Cobo Hall photo from the fall of 1970.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/70DetroitShow-1.jpg)
💩
Maybe I am mistaken. I just googled it and it says the Cobo show is every January. My dad thinks they took the car up there in Dec (1970).
#
Cobo Arena Tickets
It is attached to Cobo Hall, which is a convention center that hosts the famous Detroit Auto Show every January. It is a 12191-seat indoor arena adjacent to ...
www.ticketluck.com › Venues Tickets - Cached -
#
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 06:42:40 PM
If the car was raced, and shown, raced, shown, shown, raced, whatever - the reason it would change appearances is because it was raced. And as stated, they changed the front clips for every event. Sometimes they put a nose and wing on it. Car looks different every time you see it.
I am not an expert on here like many of these guys, but I am a thinker. But the scenario you just proposed does not seem plausible. To be quite honest, that has to be one of your most illogical statements yet.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 16, 2010, 10:07:59 PM
The famous Cobo Hall photo from the fall of 1970.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/70DetroitShow-1.jpg)
Doug,
Not only does this photo contain the potential answer to this car dilemma and history, but a number of important questions that have been bothering people for decades such as who built the pyramids to who shot JFK etc...
Look closely about 10 feet in front of the Daytona in Cobo hiding by the display engine.
Do you see the answer????????
I do
It's Aliens!
What is that orange car behind the Daytona? It ALMOST looks like a convertible with a 71 Charger front half....but it can't be.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 16, 2010, 10:27:51 PM
Maybe I am mistaken. I just googled it and it says the Cobo show is every January. My dad thinks they took the car up there in Dec (1970).
So the Cobo show was in January. And less than a month later the car was running in the Daytona 500. I can not imagine them doing such a thing. The Daytona 500 is the largest NASCAR race of the season. Instead of getting the car ready for the most important race of the year, they drag it to Detroit for a car show? ::)
💩
Quote from: maxwellwedge on February 16, 2010, 10:33:30 PM
What is that orange car behind the Daytona? It ALMOST looks like a convertible with a 71 Charger front half....but it can't be.
Does look like a 71 charger behind the Daytona, but then again if it was in the fall of 1970 the 71 model's would have been out. Also what years was the Diamante on display isn't it at the rear end of the #6 car?
💩
Quote from: maxwellwedge on February 16, 2010, 10:33:30 PM
What is that orange car behind the Daytona? It ALMOST looks like a convertible with a 71 Charger front half....but it can't be.
It appears to be a 71 Charger with a black vinyl top.....if this picture is from the fall of 70 then the 71 models would have come out in Sept. and a fall 70 show would have 71 models there correct????
Well Danny you were posting as I was typing.......
💩
What were the dates for all of the shows in 1970 anyone know? Where is Steven Juliano when you need him to chime in with his exhaustive stack of vintage auto show photo's and information? I'm sure he probably has a ticket stub from the events that are in question.
💩
I believe Doug's picture is from Detroit November or December of 1970, the new year introduction of the '71 models. Take it or leave it-there were 4 big shows for car introductions. Detroit was the first big one of the season, Chicago next then New York (I don't know how L.A. fit in). Detroit-Motor City gets 1st big show of the season, I believe it is always Nov/Dec. Detroit happened in the November/December time frame. The 1970 model year introduction at Detroit is documented in the December Chrysler-Plymouth Times of December 1969. I believe the dates I previously posted for Chicago are correct, the 1970 model year was shown in Chicago Feb. of 1970. The 1971 Model year was shown in Chicago February of 1971. I have the Official Program for the 1970 New York show April 4-12, 1970.
New car introduction was mid-September of the preceding year-i.e. 1970 model came out in mid-September 1969
Detroit-big introduction. Chicago-next-big sales show. New York followed..
It appears to me we can now place a/the Owens/Baker Daytona at 3 shows.
It seems to me the car is first shown with 1970 model cars in Chicago in February 21-March 1 1970 if the multiple pictures posted are Chicago, which the evidence suggests they are. With the surrounding 1970 model cars it is certainly while the 1970 models were the new-new cars.
We next see the car in Detroit Nov./Dec. 1970 in Detroit.
We again see the car in Chicago at McCormick Place Feb. 20-28 1971.
The Owens/Baker Daytona next to the 1970 model year cars suggests sometime in the Winter/Spring of 1970 to me. Maybe Feb. 1970?
💩
Since the picture Doug has posted says "1970 Detroit", I believe it is reasonable to say it is December 1970, with the surrounding 1971 cars. If Cobo was January 1971, the Baker/Owens car is still shown at 3 separate shows and it does not change the time line.
Quote from: 70Sbird on February 16, 2010, 10:29:51 PM
The famous Cobo Hall photo from the fall of 1970.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/70DetroitShow-1.jpg)
The Detroit show (photo above) opened on November 21, 1970 and ran for 9 days. Autoweek references the new Dodge Diamante (shown behind the Daytona) in its coverage.
💩
Walter Miller has a brochure for sale on e-bay for the 44-th National Auto Show at Cobo Hall Detroit October 20-28, 1962 featuring the 1963 model year cars.
1971 model year cars get introduced in the Fall of 1970.
The part that no one has explained is how the Owens/Baker Daytona is next to the 1970 model year cars at the 1970 car show with the pink challenger.
If it was Chicago Feb. 1970, the Daytona 500 was taking place at the same time. The only way I know a single car can be 2 places at the same time is it was on "Star Trek".
💩
💩
Nobody is guessing on the Chicago show dates.
Can the individuals in this picture be identified, are they the same guys who got their names added to the fender(s)?
The decals that appear in both pictures are in the same location.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 16, 2010, 11:35:33 PM
The Detroit show (photo above) opened on November 21, 1970 and ran for 9 days. Autoweek references the new Dodge Diamante (shown behind the Daytona) in its coverage.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/70DetroitShow-1.jpg)
Here is coverage from the Autoweek newspaper referenced above.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/BakerDaytona/TMP77.jpg)
💩
Then, what about the 1969 Detroit Show? That show opened on November 16, 1969.
I will call your attention to the text in the fourth column:
"Buddy Baker and his racing Dodge and Mario Rossi were at the Dodge counter..."
I wonder what Buddy Baker car this was? If it was a Baker car, it would make sense to be an Owens car as Baker took over the ride in the spring of 1969.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/BakerDaytona/TMP78.jpg)
You will also notice there is an overhead sign in the second photo labeled "Daytona Lane". Hmmmm...
The Yellowjacket is what became the Diamante for the next years show season.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/BakerDaytona/TMP79.jpg)
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 12:11:16 AM
McCormick Place. Built along Lake Michigan in the ruins of the first McCormick Place, the replacement exposition center opened Jan. 3, 1971.
First photo is at the Chicago International Amphitheatre, February 1970 (while McCormick Place was being finished)
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120580;image)
Second photo is Detroit, November 1970
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/70DetroitShow-1.jpg)
Third photo is at the New Chicago McCormick Place, February 1971. You can tell is it McCormick Place because of the windows near the ceiling.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=114370;image)
You will never see a Daytona race car at the track with a puny little street car front spoiler like that. Note that the auto show car has this same kind of spoiler.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120579;image)
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 12:03:04 AM
The fender decals are different in those photos
The majority are not different, I removed 3 decals from each fender.
The remaining decals are in as close to the same position as practical on RH & LH fenders.
I'm voting (with another unqualified worthless opinion) that the show car was not the Southern 500 car.
The show car is a great piece of NASCAR history. It was lifted right out of the heat of combat in 1970, and time-capsuled for us. It was built out of contemporary pieces in the same manner as the other racers were at that week and day. It probably tells us more about the Southern-500-winning Daytona in 1970 than if you found that actual chassis today after multiple rebodies & wrecks.
But still, IMHO the 1970 Southern 500 happened to be won with a different Owens/Baker chassis.
Kinda off topic but Man are there some sweet pics being posted :cheers:
Quote from: Redbird on February 16, 2010, 11:48:36 PM
The part that no one has explained is how the Owens/Baker Daytona is next to the 1970 model year cars at the 1970 car show with the pink challenger.
If it was Chicago Feb. 1970, the Daytona 500 was taking place at the same time. The only way I know a single car can be 2 places at the same time is it was on "Star Trek".
To me that is the biggest question. There is no way the car can be at two places at one time. Links are provided to prove the dates are correct.
The 1970 Daytona 500 was run on February 22. 1970.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970_in_NASCAR
And the Chicago Auto Show was February 21st- March 1st. 1970
http://www.highperformancepontiac.com/events/hppp_0904_pontiac_history_at_the_chicago_auto_show/index.html
So there was a Buddy Baker at the Detroit show in Dec '69, the Chicago show in Feb '70, and again in Detroit in Dec '70?
I found a very interesting website. It list the #6 car in several more races than the E-Bay ad states.
Here is the E-bay ad. It shows 9 races.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Outside-Pole-Position-of-the-1970-Daytona-500_W0QQitemZ170435715234QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Cars_Trucks?hash=item27aec2a0a2
Here is the NASCAR website I found. It has the #6 car running 18 races.
http://www.racing-reference.info/rquery?id=6&trk=t0&series=W&cn=1&yr=1970
It seems to be a busy car in 1970 running 18 races and being on the car show circuit. When did they have time to even work on the car?
Quote from: richRTSE on February 17, 2010, 09:49:21 AM
So there was a Buddy Baker . . . and again in Detroit in Dec '70?
The Detriot Auto show was November 21-29th 1970. Here is the link.
http://books.google.com/books?id=t6Zd_fMN2sIC&pg=PA203&lpg=PA203&dq=detroit+auto+show+november++1970&source=bl&ots=Keq0PItuRW&sig=XnJLN_KuPi45z2BX66pdiTpsksg&hl=en&ei=AQV8S7C-GIn-M5udmMAF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CCAQ6AEwCDgK#v=onepage&q=detroit%20auto%20show%20november%20%201970&f=false
And just a few days before the #6 car was racing in Rockingham on November 15th. 1970. Looks like he finished 5th.
http://www.racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-47&series=W
So would that mean within a couple days, the car raced at Rockingham, was then taken somewhere to get a complete makeover, and then taken to Detroit to be in the Auto Show. ::)
getting a little side tracked , but reading a few years back , in a interview with one of the mopar mags ! the team owner or crew chief of the number 71 daytona , said when the RACE car was displayed at shows ! exibits etc , we would fit carpet to the car ! & on the inner door shells :-\ to make it look nice for the viewing public :yesnod: same with the stick on wood grain dash ! :scratchchin: will have a look for said mag feature later
💩
We believe the pic of Cotton with crew and #6 was from end of 1970. After the car was first built back for showing. That would explain the single #6 on the front nose, and the small spoiler.
However, it does not have the crew painted on the fender nor the same decals as it did in the museum. It appears to have the 1970 Goodyear decals, which would coincide that it was rebuilt in 1970. The car did some shows in late 1970 and 1971, visited the Chrysler dealers, ending up in Atlanta and then back to Cotton. Not sure how long he kept it before putting it in Darlington museum, but at some point he must have changed the fenders again, putting on the 1971 decals (long Goodyear) - again jiving with the timeline - and him wanting to put the crew member names on it for the museum and posterity.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 10:56:39 AM
Gale Porter called Cotton and wanted a car for Cobo in Nov-Dec (1970) or Jan 1971. The car shown at Cobo in 70-71 and Chicago 71 were in fact the real COG race car (and Southern 500 winner). Hence the sign "Dodge Wins Big in '70"
I am not trying to play the "Gotch Ya" card but I am not sure how this is correct.
The show in Detroits Cobo Hall was November 21-29th 1970.
The car ran at Rockingham just a few days before the show started.
💩
Look closely at the Chicago pic - see that flowery looking decal at the front of the fender?
See it?
It has a Dodge Scat Pack bee in it.
A COG RACE car would never have that on it. None of the pics of a COG car have it. Ever.
The only reason it would be on there is if that car was built by Chrysler (Ray Nichels).
There is your smoking gun guys.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 11:23:38 AM
Look closely at the Chicago pic - see that flowery looking decal at the front of the fender?
See it?
It has a Dodge Scat Pack bee in it.
A COG RACE car would never have that on it. None of the pics of a COG car have it. Ever.
The only reason it would be on there is if that car was built by Chrysler (Ray Nichels).
There is your smoking gun guys.
But why does the same car have a COG sticker in the vent wing window?
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 11:30:32 AM
Obviously it was a pretty damned good replica.
::)
No offense, but I am not buying this storyline at all. It does not make any sense at all. What does make sense is Mike DC's earlier summarization, which is what all the pictoral evidence points to.
Quote from: Mike DC (formerly miked) on February 17, 2010, 05:24:34 AM
The show car is a great piece of NASCAR history. It was lifted right out of the heat of combat in 1970, and time-capsuled for us. It was built out of contemporary pieces in the same manner as the other racers were at that week and day. It probably tells us more about the Southern-500-winning Daytona in 1970 than if you found that actual chassis today after multiple rebodies & wrecks.
But still, IMHO the 1970 Southern 500 happened to be won with a different Owens/Baker chassis.
:cheers:
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 11:03:56 AM
We believe the pic of Cotton with crew and #6 was from end of 1970. After the car was first built back for showing. That would explain the single #6 on the front nose, and the small spoiler.
However, it does not have the crew painted on the fender nor the same decals as it did in the museum. It appears to have the 1970 Goodyear decals, which would coincide that it was rebuilt in 1970. The car did some shows in late 1970 and 1971, visited the Chrysler dealers, ending up in Atlanta and then back to Cotton. Not sure how long he kept it before putting it in Darlington museum, but at some point he must have changed the fenders again, putting on the 1971 decals (long Goodyear) - again jiving with the timeline - and him wanting to put the crew member names on it for the museum and posterity.
Don Moody received this exact photo from the hand of your grandfather on the weekend of May 3, 1970 at Indianapolis Raceway Park. Don was a crewman on Butch Hartman's USAC team in 1970. Your grand dad was friendly with Butch and Dick Hartman and helped them get their Charger 500 converted to a Daytona among providing other advice. Don has an interesting and pleasant story about Cotton's interaction with the Hartman Racing Team. Perhaps he will chime in.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120579;image)
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 11:13:46 AM
NO - THIS PARTICULAR #6 car's last race was Charlotte (10.11.1970). I stated this many times. Nobody said anything about THIS #6 running at Rockingham. They obviously had more than 1 race car. Here is THIS car's record again:
July 4, 1970 Firecracker 400 at Daytona
Finished 2nd
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-24&series=W
Aug 2, 1970 - Dixie 500 at Atlanta
Finished 4th
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-31&series=W
Aug 16, 1970 - Yankee 400 at Michigan
Finished 6th
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-34&series=W
Aug 23, 1970 - Talladega 500
Finished 5th
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-35&series=W
Sept 7, 1970 - Southern 500
Finished 1st
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-38&series=W
Oct 11, 1970 - National 500 at Charlotte
Finished 26th (crash)
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-44&series=W
You just got done telling us yesterday after you talked to your dad, that there was only one Daytona.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 17, 2010, 12:00:03 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 11:13:46 AM
NO - THIS PARTICULAR #6 car's last race was Charlotte (10.11.1970). I stated this many times. Nobody said anything about THIS #6 running at Rockingham. They obviously had more than 1 race car.
You just got done telling us yesterday after you talked to your dad, that there was only one Daytona.
And here.
"So you suggest a duplicate show car was built - that looks exactly like the race car down to the very last detail? And this show car was put in Cobo and the museum, while the original race winner was forever lost? Does that make sense, that Cotton would somehow lose the 500 winner, whip up a show car built out in race trim, dry sump and race hemi and all - and just keep a car that was for show only? No it does not, and if doesn't make sense, then it isn't true.
So don't get too wrapped up in your trivia nonsense. You don't know enough about the reality of the time. The truth is really so simple. Only when you try to discredit it do things get really confusing."And here too
"I just called my dad. He was part of the team, and his memory is (arguably) better than Cotton's in some aspects. He tells me:
They only had 1 wing car that he can remember."
You also posted this;
therealmoparman
Junior Member
Online
Posts: 57
Re: The REAL story of the Cotton Owens/Buddy Baker 1969 Dodge Charger
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2010, 06:50:06 PM »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is the race history of the car:
http://www.canepacollection.com/detail-1969-dodge-charger-daytona-5111490.html
Race History Cotton Owens Dodge Charger Daytona driven by Buddy Baker
Daytona, qualified 2nd, — DNF
Rockingham — DNF
Atlanta — DNF
Alabama 500, led for 101 laps, first race lap at over 200 MPH — DNF
Firecracker 400 — 2nd
Atlanta — 4th
Michigan — 5th
Darlington Southern 500 — 1st
Charlotte — DNF
Which doesn't exactly jive with this;
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 10:56:39 AM
There was never a claim anyway that the Southern 500 winner ran at Daytona in Feb. It was the July 4 Firecracker race where it ran 2nd.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 11:30:32 AM
Obviously it was a pretty damned good replica. Ray Nichels was capable of that.
In fact, I'm sure this car eventually went on to race, just not for COG. Ray Nichels could have taken it back to his shop in Indiana and made a car for Goldsmith or Glotzbach out of it.
Back then, they just didn't built show cars. Nobody did. They showed them, and raced them. They cut these cars up and rebodied them, reconfigured them, whatever - all the time.
Ray Nichels, Cotton Owens and Chrysler were all very tight.
http://raynichels.com/id2.html
If Ray Nichels built a show car for Chrysler for the 1970 Chicago Auto Show, it would be highly unlikely he would build it in ANY colors other than his own. And he certainly would not put a COG decal in the window! He'd put a NIchels decal there.
Considering the sheet metal and paint details on the shop car, the Chicago car, the Detroit car, and the Darlington museum car seem to match - I find it tough to believe they are not the same car. Forget about stick on decals. Each of these cars have their own fingerprints in the metal.
💩
Just to clarify - because I know I need to - by HIS car I meant one that looked like BAKER's car. Baker was #1 Chrysler driver, and they would want to display his car, not Goldsmith's or Glotzbach. At least not in 69-70.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 12:41:31 PM
Just to clarify - because I know I need to - by HIS car I meant one that looked like BAKER's car. Baker was #1 Chrysler driver, and they would want to display his car, not Goldsmith's or Glotzbach. At least not in 69-70.
Ray Nichels and Charlie would probably disagree with you on that.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 12:36:58 PM
Feel the force, Luke - you know it makes sense.
I disagree with your pop culture analogy... this whole storyline appears more like a Don Adams (of Maxwell Smart fame) "Would you believe" routine
Faversham: You think you've got me, but I have you surrounded by the entire mounted 17th Bengal Lancers.
Khan: I don't believe you.
Faversham: Would you believe the First Bengal Lancers?
Khan: No
Faversham: How about Gunga Din on a donkey?
Would You Believe (http://www.wouldyoubelieve.com/sounds/believe.wav)
Quote from: Aero426 on February 17, 2010, 12:43:50 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 12:41:31 PM
Just to clarify - because I know I need to - by HIS car I meant one that looked like BAKER's car. Baker was #1 Chrysler driver, and they would want to display his car, not Goldsmith's or Glotzbach. At least not in 69-70.
Ray Nichels and Charlie would probably disagree with you on that.
So would Bobby Isaac and the #71 K&K team, who had already won at College Station in '69.
Which is why they didn't feature Glotzbach or Issac (or even a nobody like Don White) in any of those Scat pack ads, correct? I suppose they would have been especially pissed at Issac after the way he went and agreed to drive that first race at Talladega when the rest of their guys walked out.
Baker was an important driver and is a legend in his own right but I wouldn't go so far as to assert that he was their main number one guy. Wylie has stated that the reason he chose Buddy for the 200 mph run is because he knew that he wouldn't lose his nerve at the last minute, that he would definitely go for the record. But at no time have they ever said he was their best or number one or most important member of the team.
Chrysler had no such thing as a "number 1 driver". All the full factory supported teams and drivers were treated equally.
Which leads to an obvious outstanding question, how would one team get picked over another to have a representative race car displayed at the 1970 Chicago Auto Show right immediately before the Daytona 500?
One answer could be that Chrysler told a shop (such as Nichels or even in house) to build them a car for the show that looked like "X". Maybe "X" was left up to the shop to choose (which would probably eliminate Nichels) or maybe it was drawn out of a hat or maybe McCurry really liked the number "6". Who knows?
Another possibility might be (and this is 100% conjecture too) someone had an extra car available that was free to use in 1970? If that were the case, why would they not contact that same team in the fall to see if they could use a car again for the next round of shows?
Note that I am asking hypothetically and not making an accusation here. I'd like to know the answer as much as anyone.
💩
Back then the teams received from the mfg what are called "bodies in white" which basically were non-VIN chassis with no paint or anything really. Sometimes the teams would add the body, othertimes it may have come with a body.
I cannot say that Ray Nichels built that show car. I think it is likely. Ray basically worked for Chrysler. But where do you draw the line between a factory man and a factory car? Is it a Nichels car or a Chrysler car. I do not know. Don't know really why they chose to promo the #6, I am only offering reasons why I think so. Not sure who ultimately made that decision.
💩
No one has offered an explanation for why the COG race cars have four A pillar screws and 5 door handle cover rivets but BOTH show cars have two screws and six rivits?
💩
💩
💩
Or it could also mean that Dodge as a brand was a winner, or it could mean that a car that looked just like that one won something, or it could be merely a marketing effort to tie the image of a winner with the image of buying a Dodge. To state that the reason for that sign being there was to promote THAT car as a winner is not something you can state as fact. It could be fact, but you have no more idea that it was than I do it wasn't.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 12:24:15 PM
My bad on those races - those were pulled from Canepa's site in haste. They have changed over time. I can only stick with my previous statement and those exact races. Not sure where Canepa got that info. A brand new car would have debuted at Daytona in Feb.
You pretend to speak with authority, yet it is obvious you have not truly done the research. You are willfully blind to any evidence contrary to what you've been told. It would seem you MO is to throw enough junk, and hope that some of it will stick.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 02:19:30 PM
Excuse me sir, I believe I do speak with authority.
Rather, I am speaking directly for someone who does have authority on this subject.
I am learning this history directly from The Ultimate authority.
Not from anecdotes, hearsay, and other claims from people who were not there themselves. Or said this or that.
I am telling you from the men who lived it. They lived it. They did not document their lives like you would have wished. We are filling in the details and remembering history, just like you are.
I have come to this board to clear the air, once and for all. I am willing to undertake any piece of history you can dig up. I have challenged you to do so. Together, we are all learning a lot. The Truth will come out.
Nothing you have presented thus far has changed my story. It has only made it stronger.
Considering you have sold the car four years ago, collected the money, and it is two owners down the road, why is this car even your issue?
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 10:56:39 AM
The cars displayed at Cobo in 1969 and Chicago Feb 1970 are not COG cars. We do not know who they were built by. Could have been by Ray Nichels or Chrysler. Cotton did not attend the 69 Cobo show. That is why Mario Rossi and Baker were there.
The #6 Southern 500 winner began life in 1969. It raced in Dec of 1969 at College Station Texas. It was wrecked by Baker here. I believe there are pictures of this.
The #6 (eventual 500 winner) was taken back to COG shop, where it sat for a while. Cotton was building a new car to take to Daytona for Feb 1970. A brand new car was taken to Daytona in Feb 1970. There was never a claim anyway that the Southern 500 winner ran at Daytona in Feb. It was the July 4 Firecracker race where it ran 2nd.
So the car sat around COG shop until it was later rebuilt in 1970. It raced at Daytona in July 1970 finising 2nd. At Talladega (not sure if it was April or August race). Then raced and won at Darlington (09.07.1970). It later raced at Charlotte (10.11.1970) where it was wrecked again.
Gale Porter called Cotton and wanted a car for Cobo in Nov-Dec (1970) or Jan 1971. The car shown at Cobo in 70-71 and Chicago 71 were in fact the real COG race car (and Southern 500 winner). Hence the sign "Dodge Wins Big in '70"
So it looks like there was another #6 out there. It just wasn't built by COG. Ray Nichels built cars for Chrysler and I am quite sure he was capable of building a replica and Chrysler may have used that for promotions. I cannot speak for that car.
That would explain why all the cars look different. The car shown at COG with crew is not the same car shown at Chicago in 1970.
QuoteIt makes a lot more sense that this "crashed" race car .....
Quote12/7/69 Texas 500 (Texas World Speedway) -- #6 started 1st, finished 8th after a crash -- pole speed was 176.284mph
*end of 1969 Grand National season*
Was turned into a "show car" for Chrysler Corp. and used for the '70 & '71 seasons strickly as a "show car".
