Cotton Owens 500

[Ghoste]

There has been so many 500 threads lately that I couldn't remember which one we were discussing Cotton Owens 500 in.  Since there can't be too many 500 threads anyway, I thought it wouldn't hurt to add these.  You 500 regulars no doubt already have these pics but for the rest of us, here are a couple of pics of Cotton Owens 500.  This looks to be a track car and not a street car but they are interesting just the same (to me anyway).
Since I blatantly and wrongly ripped them off from the Cotton Owens website, I thought I better include this link too so people will go over and buy stuff.

http://www.cottonowens.com/

[69_500]

The other thread was talking about the street 69 Charger 500 that Cotton Owens had. But that car is gorgeous too. He wound up with a street car after it was stolen, and it was the test mule for nose cones at Creative Industries.

[Ghoste]

Yeah, and actually I went to the site hoping to turn up some info on the street 500 but this was as close as I could come.
At least it get the link up for anyone who may not have heard of Cotton Owens and wants to find out more.

[Silver R/T]

nice 500 anyways

[Highbanked Hauler]

 Check out the single guard rail at the top of the track That wouldn't do much to save you.

[Shakey]

I recall old footage where some cars actually left the speedway going over that railing.

[Highbanked Hauler]

  Wonder if that is the Chrysler test track.

[Ghoste]

I'm thinking it probably is.  Notice the strips on the front of the hood to watch the airflow?  The car appears to still have the front bumper intact as well.

[Highbanked Hauler]

I've read that the car was to low to pass tech.inspection in NASCAR and that is how it got to be a test vehicle.I am guessing they cut a notch in the top of the frame just behind the K frame.This would allow the car to be lower at the A pillar-cowl.At this point that is what I have in mind for the stocker to lower it and not use drop spindles.You couldn't do it on a street car because of the inner fenders and hood lines.

[Ghoste]

Now that I look more carefully at both pictures, you can see that there are airflow test strips all over the car.

[Highbanked Hauler]

Now that I look more carefully at both pictures, you can see that there are airflow test strips all over the car.

Have you seen the picture of the superbird test,the car looks like its got a fur coat.

[Ghoste]

Yeah, I've seen a few of those but this was the first I had ever seen these Cotton Owens ones.  I'm sure I saw a test of a 1st gen somewhere once and I wish I could find those pics again.  I don't think they were on the track though, I think it was in the wind tunnel.  Then again, it could just be a memory trick.

[chrisII]

I've read that the car was to low to pass tech.inspection in NASCAR and that is how it got to be a test vehicle.I am guessing they cut a notch in the top of the frame just behind the K frame.This would