The same car CAN NOT be at Daytona and Chicago in February of 1970.
& it would be easy to confuse the dates of turning a wrecked racecar at the end of the season into a show car for Chrysler. 1969 VS. 1970
Earlier in the thread I suggested this possibility and was dismissed. Now you are stating they are the same car.
What was relayed to
hemigeno about the fate of the wrecked College Station, TX car?
Why would Chrysler Corp want a "show car" built at the end of the '70 season that represented a car that NASCAR basically outlawed? & why would the car be painted to represent the single digit #6 on the nose that only raced in (at most) 3 '69 season races?
Have you identified the "crew members" in the vintage shop photo?
Why would there be two nearly identical #6 "show cars" one built by COG and the and one by others?
Some "hipster" from Dodge Marketing/Advertising probably slapped the "flower power" Scat Pack decal on the nose of the car at a show.
Not to throw another wrench into this, but how long did Charlie Glotzbach drive a #6 Dodge? And did he ever drive a #6 Daytona?
I will echo Doug's question:
Quote from: Aero426 on February 17, 2010, 02:24:24 PM
Considering you have sold the car four years ago, collected the money, and it is two owners down the road, why is this car even your issue?
Quote from: richRTSE on February 17, 2010, 02:38:11 PM
Not to throw another wrench into this, but how long did Charlie Glotzbach drive a #6 Dodge? And did he ever drive a #6 Daytona?
Charlie began driving for Cotton in 1968, and walked away from NASCAR briefly in 1969 over personal issues he had with the series. Buddy Baker was given Charlie's #6 ride. As to Charlie, cooler heads prevailed and Charlie returned to drive the Nichels #99 in June of '69 when Paul Goldsmith retired. He never drove a #6 Daytona.
I'm still curious as to why they would put a street wing on it... at the end of the season. Now if you had a crashed car at the beginning of the season and wanted to keep your legal parts for race use, it would make sense, but if it were the end of 70 and the the car had just been made illegal, why on earth would you bother to change the wing?
For that matter, why would you give up a winning chassis just because the sheet metal was made illegal? Cars were reskinned all the time as we have all agreed so with chassis dialing a time consuming and important part of the equation and now suddenly being more important with your wind cheating sheet metal denied, why would you get rid of a winning one? Wouldn't it be easier to give up one that didn't work as well?
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 01:54:34 PM
Note that the sign show from Cobo at end of 70 or begin of 71 says "Dodge Wins Again in '70" with #6.
I have posted the dates a couple times for you. The show at Cobo was
November 21-29 1970. Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 01:54:34 PM
They would only put that with a car that really won.
What the #@%!. ::) I would like to know how they did that considering the #6 just ran a race a couple days before in Rockingham. And since you have stated several times there was only one car, I am still curious how the #6 car ran
18 races in 1970 and still had time to tour the country as a show car. And we know for sure, as stated by you several times, the one and only #6 car was at the Chicago Auto Show on February 22, 1970 and the Daytona 500 on February 22, 1970. That is one car, two places at the same time, 1700 miles away.
Here is where I get my information on the 18 races the #6 car ran that year. But lets not cloud this discussion with facts.
http://www.racing-reference.info/rquery?id=6&trk=t0&series=W&cn=1&yr=1970
Quote from: Ghoste on February 17, 2010, 03:00:09 PM
I'm still curious as to why they would put a street wing on it... at the end of the season.
I might be wrong, but I think what they said was it had the street braces, the part that is inside the trunk and bolts to the bottom of the wing and the trunk floor. The pictures from Canepa's site show the street style braces.
Quote from: richRTSE on February 17, 2010, 03:07:12 PM
Quote from: Ghoste on February 17, 2010, 03:00:09 PM
I'm still curious as to why they would put a street wing on it... at the end of the season.
I might be wrong, but I think what they said was it had the street braces, the part that is inside the trunk and bolts to the bottom of the wing and the trunk floor. The pictures from Canepa's site show the street style braces.
The Canepa car's wing also lacked the safety cabling mandated after Buddy Arrington's crash which sent a horizontal wing section helicoptering off the racetrack area. While the cabling could have been merely removed, its previous installation would have left visible evidence of a drilled hole in the wing. I've seen the Chrysler blueprints from Neil Castles which gave explicit dimensions for how this was done.
The fact that bracing and cabling were not track-ready or track-approved for racing during the bulk of the 1970 racing season is yet another piece of evidence supporting a pre-1970 season construction timeline and show-car intent. So far, the only explanation proffered is that "it must have been changed out". This is an explanation of convenience to fit a storyline that is otherwise not supported by the evidence.
Quote from: hemigeno on February 17, 2010, 03:10:46 PM
Quote from: richRTSE on February 17, 2010, 03:07:12 PM
Quote from: Ghoste on February 17, 2010, 03:00:09 PM
I'm still curious as to why they would put a street wing on it... at the end of the season.
I might be wrong, but I think what they said was it had the street braces, the part that is inside the trunk and bolts to the bottom of the wing and the trunk floor. The pictures from Canepa's site show the street style braces.
The Canepa car's wing also lacked the safety cabling mandated after Buddy Arrington's crash which sent a horizontal wing section helicoptering off the racetrack area.
The wing cable would typically be visible externally at the top of the wing upright. Of course if the car was completed prior to Daytona in Feb of 1970, it wouldn't have a cable whether it raced or not. The car also has a street style trunk lock pillar which is just extra baggage on a race car. No driveshaft loops? No passing tech either. Why would anyone take the time to remove driveshaft loops on a car destined for show?
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 17, 2010, 02:29:08 PM
What was relayed to hemigeno about the fate of the wrecked College Station, TX car?
I'm interested myself in what Ryan relays about this car's fate. I remember quite distinctly what Cotton said, and others were present at the time the story was relayed.
💩
💩
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 03:26:52 PM
Quote
12/7/69 Texas 500 (Texas World Speedway) -- #6 started 1st, finished 8th after a crash -- pole speed was 176.284mph
*end of 1969 Grand National season*
Was turned into a "show car" for Chrysler Corp. and used for the '70 & '71 seasons strickly as a "show car".
The same car CAN NOT be at Daytona and Chicago in February of 1970.
--
Was stated there was a Cobo show in Dec 69. How could a car that was crashed on 12.07.69 be at a Cobo show that same month?
That was not the fate of the '69 Texas 500 car as relayed to me by Cotton. What have you been told by him about that particular chassis?
:scratchchin:
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 03:30:08 PMYou are confusing points that have already been made. It never ends! :brickwall:
You have NOT made any/nor proven any points to anyone but yourself.
Try stating one FACT and be willing to discuss that one FACT.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 03:39:23 PM
QUOTE: What the #@%!. Roll Eyes I would like to know how they did that considering the #6 just ran a race a couple days before in Rockingham. And since you have stated several times there was only one car, I am still curious how the #6 car ran 18 races in 1970 and still had time to tour the country as a show car. And we know for sure, as stated by you several times, the one and only #6 car was at the Chicago Auto Show on February 22, 1970 and the Daytona 500 on February 22, 1970. That is one car, two places at the same time, 1700 miles away.
ANSWER: There was not one and only #6 car. Cotton had a stable of 1-3, in any form at any time. Charger 500 or Daytona. Dad says he only remembers one WING car.
That means that they put the wing and nose on at different tracks, at different times.
If two different chassis ran with Daytona sheet metal on them, I guess that would mean there was more than one Daytona!
💩
Quote from: hemigeno on February 17, 2010, 03:42:55 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 03:26:52 PM
Quote
12/7/69 Texas 500 (Texas World Speedway) -- #6 started 1st, finished 8th after a crash -- pole speed was 176.284mph
*end of 1969 Grand National season*
Was turned into a "show car" for Chrysler Corp. and used for the '70 & '71 seasons strickly as a "show car".
The same car CAN NOT be at Daytona and Chicago in February of 1970.
--
Was stated there was a Cobo show in Dec 69. How could a car that was crashed on 12.07.69 be at a Cobo show that same month?
That was not the fate of the '69 Texas 500 car as relayed to me by Cotton. What have you been told by him about that particular chassis?
:scratchchin:
Speaking of the Texas 500, here's the high-banks.......... Maybe we should have an Aeros meet there.......
(http://www.texasworldspeedway.com/images/phocagallery/thumbs/phoca_thumb_l_2009%2002%2004%20tws%20ferrari%20test%20014.jpg)
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 03:30:08 PM
QUOTE:
For that matter, why would you give up a winning chassis just because the sheet metal was made illegal? Cars were reskinned all the time as we have all agreed so with chassis dialing a time consuming and important part of the equation and now suddenly being more important with your wind cheating sheet metal denied, why would you get rid of a winning one? Wouldn't it be easier to give up one that didn't work as well?
ANSWER: You are speculating again. You weren't there.
The car was wrecked at Texas in 69. Wrecked again at CLT in Oct 70. The car had been wrecked several times. Baker tore up a lot of race cars.
Cotton didn't get rid of it. That's what I've said. He kept it, because it was a winner. He did not give it away, he loaned it to Chrysler. Took it back, then loaned it to museum.
He got rid of it because they ran Plymouths in 1971.
You are confusing points that have already been made. It never ends! :brickwall:
I wasn't speculating at all, I was asking a question (hence the question marks). Let me rephrase the part about giving it away and ask why wouldn't you continue to race that chassis with new, albeit Plymouth shaped) sheet metal?
And yes, Baker did tear up a LOT of cars. Makes you wonder almost how you could keep track so easily 40 years later about which one went where and when. But then, you weren't there either or more accurately I suppose you were there but at 7 years of age it isn't likely you were documenting much of this. And yes, I get it, you are asking the people who were there doing it but something still isn't adding up.
💩
You are right, we are trying to get to the truth and I am only asking to make sure those details help us get there. If there hadn't been a lot of false provenance attached to the car in the first place when it entered the collector world, we wouldn't be here now.
💩
I think a reasonable assumption would be that the Flower Sticker with the Bee inside it is probably a red Herring. I have seen similar stickers from the period before. Maybe if someone has the time to search Steve Juliano's web site there will be a similar sticker in one of his display cases like that. I don't think it is a stretch that one of the floor workers at the show plastered it on the car just because he could. At shows in that time they often had little give aways, Joe Higgins stickers, Joe Higgins Badges and the like. I have a rectangular "wink" Road Runner sticker that had stickum on the back so it would attach onto a shirt or sweater, the "wink" sticker is just plastic-no metal frame around it or pin on the back. My belief is that my "wink" sticker was on a sheet of stickers like it. A floor worker probably folded the sheet to crack the plastic on a seam, then gave them to kids to put on their shirt for the show. Cheap give aways for shows; decals, literature, dealer pins; advertising.
Why would Ray Nichols build a copy of an Owens/Baker car? Logic would say Ray Nichols would build a copy of Charlie Glotzbach's car or another car representing his shop. I couldn't see Cotton Owens building a copy of a Petty car to put in a show because Chrysler wanted a Petty car in a show.
💩
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 05:01:19 PM
Hey you guys are the ones all hung up on decals and paint and 4 vs 5 rivets and such esoterica.
Your evidence is unmistakable - but mine is a "red herring?"
It's all in the sheet metal. Those decals can be changed in five minutes. Decals are pretty low on the "prove it" list.
💩
When did it run over 200 at Talladega?
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 05:09:02 PM
Please describe how you can tell in the sheetmetal? I am VERY curious.
The only constant seems to be that the completed Daytona in the shop photo matches the Chicago car, the Detroit car and the Museum car. They are the ONLY ones with ALL of the above:
stock type front clip
stock front spoiler
full right side exhaust
closed headlights
full glass.
air deflectors with two screws
NONE of the race cars have ALL these traits. You would have to be blind to not to make the connection on these, and not question the accuracy of a November 1970 delivery date to Cobo Hall.
💩
Quote from: Aero426 on February 17, 2010, 12:43:50 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 12:41:31 PM
Just to clarify - because I know I need to - by HIS car I meant one that looked like BAKER's car. Baker was #1 Chrysler driver, and they would want to display his car, not Goldsmith's or Glotzbach. At least not in 69-70.
Ray Nichels and Charlie would probably disagree with you on that.
Mario (where-ever he is) and Bobby might have a differing opinion, too.
💩
Running 200 mph at Chelsea is very different from running 200 mph at Talladega. Again, even though Buddy says in his book he did it lots of times, there appears to be absolutely no documentation at all to back that up. He did it during a record run in a different car at Talladega, that is a fact. During a race however there is no hard evidence of any NASCAR driver doing this during a NASCAR event on a NASCAR ttrack until the early 1980's. I pointed this out before and you said it happened during drafting. Did they turn off the timers on any car that was in a draft? 200 mph was a pretty significant achievment so it seems a little strange that NASCAR wouldn't have promoted this or at least admitted it actually happened.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 17, 2010, 03:18:45 PM
Quote from: hemigeno on February 17, 2010, 03:10:46 PM
Quote from: richRTSE on February 17, 2010, 03:07:12 PM
Quote from: Ghoste on February 17, 2010, 03:00:09 PM
I'm still curious as to why they would put a street wing on it... at the end of the season.
I might be wrong, but I think what they said was it had the street braces, the part that is inside the trunk and bolts to the bottom of the wing and the trunk floor. The pictures from Canepa's site show the street style braces.
The Canepa car's wing also lacked the safety cabling mandated after Buddy Arrington's crash which sent a horizontal wing section helicoptering off the racetrack area.
The wing cable would typically be visible externally at the top of the wing upright. Of course if the car was completed prior to Daytona in Feb of 1970, it wouldn't have a cable whether it raced or not. The car also has a street style trunk lock pillar which is just extra baggage on a race car. No driveshaft loops? No passing tech either. Why would anyone take the time to remove driveshaft loops on a car destined for show?
Doug, that was probably done when the windows were being taken in and out on those
multiple occassions between race and show dates. You know, because it
looked better. Ditto for the street spoiler and rear wing. And same thing with the four rivet vs. two rivet "A"pillar covers and the different door handle covers. I often find myself out in the garage with my race cars doing the same thing. Windows one day, none the next. Idle hands are the Devils workshop. I am surprised that you haven't succumed to the same urge with yout Stott car yet?
💩
I guess it is everyone but me. Oddly enough they can post other speeds during the race all they want but when someone broke a barrier it was apparently some sort of agreed upon secret to just not say a word and only publish the average lap speeds or winning lap speeds and ones like that. ::)
💩
Quote from: Ghoste on February 17, 2010, 05:50:44 PM
I guess it is everyone but me. Oddly enough they can post other speeds during the race all they want but when someone broke a barrier it was apparently some sort of agreed upon secret to just not say a word and only publish the average lap speeds or winning lap speeds and ones like that. ::)
The race report did publish that Baker went 198 and Cale shortly after ran 199 and change. But nobody said anything about 200.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/Mustang%20Parts/TMP48.jpg)
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 05:28:25 PM
RE: 200 MPH:
From the book "Chrysler, Plymouth & Dodge Stock Cars" by Dr John Craft (the one with the #6 car on the cover).. pg 62 talks about the first Daytona wing cars... "Side by side top speed tests were conducted with a race spec Charger 500 at Chelsea in July of 1969. Those results were mixed.... While the new Daytonaa proved to be faster than the old 500, it was only just so. But within a week of taking it to the track, Dodge drivers and engineers had pumped up the top speed to an impressive 205 miles per hour average around the five-mile Chrysler banked track. By the time Chelsea testing was completed, Glotzbach had pushed the envelope out to an incredible 243 miles per hour. Soon all involved with the project were looking forward to September and Talledega with undisguised glee."
Doesn't specify the #6 specifically - but jives with Baker's statement in his own book "Tales from Pit Road" - "Dodge picked me to run the first official 200 mph lap at Talladega. We had all run 200 mph before, but not officially."
I know the guy who wrote that book. He wasn't referring to the Baker car
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 05:59:07 PM
QUOTE:
The wing cable would typically be visible externally at the top of the wing upright. Of course if the car was completed prior to Daytona in Feb of 1970, it wouldn't have a cable whether it raced or not.
ANSWER:
The "S-500" car - the one from the museum, did not race at Daytona in Feb 1970. A new car was built for that race. The "S-500" car was still in pieces in COG shop. :brickwall:
Oh that's right. They installed the wing cable for Darlington, and then removed it and put a whole new street wing on after Charlotte. Then they filled the bolt holes in the floor where the old braces were. I forgot. :slap:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 05:59:07 PM
QUOTE:
The car also has a street style trunk lock pillar which is just extra baggage on a race car. No driveshaft loops? No passing tech either. Why would anyone take the time to remove driveshaft loops on a car destined for show?
ANSWER:
You are talking about the car as it finally appears now (from museum). Let me say again for the 20th time today: The car was retired from racing at end of 1970 season. COG made it into a pure show car. Never to race again. No techs to pass ever again! Didn't we go over this on like page 2?
Oh my gosh, I forgot again. When they rebuilt the car after Charlotte for the auto shows, they went to the trouble to weld in that trunk lock pillar, and take out those driveshaft loops. Oh, and then they had to move the dry sump tank from the left fender to inside the car. I'm sorry, I just have my head up my butt sometimes I hope I've got it right now. :slap:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 05:59:07 PM
Didn't we go over this on like page 2?
Please tell me more about your race cars and experience, as it were in 1969 and 70. Tell me more about how they ran with windows or not.
Look at this photo attached.
That can't be can it? Why, it's a 1969 Charger 500 race car.... and it's got glass in it!?!?!?!
I have found people loosing a discussion tend to turn into a not so pleasant person ( I cleaned it up).
I have followed these guys on this board for years. And I will tell you these guys know more about these cars than you will ever know. Just a word of advise, you might want to sit back listen to these guys. There is a wealth of knowledge to be learned here if you actually pay attention.
The problem is you do not like hearing what they are giving you. . . the facts.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 06:16:23 PM
Boy I have never met a bunch of fellows who know everything there is to know about who wrote what book, or said this or that, what they REALLY meant,
The irony of that statement is unbelievable... if you only knew...
💩
Juliano Collection>automobelia>gallery page-small images>page 5>middle line far right picture> bottom right of case>looks similar to a bee in a flower decal.
A decal comes off pretty easily with a heat gun.
As I said before-sticker probably a car show give away.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 06:28:27 PM
Let me give you some advice - all of you - if you have a chance to learn some history - from those who actually lived it - you should forget all your preconceptions and bullshit and forget how you read about it in books or how so and so said it was - that is not reality. You do not know the True Reality - you can't - because you were not there. I have tried in vain to relay the True Story exactly as I have been told it. I have encouraged you to contact Cotton himself to get the remaining blanks filled in.
YOU then might actually learn something FOR REAL. Not an anecdote.
With all due respect to your grandfather, what are we to do if there are people who also knew the car back then, who disagree with what he remembers? Because that is the situation.
What I see is this is an opportunity to learn something about things I'm interested in. I don't have to have all the answers. I do know a bit about the shows and others can help me learn more.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 06:28:27 PM
If I recall, you guys first claimed that they never raced with windows. Then you said that wasn't a real race car. Then you said ok it could be. Then you said it was.
I don't recall any of the above comments coming from the main participants in this discussion. Certainly not from me. There are numerous photographic examples (from Buzz McKim and the NASCAR archives) on my office walls right now of both with-windows and without-windows setups for various wing cars. Think what you will.
When first seeing pictures of the Canepa car after Cotton removed it from the Weatherly museum, I was quite intrigued by the genuine race equipment on the car and have never doubted its status as a race chassis. What we HAVE collectively doubted is that the car has the exact race pedigree you've claimed, although I am not sure any of us have absolutely ruled out the possibility the chassis raced in Daytona trim - just that it did not race during the 1970 race season (how could it, if it was on the show circuit beginning in February 1970 through early 1971?). Again, think what you will.
:cheers:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 06:16:23 PMYour memories, connections and knowledge of esoteric trivia are outstanding and completely INHUMAN. Frankly, they are UNBELIEVABLE.
Your evidence and stories are nothing but HEARSAY and CIRCUMSTANTIAL.
Completely INADMISSABLE.
You mean circumstantial evidence such as if I "HEAR" someone"SAY" they ran 200 mph but they have no way of proving it? And in that case should I be doubtful?
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 05:46:21 PM
They cannot promote a 200 mph lap unless it was official.
If it happened during qualifying, it would have been official.
It happened during a race. In the draft. With other cars around.
No way it could ever been officially referred to, and that's why you won't find a shred of hard evidence to back it up. Sure, they had stop watches and seems everyone but you knows they ran more than 200 mph on several occasions. But a stopwatch is unofficial. And back then, they were analog stopwatches.
In order for an "official" organization like NASCAR or Chrysler to make a claim like that, they had to do it "officially."
That is why Chrysler set out to claim that record, with their #1 driver, before anyone else did it - officially.
So no, I have admitted several times there is no real evidence. You don't have to believe if that makes it easier to live with yourself.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but ...
ALL laps during a NASCAR race are OFFICIAL.The un-official 200+mph laps were plenty & by numerous drivers at the Chrysler Proving Grounds.
The first official 200+mph closed course laps (with NASCAR officials present) was March 24, 70 during a test session with the Chrysler Engineering #88 Dodge Daytona being driven by Buddy Baker.
💩
💩
The Washington story was about cutting down a Cherry tree not planting them......and that has been proven to have been just that a story not actual event.......
And the window thing is that cars were raced with windows until Nascar changed the rules and made them take the glass out for safety.
So the date when that happened was after the 500's raced so it would have made sense for the picture of the 500 race car to have had glass.
Are you claiming that all of the 1970 season COG cars were retired and NONE were reskinned as Road Runners for the '71 Season with Pete Hamiton?
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 06:28:27 PM
Loosing a discussion?
It's LOSING.
Loosing is how a car handles. The opposite of Tite.
That is it? That is right, you got me. I did put an extra "o" in the word "losing" I do need to slow down and proof read my post.
Quote from: therealmoparman on January 15, 1970, 10:47:29 AM
Let me give you some advice - all of you - if you have a chance to learn some history - from those who actually lived it - you should forget all your preconceptions and bullshit and forget how you read about it in books or how so and so said it was - that is not reality. You do not know the True Reality - you can't - because you were not there. I have tried in vain to relay the True Story exactly as I have been told it. I have encouraged you to contact Cotton himself to get the remaining blanks filled in.
So Mr. Spelling Bee, since you are wise in the ways of crafting a reply, I find it my duty to point out your excessive use of run-on sentences. Also, didn't you ever learn you are not supposed to end the sentence with a preposition?
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 07:49:34 PM
QUOTE:
3. Photos exist of it at Chicago in 1970, and as we now see at a 1971 show as well.
Not the same car. As previously explained.
Actually you never explained. So what's different? And don't say "the decals"!
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 07:19:49 PM
QUOTE:
what are we to do if there are people who also knew the car back then, who disagree with what he remembers? Because that is the situation.
ANSWER: Bring them forward and out into the spotlight. Have them post their version of events in a public forum on this very message board. Have them do it themselves, under their own name. Not retold by you or anyone. Only then can we admit that as "evidence" and rightfully debate it.
All the "evidence" that is necessary is already posted in this thread in the form of
period pictures. Those picture are the same as being there and are far more accurate that the memories of one who was a child at the time or the sepia toned recollections of your storied and legendary Grand Father. I have personally had the pleasure of interviewing and getting to know a great many of the folks who made NASCAR what it once was (and--sadly--is no more, thanks to Brian X. France). I won't bore you with the list, but it is extensive. Their memories of events 40 years in the past are on many occassions inexact. Pictures, on the other hand, do not lie. Pictures do not forget and pictures do not mis-remember. The photographically documented differences between the Canepa car and the Southern 500 car are legion (to include side glass, rivet count on "A" pillars, shape and rivet count on door handle holes, lanyardless street wing, street supports, lack of drive shaft loops, street chin spoiler, over flow vent location, size and shape of fender flares, and on and on) . To attribute them to cosmetic preferences is tendentious and contrary to logic. This does not mean or even suggest that the Canepa car is in some way sub rosa, or not a legitimate racing chassis (specific racing history unknown at present). What is does
mean is that the Canepa car is not the car that
you want it to be (for reasons unknown). It is not the Southern 500 winning car on the facts presented. And your 200 mph claim has even less support in objective fact than the contention the car won the Southern 500. You have taken a position on the Canepa car that is based more in emotion and ego than logic or fact. As a result, you are unable to objectively evaluate the "evidence" that has been presented here. This has even impaired your ability to digest the facts set out in this thread such as the undisputable fact that NASCAR rules changes in
1970 outlawed the use of side glass in Grand National Stock Cars---the shot you posted of the 500, therefore, is a non sequitur). Further discussion would seem to be unproductive.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 07:49:34 PM
6. Andy's position has been that if it was not on display at a show, the car was in a warehouse in storage during 1970.
Wrong date. Car was in pieces in 1970 until rebuilt and raced in second half of 1970. 1971 - maybe. Still trying to pin down when the car ended up at Atlanta dealer, when Cotton took possession of it again, and when he put it in museum. Or Andy may have the two cars confused - a definite possibility.
You have 801,000 reasons to spin the tale your way.
💩
Just a few thoughts here. First, none of the cars ran 243mph at Chelsea proving grounds. Not even the #88. That came right from Larry Rathgeb when I questioned him on it about a year ago. Second, has anyone really looked close at the bodywork of the supposed winning/show car? The reason I ask is if the car was converted from the race car into the show car and the wing was changed (along with other stuff) for the show circuit then there should be sure sign of that on the car. Let me explain. If the daytona show car originally had a race wing, then the supports required the holes in the top of the quarter to be enlarged do to the diameter of the aluminum tubes. So, since a steet wing only required small 3/8 holes for the studs, you would think there would be evidence that larger holes on the top of the quarters still exist or were modified. (I could tell by looking at it) Also, at the base of the supports, the were bolted directly to the trunk floor with four bolts on each support. Are those still there? This may help with identifying weather the show car was a dautona race car at some point or if perhaps it was a modified 500 used for the show circuit.
As for my knowledge, I don't know everything but I have spent a few hundred hours working on and studying a certain well known 69.
Also, if Nichels built the show car for chrysler as you say, there should be certain noticable differences in the chassis. For example the torion bar adjuster. Just my .02.
💩
💩
Quote[How many 1969 Charger 500s and/or Daytonas did you actually own?] Two cars of the 500s that I actually raced with. Then I bought the car that they used to make up the car (Daytona) with that you saw in the magazine. I bought that car. It was stolen out of California. It was brought to me. I carried it to Detroit. They cut the nose off of it and made the needle nose car and then I bought it back, fixed it and then I bought a nose that Neil Castles wrecked going across the Daytona Speedway in, I guess it was '69. He had a white 500, and I bought it from Chrysler. You know, they loaned us cars back then. So I'd say all together, four of them total. I just got through building that, I guess four or five years ago, I had two or three of those kits that we put in it back there; we sold them now. I don't have another one. I sold the last one. I really gave it to a friend of mine, Rodney Daniels out of Detroit. The car is in Spartanburg. It's a 500 now, but it's really just a '69 Charger. He's making a Hemi-powered car out of it. I don't know if he's going to put the wing on it or not. So far, he's just got it as a 500.
Am I reading this right? Cotton Owens is saying he bought the car THEY used to make the Daytona that was in the magazines. He brought it to Detroit, THEY cut the front of the car off and made a Daytona (needle nose car?). He then later bought the car and fixed it IN "I guess" 1969, and I assume went racing with it??? And who are "THEY", Chrysler and Ray Nichels?
💩
Personally, I think a good close visual inspection of the car would tell a lot to what it was. As for the car being wrecked and possibly totally rebuilt with new sheet metal, I can believe that but the odds of the rear section (trunk pan and rails for ex) being replaced is slim. Someone with a good eye could tell where the previous damage was repaired whether in involved welding on new quarters or replacing a rail. Trust me when I say repairs and or modifications were fairly crude and easily spotted. Again, these were race cars and appearance was not favored over function. Someone really needs to take a good, in depth look at the "show car" chassis. I think it would answer a lot of questions.
💩
The car just pictured is a legit street HEMI 500. It was stolen early in life in California from a dealership and it is definitely not a race car by any stretch of the imagination. HEMI 4 speed car to boot.
Okay, I was a little confused. I do remember reading the story about the stolen 500 now...that picture jogged my memory.
That would be the first C500 I have seen with the high bumpers on the front though.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 08:47:59 PMQUOTE:
As for my knowledge, I don't know everything but I have spent a few hundred hours working on and studying a certain well known 69.
Also, if Nichels built the show car for chrysler as you say, there should be certain noticable differences in the chassis. For example the torion bar adjuster. Just my .02.
ANSWER:
I should not say Nichels built it. I honestly do not know. I only think it is very possible, considering the time period, etc. But I do not have any knowledge about what that car may or may not contain, and have never seen it.
You are kidding right? :rofl: There's a picture of yourself sitting in it on your Grandfathers website. :2thumbs:
That is him in the car? The car he has never seen. I can not wait to hear his explanation.
Maybe we will get another story about George Washington (see page 15) planting green beans or something to change the subject.
:popcrn:
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 07:19:49 PM
QUOTE:
what are we to do if there are people who also knew the car back then, who disagree with what he remembers? Because that is the situation.
ANSWER: Bring them forward and out into the spotlight. Have them post their version of events in a public forum on this very message board. Have them do it themselves, under their own name. Not retold by you or anyone. Only then can we admit that as "evidence" and rightfully debate it.
So wait, you will only believe it when the people who were actually there post their version of events here? In their own words? Using their real names? I'm sorry, I wasn't aware Cotton was a member and I don't see him posting. I will have to send him a welcome message.
Troy
These 4 pictures are the same car. I welcome any PROOF to the contrary.
That is exactly what all of the evidence points to because these picures ARE all of the same car!
Everyone understands this fact except for one person, and he's sitting in it.
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 17, 2010, 10:30:45 PM
These 4 pictures are the same car. I welcome any PROOF to the contrary.
The only difference I see are a few different "stickers" on the front fender...or is it my eyes again??
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 08:42:45 PMQUOTE:
I have personally had the pleasure of interviewing and getting to know a great many of the folks who made NASCAR what it once was (and--sadly--is no more, thanks to Brian X. France). I won't bore you with the list, but it is extensive. Their memories of events 40 years in the past are on many occassions inexact. Pictures, on the other hand, do not lie. Pictures do not forget and pictures do not mis-remember.
ANSWER:
Don't pump yourself up buddy - you still weren't there.
Neither were you, unless at 7 years of age you were somehow more cognizant of the history of what was taking place than a typical second grader. You have ready access to one of the greats but you are really just interviewing someone who was there the same as others.
There was a Daytona on display at the Chicago Auto Show late February 1970 painted in the #6 Buddy Baker/Cotton Owens colors.
There was a Daytona on display at the Detroit Auto Show late Nov/Dec. 1970 painted in the #6 Buddy Baker/Cotton Owens colors.
No Argument here, right?
Without running back for exact quotes, it has been stated that Chrysler asked Owens to provide a car for the Detroit show. Cotton didn't have time to make a showcar so he took the 70 Southern 500 winner and repaired it for the show.
Two questions: Why would Chrysler want a car for the Detroit show, when they already had one that was shown at the earlier Chicago show? And why would Owens go through the trouble of making his car look almost identical to the showcar Chrysler already had, instead of the race winning car he might wish to preserve for history?
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 09:04:53 AM
So where did this phantom car come from?
This is the crux of the whole discussion.
>> You posit that the car is a "phantom"
>> There are a whole lot of us who see absolutely no differences (other than decals, which is no big deal) between any of the "show car" pictures - including the one taken in Cotton's shop that has been dated -- by the photo's recipient -- long before the end of the 1970 racing season.
A serious question for you, Ryan...
IF the car in the Feb '70 Chicago show pictures is indeed the same car as in the other "show car" pictures, would you agree that your timeline theory could not be true? I am not asking if you believe whether that's the case, as you've made it abundantly clear you do not currently hold to that same opinion.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 09:28:10 AM
What do you know about this car?
I don't know anything about it. But obviously it is a pretty good clone from a distance. Where did it come from? What is it's story? Who knows how many other fake #6's there could be out there that we all don't know about?
It's a home made race car that runs in Wisconsin on a tribute vintage circuit. Some of these cars were at Darlington last year.
Now stop dancing and please answer Geno's question below.
Quote from: hemigeno on February 18, 2010, 09:15:17 AM
A serious question for you, Ryan... IF the car in the Feb '70 Chicago show pictures is indeed the same car as in the other "show car" pictures, would you agree that your timeline theory could not be true? I am not asking if you believe whether that's the case, as you've made it abundantly clear you do not currently hold to that same opinion.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 09:28:10 AM
What do you know about this car?
I did not ask anything about other cars, only specifically about the #6 car photographed at the February 1970 Chicago show. I'll repeat the question:
Quote from: hemigeno on February 18, 2010, 09:15:17 AM
IF the car in the Feb '70 Chicago show pictures is indeed the same car as in the other "show car" pictures, would you agree that your timeline theory could not be true? I am not asking if you believe whether that's the case, as you've made it abundantly clear you do not currently hold to that same opinion.
:popcrn:
💩
As I stated before, the Daytona as a model made its debut in Sept of 69. COG made its first race with a Daytona at Texas in 12.69. Then Daytona in 02.70.
So you think he started working with the Daytonas in Sept-Oct-Nov of 69 - and he and his 6-man crew had time to build a race car for Texas, a new race car for Daytona, and a show car - all at the same time?
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 09:47:19 AM
So you think he started working with the Daytonas in Sept-Oct-Nov of 69 - and he and his 6-man crew had time to build a race car for Texas, a new race car for Daytona, and a show car - all at the same time?
I think you underestimate the power of what an experienced crew can accomplish. It's not like they had to build every car from the ground up. They had cars to start with. It also does not take very long to convert a Charger 500 into a Daytona.
What happened to the wrecked COG #6 500 from the Volunteer 500 at Bristol on 7/20/69?
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 18, 2010, 10:13:49 AM
What happened to the wrecked COG #6 500 from the Volunteer 500 at Bristol on 7/20/69?
i remember seeing a picture of that he wrecked with the road runner of Dick brooks on lap 30 i believe , think there was a 8 or 10 car wreck , for get now , :scratchchin: will have to dig out the book i saw it in :yesnod:
I'd like to add another nail in the coffin in regards to the suggestion that another shop may have built a copy of the Baker/Owens car for show purposes in early 1970.
If you look at the Feb. 1970 Chicago show pictures (which no one has offered an alternate place or time for), the hood,door, quarter (plus what we can see of the roof) lettering seem to match exactly what COG was putting on it's race cars. For another busy shop to get these things done as COG in it's cars did stretches imagination. If one looks at the contemporary "tribute' car you can see the proportion of the door "6" is off. Anyone that has experience replicating things knows there is a "tell" when you see an original and reproduction piece. I would suggest that COG had it's standard way in proportioning it's distinctive lettering and that was on the Feb. 1970 Chicago show car.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 12:05:41 PM
So it would be no big deal to send someone a set of decals, or for them to get their own set. Coffin still open.
But for a stranger to apply them "exactly" would be a real stretch.
It'd be a stretch for anyone to apply them exactly between different cars. Even if they did it hundreds of times. You could get them pretty close if you were to use a template.
you know i got a call yesterday to read this thread thats on here and you know what?.... i read it last nite leading me to have and get a bottle of F@%Kin Tylenol! this thread has gone in circles and went no where. the shear notion that Ray Nichels would have built a car for Chrysler is utter nonsense. Ray if you recall had his plate full with Nascar and USAC teams at the time.I was going to call Terry Nichels this morning and ask him about it but I know what he would say. I get to go thru the Nichels archives when i want to and there is no photos or reference to him building a show car for Chrysler or anyone. now this issue of this Car in question is very interesting to say the least. now one very interesting feature of the human brain is it has the ability to get confused over a course of years. a good example is Ray Fox, now when i was talking to him one nite he said that he built his own Chassis' now Terry told me that Fox Bought all his chassis from Nichels also as did many other teams. Jim Vandidver told me his daytona was a home made car never came from Nichels. Now the Daytona that Terry owned that Verlin Eaker drove was the same old yellow #99 Charger. he had one car and it was fitted with the daytona nose and wing when needed. the cars were rebodied faster than you know. the old #99 Dow Daytona was rebodied as was the first Talladega winner. back then the big hype didn't exist about keeping winning cars. nobody had the notion that these cars would be anything other than a race memory in the future. now one of Cottons cars was wrecked I believe in the World 600totally wasted in the ass. here is a picture below and also an invoice from Nichels with a list of parts consistent with the damage. now is it possibble that this car could have been used as the show car in question? judging by the photos it had to have had a whole ass put on the car. there fore bringing in the question of the rear trunk latch and stuff being in the car.and no race stabilizer braces put in. and the rearend being pushed forward shoving the driveshaft to and maybe taking out the loops as well. also the invoice is dated May 26,1970. so in my personal opinion i believe the show car in question is this car in the photos. also as brought up earlier that any Nichels chassis would have a number. we may never really know the true pedigree of this car as it's past has a cloudy memory and Mr. Canepa is relying on that. But i will say this, the series of events last year when someone called me about tires for a particular COG Daytona raised my suspicions.
💩
Quote from: wingcar builder on February 18, 2010, 12:29:48 PM
you know i got a call yesterday to read this thread thats on here and you know what?.... i read it last nite leading me to have and get a bottle of F@%Kin Tylenol! this thread has gone in circles and went no where. the shear notion that Ray Nichels would have built a car for Chrysler is utter nonsense. Ray if you recall had his plate full with Nascar and USAC teams at the time.I was going to call Terry Nichels this morning and ask him about it but I know what he would say. I get to go thru the Nichels archives when i want to and there is no photos or reference to him building a show car for Chrysler or anyone. now this issue of this Car in question is very interesting to say the least. now one very interesting feature of the human brain is it has the ability to get confused over a course of years. a good example is Ray Fox, now when i was talking to him one nite he said that he built his own Chassis' now Terry told me that Fox Bought all his chassis from Nichels also as did many other teams. Jim Vandidver told me his daytona was a home made car never came from Nichels. Now the Daytona that Terry owned that Verlin Eaker drove was the same old yellow #99 Charger. he had one car and it was fitted with the daytona nose and wing when needed. the cars were rebodied faster than you know. the old #99 Dow Daytona was rebodied as was the first Talladega winner. back then the big hype didn't exist about keeping winning cars. nobody had the notion that these cars would be anything other than a race memory in the future. now one of Cottons cars was wrecked I believe in the World 600totally wasted in the ass. here is a picture below and also an invoice from Nichels with a list of parts consistent with the damage. now is it possibble that this car could have been used as the show car in question? judging by the photos it had to have had a whole ass put on the car. there fore bringing in the question of the rear trunk latch and stuff being in the car.and no race stabilizer braces put in. and the rearend being pushed forward shoving the driveshaft to and maybe taking out the loops as well. also the invoice is dated May 26,1970. so in my personal opinion i believe the show car in question is this car in the photos. also as brought up earlier that any Nichels chassis would have a number. we may never really know the true pedigree of this car as it's past has a cloudy memory and Mr. Canepa is relying on that. But i will say this, the series of events last year when someone called me about tires for a particular COG Daytona raised my suspicions.
good info WB , thanks for sharing :cheers: forgot about the big rear end wreck the #6 had , that certainly sounds plausible , & makes sence :shruggy: :scratchchin: :popcrn:
💩
Quote from: wingcar builder on February 18, 2010, 12:29:48 PM
you know i got a call yesterday to read this thread thats on here and you know what?.... i read it last nite leading me to have and get a bottle of F@%Kin Tylenol! this thread has gone in circles and went no where. the shear notion that Ray Nichels would have built a car for Chrysler is utter nonsense. Ray if you recall had his plate full with Nascar and USAC teams at the time.I was going to call Terry Nichels this morning and ask him about it but I know what he would say. I get to go thru the Nichels archives when i want to and there is no photos or reference to him building a show car for Chrysler or anyone. now this issue of this Car in question is very interesting to say the least. now one very interesting feature of the human brain is it has the ability to get confused over a course of years. a good example is Ray Fox, now when i was talking to him one nite he said that he built his own Chassis' now Terry told me that Fox Bought all his chassis from Nichels also as did many other teams. Jim Vandidver told me his daytona was a home made car never came from Nichels. Now the Daytona that Terry owned that Verlin Eaker drove was the same old yellow #99 Charger. he had one car and it was fitted with the daytona nose and wing when needed. the cars were rebodied faster than you know. the old #99 Dow Daytona was rebodied as was the first Talladega winner. back then the big hype didn't exist about keeping winning cars. nobody had the notion that these cars would be anything other than a race memory in the future. now one of Cottons cars was wrecked I believe in the World 600totally wasted in the ass. here is a picture below and also an invoice from Nichels with a list of parts consistent with the damage. now is it possibble that this car could have been used as the show car in question? judging by the photos it had to have had a whole ass put on the car. there fore bringing in the question of the rear trunk latch and stuff being in the car.and no race stabilizer braces put in. and the rearend being pushed forward shoving the driveshaft to and maybe taking out the loops as well. also the invoice is dated May 26,1970. so in my personal opinion i believe the show car in question is this car in the photos. also as brought up earlier that any Nichels chassis would have a number. we may never really know the true pedigree of this car as it's past has a cloudy memory and Mr. Canepa is relying on that. But i will say this, the series of events last year when someone called me about tires for a particular COG Daytona raised my suspicions.
This makes sense as the canepa car has a street wing washers that creative spotwelded in , I don't believe any of the race cars had the spot welded in wing washers. and the street wing is totally different than a race wing. Who was the foundry that made the race wings and does anyone have a photo of a race wing?
💩
hackett brass made the street wings maybe they made the race ones too
http://wwnboa.org/motw.htm
Quote from: moparstuart on February 18, 2010, 12:59:39 PM
hackett brass made the street wings maybe they made the race ones too
http://wwnboa.org/motw.htm
The casting of the wing is the same between street and race. The race wing is modified with the quick removal tubular braces and of course the cable.
The repair of the World 600 car would not change anything about the fact that the cars in these four photos spanning four decades look alike. FORGET ABOUT DECALS. Decals can be changed in a matter of minutes and for ANY reason. The sheet metal does the talking here.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120648;image)
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120649;image)
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120650;image)
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120651;image)
Quote from: moparstuart on February 18, 2010, 12:59:39 PM
hackett brass made the street wings maybe they made the race ones too
http://wwnboa.org/motw.htm
I thought so. I saw a of daytona upright on ebay a couple years ago and it had tubes on the bottom of it . Why does the canepa car have spotwelded in wing washers? didn't the race bodies come straight from chrysler? if the car does have a rear clip from a street daytona it should have a serial number stamped on the trunk lip.anyone think of looking ?
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 01:45:24 PM
I want to hear why these "show cars" constantly changed appearances, had full fledging racing chassis, suspension, race hemi, dry sump, dual shocks, and more.
Because they were raced. That is the only explanation that makes sense.
Look at these pics. These were taken by Canepa (who added the crappy spackle paint). Why on earth would Cotton go to such lengths for a "show car"
Absurd. When would he have had time or inclination to do this for a car merely to be seen from two feet away?
See that little vent? Who at a show would ever see that? So why is it there then? Maybe for a race... hmmmm
Anyone who knows the first thing about racing in that era can see this is a RACE car.
It WAS a racecar until some point of the 1969 season, then it became a show car and only a show car from the beginning of 1970 and on. Take away the change of decals from show to show and you have no other proof that the car in the 4 pictures that Aero426 posted are any different.
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 02:06:46 PM
COG raced only 1 race in 1969 with the Daytona - 12.07.69 at Texas.
There was a news article on Cobo posted earlier from 12.13.69, stating that Baker would be there with his racing Dodge.
So what car was at Cobo in 12.13.69, if Cotton's first wing car race was one week before it?
Cotton could not have built a show car out of a wreck (from Texas race 12.07.69) in ONE WEEK for 12.13.69 show. Have you seen that wreck picture?
Comments welcome.
It was obviously an older race chassis that was never a wing car and they used stock factory rear sheet metal to build a show car out of . 2+2= 4 not 500
I don't think the point is clear here at all. I don't think there is any question at all that this "IS" a Grand National Built Car! It is the cars "HISTORY" that is in question! forget the decals and the dry sump and the quotes and the racing reference BS they dont have any pics to back up what the car looked like that won the race just the writings from a scoring official ok? what we see is a car that has "NO" pedegree! that is the point here. this car is being represented as the southern 500 winner and mr. Canapa had better think of shitting some documents to back these claims before suckering a buyer into thinking he's buying a legitiment car. i've been friends with Terry Nichels for awhile and like he said "do you know how many cars came thru here to remember all this?" so let's forget the photos of decals and stuff i wanna see the photos of the southern 500 winner from back in the day with the hood up I wanna see the interior and so forth and compare it to the car in question today in this rediculous thread. also here is a photo of the sheet metal of the quarter panal from the K&K Dodge for the other guys to see what the wing stabilizer wing brace holes look like.
Wasn't the #6 Daytona prepared to race at Talladega in September of 1969?
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 02:06:46 PM
COG raced only 1 race in 1969 with the Daytona - 12.07.69 at Texas.
So the Dodge that Baker drove at Charlotte 10/12/69 and Rockingham 10/26/69 was not a Daytona??
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 01:45:24 PM
I want to hear why these "show cars" constantly changed appearances, had full fledging racing chassis, suspension, race hemi, dry sump, dual shocks, and more.
Because they were raced. That is the only explanation that makes sense.
Look at these pics. These were taken by Canepa (who added the crappy spackle paint). Why on earth would Cotton go to such lengths for a "show car"
Absurd. When would he have had time or inclination to do this for a car merely to be seen from two feet away?
See that little vent? Who at a show would ever see that? So why is it there then? Maybe for a race... hmmmm
Anyone who knows the first thing about racing in that era can see this is a RACE car.
I don't think the above is in dispute. It certainly appears to be a Nichels type chassis. As mentioned MANY times, it is simply the PERIOD of the racing you've claimed that doesn't make sense.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 01:45:24 PM
I want to hear why these "show cars" constantly changed appearances,
Get over the few missing/different decals on the former racecar turned "show car".
Cars on display & in museums lose their decals and loose parts to "souvenir" hunters, check out all the partial decals next time you're in one.
Quote from: Sicklajoie on February 18, 2010, 01:51:14 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 01:45:24 PM
I want to hear why these "show cars" constantly changed appearances, had full fledging racing chassis, suspension, race hemi, dry sump, dual shocks, and more.
Because they were raced. That is the only explanation that makes sense.
Look at these pics. These were taken by Canepa (who added the crappy spackle paint). Why on earth would Cotton go to such lengths for a "show car"
Absurd. When would he have had time or inclination to do this for a car merely to be seen from two feet away?
See that little vent? Who at a show would ever see that? So why is it there then? Maybe for a race... hmmmm
Anyone who knows the first thing about racing in that era can see this is a RACE car.
It WAS a racecar until some point of the 1969 season, then it became a show car and only a show car from the beginning of 1970 and on. Take away the change of decals from show to show and you have no other proof that the car in the 4 pictures that Aero426 posted are any different.
hello & welcome Sicklajoie :cheers: :2thumbs:
I doubt that anyone here has actually changed their opinion about the car for the last 10 or 15 pages.
It's just verbal sparring for the sake of it at this point.
Quote from: Mike DC (formerly miked) on February 18, 2010, 03:58:14 PM
I doubt that anyone here has actually changed their opinion about the car for the last 10 or 15 pages.
It's just verbal sparring for the sake of it at this point.
:popcrn: Where would the money trail surrounding this car lead to?
Quote from: english bob on February 18, 2010, 05:36:48 PM
:popcrn: Where would the money trail surrounding this car lead to?
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120651;image)
Quote from: Sicklajoie on February 18, 2010, 02:45:31 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 02:06:46 PM
COG raced only 1 race in 1969 with the Daytona - 12.07.69 at Texas.
So the Dodge that Baker drove at Charlotte 10/12/69 and Rockingham 10/26/69 was not a Daytona??
yes Buddy Baker ran the #6 Daytona in both of those races & came in 3rd in both races
I'm guessing that just about 100%, including me, of the folks posting on this thread believe the Baker/Owens car at the '70-'71 car shows was and is a real Owens car that Owens had previously used in NASCAR races.
Quote from: tan top on February 18, 2010, 05:48:24 PM
Quote from: Sicklajoie on February 18, 2010, 02:45:31 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 02:06:46 PM
COG raced only 1 race in 1969 with the Daytona - 12.07.69 at Texas.
So the Dodge that Baker drove at Charlotte 10/12/69 and Rockingham 10/26/69 was not a Daytona??
yes Buddy Baker ran the #6 Daytona in both of those races & came in 3rd in both races
Well, the grandson begs to differ according to what I quoted...
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 15, 2010, 02:54:27 PM
Anyone have pics of the "show car" at other venues? Cobo Hall '71?
In an effort to compare still pics to raceday pics to create/verify a timeline.
Here's a picture of the COG Buddy Baker #6 Daytona from the '69 National 500. From AUTO RACING Jan. '70 pg 46.
Quote10/12/69 National 500 (Charlotte Motor Speedway) -- #6 started 5th, finished 3rd, led 80 laps -- pole speed was 162.162mph
:o Nope!! :rofl: "Only the wrecked Daytona at College Station TX." :brickwall:
Quote from: Sicklajoie on February 18, 2010, 05:55:57 PM
Quote from: tan top on February 18, 2010, 05:48:24 PM
Quote from: Sicklajoie on February 18, 2010, 02:45:31 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 18, 2010, 02:06:46 PM
COG raced only 1 race in 1969 with the Daytona - 12.07.69 at Texas.
So the Dodge that Baker drove at Charlotte 10/12/69 and Rockingham 10/26/69 was not a Daytona??
yes Buddy Baker ran the #6 Daytona in both of those races & came in 3rd in both races
Well, the grandson begs to differ according to what I quoted...
although just checked ! there was no Cotton Owens / Buddy Baker number 6 daytona at the 100 mile races at Augusta georga in 19th of october 69 & 17th of october at Savannah Georga , both half mile paved tracks :yesnod:
:scratchchin: :shruggy: :popcrn:
who did the bigfoot/mod top daytona pic? he needs to shop another pic right quick. the BS train/BS car one is my favorite.
and again, it was "imperical" evidence from back in the day when they were too young to remember. Coincidence? I think not.
This was taken in 73. Another baker front end.. I was told in the 70's that the #6 Daytona in the museum was NOT the Darlington car or even a 70 season car. Possible the 70 Texas crash car?? Just my 2 cents.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 18, 2010, 01:15:39 PM
Quote from: moparstuart on February 18, 2010, 12:59:39 PM
hackett brass made the street wings maybe they made the race ones too
http://wwnboa.org/motw.htm
The casting of the wing is the same between street and race. The race wing is modified with the quick removal tubular braces and of course the cable.
Race wing also has 8 set screws in the horizontal section....I have a race wing on my car
Cable is still in it....and only 3 studs are on the under side of each vertical stabilizer.
Here is an interesting article from 2002 about the real Daytona that went 200 at Talledega. Talks about how the car that ended up in the museum as "the 200mph Daytona" wasn't the actual car that set the record. The actual car went to Don White and ended up rebodied as a '73 Charger. It also says builder Ray Nichols numbered the cars under the dash. The 200mph car was car DC-93 and the car that was repainted and sat in the museum for years was car DC-71. Good article includes memos from G.W. Porter as well...would seem there should be a car number on the Canepa car as well???
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/featuredvehicles/b_body/mopp_0201_1969_dodge_daytona/index.html (http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/featuredvehicles/b_body/mopp_0201_1969_dodge_daytona/index.html)
QuoteIn a well-publicized test session at Talladega on March 24, 1970, Chrysler testdriver Buddy Baker took a No. 88 Dodge (similar to the car campaigned by Cotton Owens) to a 200.447 world record. While a No. 88 car has resided for years in the International Motorsports Hall of Fame at the fabled Alabama track, it has now come to light that the car that actually achieved the glory had been forlornly sitting out behind former circle track racer Don White's race shop in Keokuk, Iowa, for almost 25 years!
the actual car that went 200 mph:
QuoteThe number on this car is DC-93. It has no VIN on the dash, like a stock vehicle. It has DC-93 under the dashboard, which is the number noted NASCAR builder Ray Nichols of Highland, Indiana, assigned the car when it was built. The Chrysler guys called it "093" and vintage photos show this. The car has no title because it was strictly a race car. Don's close connection with Ray, whom he drove for several times during the '60s, may have played a role as to why he ended up with this particular machine.
...and about the museum car not being the car everyone thought it was:
QuoteThis was surprising news, and if the Daytona at the museum wasn't the car that first cracked the 200-mph time, where was the historic automobile? Larry explained that automotive musical chairs had occurred and the real No. 88 car went to Don White, who was actively racing on the USAC stock car circuit in the early '70s.
In fact, No. 88 was still a very good race car and, with wings still flying high on the USAC and ARCA circuits, Don received the good car and NASCAR received a similar test vehicle for their historic collection. The car NASCAR received was formerly painted red and numbered 71 like the Harry Hyde-owned, Bobby Issac-driven machine. Chrysler repainted it Corporate (Petty) Blue, lettered it, then donated it to the sanctioning body. It hadn't gone 200 mph.
Backing up this information was an inter-company correspondence memo written by G.W. Porter and dated July 31, 1970, which was uncovered by Tim Wellborn (director of the Talladega Museum) in 1997. Key parts of this memo include the following: "In May, we received a request from NASCAR relative to the possible donation of the subject car to NASCAR for their speed museum.... Contingent upon your approval, we will take our old No. 71 car, DC-74, paint it to look like the Engineering car No. 88 car, which we used in breaking the 200-mph speed record, and present it to NASCAR. This No. 71 car has outlived its usefulness and would be scrapped in the event we weren't to use it for this purpose."
and here is a good picture of a NASCAR Daytona wing with the tubular braces...
WOW! :cheers:
Quote from: richRTSE on February 18, 2010, 09:29:42 PM
Here is an interesting article from 2002 about the real Daytona that went 200 at Talledega. Talks about how the car that ended up in the museum as "the 200mph Daytona" wasn't the actual car that set the record. The actual car went to Don White and ended up rebodied as a '73 Charger. It also says builder Ray Nichols numbered the cars under the dash. The 200mph car was car DC-93 and the car that was repainted and sat in the museum for years was car DC-71. Good article includes memos from G.W. Porter as well...would seem there should be a car number on the Canepa car as well???
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/featuredvehicles/b_body/mopp_0201_1969_dodge_daytona/index.html (http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/featuredvehicles/b_body/mopp_0201_1969_dodge_daytona/index.html)
QuoteIn a well-publicized test session at Talladega on March 24, 1970, Chrysler testdriver Buddy Baker took a No. 88 Dodge (similar to the car campaigned by Cotton Owens) to a 200.447 world record. While a No. 88 car has resided for years in the International Motorsports Hall of Fame at the fabled Alabama track, it has now come to light that the car that actually achieved the glory had been forlornly sitting out behind former circle track racer Don White's race shop in Keokuk, Iowa, for almost 25 years!
the actual car that went 200 mph:
QuoteThe number on this car is DC-93. It has no VIN on the dash, like a stock vehicle. It has DC-93 under the dashboard, which is the number noted NASCAR builder Ray Nichols of Highland, Indiana, assigned the car when it was built. The Chrysler guys called it "093" and vintage photos show this. The car has no title because it was strictly a race car. Don's close connection with Ray, whom he drove for several times during the '60s, may have played a role as to why he ended up with this particular machine.
...and about the museum car not being the car everyone thought it was:
QuoteThis was surprising news, and if the Daytona at the museum wasn't the car that first cracked the 200-mph time, where was the historic automobile? Larry explained that automotive musical chairs had occurred and the real No. 88 car went to Don White, who was actively racing on the USAC stock car circuit in the early '70s.
In fact, No. 88 was still a very good race car and, with wings still flying high on the USAC and ARCA circuits, Don received the good car and NASCAR received a similar test vehicle for their historic collection. The car NASCAR received was formerly painted red and numbered 71 like the Harry Hyde-owned, Bobby Issac-driven machine. Chrysler repainted it Corporate (Petty) Blue, lettered it, then donated it to the sanctioning body. It hadn't gone 200 mph.
Backing up this information was an inter-company correspondence memo written by G.W. Porter and dated July 31, 1970, which was uncovered by Tim Wellborn (director of the Talladega Museum) in 1997. Key parts of this memo include the following: "In May, we received a request from NASCAR relative to the possible donation of the subject car to NASCAR for their speed museum.... Contingent upon your approval, we will take our old No. 71 car, DC-74, paint it to look like the Engineering car No. 88 car, which we used in breaking the 200-mph speed record, and present it to NASCAR. This No. 71 car has outlived its usefulness and would be scrapped in the event we weren't to use it for this purpose."
I new Bob McCurry personally and he told me the same thing. The 88 car in the museum was the #71 test mule. He also said that it was a Baker #6 69 Charger 500 Before that. He said that when they were at the 69 Daytona 500 there was a Legal issue with the car. After the race that car went back to Chrysler and became the Test Mule.. Then when NASCAR wanted a car for the new Museum they took the #71 and made it into a (Regular Daytona) and donated it to what we see there today...
Quote from: Aero426 on February 17, 2010, 12:43:50 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 17, 2010, 12:41:31 PM
Just to clarify - because I know I need to - by HIS car I meant one that looked like BAKER's car. Baker was #1 Chrysler driver, and they would want to display his car, not Goldsmith's or Glotzbach. At least not in 69-70.
Ray Nichels and Charlie would probably disagree with you on that.
So would Bob McCurry, He said Baker drove him NUTS. Baker broke EVERYTHING McCurry said, Just way to rough. And that was from the horses mouth too. McCurry's mouth..
good infomation ! & picture of that #6 front end sheet metal (C5X Daytona)
thanks for sharing :popcrn:
...
Quote from: C5X DAYTONA on February 18, 2010, 09:59:00 PM
I new Bob McCurry personally and he told me the same thing. The 88 car in the museum was the #71 test mule. He also said that it was a Baker #6 69 Charger 500 Before that. He said that when they were at the 69 Daytona 500 there was a Legal issue with the car. After the race that car went back to Chrysler and became the Test Mule.. Then when NASCAR wanted a car for the new Museum they took the #71 and made it into a (Regular Daytona) and donated it to what we see there today...
This is an excellent example of a credible person (McCurry) making an easy mistake in recalling what actually happened. He was close - but the date, #6 and Daytona 500 details are completely wrong.
The car in question was built as the new 1968 1/2 series race car (2" x 2" car) for the Firecracker 400 at Daytona. It only ran only ONE race and that was as a brand new #71 Isaac car. NASCAR caught Chrysler with what they were doing. They had to raise the car for the race, and were told not to bring it back. It was sent to the Proving Grounds for future test work and became the #71 Daytona with the hand made nose and small wing. Then when Chrysler was asked by NASCAR to donate the 200 mph #88, they painted the #71 (which was nearing the end of it's useful life) as the #88 and sent it. Rathgeb, Wallace, Pointer, et al have confirmed all this. This is another situation where I am sure nobody thought 40 years on, the switcheroo of the cars would be a topic of discussion.
Switcheroo document with the #88 car
http://aerowarriors.com/gifs/cda_073170.gif
http://aerowarriors.com/cda.html
http://aerowarriors.com/gifs/cda_073170.gif (http://aerowarriors.com/gifs/cda_073170.gif)
Another question I would put forth since Dr. Craft's book was misquoted earlier would be this; on page 62 of his well researched book "Chrysler Plymouth and Dodge Stock Cars", it shows a n number 6 Daytona with the following caption [Buddy Baker drove a Daytona for Cotton Owens during the aerowars. He won the Southern 500 in 1970 in a day-glo #6 car justlike this one. This particular Daytona is on display at the Joe Weatherly Museum in Darlington.
Now why would a book written in 1997 not only NOT claim that the Darlington display car was the same one that won the Southern 500 but in fact, make a point of stating that the display car was one LIKE the car that won? Surely if it were true they would have known it back then? Why did this pedigree only come to light when the car was offered for sale?
Quote from: Aero426 on February 19, 2010, 09:38:28 AM
Quote from: C5X DAYTONA on February 18, 2010, 09:59:00 PM
I new Bob McCurry personally and he told me the same thing. The 88 car in the museum was the #71 test mule. He also said that it was a Baker #6 69 Charger 500 Before that. He said that when they were at the 69 Daytona 500 there was a Legal issue with the car. After the race that car went back to Chrysler and became the Test Mule.. Then when NASCAR wanted a car for the new Museum they took the #71 and made it into a (Regular Daytona) and donated it to what we see there today...
This is an excellent example of a credible person (McCurry) making an easy mistake in recalling what actually happened. He was close - but the date, #6 and Daytona 500 details are completely wrong.
The car in question was built as the new 1968 1/2 series race car (2" x 2" car) for the Firecracker 400 at Daytona. It only ran only ONE race and that was as a brand new #71 Isaac car. NASCAR caught Chrysler with what they were doing. They had to raise the car for the race, and were told not to bring it back. It was sent to the Proving Grounds for future test work and became the #71 Daytona with the hand made nose and small wing. Then when Chrysler was asked by NASCAR to donate the 200 mph #88, they painted the #71 (which was nearing the end of it's useful life) as the #88 and sent it. Rathgeb, Wallace, Pointer, et al have confirmed all this. This is another situation where I am sure nobody thought 40 years on, the switcheroo of the cars would be a topic of discussion.
OOPS. Not the Baker #6 it was the Charlie Glotzbach #6. MY bad on that. I will post a pic of the #6 Charger being converted as we all have seen this picture before.. It was a #6 68 Charger. Not a #71 Car. The Mule started out as a 68 Charger. Still has the 68 1/4s and glass in it..
This IS the Mule!!!!! Show me a #71 68 Dodge Charger at the prooving grounds.. This is a Picture and proof of what Bob McCurry said.. And Oh my. Look at that. The picture was taken at Chrysler's prooving grounds.. Glotchback #6 was turned into Mule #71 then converted in to #88 museum car. Bob McCurry might of had the race and name wrong but he showed me this pic in Franks book and said this was the #71 Mule and the same #88 car they converted for the museum.. Is he still wrong?? A friend and I went over the 88 car as most of us have and well it is a 68 Charger.. No hard feelings. But if I'm wrong you all can smack me and delete my message...
There were two 1968 Chargers regularly at the proving grounds during this time. The #6 1968 Charger at the proving grounds was chassis 046 which became the first Charger 500. That is where development on that car stopped. It ultimately was used as a baseline against the #88 Daytona as it developed. It is not known what happened to this car.
The second 1968 Charger, DC-74 was the illegal Isaac 2 x 2 1968 Charger from the Firecracker 400. That car became the first Daytona with the home built built nose and wing. It did the initial low speed testing with the Daytona package. This car is the fake #88 in the Talladega museum.
All of this is well documented. I'll repeat... a guy like McCurry wasn't there at the PG every day. He absolutely had the gist of the story correct, but not the details.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 19, 2010, 03:17:19 PM
There were two 1968 Chargers regularly at the proving grounds during this time. The #6 1968 Charger at the proving grounds was chassis 046 which became the first Charger 500. That is where development on that car stopped. It ultimately was used as a baseline against the #88 Daytona as it developed. It is not known what happened to this car.
The second 1968 Charger, DC-74 was the illegal Isaac 2 x 2 1968 Charger that became the first Daytona with the home built built nose and wing. It did the initial low speed testing with the Daytona package. This car is the fake #88 in the Talladega museum.
All of this is well documented. I'll repeat... a guy like McCurry wasn't there at the PG every day. He absolutely had the gist of the story correct, but not the details.
My face hurts and I am out of ammo. Now where is McCurry? I have to tell him something? LOL And we wonder how the #6 Daytona story is getting re-written.... HMMM
I would have paid money for the first hand experience you had with meeting him.
Just re-read the Bonneville Wing car thread. With the growing list of events the car participated in; can we add some Bonneville history for the Canepa car? :rofl:
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 19, 2010, 04:04:06 PM
Just re-read the Bonneville Wing car thread. With the growing list of events the car participated in; can we add some Bonneville history for the Canepa car? :rofl:
well shit, did any of the races listed conflict with the moon landing? i heard from Horace Dodge myself that THIS #6 car was the first lunar rover.
Franks book ? Do you mean Frank Moriaty Super cars book
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/dyn008_original_600_309_jpeg_4251_c.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/Glotchback_6_0001.jpg)
All this talk about turning the #6 car into a show car--seeing this pic made me laugh
Quote from: pettybird on February 19, 2010, 06:38:52 PM
Quote from: 6bblgt on February 19, 2010, 04:04:06 PM
Just re-read the Bonneville Wing car thread. With the growing list of events the car participated in; can we add some Bonneville history for the Canepa car? :rofl:
well shit, did any of the races listed conflict with the moon landing? i heard from Horace Dodge myself that THIS #6 car was the first lunar rover.
Funny Didn't Baker do the 200mph lap in the 88 car the same day we landed on the moon???
:scratchchin: July 20 1969 moon landing
On March 24, 1970, with Buddy Baker at the wheel, the #88 Chrysler Engineering Daytona became the first stock car to officially exceed 200 MPH on a closed course.
http://www.superbird.com/ftkc.html
additional info
Both this and the next photo show Chrysler test driver Jerry Wenk behind the wheel of what presumably is the #6 Cotton Owens '68 Dodge Charger. According to Frank Moriarty in his book, Supercars, the Story of the Dodge Charger Daytona and Plymouth SuperBird, this car eventually became the #71 slow speed test car (seen in the first two photos above). Jerry did a lot of testing in both the slow speed #71 car and the high speed Engineering Daytona prior to Glotzbach and Baker taking over the driving chores. Take note in both this and the next photo of the yarn tufts taped to the car. By driving the car on the test track and having a person in a chase vehicle photograph it, engineers were able to get some idea of how air was flowing around the car body. Crude, but wind tunnels were even less easy to come by in the late '60s than they are now. Greg Kwiatkowski's copy of this photo is courtesy of Jerry Wenk.
Quote from: nascarxx29 on February 19, 2010, 11:01:37 PM
:scratchchin: July 20 1969 moon landing
On March 24, 1970, with Buddy Baker at the wheel, the #88 Chrysler Engineering Daytona became the first stock car to officially exceed 200 MPH on a closed course.
http://www.superbird.com/ftkc.html
additional info
Both this and the next photo show Chrysler test driver Jerry Wenk behind the wheel of what presumably is the #6 Cotton Owens '68 Dodge Charger. According to Frank Moriarty in his book, Supercars, the Story of the Dodge Charger Daytona and Plymouth SuperBird, this car eventually became the #71 slow speed test car (seen in the first two photos above). Jerry did a lot of testing in both the slow speed #71 car and the high speed Engineering Daytona prior to Glotzbach and Baker taking over the driving chores. Take note in both this and the next photo of the yarn tufts taped to the car. By driving the car on the test track and having a person in a chase vehicle photograph it, engineers were able to get some idea of how air was flowing around the car body. Crude, but wind tunnels were even less easy to come by in the late '60s than they are now. Greg Kwiatkowski's copy of this photo is courtesy of Jerry Wenk.
July 20 1969 was the first over 200mph speed at Chelsea. That was it.. Same day as as the moon landing (walk)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1520.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1519.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1515.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1513.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1512.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1511.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1510.jpg)
:2thumbs:
http://www.allpar.com/racing/200-mph-Daytona.html
http://www.allpar.com/corporate/chelsea-proving-grounds.html
Right, Baker drove through the 200 mph barrier in 69 but the number 6 car was not part of it yet.
💩
Quote from: nascarxx29 on February 19, 2010, 11:56:24 PM
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1511.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1510.jpg)
Just to clarify, these photos are from the 1990's Chrysler Corporation Stock Cars book by "Sport Game" . The book is made up of photos from the old Racing Pictorial magazine archives. The photos are wonderful, but as you can see, many captions are incorrect.
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 20, 2010, 09:01:56 AM
On July 20, 1969, Buddy Baker ran 203 mph in a Dodge Charger Daytona stock car — the first time anyone had beaten 200 mph on a closed course. The oval was 16 years old — and made of concrete.
http://www.allpar.com/corporate/chelsea-proving-grounds.html
So what was Baker driving on July 20, 1969?
He was driving the Engineering #88 Daytona. Actually it was before car before it was known as the 88. At the time, it had a combination of B5 blue and camo paint. The Corporate Blue paint and numbers came later.
(http://aerowarriors.com/jpgs/gk6.jpg)
Quote from: Aero426 on February 20, 2010, 10:25:36 AM
Quote from: therealmoparman on February 20, 2010, 09:01:56 AM
On July 20, 1969, Buddy Baker ran 203 mph in a Dodge Charger Daytona stock car — the first time anyone had beaten 200 mph on a closed course. The oval was 16 years old — and made of concrete.
http://www.allpar.com/corporate/chelsea-proving-grounds.html
So what was Baker driving on July 20, 1969?
He was driving the Engineering #88 Daytona. Actually it was before car before it was known as the 88. At the time, it had a combination of B5 blue and camo paint. The Corporate Blue paint and numbers came later.
(http://aerowarriors.com/jpgs/gk6.jpg)
As should be painfully obvious to you by now, Ryan, playing 20 questions about winged cars with Doug is like Russian Roulet with all six chamber loaded.
Doug knows his stuff.
And he hasn't even started to post all of the photos he can to back up his contentions and undermine yours.
Word up.
Your Grand Father lived it
then and then moved on. Doug and the brain trust here (and I am most assuredly not in that number)
still live it. Though Brain X. France has forgotten his NASCAR history, these guys have not. By a long shot.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 20, 2010, 10:14:11 AM
Quote from: nascarxx29 on February 19, 2010, 11:56:24 PM
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1511.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/101_1510.jpg)
Just to clarify, these photos are from the 1990's Chrysler Corporation Stock Cars book by "Sport Game" . The book is made up of photos from the old Racing Pictorial magazine archives. The photos are wonderful, but as you can see, many captions are incorrect.
I found these lastnight sports game book stock cars John Craft and Pauls M Supercars
There is some more #88 archive material outhere :drool5:
Aero Warriors - #88 Racing Daytona
Note: Since this page was added to the Aero Warriors site in 1997, the genuine #88 Daytona has been located. Specific details and several photos are ...
www.aerowarriors.com/wci88.html - Cached
Aero Warriors - The <I>Real</I> #88 Chrysler Engineering Daytona!
This was briefly discussed on the Aero Warriors site in 1997 on the #88 ...
www.aerowarriors.com/88daytona.html
Aero Warriors - 200 MPH Record Run
On March 24, 1970, Buddy Baker guided the Chrysler Engineering #88 Dodge ...
www.aerowarriors.com/200mphrun.html
More results from aerowarriors.com »
Aero Warriors - Other Racing Daytona Drivers
If and when more details are located about these cars and drivers, the Aero Warriors site will be updated to include them. Ron Kesolowski #88 - Kesolowski ...
www.aerowarriors.net/odaytable.html - CachedAero Warriors - Photos From the 2004 Aero Warrior Reunion - The ...
Reunions have been held in 1988, 1994, 1999, and 2004. Photos from the 2004 meeting are showcased here. Other pic's of the 2004 event taken at host Tim ...
www.aerowarriors.net/aw04pimhof.html - Cached
Show more results from www.aerowarriors.netAero Warriors - The <I>Real</I> #88 Chrysler Engineering Daytona!
Information about this wing first appeared on the Aero Warriors site in 1996. Keep in mind that this 1996 article was written two years before the real #88 ...
www.superbird.com/88daytona.html
Scenes from 2004 Buddy and car at Carlisle
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/DCP_0970_0001.jpg)
(http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/DCP_0969_0001.jpg)
are there any more pics of when the #88 was b5 blue n flat black?
...
Quote from: THE CHARGER PUNK on February 23, 2010, 12:10:36 AM
are there any more pics of when the #88 was b5 blue n flat black?
They are on the aerowarriors.com site. Click the link below.
http://aerowarriors.com/ftkc.html (http://aerowarriors.com/ftkc.html)
So what ended up happening here?
A page of posts, a three month lapse , then 12 pages in just over a week?
I think it has now been established that the car's history is not verifiable, or did the "Realmoparman" just give up?
:shruggy:
I lost some good hours of my life keeping up with this thread
He's been lurking since his last post but nothing since Feb 23. I suspect he'll log on when he gets notification of action in the thread again but I doubt he'll reply. There is too much evidence that says the car is not what he claimed it to be when it was first sold. I can't help but think the current sellers would like to have the fake pedigree be taken as true but it sort of looks like they will have to find a collector who isn't too much into the wingcar community to make lightning strike here. :Twocents:
EDIT: Checked today (March 2) and sure enough...
Name: therealmoparman
Posts: 109 (6.412 per day)
Position: Junior Member
Date Registered: February 12, 2010, 10:05:15 PM
Last Active: Yesterday at 01:31:21 PM
I think it's a dead issue.
Just to add a little more fuel to the fire here:
I just had the opportunity to get a lot of old NASCAR photos from a gentleman here locally who's Dad was very involved with NASCAR back in the day. These are two of the photos in the collection and they are of a practice at the "early" March 23, 1969 Bristol race. These are of Owens #6 Charger 500 with Charlie still as the driver. Please correct me if I wrong but this REALLY looks like the show car. It has the two screw A-Pillar caps, right side exhaust and the vent in the correct place.
After reading all the info on the car and talking to a couple of guys (including the guy who had Cotton build the car for Chrysler) that the show car was Cotton's short track 500 and was built using the car that was crashed at Bristol on July 20th, 1969. I have no way to back up the Bristol claim but the gentleman I talked to said Cotton built the show car out of a wrecked car and the timeline adds up. All of this should be done with the disclaimer that the guy I talked to has a pretty hazy memory about all of this.
(http://rocketresto.com/6Dodge2WM.jpg)
(http://rocketresto.com/6DodgeWM.jpg)
Also something else about the pictures, notice how far down the rear end is in the second picture? A lot of down force!
:coolgleamA: good pictures ! intresting :yesnod:
thanks for sharing (TZ) :2thumbs: :cheers:
Quote from: tallzag on March 04, 2010, 10:55:51 PM
Just to add a little more fuel to the fire here:
I just had the opportunity to get a lot of old NASCAR photos from a gentleman here locally who's Dad was very involved with NASCAR back in the day. These are two of the photos in the collection and they are of a practice at the "early" March 23, 1969 Bristol race. These are of Owens #6 Charger 500 with Charlie still as the driver. Please correct me if I wrong but this REALLY looks like the show car. It has the two screw A-Pillar caps, right side exhaust and the vent in the correct place.
After reading all the info on the car and talking to a couple of guys (including the guy who had Cotton build the car for Chrysler) that the show car was Cotton's short track 500 and was built using the car that was crashed at Bristol on July 20th, 1969. I have no way to back up the Bristol claim but the gentleman I talked to said Cotton built the show car out of a wrecked car and the timeline adds up. All of this should be done with the disclaimer that the guy I talked to has a pretty hazy memory about all of this.
(http://rocketresto.com/6Dodge2WM.jpg)
(http://rocketresto.com/6DodgeWM.jpg)
Also something else about the pictures, notice how far down the rear end is in the second picture? A lot of down force!
Interesting shots. Thanks for posting.
Note the round decal in the wing window. I have shots of this same Charger undergoing an engine swap. By my lights, that's the same wing window decal as the "Southern 500 winner". And it is pasted in the same location as on that car. The decal is not dispositive. But it is very persuasive.
Of course, Cotton could have gotten the urge to move wing windows around from car to car while they were all sitting in his shop.
Mystery solved?
DING DING DING DING
I think we have the winner!!!!!
:popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
good spot ! that could be the answer :yesnod: :popcrn:
Doug I'd have to say i would agree on this being the showcar. not only the decal on the window i'm looking at the more convincing evidence of the right hand exhaust. thats alittle more coincidental than a small sticker.
It's baaaaaaack.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Winner-Southern-500-Outside-Pole-Daytona-500-/170480889603?cmd=ViewItem&pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item27b173ef03#ht_4477wt_1161
(like we ever doubted it wouldn't be)
GrEEEEEEEAT :brickwall:
Does this really suprise anyone? We knew that this would happen.
so.... is it real?
*runs after throwing the bucket of gas on the fire*
The owner-s shot themselves in the foot when they painted and used bed liner on the car :rotz:
Not to mention overpaying in the first place and very probably at least partly based on an invented history for this particular car.
Quote from: Ghoste on May 19, 2010, 05:26:17 PM
Not to mention overpaying in the first place and very probably at least partly based on an invented history for this particular car.
At least this car was owned by Cotton Owens, that 22 car sold by Mecums is a joke to begin with :rofl: :smilielol:
Very agreed. Of the two, the Mecum one is a complete travesty.
As far as the # 6 car being what claimed,does it really matter?You can argue all day long about the history.It comes down to who said/wrote/saw what is usually debated.Everyone has their own interpretation.Just because it is written/published somewhere that it is correct doesn't prove it so.Do you believe everything you read in the newspaper,what is on network news programs and what floats around on the internet?The car is what it is,unless you are a buyer with that kind of fund's most (and I doubt the majority who have posted including myself) couldn't come close to that figure.That being the case,don't lose sleep over it,a potential buyer with the $$$ will do that.I would bet two thirds of those who nitpick any car probably have some of the same issues with their own (if they even have one) if the truth were known.If you so choose to nitpick me,enjoy yourself :Twocents:
Well yes, I would say what is claimed does matter. It's not in agreement with what has been common thought for decades by people involved with the race program.
At the end of the day, it's still a great car. As always, the buyer needs to do their homework. That said, at the current price, it's probably not going anywhere anytime soon.
Doug,guess I should have rephrased my statement.Still feel the only ones it matters to in the end is the seller and eventual buyer.
It does matter beyond the seller and buyer and it matters very much. First of all, if it wasn't meant to increase the value of the car, it wouldn't be used as the primary selling feature of the thing. So make no mistake, the phony pedigree has a huge impact on the perceived worth of the thing. Once the phony history has been passed around enough, it will become legitimized and everyone will insist that this one is THE car. So another car has now been made worth more through a lie. So what you might say? What if the car or cars that did actually accomplish those goals turn up? How do they establish their worth? If we do choose to take a "what is the real harm" approach, where does it stop? Why should we as the hardcore freaks of this segment of the hobby be selective about which fake cars we try to point out? If this one is okay what about the Allison car that is also making the auction rounds right now? What if you paid ALL the money for one of YOUR cars thinking it was something special only to find out after you were ripped off by a fraudster?
If one thief is okay, they all are.
Quote from: Ghoste on May 23, 2010, 09:26:08 AM
It does matter beyond the seller and buyer and it matters very much. First of all, if it wasn't meant to increase the calue of the car, it wouldn't be used as the primary selling feature of the thing. So make no mistake, the phony pedigree has a huge impact on the perceived owrht of the thing. Once the phony history has been passed around enough, it will become legitimized and everyone will insist that this one is THE car. So another car has now been made worth more through a lie. So what you might say? What if the car or cars that did actually accomplish those goals turn up? How do they establish their worth? If we do choose to take a "what is the real harm" approach, where does it stop? Why should we as the hardcore freaks of this segment of the hobby be selective about which fake cars we try to point out? If this one is okay what about the Allison car that is also making the auction rounds right now? What if you paid ALL the money for one of YOUR cars thinking it was something special only to find out after you were ripped off by a fruadster?
If one thief is okay, they all are.
I would be careful labeling anyone as a thief regardless,you are painting everyone with a broad brush.Suppose in the end that the facts were proved to be correct,or for that matter same scenario with any vehicle.Then what?If I were to ever sell any thing i own,it would be by word of mouth.To openly advertise anywhere opens the proverbial can of worms.You could have bought a car new in 1970,lock it in a sealed building,advertised it today and i guarantee you someone would find fault with it.It would be,I read this,he said that etc and on ad on and on..
Quote from: 62 Max on May 22, 2010, 10:28:24 AM
Do you believe everything you read in the newspaper,what is on network news programs and what floats around on the internet?
there are no lies on the internet, silly.
The problem I have with the situation is not the claim made earlier by Canepa et al which precipiated this entire debate - it's the insistence on following the same storyline even after its history has been called into question and de facto debunked for all but the most ardent supporters of that particular version of history.
As an example... I've been given a verbal history of my Daytona from its previous owners. If damning evidence that refutes that history (my car's history is not that interesting or important, of course) is produced and I continue insisting that the story is true in spite of any evidence to the contrary, any objective onlooker has to wonder what my motives are. In the instance of the #6 revisionist history, the motivation is quite clear.
Now - where the fault lies for the origination of this storyline is debatable. Ultimately, even that is irrelevant apart from noting that the current seller is apparently unfazed by factual evidence to the contrary. That's the sad part. I don't fault them for initially believing what they were told, but I do question the motives under these circumstances. If they're going to market the car as an unbelievably-preserved time capsule from NASCAR's golden era (that's my opinion of what it is, anyway), fine. Establish a value and see if the market agrees. Us armchair quarterbacks cannot have any meaningful feedback on that topic, as the ultimate valuation question is answered only by a bona fide buyer.
A case could be made, however, that the historical claims made by this seller border on fraud. For those who don't like the use of that term here, look up the legal definition and see if it applies to this situation. If a buyer relies on the statements/history being presented and then discovers the factual evidence which refutes said statements/history -- especially if the buyer can prove that the seller or parties associated with the seller knew of this factual evidence to the contrary -- that could easily be grounds for a fairly significant lawsuit. The seller doesn't have to agree with us (no one HAS to do so), but ignoring pretty convincing evidence which refutes their historical claim could come back and bite them.
In large part, I agree with 62Max that we don't have much input on the value set for this car. They can ask whatever they want. Where I differ is in the treatment of the seller's historical contentions.
:Twocents:
I didn't label anyone as a thief. I am merely stating that if one is okay then they all are.
Now I do agree and concede that my statement implies such but I stand by the sentence as written. I could never accuse any of the participants in this thread or parties represented herein as being thieves as I have no reason or evidence to such. I do however fully support my argument that if we choose to ignore perceived examples of fraud without questioning it, then we open the door to encouraging actual thieves to steal our hard earned collector car purchase dollars.
5/20/70 newspaper ad
I remember the real moparman cottons son discussion :Twocents: .I believe what the documentation tells you .You have to dig back in the history .To get the real truth about certain mysterys
On another note by Jack Spiller was a # 6 sponsor
Check out second reply and you will see Jack Spiller dodge is a sponsor on the # 6 daytona
http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?topic=63521.120
Quote from: Aero426 on September 13, 2011, 10:48:55 AM
5/20/70 newspaper ad
great pic--thanks for sharing!!!!!!!!!!!!! :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod::cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :yesnod: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
wait till i get my nascar winged 66 charger set up with a new VIN tag and it will be the 2nd prototype right behind the orange/white one out of south dakota :RantExplode:
Quote from: mauve66 on September 13, 2011, 01:47:54 PM
wait till i get my nascar winged 66 charger set up with a new VIN tag and it will be the 2nd prototype right behind the orange/white one out of south dakota :RantExplode:
:D :D :D :D
The following posts are from the December 17, 1970 issue of Midwest Racing News. Article on the 1971 Detroit Auto Show at Cobo Hall. Photo with Baker and the #6 show car Daytona.
Article with the above photo written by Phil Hall. Hall is a seasoned racing writer and worked with the Milwaukee Mile and Midwest Racing News for decades. Note his description of the #6 Daytona in column 2 of the article.
Conclusion of the article for your reading pleasure.
The Cobo Hall display. I know it's a repost, but you might want to see it relative to the B & W photo.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=120691;image)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/BakerDaytona/BakerCobo71MRN.jpg)
Aftermath of Charlie Glotzbach's Bristol crash in the Charger 500. It has been suggested that this car was rebuilt into the existing Baker #6 Daytona.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 21, 2014, 05:09:42 PM
Aftermath of Charlie Glotzbach's Bristol crash in the Charger 500. It has been suggested that this car was rebuilt into the existing Baker #6 Daytona.
And why not? Cotton was never a guy to waste money! When Chrysler paid him to make a show car Daytona, why not add parts to this wrecked one and call it a day?
Careful comparisons of the show car #6 to vintage photo shows it is not the car that ran Darlington, Talladaga, MIS, Daytona, Charlotte, Atlanta or any other speedway.
Here we go again...... ::)
Quote from: 70Sbird on February 22, 2014, 02:25:07 PM
Here we go again...... ::)
It has been some time, ya know.... The #6 owners STILL claim the car ran over 200 during a race.... with no side glass, no less! :smilielol: :smilielol: :smilielol:
Unfortunate since the car could still be noteworthy just for what it is.
Quote from: Ghoste on February 23, 2014, 09:43:21 AM
Unfortunate since the car could still be noteworthy just for what it is.
And that (to the casual observer such as me) is what makes the ads/claims frustrating. Here is a very nice car with a documented history, and a great story to tell of it's own, why try to make one up that really is not much better, and can easily be dispelled as crap?? :shruggy:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
That's why, even if its just a couple.
Similarly, anyone who finds an old Mopar race car with some blue paint wants it to be a Petty car.
(http://i792.photobucket.com/albums/yy205/mikejmc/1970DetroitAutoShow_zpsadd44d9f.jpg) (http://s792.photobucket.com/user/mikejmc/media/1970DetroitAutoShow_zpsadd44d9f.jpg.html)
(http://i792.photobucket.com/albums/yy205/mikejmc/0809_31_zmilestones_in_speedbuddy_baker_zps124b84b8.jpg) (http://s792.photobucket.com/user/mikejmc/media/0809_31_zmilestones_in_speedbuddy_baker_zps124b84b8.jpg.html)
Stock Car Racing magazine was there for the April 1970 race. Below is an excerpt from coverage
in the August, 1970 issue.
The fact is that Baker's 198 mph was IN A DRAFT with Bobby Allison, which was good for an additional 4-5 mph.
By himself, Baker in the Owens #6 would have done only about 194 mph.
However the 200.477 was a solo pass.
Quote from: Ghoste on February 26, 2014, 06:19:51 AM
However the 200.477 was a solo pass.
Yes, it was. Makes the 200.447 run by the Baker in the #88 impressive.
The day after the 200.447 run, they ran again in the 88 without side glass. It went 197.5
Keep in mind for the April Talladega race, side glass was banned for the race.
Quote from: odcics2 on February 26, 2014, 05:32:27 PM
Quote from: Ghoste on February 26, 2014, 06:19:51 AM
However the 200.477 was a solo pass.
Yes, it was. Makes the 200.447 run by the Baker in the #88 impressive.
The day after the 200.447 run, they ran again in the 88 without side glass. It went 197.5
Keep in mind for the April Talladega race, side glass was banned for the race.
No side glass for April and a restrictor plate for the August race which slowed them down another 10 mph.
Quote from: Aero426 on February 26, 2014, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: odcics2 on February 26, 2014, 05:32:27 PM
Quote from: Ghoste on February 26, 2014, 06:19:51 AM
However the 200.477 was a solo pass.
Yes, it was. Makes the 200.447 run by the Baker in the #88 impressive.
The day after the 200.447 run, they ran again in the 88 without side glass. It went 197.5
Keep in mind for the April Talladega race, side glass was banned for the race.
No side glass for April and a restrictor plate for the August race which slowed them down another 10 mph.
Correct! The plate was FIRST seen in Nascar at the MIS Yankee 400 in August 1970.
The pole speed was 156 by Glotzbach. Two months prior Hamilton had the pole for the Motor State 400 at 162.
A week after the Yankee 400, they ran at Talladega. I remember a pole speed of around 186...
No side glass, and that infernal PLATE!!
Real race #6 has six rivets on the door block off. Show car has five.
By the way, you could change the door skin because of a crash. But unless the door handle panel was wiped out, an efficient crew man would drill out the rivets and reuse that part on the new skin.
I've wondered why those aluminum plates were used over the door handle holes at all. They could have just erased the holes entirely. It wouldn't have looked stock but there were nonstick details all over the cars by then.
QuoteI've wondered why those aluminum plates were used over the door handle holes at all. They could have just erased the holes entirely. It wouldn't have looked stock but there were nonstick details all over the cars by then.
Just easy and quick and still gives the appearance from a distance that their is a stock door handle....
1968 was the last year that some cars ran the actual diecast chrome door handle, as a dummy bolted on the door shell.
Ford fabricated their Talladega headlight doors and quarter panel extensions out of aluminum. They are like works of art. I believe that was to eliminate the chance of broken diecast parts.
Read it in a magazine. It must be true. :rofl:
The photo used in this ad was from the Daytona 500.
The root cause of all this misinformation, is that Chrysler made a mistake in not having really good PR pics of the #88 available to the media. The on-track pics taken of the car are with the late afternoon sun coming at the camera. Since the purpose of the car being there was to break the record, why they (and NASCAR) did not have this figured out is a mystery to me. Did they not have a car to run the photographer down to turn 3 to get the right shot? :brickwall:
What about this? :nana:
http://www.allpar.com/racing/NASCAR/daytona-development.html
Quote from: odcics2 on February 27, 2014, 04:05:24 PM
What about this? :nana:
http://www.allpar.com/racing/NASCAR/daytona-development.html
:drool5: :bow: looking forward to reading & seeing the resto pictures & it finished :dance: :coolgleamA: :2thumbs:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
just taken a few screen shots of Buddy Bakers / Cotton Owens C500 in the chargers video , think i can can see four rivits for the door handle blanking plate :scratchchin: :shruggy: could be my eyes though , will try to take a better picture later !! & four for the A pillar windshield mouldings :scratchchin: :popcrn:
See the DUAL ignition switches? This is the same car that ran Daytona in 1970, along with Talladega.
Quote from: odcics2 on February 28, 2014, 04:19:22 PM
See the DUAL ignition switches? This is the same car that ran Daytona earlier in the year, along with Talladega.
The screen grabs are 1969 pics of a 500, so it would have been later converted to a Daytona. Not unexpected.
few more from the chargers video !!
had to take a picture with digital camera then resize , ! sorry not that clear , not come out as good as I hopped :icon_smile_blackeye:, & don't have the software on this computer to lighten the pictures & or turn in to a negative to see more detail !
took one of the rear valance corner too !! wonder if it matches the #6 race car that's forsale :scratchchin:
:popcrn:
:popcrn:
dual ignition switches? :shruggy:
"Now see heah boy? That car over there is the real Buddy Baker Daytona". :icon_smile_big:
Quote from: Aero426 on May 13, 2014, 03:26:43 PM
"Now see heah boy? That car over there is the real Buddy Baker Daytona". :icon_smile_big:
PHOTOSHOPPED!!! That guy is a mailman in a sheriffs outfit! :smilielol:
Still available:
http://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/dealer/dodge/charger/1628161.html
An inquire price.
If you are on Facebook, here is a nice video of the engine in the Baker car running.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater)
Quote from: Aero426 on August 20, 2014, 09:39:04 PM
If you are on Facebook, here is a nice video of the engine in the Baker car running.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater)
the car has two right side exhaust pipes--was there no specified configuration, or was this a track by track thing?
Quote from: pettybird on August 20, 2014, 10:11:47 PM
Quote from: Aero426 on August 20, 2014, 09:39:04 PM
If you are on Facebook, here is a nice video of the engine in the Baker car running.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater)
the car has two right side exhaust pipes--was there no specified configuration, or was this a track by track thing?
Richard ran both pipes out the left side of the car. I assume it is a tuning thing with the length of the pipes.
Did you notice how mild the tune of the Baker engine sounds?
Quote from: Aero426 on August 20, 2014, 09:39:04 PM
If you are on Facebook, here is a nice video of the engine in the Baker car running.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater)
:scratchchin: motor sounds pretty tame to me, through my computer speakers !! street hemi , mild cam ? :shruggy: , :scratchchin:
Quote from: Aero426 on August 20, 2014, 05:59:24 PM
Still available:
http://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/dealer/dodge/charger/1628161.html
:2thumbs:
:popcrn:
:popcrn:
:popcrn:
:popcrn:
:scratchchin: :popcrn:
:popcrn:
:popcrn:
:popcrn: :scratchchin:
:popcrn:
:popcrn: :popcrn: :scratchchin:
:popcrn:
:popcrn:
And here is the breakdown of the engine pad...
a plain old street hemi...
BH426
B = 1966 model year
H = HEMI
WT = water tested after assembled
426 = 426 cu.in.
4 20 03
4 20 = Wednesday 4/20/66 (EAD) Engine Assembly Date
03 = 3rd engine completed that day
And why not? This was intended as a show car, never saw the race track as a Daytona...
I was going to make a joke about running the pipes out the left side of the car so they could impress the hell out of the Mopar fans in the stands and terrify the Brand X ones but then I got to thinking it could have been done to allow the driver to talk to the crew in the pits in the pre-radio days.
WOW, thanks for the detailed pictures.....the car has really nice worksmanship.....
Quote from: maxwellwedge on August 21, 2014, 09:00:57 AM
http://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Number=6972526
Good info.
so another odd race car question...did they use the standard mechanical voltage regulator like that? How about for 70?
Quote from: pettybird on August 21, 2014, 11:41:04 AM
so another odd race car question...did they use the standard mechanical voltage regulator like that? How about for 70?
Mine has an electronic voltage regulator.
From 1970?
Quote from: Ghoste on August 21, 2014, 12:00:29 PM
From 1970?
Looks like 2875400. Believe that is a '69 Imperial part.
Controversy or not, this would be a cool car to have at Carlisle. :cheers:
Now if I owned it, I'd drive it & I'd probably have my first speeding ticket (among others) in years. :lol:
Quote from: Aero426 on August 21, 2014, 01:46:39 PM
Looks like 2875400. Believe that is a '69 Imperial part.
yep. 46th week of '68, so I'd imagine that the new for '69 race cars would have been electronic.
Cool, and makes sense too.
Quote from: Aero426 on August 21, 2014, 01:46:39 PM
Quote from: Ghoste on August 21, 2014, 12:00:29 PM
From 1970?
Looks like 2875400. Believe that is a '69 Imperial part.
three wire regulator !! :yesnod: :scratchchin:
Nice work on the photos, Tan Top! :2thumbs:
Anyone notice the STOCK production '70 charger hood??? Not the typical race Daytona hood with the 'edge' on it.
Also - a stock front valance, stock wing braces & wing. It does NOT have the retaining cable!!!!!!!! Or the hole in the wing
to run the cable to the trunk floor!
(we know about the choke and the stock alternator and upper radiator hose from the local parts store!)
Quote from: tan top on August 21, 2014, 05:10:07 PM
Quote from: Aero426 on August 21, 2014, 01:46:39 PM
three wire regulator !! :yesnod: :scratchchin:
now why would that ignition terminal be there? The regulator is a variable ground.
them crazy chrysler folks, I tell ya.
It's so obvious this car was never raced in its current Daytona configuration. Way too many inconsistencies with real race Daytona's. Its good to see the light being shown on the car for what it really is/was. Don't get me wrong, its a cool piece of history but so many times you hear bogus stories about these cars without anyone questioning them.
Especially when the bogus story is being put out there by the person who otherwise could have been the most credible witness.
Quote from: Ghoste on August 26, 2014, 11:18:11 AM
Especially when the bogus story is being put out there by the person who otherwise could have been the most credible witness.
It is unfortunate that story got put out there when the car left Spartanburg. It did result in a large pay day.
Which is all he really wanted.
more recent pictures of the Buddy baker #6 / show car / ? :yesnod:
http://justacarguy.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-1st-car-in-nascar-over-200mph-buddy.html
Quote from: tan top on August 29, 2014, 07:42:40 AM
more recent pictures of the Buddy baker #6 / show car / ? :yesnod:
http://justacarguy.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-1st-car-in-nascar-over-200mph-buddy.html
Nice pictures but what is with the massive amount of pure BS on that placard? ::)
Quote from: Stevearino on August 29, 2014, 04:18:28 PM
Quote from: tan top on August 29, 2014, 07:42:40 AM
more recent pictures of the Buddy baker #6 / show car / ? :yesnod:
http://justacarguy.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-1st-car-in-nascar-over-200mph-buddy.html
Nice pictures but what is with the massive amount of pure BS on that placard? ::)
So deep, it is shovel ready.
Nice that the comment on that blog directs readers to this thread.
Not that it matters, but that's a pair of '68 Charger doors on the CANEPA #6 Daytona. :scratchchin:
Quote from: 6bblgt on August 30, 2014, 01:59:56 AM
Not that it matters, but that's a pair of '68 Charger doors on the CANEPA #6 Daytona. :scratchchin:
:2thumbs:
Quote from: Aero426 on August 30, 2014, 11:03:43 AM
Quote from: 6bblgt on August 30, 2014, 01:59:56 AM
Not that it matters, but that's a pair of '68 Charger doors on the CANEPA #6 Daytona. :scratchchin:
:2thumbs:
LOL, I noticed that, too. And why would Cotton give Chrysler new , 69 doors when he built it for them? Same reason he dropped a standard street hemi in it! He figured, who'd care for a show car?? (The "Fake 88" Daytona at Talladega also has 68 doors on it, since it was a 1968 built "2x2" car... )
I hope this car becomes known to the world as it what it actually is someday (which is still plenty cool and desirable in its own right).
Quote from: Ghoste on August 30, 2014, 02:29:14 PM
I hope this car becomes known to the world as it what it actually is someday (which is still plenty cool and desirable in its own right).
All you have to do is call Canapa and tell them.
I contacted them in the past and never heard back. Perhaps if others do the same, they will get the message. :cheers:
With the amount of street parts on the car, the fact that the instrument panel is totally different than the cars Cotton ran in 1970
and the fact it was at car shows the same time is was supposed to be on the track, heck, any one of these is proof that car never
was on the track as a Daytona in 1970.
Contact info:
Mr. Bruce Canapa
4900 Scotts Valley Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
Phone # 831-430-9940
:2thumbs:
Don't forget, there is proof that the best ANY Owens car ran was 198. mph, leading a draft, at the April 1970 Talladega race. This is documented in a vintage Stock Car Racing magazine.
THERE WERE NO RACE LAPS OVER 200 MPH IN 1970. BY ANYBODY! AT ANY TRACK !!
I sent something to them when they bought it, but with what they paid I think they much prefer the "official version of the truth" that Cottons grandson told.
From their Hemmings description, I am wondering what show Dodge displayed it at in January 1971 at Cobo Hall in Detroit? Since the 1971 Detroit auto show was from November 21-29, 1970 it seems like they are saying it was at another show there, or perhaps they have the date wrong.
Quote from: Redbird on August 30, 2014, 07:47:23 PM
From their Hemmings description, I am wondering what show Dodge displayed it at in January 1971 at Cobo Hall in Detroit? Since the 1971 Detroit auto show was from November 21-29, 1970 it seems like they are saying it was at another show there, or perhaps they have the date wrong.
Good catch. Pretty sure the owner and his people have just parroted what they have been told versus doing actual research. He also has the Petty "Riverside" Torino which he has been told is fake, but continues to represent as real. It started out before restoration as a real Holman-Moody frame and cage of unknown origin. The real car was written off at Asheville in early '69. One of the hardest hits Petty ever took.
(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y162/dodgeboy43/pettycrash.jpg)
You can see how far it moved the passenger floor in. This is the Asheville/Riverside car stripped out at H-M. This car was a total write off.
(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y162/dodgeboy43/Bach_Images_Petty_wreck_interior.jpg)
The fact that there is a '66 "street HEMI" block (or complete never apart engine) in the car really has nothing to do with its authenticity.
I don't think anyone is claiming "that" engine is in NASCAR tune and/or went 200 MPH. :scratchchin:
Wow, Petty's Torino sure did take a hit!
Nobody was scrapping a brand new H&M chassis very easily in those days. That thing must have been pretty thoroughly distorted.
The Riverside Torino is an excellent example Doug, I saw that car not too many years ago and even with my limited knowledge was surprised how it was presented.
Quote from: 6bblgt on August 30, 2014, 09:03:41 PM
The fact that there is a '66 "street HEMI" block (or complete never apart engine) in the car really has nothing to do with its authenticity.
I don't think anyone is claiming "that" engine is in NASCAR tune and/or went 200 MPH. :scratchchin:
They claim the car is just like it was when it came off the track. So, "that" engine was in it as it was last "raced"....
The car is not nascar legal. Then or now. It never raced.
:popcrn:
http://www.canepa.com/inventory/racecar_1/Dodge_Daytona/
:popcrn:
:popcrn:
There ain't no skid plates on speedway cars!
Note the front valance & spoiler are street items, not correct race pieces.
Quote from: odcics2 on August 31, 2014, 02:29:53 PM
There ain't no skip plates on speedway cars!
What are you looking at? Which picture? I'm terrible with how the race cars were constructed...
There is NO way that car ran 200 with a factory valence panel. The race Daytona's had a valence panel that was mostly hand made and went from the rear of the cone to the front of the cross-section of the k-frame to eliminate turbulence in that area. Another issue is the lack of holes in the trunk floor where race braces (for the wing) would have bolted down. And the wrong doors, dash panel etc...this was definitely a non-daytona Nichels chassis used for show-car purposes. In addition, I met Cotton on several occasions. He personally told me what happened to the Baker car after Buddy crashed it and it wasn't "turned into the show car".
He should have told his grandson. :lol:
Quote from: pettybird on August 31, 2014, 06:02:45 PM
Quote from: odcics2 on August 31, 2014, 02:29:53 PM
There ain't no skip plates on speedway cars!
What are you looking at? Which picture? I'm terrible with how the race cars were constructed...
About 6 pics up from your posting.
Just noticed that there is a lowering block on the pass side only... Rather odd. :shruggy:
QuoteJust noticed that there is a lowering block on the pass side only... Rather odd.
Yeah I noticed that as well and I believe that was done because the right rear spring has more leafs and is a stiffer spring which would make sense in a Nascar setup, in fact I just received my XHD Mopar leaf springs today and the arc on the right rear leaf is 1 1/4" taller sitting on the floor next to driver side leaf and I am sure they had a very stiff right rear leaf so that is why they ran the lowering block to even out the rear height of the car.
Quote from: odcics2 on September 24, 2014, 04:38:01 PM
Just noticed that there is a lowering block on the pass side only... Rather odd. :shruggy:
Take another look. Driver side appears to have a lowering block, but it seems to have been placed below the spring. The one on the passenger side is where it should be.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=225506;image)
A lowering block below the axle would only effect the travel of the shocks but that car has no lowering block below the axle and above the shock mount on the driver side, the shock mount is just mounted directly to the leaf spring pack on the driver side.
Quote from: Aero426 on September 24, 2014, 05:47:19 PM
Quote from: odcics2 on September 24, 2014, 04:38:01 PM
Just noticed that there is a lowering block on the pass side only... Rather odd. :shruggy:
Take another look. Driver side appears to have a lowering block, but it seems to have been placed below the spring. The one on the passenger side is where it should be.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=225506;image)
I don't know if it has anything to do with it since this started life as a race car there might have been an asymetrical treatment of the suspension left to right to compensate for body roll in the corners. Before COT or Gen 6 cars all cars were built in our shop with 1" of side rake with the corners of the deck lid at 35" and 36"at rest. 36" being the right side of the car. Now the cars are built flat with ride heights of 6" and 8" at the front and rear of the frame rails all compensation is done with the suspension.
Yeah, I recall reading a bit of advice for buying ex-NASCAR chassis/suspension cars/parts for streetable projects: You always want to go for road-course cars. Those are the only ones built without any kind of bias towards left turns.
Quote from: Indygenerallee on September 24, 2014, 05:51:16 PM
A lowering block below the axle would only effect the travel of the shocks but that car has no lowering block below the axle and above the shock mount on the driver side, the shock mount is just mounted directly to the leaf spring pack on the driver side.
Why does the left side below the axle look different than the right side below the axle? They do not appear the same.
idk, I have looked at it again, very hard to tell in those pics maybe it does have a spacer there to lower the shock mounting point to match the passenger side. kinda hard to tell.
💩
💩
💩
💩
:popcrn:
💩
I am going to get a piece of paper and have folks who know nothing at all about the about mechanical history of my car attest that it is the Lunar Rover. How long..do you think...until the Smithsonian calls? Should I wait by the phone?
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 01, 2014, 08:10:37 PM
Quote from: Ghoste on August 26, 2014, 11:18:11 AM
Especially when the bogus story is being put out there by the person who otherwise could have been the most credible witness.
So this story was "put out" in 1992, an unbelievable 16 years before the Daytona car sold on ebay?
Thanks for posting the licensing paperwork. Interesting to see how it worked.
Do you have any paperwork from when the car was donated to the museum at Darlington?
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 01, 2014, 08:15:05 PM
Quote from: C5HM on November 01, 2014, 08:05:14 PM
I am going to get a piece of paper and have folks who know nothing at all about the about mechanical history of my car attest that it is the Lunar Rover. How long..do you think...until the Smithsonian calls? Should I wait by the phone?
So here is where we find ourselves:
1. The story was fabricated by COG in 2008 when they wanted to sell the car on ebay - or -
2. The same story has been maintained all along, by documentation at least since 1992, a full 16 years before the car was sold on ebay, stating the same thing that was said all along. The documentation even shows that Bud Moore stated these as facts, not COG.
We can now agree that portions of the history were factually incorrect going all the way back to at least 1992. I would not expect that Bud would know everything about the car in the museum.
💩
💩
Is there any historical paperwork from the Weatherly Museum showing exactly when the car was donated to the museum?
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 01, 2014, 08:15:05 PM
Quote from: C5HM on November 01, 2014, 08:05:14 PM
I am going to get a piece of paper and have folks who know nothing at all about the about mechanical history of my car attest that it is the Lunar Rover. How long..do you think...until the Smithsonian calls? Should I wait by the phone?
So here is where we find ourselves:
1. The story was fabricated by COG in 2008 when they wanted to sell the car on ebay - or -
2. The same story has been maintained all along, by documentation at least since 1992, a full 16 years before the car was sold on ebay, stating the same thing that was said all along. The documentation even shows that Bud Moore stated these as facts, not COG.
Q: Is Bruce Canapa, current owner of the #6 Cotton Owens Dodge, suing the Cotton Owens Estate? Is that why this 'paperwork' is being presented?
......
💩
💩
Dumb as I am,
I read the letter posted above dated 1/22/1992 and it says;
..., but it was also a show car. The Owens built car won an award at the Detroit Auto Show as the best looking car and it was also shown in car shows all over the United States for 2 consecutive years."
There are plenty of pictures of the Ownens/Baker car at the Auto Shows. The dates of the auto shows are known.
So I'm not too bright, just how does the race schedule fit in with the Auto Show schedule?
💩
:Twocents: They did a indepth interview sometime back on speedvision from the Darlington museum with Cotton Owens and that car right beside him ..Wonder if that would show any usable detail.Or I he mentioned anything on cars prior history. It might be on youtube?.I think I taped it
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 02, 2014, 10:12:48 AM
We know that Daytonas were only used at the bigger speedway tracks, where the race dates are spread throughout the season. There was more than one Charger race car that could be converted to a Daytona (and likewise back to just a Charger). And car shows are intermittent too, so there could be plenty of opportunities to use a certain car or another car at any given track or car show as the schedule allowed.
I don't mean for my observation below to be included in the quote above.
Here is among one of the challenges I just can't seem to overcome. Again, dumb as I am.
The 50 Lap race that a Owens/Baker Daytona ran at Daytona and finished 2nd at was on 2/19/1970.
The 1970 Daytona 500 was on 2/22/1970, a Owens/Baker Daytona finished 27th there. There are plenty of pictures of the car there as well as it was shown on ABC's Wide World of Sports on that date.
The 1970 Chicago Auto Show was 2/21/1970-3/1/1970. A Owens/Baker Daytona was there.
The "Carolona 500" at Rockingham took place 3/8/1970 where an Owens/Baker Daytona finished 33rd.
So is someone saying that in late February/March 1970 that there were 2 Owens/Baker Daytonas?
There are also plenty of pictures of a Owens/Baker Daytona at other Auto Shows. So any differences in auto show cars can be documented.
Now is it being said that the Owens/Baker Auto Show Daytonas were a different car depending on which show it was?
💩
💩
interesting stuff , thanks for sharing ... :popcrn:
2 vintage photos of DC-84, the car used at both the Daytona 500 and the April Talladega race.
First photo is a documented pic from a vintage newspaper.
Second is from a vintage Cotton Owens-dodge press release.
Closely look at the tape on the steering column. Same in both vintage photos.
No conspiring here, just fact.
Now look at the photo of the Owens Dodge owned by Canapa.
Plainly seen is the totally different roll cage designs when comparing DC-84 to the Canapa owned car.
It has been often stated that the Canapa car is "just like it rolled off the track." :shruggy:
💩
💩
i have no dog in this fight, and i think the canepa car is interesting in it's own right, even though it appears to just be a show car. you said here:
QuoteUnfortunately I do not have Cotton's contract with Chrysler from 1969-1970
and that's understandable. you can't come back later and say, though:
QuoteThe contract proves that there was no financial renumeration or incentive for COG to build a "show car" that never raced.
it doesn't matter what was in a 62, 63, 64 contract, etc. it wouldn't matter what was in a 71, 72, 73 contract. the only contract that would matter for 69 and 70, aren't represented. again, the car should be able to stand on it's own, as the last cotton owens garage built hemi daytona. doesn't matter why it was built, it was built. it's an awesome car, and thanks for sharing your families race documents, with the community. :2thumbs:
💩
💩
The "show car" is an animal unto itself. It would not be part of the normal year to year contract from Dodge to COG. It was a special one time project.
Further, the cars built in 1969-70 period would all originate at Nichels Engineering and be finished at COG. The cars from the contract you posted would be tear downs built completely in-house at COG.
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 02, 2014, 01:57:40 PM
As has been stated many times the interior, exterior, trim and anything, including roll bars, dash, whatever, could have been changed when the car was prepared for Darlington museum. Interesting that your photos show the actual race car photos have door panels on them. Obviously they put carpet in it and window cranks for the museum, so perhaps they had a reason to modify the roll cage and many other things. Please note that no representations are made for any modifications that have subsequently been made by Canepa, who has attempted to put it into more of a race prep form.
It should also be noted that the same car was used for several years, 1968 - 1970. It was changed in various forms from Charger to Daytona, with various modifications made for NASCAR rule changes as well as manufacturer changes.. so who knows exactly what it looked like from week to week or year to year. :shruggy:
More photos can be found here:
http://cottonowens.com/daytona/index.html
The central roll cage behind the driver and dashboard differences are significant. It would not be typical to alter those parts of the car.
Cars delivered from Nichels Engineering were equipped with partial carpets. It was typical to have asbestos mat under them. The carpets on the existing car have been removed by the current owner for reasons unknown. Window cranks were necessary when the cars raced with side glass.
With the 1/22/1992 letter saying that the #6 car was on the auto show circuit as a show winner for 2 years, is the premise that a Nichols car painted in #6 livery was used for the auto shows in late 1969 to 1970 no longer being promoted?
Or is it now the contention that a Nichols car was used for one year and a COG garage car was used for 2 more years-for a total of 3 years of #6 Daytonas at auto shows?
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 07:39:24 AM
Let's not re-hash old photos and old arguments anymore shall we? :brickwall:
I have posted new documents that state that actual race cars were to appear at auto shows, per Chrysler. I have also posted documents that make the same claims made all along at least 16 years before the car was sold on ebay.
These documents raise a lot of new points and I've posited a lot of questions that no one has yet to answer to specifically. If you would like to address any of the new points or questions these documents raise, I'll be glad to engage in a conversation with you.
Your Cottons Grandson correct? I am late in this thread but just knowing your relationship to Cotton it would be difficult to refute anything from you.
💩
From your extensive photo archives, I will challenge you to post a photo of a 1968 or 1969 bare body in white sitting at COG waiting to become.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/Ayers/Petty68shells.jpg)
you state this........
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 02, 2014, 08:14:23 AM
Here you go again, trying to establish your case by using 100% completely un-related examples. Whether or not these examples are true or not is not relevant. Because lots of other cars may or may not be fakes does not pertain or have any bearing on this specific case, your honor. It's like saying "well I know lots of guys who cheat on their taxes, so every guy must cheat on their taxes."
and later respond with
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 02, 2014, 10:53:39 AM
Unfortunately I do not have Cotton's contract with Chrysler from 1969-1970, however I do have others including 1962, 1963, 1965. They are all pretty much the same though with exception of few details. The scans I am uploading are pages 1 and 2 from 1963 contract. These contracts (like every contract) are very specific. They detail exactly what Chrysler will provide to COG, and what COG will provide to Chrysler.
Of importance is what they DO NOT say. Specifically, they make no mention of COG to build special "show cars." They do say "... you will, upon request of Chrysler, display the Special Test Car at dealerships, auto shows and other special events."
If Chrysler wanted COG to build a show car(s), it would have explicitly requested it in this contract. If it was not specified within the four corners of this document, then COG would have had no obligation or inclination to build a "show car."
you're so convinced you know what you're talking about that the irony coming from your own mouth escapes you, doesn't it?
i don't have the contract from 1969, but i can tell you what it does or does not say, based on unrelated contracts from other years
It is interesting that folks automatically ascribe to a family member...knowledge that they don't possess (as in Nichels never built a COG car). Same thing happens with Lee Holman. With similar uninformed results. My favorite risible line above is : "Let's not rehash old photos". What a hoot. It is THOSE very photos that undermine/refute the suggestion that Canepa's car was, as contended, The Southern 500 winner. And even ever a Daytona race car. So yes, by all means...let's NOT consider the concrete, non speculative, irrefutable facts. Let's instead wander off into conjecture and tendentious self interested speculation.
For sure.
💩
💩
💩
Just for me, and I know not everyone will agree, the following is a logical idea of the history of the #6 show car. Again, just my thoughts based on the information presented, I don't have to be right. And I really like the show car.
Spring of 1969 Dodge decides to build the Daytona.
Sometime mid 1969 Chrysler contacts COG to build a NASCAR show car for the 1970 Auto Shows which will start in Fall of 1969.
COG takes a real NASCAR car from it's stable, probably a used short track car, and converts it to a Daytona show car.
That car travels to auto shows for the 1970 auto show season. Dodge makes the decision to again use the car for the 1971 auto show season and it again travels all over the country.
There are any number of pictures of a Red #6 car at auto shows in 1970-1971.
COG builds a Daytona for Buddy Baker to race in the 1969-1970 period. There are accidents with it, it gets rebuilt, it wins a very big race, it places well throughout the season.
Here is a story that does not make sense to me. Again, just for me.
Spring 1969 Dodge decides to build the Daytona.
Chrysler makes the decision to build a show car for the 1970 season, so they call Ray Nichols, and ask him to build a #6 copy. Ray calls Cotton and tells him of the deal. Ray asks Cotton for the paint codes so he can get the right colors. Cotton also sends Ray details on how to do the Number lettering right.
Document seems to predate the 1968-70 period by several years and has no bearing on the subject of the Daytona.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=229234;image)
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 10:07:33 AM
Hey smart guy.. I have 60 years of paperwork, contracts, photos and archives direct from the source. I also have 40 years of first-hand knowledge straight from the horse's mouth, the guy who was there, lived it, breathed it, made the history you know so little about other than from anecdotes, hearsay, and books you may have read but failed to understand. For any clarifications needed, I can just ask my dad, who worked on the COG team. Please refrain from further posts in this discussion, you have disqualified yourself already.
In your put down, you have left out "books he has written".
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 10:07:33 AM
Quote from: C5HM on November 03, 2014, 10:00:54 AM
It is interesting that folks automatically ascribe to a family member...knowledge that they don't possess (as in Nichels never built a COG car). Same thing happens with Lee Holman. With similar uninformed results. My favorite risible line above is : "Let's not rehash old photos". What a hoot. It is THOSE very photos that undermine/refute the suggestion that Canepa's car was, as contended, The Southern 500 winner. And even ever a Daytona race car. So yes, by all means...let's NOT consider the concrete, non speculative, irrefutable facts. Let's instead wander off into conjecture and tendentious self interested speculation.
For sure.
Hey smart guy.. I have 60 years of paperwork, contracts, photos and archives direct from the source. I also have 40 years of first-hand knowledge straight from the horse's mouth, the guy who was there, lived it, breathed it, made the history you know so little about other than from anecdotes, hearsay, and books you may have read but failed to understand. For any clarifications needed, I can just ask my dad, who worked on the COG team. Please refrain from further posts in this discussion, you have disqualified yourself already.
What do you guys have against this guy?
💩
💩
Well here is my two cents. There are a few people in this debate who have loved and tracked these aero cars for 40+ years now, and have dedicated countless hours to minute details on cars that were only ran for a short time, and then others who are related to someone who raced/built cars back then. Who's relatively surely have built hundreds of other cars since then and not spent the last 40 years documenting the ones they built in 69/70. And why would they, they had moved on to newer projects.
Does not matter to me what anyone thinks of the car. It's a Daytona, it is a Race chassis. Is it a race winning chassis, in my opinion yes. Was it a race winning chassis as a Daytona, in my opinion again, NO.
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 10:27:33 AM
Thank you moparnation, for your sanity and common sense.
These guys apparently can't stand to be wrong so bad that they will go to great lengths to cling to any shred of their long-held misconceptions, rumors and innuendo; or simply turn a blind eye to the facts presented to them and fail to connect the dots that are oh-so-obvious to anyone who has an education.
Anytime! Especially for a relative of a true race Legend. I would love to sit back, share a beer and act as a sponge. While hearing the stories your grandfather told! Priceless!
In today's world there are a lot of "arm chair" quarterbacks, unfortunately.
I have spent a fair amount of time studying the 1969-1971 auto shows. I am interested in them.
I have a lot of original pictures. My favorite 2 one off-albums were done for Ford Motor company for the 1969 show season.
I get that Chrysler and other manufacturers brought real race cars to auto shows.
Just talking Mopar, I have seen or have pictures of race cars in the 1969-1971 period from Sox & Martin, Bill Tanner, Buddy Baker, Don Grotheer, Pete Hamilton, and Bernilla's at Auto Shows.
For me, and to emphasize for me, not everyone has to agree. I can't get over that a Buddy Baker/Cotton Owens Daytona was both at the 1970 Chicago Auto Show and 1970 Daytona 500 at the same time. For me that says there were two cars.
I hope that people can agree to disagree without being disagreeable. Many of us want to learn something about history here.
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 10:27:33 AM
Thank you moparnation, for your sanity and common sense.
These guys apparently can't stand to be wrong so bad that they will go to great lengths to cling to any shred of their long-held misconceptions, rumors and innuendo; or simply turn a blind eye to the facts presented to them and fail to connect the dots that are oh-so-obvious to anyone who has an education.
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 09:20:13 AM
You are incorrect and talking above your knowledge. Let me correct you for the record:
Ray Nichels NEVER built cars for COG or Petty teams. He did however build cars for other teams that ran Chrysler.
The cars themselves, "bodies in white" originated and came directly from Chrysler to COG. Chrysler used to supply all the race parts directly to the teams themselves.
COG built every race car that came from their shop, every year. Period.
At some point around 1963 (I have the original notes from Frank Wylie at Chrysler on this), Ray Nichels did become a distributor for Chrysler and began supplying the race parts (and things like the Daytona nose, spoiler, etc) to all teams, and the cars to some teams, but NEVER COG or Petty teams, which built their own cars from the cars supplied directly from Chrysler. Every contract I have reiterates the fact that Chrysler would supply the cars to COG.
Later, towards the end of Chrysler's factory racing efforts, Petty replaced Nichels as the distributor for Chrysler race parts.
"Never" is a strong word.
You cannot compare the way things were done with Nichels in 1963-1964 with 1968-1969. In 1964, Nichels did not have the capacity and COG most certainly built their own cars. By 1968, anything fielded by COG started in a basic build on the benches at Nichels. It could be finished by COG in their own way. Most teams would say, "we built that car".
Petty Enterprises had the exception to build their own cars from the ground up, which they did through 1968. Those cars look much different than the Nichels cars. However, COG's 1968 thru 1970 cars look like Nichels cars under the skin.
You will notice Nichels Engineering chassis number DC-84 on the blower of this COG car. That means "Dodge Charger, chassis number 84".
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/Ayers/owensbuild1.jpg)
Quote"Never" is a strong word.
You cannot compare the way things were done with Nichels in 1963-1964 with 1968-1969. In 1964, Nichels did not have the capacity and COG most certainly built their own cars. By 1968, anything fielded by COG started in a basic build on the benches at Nichels. It could be finished by COG in their own way. Most teams would say, "we built that car".
Petty Enterprises had the exception to build their own cars from the ground up, which they did through 1968. Those cars look much different than the Nichels cars. However, COG's 1968 thru 1970 cars look like Nichels cars under the skin.
You will notice Nichels Engineering chassis number DC-84 on the blower of this COG car. That means "Dodge Charger, chassis number 84".
:yesnod:
It is WELL documented that the 2 Petty Super Birds in 1970 were built by Nichels and finished at Petty Enterprises.
Richard Petty "building the Superbird". On the door bars is Nichels serial number P-98 which is "Plymouth, car #98 in sequence". Petty's people would probably tell you, "we built that car", and they wouldn't be wrong. But the basic construction of this car was done at Nichels Engineering.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll56/Aero426/Ayers/P98onrollbar.jpg)
I certainly can believe that COG got a body in 1967. But it has no bearing on future cars. The fact that he got a body doesn't even mean it was actually used. It could have been built. It could have been kept for spares. It could be used for ANY purpose.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=229238;image)
💩
Still waiting for that body in white photo at COG from 1968 or 1969.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 11:24:41 AM
Still waiting for evidence that COG did not build his own cars.
As I've said, he did "build" his cars. It's just that the cars from 1968, 1969 were not built from the ground up in-house.
In 68 69 and 70 COG received mostly finished cars from Nichels, just like Ray Fox, Harry Hyde and Mario Rossi.
Did you know that COG also ran Chrysler Engineering built hemis in some races?
Off hand I remember: Firecracker 400 in 67, Daytona 500 in 68, Firecracker 400 in 68, Daytona 500 in 69, World 600 in 69, National 500 in 69.
Snapshot of the repaired COG #6 in Ohio on the way back from Nichels Engineering, June 1970. Cotton was with the car on this trip.
The heavy repair of this car was done at Nichels where the car was originally framed. Why? Because Nichels had the original fixtures on their fab bench to do the job.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 11:39:40 AM
You have no idea why it could have been there, unless you were there yourself.
Now you guys are talking out of your ass. Completely wrong. Really man, c'mon. You weren't there. You have assembled your version of reality from half-truths. I have to go now, this is useless and you guys take the cake. No sense in continuing this argument when you guys know more than God himself.
:brickwall:
I'm not sure what it means when someone too young to be there points the finger at the collective and says "You weren't there".
How about you post a photo or two of the bed plate used by COG to build his own cars from 68 to 70 ?
That would surely shut me up... :Twocents:
I'll say this once (directed to therealmoparman).
Keep the personal attacks and insults to yourself.
You may differ in opinion, and that's fine. There's no obligation to agree - but either leave the name-calling out of the posts or prepare to make an exit.
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 11:39:40 AM
You have no idea why it could have been there, unless you were there yourself.
Now you guys are talking out of your ass. Completely wrong. Really man, c'mon. You weren't there. You have assembled your version of reality from half-truths. I have to go now, this is useless and you guys take the cake. No sense in continuing this argument when you guys know more than God himself.
:brickwall:
How old were you in 1970? I was 14 and at MIS. I had already been getting Stock Car Racing and reading it cover to cover.
My interest in Nascar started in '67 when my dad told me Petty toured the Trenton Engine Plant.
The question of the origins of the Darlington museum #6 Daytona were around for years prior to Cotton getting the car out of the museum and selling it. This 2003 email is from Andy Agosta, the Chrysler employee who personally handled the #6 show car at the major show events in 1970. This is the car that went into the Darlington museum and is now in Bruce Canepa's hands.
:popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
💩
It was at Chicago in Feb of 70 (while the Daytona 500 was going on). A good example that exact details of recollections in the absence of photos (including people you know) are subject to time. There would be no reason to build this new car for 1971 shows when the Daytona body design was obsolete.
As to Mr. Agosta, I wasn't involved and there was no ability, or even a reason to go back and ask a follow up question. Obviously, the photo stands. But the salient parts about who ordered construction and its purpose stand. Mr. Agosta certainly had no dog in the fight.
So, photographic proof the Show Car Daytona was at Chicago when one of the other Daytonas, in this case DC-84, was racing at Daytona.
I agree with you, memories are suspect. Therefore vintage photographs rule.
What we have is that Cotton's DC-84 Daytona was racing at the 1970 Daytona 500 when the Show car was being exhibited in Chicago.
We have photographic evidence of this.
Look at the 1970 World 600 Program. One photos show a few Daytonas at Cottons Shop. How many were there?
The K&K guys had 6 race cars, at least, in 1970.
1966 street Hemi
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=224842;image)
Hear it run.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater (https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=722419194460807&set=vb.213574712011927&type=2&theater)
💩
I looked at the link - nice display of history.
I fixed one photo for you below. Have to be historically correct! :2thumbs:
Feel free to update the Cotton Owens website.
💩
When did Baker "unofficially" go 200+ prior to doing it in the #88 car, in the COG #6?
By way of full disclosure...I am not "The Real Mopar Man" (what a self absorbed self description that is). In fact, I am not "a" Mopar guy at all. But I am a fellow who has spent thousands of hours studying photographs of Grand National stock cars. And I am also a fellow who has spent many, many happy hours interviewing the folks who were "there". So, far from being disqualified from further participation (palpable hubris , that) as some may contend, I actually have a pretty objective and informed position to judge this debate from.
I am not the fellow (fraudster?) who misrepresented the Daytona show car in order to sell if for 800K.
I am not the current owner of that car who continues that misrepresentation.
And I really have no dog in the fight. Except to see that NASCAR history is not adulterated more than it apready has been.
Firstly, Memories fade; photographs NEVER forget. Doug S. and Greg K. are rivet counters. So am I. We pour over ever minute detail of a given stock car chassis (and photos of the same) because each aspect of "how it was done" is fascinating to us. From those photos we have learned (and it can be established) in many cases just which cars were what.
There is an incredible amount of fraud and misrepresentation out there about old stock cars. Lots of it actually comes from NASCAR and the NASCAR museums, sad to say. The COG supposed Southern 500 winning Daytona was just one of several misrepresented cars that perpitrated a fraud on the public at the Joe Weatherly Museum...for decades. The Fireball Roberts Galaxie...is not a car Fireball ever drove. In fact, it is not even a 1963 Galaxie ...rather it was a 1964 chassis that Banjo built for AJ and (later) for Junior to run. The Johnny Mantz car was a complete fake. Ditto for the Jim Reed Chevrolet. The supposed Joe Weatherly 1964 Marauder was never driven by Joe as a '64. Rather it was a 1963 Marauder that Joe got at the 1963 Southern 500 when Bud signed with Fomoco. And...as has been established to my satisfaction, the #6 Daytona was not the Southern 500 car it was claimed to be. Rather it is a Charger 500 (and perhaps an even earlier car) that was tarted up for sho duty.
The people who built and raced these cars (and not just johnny come lately pups revelling in the reflected glow of their forbearers) did NOT study or count rivets. Cotton didn't. Bud didn't. and Ralph Moody didn't. The cars they raced were tools to achieve an end. Winning the next race. They raced them and then moved on to the next best thing. For someone today to say that they heard this or that from the folks who were there is not very compelling....unless they had photos of specific details to jog memories.
Human beings forget. It is a fact of life. And...they certainly don't remember things they never paid attention to in the first place.
In my research with the old GN hands, I have found time and again that memory of technical details is often (if not always but certainly more often than not) at odds with the photographic record. Since Mr. Moore's name has been dropped by the aggitator in this thread, I will tell you that I have spent many, many happy days picking his brain about the mechanical details of the cars he raced. His memory was...on many occassions...incorrect. When presented a photograph of the subject in question, his memory was refreshed. And corrected.
That is just the way it is with human recollection. I am quite sure it was the same way across the sport...to include across town from Bud at Cotton's shop. I, for example, got to have lunch with Mr. Ownes on a number of occassions...and I asked him some technical questions...his answers weren't exactly detailed. Whose would be after 40 years+? (How many of you can give a mecnanical dissertation on, say, the car you drove in high shcool, for example?).
The agitator in this thread was..it appears...not even alive in 1970 (or if so, not far removed from the teat). So he himself has no first hand knowledge. Nor does he own or has restored/wrenched on a period Mopar wing car, either. (It bears mentioning that Doug S. and Greg K. own such cars, and have worked on them.). And I am equally sure that the agitator in this thread does not have access to the same historic photos that other folks posting here do. It follows that...when talking to folks for however long he claims to...he didn't have those same photographs to refresh their recollections. So all he has..if he remembers correctly...is their potentially incorrect sepia toned memories.
As to documents from back in the day...the written record is only as accurate as the person composing it. None of the documents presented recently in this thread actually documents what the proponent claims they do. They are all third hand, indirect and oblique. That's just the fact. Licensing agreements written by third parties in the 80s and other such second hand information is often incorrect. Not to mention the fact that...there was sometimes a reason for intentional incorrectness in historical documents (like
licensing agreements). And, please to remember, the COG Daytona was represented to the public for decades as the Southern 500 car. Who imagines that Mr. Ownes would have been eager to go behind that misrepresentation...even if he recalled the actual mechanical history of the car?
On the Ford side of the equation, I can tell you for sure that H&M's "cost plus operation" was rife with intentional falsehoods....In fact, when Iacocca ordered a complete audit of all Fomoco racing operations in 1969 H&M was found to be TEN (10) millions dollars short. Bud, BTW, only had one tank of gas unaccounted for in his audit. So...not everyone was shading the truth back in the day...but some were. So, historical documents must be looked at sceptically.
So what is left upon which to make a decision? As mentioned, period photographs of specific details that capture history like a fly caught in amber are not subject to debate.
Doug S has made a compelling case with just such photographs.
The (Un)real Mopar Man has not.
End of story.
Quote from: moparnation74 on November 03, 2014, 08:48:08 AM
Your Cottons Grandson correct? I am late in this thread but just knowing your relationship to Cotton it would be difficult to refute anything from you.
Here is a race car museum you should plan to visit if you enjoy this sort of historical accuracy.
http://www.memorylaneautomuseum.com/Home_Page.html (http://www.memorylaneautomuseum.com/Home_Page.html)
💩
:rotz:
There is a difference in hitting 200 at a point in a lap, and averaging 200 for a lap too.
Quote from: Aero426 on November 03, 2014, 04:13:25 PM
Quote from: moparnation74 on November 03, 2014, 08:48:08 AM
Your Cottons Grandson correct? I am late in this thread but just knowing your relationship to Cotton it would be difficult to refute anything from you.
Here is a race car museum you should plan to visit if you enjoy this sort of historical accuracy.
http://www.memorylaneautomuseum.com/Home_Page.html (http://www.memorylaneautomuseum.com/Home_Page.html)
Thanks, or the link/info. That is right up my alley, time to schedule a winter trip.
Whether this car is real or not makes no difference to me personally. That is an issue between buyer/seller. This said car fake or not was tastefully restored. I think with the people involved no one is going to win over another on opinions.
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 04:49:20 PM
You present a photo of a car on a trailer, tell me it's in Ohio, Cotton was there, etc. Then you proceed to tell me WHY it was there. That's a lot of bullshit. You have no idea, unless you were there yourself. So why go to such lengths to portray your version as the truth, when you are embellishing the story. If only part of it is true, then what part exactly? How can we believe any part of it, if you would stretch what you claim to know on another part of it? You can't know WHY it was there, because you weren't there.
I should tell you the rest of the story. I know you won't believe it. But it's pretty good.
💩
💩
💩
I think it was Winston Churchill who provided an apt definition for a Fanatic: One who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
It is pretty clear that The Real Mopar Man fits that definition.
It is equally clear that he will continue flopping around like a mullet on the bank, regardless of what the photographic record is.
Likewise, it is evident that he will continue with his puerile taunts and ad hominems in the process.
I am reminded of the Black Knight in the Monty Python Classic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4
Sadly, he is so unselfaware, that he has no idea what a figure of fun he has made of himself here.
One wonders why he clings so tenaciously to this tissue of lies about the Daytona.
Is there nothing else in his life that gives a sense of accomplishment save for his lineage to Mr. Owens and this replica?
BTW, Doug, your snark about Fantasy Lane almost made me spill my single malt. That would have been a loss.
Good work on documenting what the replica Dodge Daytona is ...and isn't.
I have to say this thread has been nothing short of entertaining all day long. Thank you. It was a rough day at work for me today, not wal-mart but still tough none the less.
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 04:21:42 PM
Quote from: 69_500 on November 03, 2014, 03:38:19 PM
When did Baker "unofficially" go 200+ prior to doing it in the #88 car, in the COG #6?
From the book "Flat Out and Half Turned Over - Tales From Pit Road with Buddy Baker" - Chapter 12, "The 200 mph Man":
"Dodge picked me to run the first official 200 mph lap at Talladega. We had all run 200 mph before, but not officially. When they did pick me to be the one, there was a lot of bellyaching from the rest of the guys driving Dodges. We got a lot of press. It wasn't a big deal for me back then, but it became a big part of my life."
I wasn't there myself, but if Baker says he did, I guess he did, didn't he?
Any laps over 200 were done at the Chelsea Proving Grounds in the second test session July 20th., 1969.
203 was the top speed for a timed lap. Both Charlie and Buddy were at that session.
(yes, there are rumors that Charlie went 243! Really?? The hemi didn't even have a Dominator on it. I know I have
the original photos of both test sessions)
You are correct in saying that only a Nascar timed lap is official.
Now, tell me how fast Buddy went during race conditions with no side glass at the April 1970 Talladega race
and I'll tell you how much horsepower the hemi would have to be making to do it.
Keep in mind that Lee Roy had the top speed that day during the race of a documented, Nascar timed lap, barely over 199. mph.
That was leading a draft, and we all know that the draft helped speed by a few MPHs.
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 04:52:07 PM
Just to clarify one more thing regarding that 200 mph record.
It was strictly Chrysler's idea to promote the #6 Daytona and Baker with the record. COG had nothing to do with the promotion or marketing of this, it was not their decision to make.
FWIW
Let's see the proof. :popcrn:
Just a couple of thoughts for therealmoparman.
I have known Doug since the mid 1970's. I knew his father, and I would be proud to be known as a friend of his. I was one of the first 100 members of the DSAC. I have written articles for the DSAC and have never gotten a free or discounted membership, I was not looking for a free membership when I contributed.
I believe Doug to be one of if, not the top expert on winged cars alive today. He owns an original Nichels Superbird that is a true time capsule. He did not build a NASCAR car in 1970, but he has spoken with just about everyone that did. Doug knows the right questions to ask. He is a good person.
💩
Here is the show car #6 at the 1970 SAE Motorsports Convention in Detroit.
Revs Institute photo.
#6 replica underhood at the 1970 SAE convention. Note the small carb and choke for easing it on and off the trailer - just as it is today. Revs Institute photo.
💩
💩
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 08:38:47 PM
Owens says there aren't any race cars in the yard but he does have two Dodges in museums. "I put one car in the museum in Darlington - one of the needle-nose cars, the one that we actually ran at Talladega. They have Marty Robbins' race car at Talladega. Of course it belonged to Marty, but I sold it to him and maintained it, and I fixed it at the museum down there. Marty was extra good to work with - a real nice guy."
http://cottonowens.com/DodgeRecordBooks.shtml
As I, and others, understand, Chrysler itself donated the Show Car Daytona to the Weatherly Museum.
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 04:21:42 PM
Quote from: 69_500 on November 03, 2014, 03:38:19 PM
When did Baker "unofficially" go 200+ prior to doing it in the #88 car, in the COG #6?
I wasn't there myself, but if Baker says he did, I guess he did, didn't he?
sure, just like bobby allison drove this steaming turd. bobby says he did, so who are we to question anything straight from the horse's mouth
you certainly do a wonderful job of torpedoing your own argument.
https://www.mecum.com/lot-detail.cfm?LOT_ID=FL0110-89901
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 09:36:29 PM
Why is that your understanding? I never stated that did I?
Cotton owned the car. He picked it up himself circa 2005. Not sure exactly when it was put in. You can't take something back that never belonged to you, much less sell it.
Andy Agosta stated the car was donated to the Museum. Was this by Chrysler or did Cotton do it himself?
Quote from: Aero426 on November 03, 2014, 06:16:17 PM
#6 replica underhood at the 1970 SAE convention. Note the small carb and choke for easing it on and off the trailer - just as it is today. Revs Institute photo.
The key here is that the PITA bars have the additional reinforcement, dating the replica #6 car to an early-mid '68 construction time. The 2 other Daytonas that Cotton used do not have this feature, which dates the construction time to late 68- early 69 at Nichels Engineering.
Note - single coil mount, the other 2 Owens Daytonas had dual coil mounts. This coincides with the dual ignition switches, as seen below, on the real race cars.
:popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
Still waiting for some photos of the bedplate Cotton used in 69-70 to build Daytonas from the BIW up...
Below is a photo of a Charger being built up on the jig from a non rolling BIW at the Nichels Engineering facility.
If I could only find that frame jig.... :lol:
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 04, 2014, 12:51:00 PM
1970-71.. I know blah blah blah. If Cotton could build it "from the ground up" in 70-71, he couldn't in 68-69?
http://cottonowens.com/COG-1970-1974.shtml
Apparently not. Just produce ANYTHING to show he did. Maybe even a bill of sale that he bought one?
You appear to have a lot of paperwork and links to everything except what's relevant...
All I see is a finished car that appears to be of Nichels origin. Surely there are photos of the cage being welded in... :shruggy:
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=229313)
One of the captions reads:
Quote
Cotton at work on construction of the new car. He decided to build it <<subject of previous sentence "the new car">> from the ground up himself to save money and get the safest possible race machine.
(emphasis added)
Doesn't that clearly mean he
did not build them himself "from the ground up" prior to the '71 model year car being represented in the photo?
:scratchchin: :shruggy:
💩
Quote from: odcics2 on November 04, 2014, 08:56:38 AM
:popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
Still waiting for some photos of the bedplate Cotton used in 69-70 to build Daytonas from the BIW up...
Below is a photo of a Charger being built up on the jig from a non rolling BIW at the Nichels Engineering facility.
This is "from the ground up".
I believe Cotton DID build them in the early 60s, until 68.
Nichels was the builder for the teams to have a standard chassis for all the Dodges, 68 to 70.
Likewise Holman Moody built chassis for the Ford guys.
Quote from: odcics2 on November 04, 2014, 02:29:28 PM
I believe Cotton DID build them in the early 60s, until 68.
Nichels was the builder for the teams to have a standard chassis for all the Dodges, 68 to 70.
Likewise Holman Moody built chassis for the Ford guys.
Agree. It is important to understand that the procedures and techniques on how the cars were built evolved as time went on. Completely different than 1964.
Jigs. Fixtures. This is state of the art 1970 Mopar race car building. Cars completed past this stage could be delivered to teams for finishing or "building" to their personal preferences, COG included. If COG did not have this setup or an in-floor plate to build cars "from the ground up", they would be at a disadvantage.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=229311;image)
Quote from: Indygenerallee on November 04, 2014, 12:21:04 PM
If I could only find that frame jig.... :lol:
Indy, get yourself a Black Hawk unibody bench and fixtures you could make your own. They are all but obsolete and could be had for cheap money,probably not much more than scrap price.
Quote from: Highbanked Hauler on November 04, 2014, 02:37:26 PM
Quote from: Indygenerallee on November 04, 2014, 12:21:04 PM
If I could only find that frame jig.... :lol:
Indy, get yourself a Black Hawk unibody bench and fixtures you could make your own. They are all but obsolete and could be had for cheap money,probably not much more than scrap price.
Blackhawk bench was an ultimate unibody repair system. They are excellent for race car and hot rod builders if you can find one today. I have been involved with them for many years.
Quote from: Aero426 on November 04, 2014, 02:35:19 PM
Quote from: odcics2 on November 04, 2014, 02:29:28 PM
I believe Cotton DID build them in the early 60s, until 68.
Nichels was the builder for the teams to have a standard chassis for all the Dodges, 68 to 70.
Likewise Holman Moody built chassis for the Ford guys.
Agree. It is important to understand that the procedures and techniques on how the cars were built evolved as time went on. Completely different than 1964.
Jigs. Fixtures. This is state of the art 1970 Mopar race car building. Cars completed past this stage could be delivered to teams for finishing or "building" to their personal preferences, COG included. If COG did not have this setup or an in-floor plate to build cars "from the ground up", they would be at a disadvantage.
(http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=63521.0;attach=229311;image)
And since the firewalls in the 2 Owens Daytonas and the replica #6 is identical to other known Nichels built cars... :Twocents:
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 03, 2014, 06:19:06 PM
Great photos Doug. Not sure what that proves. The record states that there were 2 Daytonas. So we are going to have to agree that the only way to move forward is to disagree, and concur that nothing can be resolved to anyone's satisfaction.
Yes, the surviving car is the third of the original two Daytonas. :cheers:
💩
:smilielol: :smilielol: :smilielol: :smilielol: :smilielol: :smilielol:
And here you go! :nana:
That's a cool jacket! Who sold that to you anyway?
Quote from: 1RareBird on November 04, 2014, 05:01:20 PM
That's a cool jacket! Who sold that to you anyway?
Bought it from a guy that went down to see Cotton a few times! Very reasonable gentleman, I might add... :cheers:
Did you notice its the same one Cotton is wearing while under the hood of DC-84 on the previous page? Now, that's cool!! :2thumbs:
That doesn't mean a thing, its just photographic evidence. Can you provide a letter from the jacket maker talking about what his wife made for dinner that day?
Quote from: Ghoste on November 04, 2014, 07:45:08 PM
That doesn't mean a thing, its just photographic evidence. Can you provide a letter from the jacket maker talking about what his wife made for dinner that day?
Would not need to be that day......could be from 2 and 3 days before.....because essentially they would be the same....right?
💩
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 04, 2014, 08:35:39 PM
:fu:
You do realize that the people here you are giving the finger to are fans of your grandfather, right?
I'm not sure that you understand what this discussion is really about.
It strikes me, Doug, that if our puerile friend had spent even half as much time studying the mechanical history of Nichels wing cars as he has mastering photo shop...he'd be about 100% less of what his posts make him appear to be. Sad, really. You and Greg have done a masterful job of disassembling his blather. But you may have been too subtle in that accomplishment. I do not believe that your new BFF yet realizes the slick trailing out behind him is the result of rectal bleeding.
I'm not sure that you understand what this discussion is really about.
Your right I don't.. maybe when its all over somebody can put in paragraph form. :shruggy: I'll crawl back under my rock now.. :leaving:
By the way C5HM. For anyone not clear the Bud Moore referred to in the Racing Champions letter is not the Bud Moore of car ownership fame but former driver "Lil Bud Moore" who was involved in many licencing deals in the early 90's.
Paragraph form;
An important wing car was sold for a very large sum and portrayed as something it wasn't. A descendent of the man who built the car is the chief proponent of the misinformation. His evidence has been nothing but hearsay at best. A great amount of so far irrefutable evidence in the form of photos and timelines and letters concerning the car (not letters about license rights to misrepresent it) was offered to counterpoint the descendents claims by people who have been serious historians of these vehicles for decades.
If you wish another paragraph to sum it up;
The descendent got mad when he couldn't prove his claims, deleted all of his posts, and will likely lurk and stew for a bit until the thread drops off the top of the page. The end.
oh crikey , why did ( TRMM) have to delete all his posts , was a interesting read , the claims & counter claims , as to what the car was & what its not etc ,
anyways thanks for sharing more awesome back in the day pictures , on this subject (odcics2) ( Aero 426) , love this kind of stuff :cheers: :2thumbs:
Quote from: Ghoste on November 05, 2014, 06:25:55 AM
Paragraph form;
An important wing car was sold for a very large sum and portrayed as something it wasn't. A descendent of the man who built the car is the chief proponent of the misinformation. His evidence has been nothing but hearsay at best. A great amount of so far irrefutable evidence in the form of photos and timelines and letters concerning the car (not letters about license rights to misrepresent it) was offered to counterpoint the descendents claims by people who have been serious historians of these vehicles for decades.
If you wish another paragraph to sum it up;
The descendent got mad when he couldn't prove his claims, deleted all of his posts, and will likely lurk and stew for a bit until the thread drops off the top of the page. The end.
Got it, as stated awesome pictures !!!
I imagine he deleted his posts because he was arguing from a position of personal emotional involvement rather than facts. Every counter claim was taken as a personal attack on his grandfather. They never were of course but I believe he is blinded by emotion in this topic and unable to recognize that.
Quote from: Aero426 on November 04, 2014, 10:09:39 PM
Quote from: therealmoparman on November 04, 2014, 08:35:39 PM
:fu:
You do realize that the people here you are giving the finger to are fans of your grandfather, right?
I'm not sure that you understand what this discussion is really about.
The more this guy posted here, the more I believe he is a douche!
I never met him personally so I'm wiling to give the benefit of doubt as to character, I think he just took all evidence as an attack on a family member he loved and misses. He was never defending the issue he was fighting for his family.
Quote from: Ghoste on November 05, 2014, 08:51:01 AM
I never met him personally so I'm wiling to give the benefit of doubt as to character, I think he just took all evidence as an attack on a family member he loved and misses. He was never defending the issue he was fighting for his family.
Did you happen to see the picture he made that was removed? I was appalled. I also stood up for him earlier in this thread, which I came into late. He has definitely changed my viewpoint.
I missed the photo but I did catch the flip the bird smileys.
Cage study. Anyone that knows these cars knows you don't go around swapping cages...
Cotton Owens had 2 race Daytonas. The Replica #6 was a "3rd" car. Read on... Study the photos.
See the simple gusset detail which proves there are 2 distinct cages seen in the photos?
DC-84 is in the background of the photo with the yellow arrow, pointing to the gusset.
There is no gusset on the Replica #6 show car in that same location.
What this proves is that the "Replica 6" car was strictly out on the show circuit, as Andy Agosta stated
in his letter. While not being shown, it was in storage, waiting to be hauled to another show.
Sometimes the smallest details tell the biggest story.
Besides, if you look closely, the cages have 3 distinct styles.
And the Replica #6 Show car appears to have thin bars in it... :shruggy:
Could the show car have been built off of an older chassis that was not usable for some reason hence the differences ?
Quote from: Highbanked Hauler on November 05, 2014, 06:45:21 PM
Could the show car have been built off of an older chassis that was not usable for some reason hence the differences ?
It is thought that the replica 6 was built from a short track Charger - most likely 68 vintage. Possibly even updated to a Charger 500. It was wrecked.
It was (is) a real Cotton Owens car. That was never in dispute. What was in dispute was the fact it never raced , as a Daytona, but was a Show Car only, from then on.
Construction techniques are all you can go on to approximately come up with a date when these cars rolled out of Nichels Engineering.
If you are lucky, the Nichels tag is on the car. (Usually by the master cyl.) On the one pic above, you can see "DC-84", a typical Nichels number,on the rear end cooler. Another example is "DC-93", the Chrysler Engineering Daytona (#88). That rolled out of Nichels shop in late November 1968.
Quote from: Ghoste on November 05, 2014, 08:51:01 AM
I never met him personally so I'm wiling to give the benefit of doubt as to character, I think he just took all evidence as an attack on a family member he loved and misses. He was never defending the issue he was fighting for his family.
no need to play nice, he was a total dick. a rather limp one at that. other than this thread, he made ZERO contribution to the site or the hobby, and will not be missed. speaking of missed, he did miss a few posts on his purge spree. notice the date on his first one here. he is the one who misrepresented the car for the ebay sale. it's no wonder he took exception to any and all evidence that proved him wrong.
I was not aware that you established speed records at Talladega by running the car in both directions. I thought that was a salt flat thing. :slap: I would like to see some archive footage of the car running clockwise to verify the record. :popcrn:
Note the carpet seam running down the center of the driveshaft tunnel. The carpet kit was not unusual on the actual race cars and was in there for a reason.
I've been watching this thread in the background and I must admit... this was probably the most entertaining and factually presented argument thread on the board in a long time. :icon_smile_wink:
It proves once again that the wing car guys here at DC.com really know their stuff! :2thumbs:
Quote from: TUFCAT on November 05, 2014, 09:47:53 PM
I've been watching this thread in the background and I must admit... this was probably the most entertaining and factually presented argument thread on the board in a long time. :icon_smile_wink:
It proves once again that the wing car guys here at DC.com really know their stuff! :2thumbs:
It helps to own one... :Twocents:
Quote from: TUFCAT on November 05, 2014, 09:47:53 PM
I've been watching this thread in the background and I must admit... this was probably the most entertaining and factually presented argument thread on the board in a long time. :icon_smile_wink:
It proves once again that the wing car guys here at DC.com really know their stuff! :2thumbs:
The areo section is what attracted me here :yesnod:
When I joined......I found the other sections pretty good too. :2thumbs:
Quote from: held1823 on November 05, 2014, 07:34:27 PM
Quote from: Ghoste on November 05, 2014, 08:51:01 AM
I never met him personally so I'm wiling to give the benefit of doubt as to character, I think he just took all evidence as an attack on a family member he loved and misses. He was never defending the issue he was fighting for his family.
no need to play nice, he was a total dick. a rather limp one at that. other than this thread, he made ZERO contribution to the site or the hobby, and will not be missed. speaking of missed, he did miss a few posts on his purge spree. notice the date on his first one here. he is the one who misrepresented the car for the ebay sale. it's no wonder he took exception to any and all evidence that proved him wrong.
Where did the $$ go, since The Weatherly Museum owned the car... :shruggy:
Not sure but I believe the grandson brokered the deal.
yes, the grandson did list the car. he states exactly that in the post i copied and pasted on the page before this one. this explains why, in the face of overwhelming evidence to prove otherwise, the grandson belittled and bemoaned everyone who pointed out his false representation of the car. if he had any genuine interest in his grandfather's racing legacy, you'd have seen him involved in more than this single thread. he was not defending his family, he was looking out for number one. he was called out, so he bailed out.
i can picture cotton recalling that "this is the car we won in", meaning the daytona body in general and not this specific chassis itself. his over eager grandson saw nothing but dollar signs, and missed that distinction. perhaps unintentionally, but rather than admit the mistake, he dissed the very people that hold his grandfather in high regard. as i said, he contributed nothing to this forum, and will not be missed.
That seems all true enough too.
According to his profile, "therealmoparman" had 160 posts (mostly on this thread).......all but a few have been recently deleted. :shruggy:
Sifting through the rubble of gutted posts I found this.... from the thread: "The REAL story of the Cotton Owens/Buddy Baker 1969 Dodge Charger"
February 12, 2010, 09:33:07 PM
There seems to be a lot of confusion over the 1969 Dodge Daytona built by Cotton Owens. The confusion comes from you folks who are actually the ones who are "slowly rewriting the history of this car." Allow me to clarify this once and for all.
Who am I? I am Cotton's grandson. I know the history of this car because I heard it directly from the horse's mouth. You can find a picture of me sitting in this car on the cottonowens.com website.
Firstly, this car was indeed the Southern 500 winner. The car later raced at Charlotte, where it was wrecked. The car was rebuilt by Cotton and made into a show car. It was later parked at the Darlington museum, where it remained for almost 40 years. It was then retrieved by Cotton, and I listed the car for him on ebay, where it sold for $801k. Of course they did not race it with carpets! Lots of modifications were made to make it a car suitable for the show circuit and the museum.
Secondly, this same car was the first car to exceed 200mph in a NASCAR sanctioned race - at Talladega. However, for it to be an "official" record, it has to be done with timing equipment, run both directions, etc. Therefore, Chrysler engineers built the #88 car and set out to "officially" claim the 200mph record for the recordbooks. This is all well documented on the cottonowens.com website. They used Buddy Baker as the driver because he was Cotton's driver and therefore a "factory" driver. Chrysler promoted the 200mph record with the #6 car, because it was an actual race car, and indeed because it did break the 200mph barrier. This is also well documented by Chrysler and you can even find an ad from that era on the website - http://cottonowens.com/photos3.html
Anyone suggesting anything to the contrary is simply incorrect and spreading half-truths. This is the real story. Period. Enough already! All you have to do is visit the website.
that is the same post of his that i posted the screenshot of on the previous page, to preserve it in case it was later deleted
you're right...sorry. :'(
This "is" a car being built from the ground up at COG. This is how it was done in the early days before Nichels was up to full capacity. Owens, Petty, Nichels and Norm Nelson built their own cars from tear downs of complete cars.
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b317/Ancient_Modeler/Dark%20Side%20Reference/CottonOwens_Rotisserie.jpg)
These old cars had a LOT more "stock" left in them.
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b317/Ancient_Modeler/Dark%20Side%20Reference/64-6_Owens-interior.jpg)
Stock dash. All this would be gone by 1968 as cars evolved into purpose built machines.
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b317/Ancient_Modeler/Dark%20Side%20Reference/Owens_Dash.jpg)
http://www.motorsportretro.com/2014/02/1969-dodge-charger-daytona/ (http://www.motorsportretro.com/2014/02/1969-dodge-charger-daytona/)
Quote from: Aero426 on November 10, 2014, 02:44:36 PM
http://www.motorsportretro.com/2014/02/1969-dodge-charger-daytona/ (http://www.motorsportretro.com/2014/02/1969-dodge-charger-daytona/)
Buyer beware! :eyes:
Incidentally, just how much is Canepa hoping to rape some poor soul for on this thing?
Last published ask was 550k. That was a while back.
Quote from: dyslexic teddybear on November 06, 2014, 09:10:16 AM
The areo section is what attracted me here :yesnod:
You mean it wasn't me? I feel slighted. :eyes:
You hiding a hemi under your lid? :lol:
Quote from: odcics2 on November 12, 2014, 06:20:06 PM
You hiding a hemi under your lid? :lol:
No, but I have one in the garage. :icon_smile_big:
Quote from: Mytur Binsdirti on November 11, 2014, 09:02:20 PM
Quote from: dyslexic teddybear on November 06, 2014, 09:10:16 AM
The areo section is what attracted me here :yesnod:
You mean it wasn't me? I feel slighted. :eyes:
I know.....it's almost unbelievable.....but I never noticed your magnificent turban.....and the.....unusual sense of humor that came with it :angel:.......until after I joined.
To do my best to set things right....here's a :pity:
Quote from: dyslexic teddybear on November 13, 2014, 11:36:32 AM
Quote from: Mytur Binsdirti on November 11, 2014, 09:02:20 PM
Quote from: dyslexic teddybear on November 06, 2014, 09:10:16 AM
The areo section is what attracted me here :yesnod:
You mean it wasn't me? I feel slighted. :eyes:
I know.....it's almost unbelievable.....but I never noticed your magnificent turban.....and the.....unusual sense of humor that came with it :angel:.......until after I joined.
To do my best to set things right....here's a :pity:
geeze... Perhaps you oughta get a room, er, make that a garage! :smilielol:
Quote from: odcics2 on November 14, 2014, 05:27:08 AM
Quote from: dyslexic teddybear on November 13, 2014, 11:36:32 AM
Quote from: Mytur Binsdirti on November 11, 2014, 09:02:20 PM
Quote from: dyslexic teddybear on November 06, 2014, 09:10:16 AM
The areo section is what attracted me here :yesnod:
You mean it wasn't me? I feel slighted. :eyes:
I know.....it's almost unbelievable.....but I never noticed your magnificent turban.....and the.....unusual sense of humor that came with it :angel:.......until after I joined.
To do my best to set things right....here's a :pity:
geeze... Perhaps you oughta get a room, er, make that a garage! :smilielol:
In this day and age, being friendly on the internet is one thing......hanging out with an armed guy in a turban is something else entirely. :rotz:
I think they shot themselves in the foot when they painted the car and sprayed it with bed liner or whatever they used. At least before it looked like it came off the track but not now. :rotz: People with that kind of money aren't dumb and are going to be looking for a return on the investment. :yesnod: You could probably have a decent clone of it built for 20% of what they are after. :Twocents:
:shruggy:
Hey, look who's back.... "💩"
Wicked thread here guys!!!
The #6 Daytona gotta be worth as much a 70 hemi cuda ragtop surely???
If the great man himself (CO-G) built this car and Buddy even farted in it, then its HISTORY!!! :2thumbs:
What history do hemi ragtops have, NONE!!! :smilielol:
I'd pay a Million for it at the drop of a HAT!(if I had a million that is)
How will Gregs #88 be welcomed?
Will there be a Post Mortem on that car too???
5J lovin every word!
What starts off with a throwaway comment, can end up in a Lawsuit?
If this car ran 198mph on any track anywhere, anytime, anyhow, then its COOLIO in my book!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
ps I owned the fastest Drag-racing street Mopar in Europe at one time, then 5 years laters everyone denied it???
as we say in England, ''NOWT AS QUEER AS FOLK''
Quote from: 500Jon on November 28, 2014, 12:27:14 PM
Wicked thread here guys!!!
The #6 Daytona gotta be worth as much a 70 hemi cuda ragtop surely???
If the great man himself (CO) built this car and Buddy even farted in it, then its HISTORY!!! :2thumbs:
What history do hemi ragtops have, NONE!!! :smilielol:
I'd pay a Million for it at the drop of a HAT!(if I had a million that is)
How will Gregs #88 be welcomed?
Will there be a Post Mortem on that car too???
5J lovin every word!
A good point. In my opinion, a street Hemi Daytona should be on par with a Hemi Cuda convertible. The market does not see it this way. But we could soon see the first million dollar public sale of a Daytona with Tim Wellborn's bronze car. The Owens #6 at 800k was probably the highest sale to date back before the recession hit. I doubt you could repeat that number for any of the race cars out there today. Perhaps one of the Petty Superbirds could do it.
The history on Greg's #88 is documented with photos and paperwork from the day the car was born at Nichels Engineering until the time was pulled out of Don White's back yard. There are no gray areas whatsoever as to what the car did or did not do.
Especially when some gray is not as gray as others.
Come on guys,
How many #6 Daytona's out there?
Supposed REAL ones???
If there was ten, twelve, fifteen all queueing up for the miilion dollar hit then there's a problem.
I think this car is Unique, why go to all this trouble to denounce it?
Just look at the English Royal family, there plenty of skeletons there too!
Just be happy for this Buddy Baker car, you don't have to sell your soul to the devil to own it!
Just marvel in its existence and BEAUTY!!! :2thumbs:
If these cars were all gone there would be no discussions anyways?
5J
ps GREY is GREY not GRAY LOL!!! :nana:
Some Folks pay $50,000,000 for a piece of canvas with BUTT FUGLY oil splashed on it!
Who's mad there then??? :slap:
I'D PAY A MILLION FOR IT, ALL DAY LONG!!! :pity:
WHAT'S UP WITH YOU GUYS???
IT BEAUTIFUL, stop arguing and start saving or doing the lotto lol!
BUDDY BAKER :notworthy:
We are not worthy, the man and his cars are GODS of Nascar.
5J
That's exactly it Jon, there was one REAL number 6 car and this is not that car. To use your royal family analogy, this would be more like a bastard son claiming the throne and telling the world at the same time that he is the true son of the king AND queen. This car was sired by the king but its mother was a lady of the court.
I don't like fakes of any kind in our hobby (whether its this car or any other Ford, Chevy, Olds, Pontiac, etc.).
Its ALWAYS BAD for the hobby when someone gets burned. :flame: Thankfully, the aero guys have provided solid evidence here this replica was built by Cotton Owens for Chrysler's auto shows and never raced (but with a running and driving race drivetrain). Like Ghoste has pointed out on many occasions....most high-dollar well-healed collectors don't frequent internet forums so buyer beware. :'(
sadly, the car's real auto show story would be just as compelling, perhaps even to a much larger audience than the aero crowd
Quote from: held1823 on November 29, 2014, 11:28:49 AM
sadly, the car's real auto show story would be just as compelling, perhaps even to a much larger audience than the aero crowd
Yes, definitely so. I don't know what's wrong with telling "that story". :shruggy: It still has historical value that could be proven.... as there's pictures all over the place from the 70-71 auto show circuit. :yesnod:
Quote from: 500Jon on November 29, 2014, 05:03:07 AM
How many #6 Daytona's out there?
Supposed REAL ones???
If there was ten, twelve, fifteen all queueing up for the miilion dollar hit then there's a problem.
I think this car is Unique, why go to all this trouble to denounce it?
The discussion is not about denouncing the car, or Cotton, or anything of the sort. It is still a great machine, built by Cotton Owens. Just call the car what it is.
Here is an example of the vintage documentation needed to prove statements. A vintage photo and factory written paperwork goes a long way.....
Yeah it is a great car built by a great man and you know it makes me feel bad in a way trying to defend its true history because in order to do that you end up making negative comments about it. It shouldn't have to be that way.
Quote from: Ghoste on November 29, 2014, 06:59:41 PM
Yeah it is a great car built by a great man and you know it makes me feel bad in a way trying to defend its true history because in order to do that you end up making negative comments about it. It shouldn't have to be that way.
Well put Ghoste! :2thumbs:
Very well put Mr.Ghoste.
Lets say that our great Driver 'Buddy' was a little heavy footed from time to time and as we all know the #6 got wrecked more than once!
If I had a hard front ender and a hard rear ender sitting 'out-back' of the shop and a pristine race-preped car on tour.
I KNOW WHAT I WOULD DO!!! :hack: :hack: :hack:
MY PRISTINE RACE CAR WOULD BE OFF THE SHOW CIRCUIT AND PRESSED INTO DUTY! :vert:
When it was reletively quite I would get my apprentices to carefully make one good SHOWCAR, outta two wrecked racecars LOL!!! :2thumbs:
I reckon the SHOWCAR IS IN FACT, two #6 racecars!!! renumberd as #12??? :scratchchin:
Thats why there's two no.6's on the later car noses!
NOW ITS WORTH 2 MILLIONS LOL :smilielol: :smilielol: :smilielol:
Quote from: TUFCAT on November 28, 2014, 12:04:50 PM
Hey, look who's back.... "💩"
He lurks frequently. Interestingly accurate cartoon representation chosen for the deleted threads.
The old Cotton Owens Garage race car shop. Hemi's then, Hondas now.
View of the entire 1960's race car shop. I believe Cotton sold this building some years ago. therealmoparman can give us the skinny, I am sure.
Cotton's home and other workshop which are being sold are out of view to the right and behind.
Cottons home (white house in background) and home shop (blue building) The 1960's Grand National shop is to the left.
The yellow open trailer off to the right hauled a lot of race cars.
I got a personal tour of cottons home garages. The blue building in the above picture, and the other 2 outbuildings on his property. The amount of history that you could "feel" was amazing, there were parts and pieces everywhere probably one of the top 5 coolest places ive ever been to the building had the smell and aura about them that cant be explained. Its sad when you think what will happen to them in the near future.
Great pics and memories...keep 'em coming! :2thumbs:
Quote from: Aero426 on December 04, 2014, 01:47:13 PM
Cottons home (white house in background) and home shop (blue building) The 1960's Grand National shop is to the left.
The yellow open trailer off to the right hauled a lot of race cars.
just beyond the building with the open doors theres a smaller garage (grey roof white stripe) inside it is al NOS hemi and drivetrain parts, plus some other oddball Items, cottons christmas tree, was in there too, best part it was all organized like it was 1969 again
Quote from: warmpancakes on December 04, 2014, 04:40:16 PM
I got a personal tour of cottons home garages. The blue building in the above picture, and the other 2 outbuildings on his property. The amount of history that you could "feel" was amazing, there were parts and pieces everywhere probably one of the top 5 coolest places ive ever been to the building had the smell and aura about them that cant be explained. Its sad when you think what will happen to them in the near future.
I can explain the smell! Taco Bell ! :nana:
Quote from: 500Jon on November 29, 2014, 05:03:07 AM
ps GREY is GREY not GRAY LOL!!! :nana:
Gray vs. grey
Gray and grey are different spellings of the same word, and both are used throughout the English-speaking world. But gray is more common in American English, while grey is more common in all the other main varieties of English. In the U.K., for instance, grey appears about twenty times for every instance of gray. In the U.S. the ratio is reversed.
Both spellings, which have origins in the Old English grǽg, have existed hundreds of years.1 Grey gained ascendancy in all varieties of English in the early 18th century, but its dominance as the preferred form was checked when American writers adopted gray about a century later. As the Ngram below shows, this change in American English came around 1825. Since then, both forms have remained fairly common throughout the English-speaking world, but the favoring of gray in the U.S. and grey everywhere else has remained consistent.
In the USA, we use "Gray", not "Grey". Know your history. :nana:
Jon is from England, the area which the language as spoken and written comes from. ;)
I'm always amazed how the English are not allowed to be ENGLISH anymore!
We are even told how to use our own language.
We are quite aware of the Pilgrim Fathers wanting to simplify our complicated words.
Of all the things that were altered, I'm sure GREY wasn't mentioned LOL.... :smilielol: :smilielol: :smilielol:
You Guys and Gals stole the 'G' from Platignum and the 'I' from Aluminium too.
What next.....
Stel, Ion, Coper, Tunsten, Bras, Nikel.....
Oh yes and whilst we are at it a TYRE is TYRE not..... I tire of this FRED LOL!!! :2thumbs:
I know a guy named Bob Grey.
I'll have to gently point out he spells his name wrong... :D
:popcrn: :yesnod:
http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,116504.msg1444932.html
New article out. Photography is beautiful. Mistakes in the story and lack of fact check about the car are inexcusable for VM.
Hopefully they get some letters to the editor.
Quote from: Ghoste on March 18, 2015, 09:33:50 PM
Hopefully they get some letters to the editor.
They did. With links here, I understand... :2thumbs:
And, I am told there is a Shelby in there that is claimed to have raced, but was a show car!
Simple check of the vin on the Shelby registry pointed that out. I bet the Shelby guys are writing emails!!!!!!!!
Thats the beauty of the Shelby registry. Ferrari guys have a similar gig.
Quote from: Aero426 on March 18, 2015, 07:17:50 PM
New article out. Photography is beautiful. Mistakes in the story and lack of fact check about the car are inexcusable for VM.
Send emails to: Brian Williams, the new editor of Vintage Motorsports Magazine! :smilielol:
Seriously, I was sent the real email address for the editor - d.randyriggs@comcast.net
Perhaps, if they get a few notes, they will look into it...
Did not know that Randy was not longer at the helm. That might explain the sudden slackness of the editorial content. More's the pity.
Up date: Just went to the website and Randy's name is still atop the masthead:
http://www.vintagemotorsport.com/contact.asp
Editorial
D. Randy Riggs
(415) 898-5776
Email: d.randyriggs@comcast.net
Quote from: C5HM on March 20, 2015, 07:43:28 PM
Did not know that Randy was not longer at the helm. That might explain the sudden slackness of the editorial content. More's the pity.
Up date: Just went to the website and Randy's name is still atop the masthead:
http://www.vintagemotorsport.com/contact.asp
Editorial
D. Randy Riggs
(415) 898-5776
Email: d.randyriggs@comcast.net
Do you know Randy, in person?
Yes, I know Randy. He's generally a straight shooter interested in keeping history straight. So I am a little surprised by the article. I have sent Randy a couple of e mails on the subject...no response.
Of course, not much he can do now that the article has seen print. Canepa is one of the major players in the vintage world on the Left Coast. And he apparently has a lot of $$$$. At least he acts like he does around the folks he considers to be unimportant to him. So I am sure he holds some sway out there in vintage circles. That's a rich guys playground for better or worse. He also owns the replica Petty 1969 Torino that was cobbled up on the Dream Works assembly line by the Gastonia Flash. Though Canepa knows that car...too...is not what it is painted up to be, he continues to misrepresent it as well. Sic semper.
(http://i1137.photobucket.com/albums/n513/C5HM/Fake%20Petty%20Canepa_zpstpjusfku.jpg) (http://s1137.photobucket.com/user/C5HM/media/Fake%20Petty%20Canepa_zpstpjusfku.jpg.html)
http://i1137.photobucket.com/albums/n513/C5HM/Fake%20Petty%20Canepa_zpstpjusfku.jpg
The problem for the Gastonia Flash, Canepa and fellow travellers who seek to change motorsports history for their own gain are the folks here and elsewhere who know the truth of the matter. The fact of what Canepa's stock cars are and are not is well known by the right people. Hence...his failure to sell them.
"Of course, not much he can do now that the article has seen print. "
A retraction would be good start to maintain some integrity.... :scratchchin:
I understand the Shelby in another article was also a show car, never raced... :shruggy:
Yeah I'm sure a retraction would get Center fold to..........Not! be lucky if it was shoved between the junk ads in the back. and it wouldn't have a pic of the car on the cover featuring a retraction either. :-\
Canepa is well known in the concours circle already and those higher end shows aren't about authenticity nearly so much as how connected you are. imo
Quote from: Ghoste on March 23, 2015, 05:32:31 AM
Canepa is well known in the concours circle already and those higher end shows aren't about authenticity nearly so much as how connected you are. imo
and that's a shame... :Twocents:
I agree 100%, they end up missing, skipping outright or ignoring many excellent cars because the owner doesn't sit on the right board of directors or play at the right golf course and conversely award a lot of questionable cars because those owners do.
On the plus side, the high end concours also bring out many genuine and rare cars that wouldn't ordinarily be seen.
Bump. Any new info?
Quote from: Aero426 on July 25, 2018, 01:24:35 PM
Bump. Any new info?
You mean like the #6 is in the July 1970 issue of Car Life???
Yup, story on the 1970 New York Auto Show, April 4-12, 1970.
There , for the world to see, is the unveiled AMX/3 design concept, and in the background........the #6.
And it is also at the 1970 Alabama 500 AT THE SAME TIME!
Quote from: odcics2 on July 25, 2018, 02:17:56 PM
You mean like the #6 is in the July 1970 issue of Car Life???
Yup, story on the 1970 New York Auto Show, April 4-12, 1970.
There , for the world to see, is the unveiled AMX/3 design concept, and in the background........the #6.
And it is also at the 1970 Alabama 500 AT THE SAME TIME!
As the Alabama 500 was April 10, 11, 12th, it's impressive that the car could be in two places during the same weekend.
:popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn: :popcrn:
This 3 year old popcorn is pretty stale......
I cant believe that this car is still being represented as "THE" race Daytona and not a touring show car when the facts and documentation clearly show otherwise. :shruggy:
Aero426, your in box is all plugged up...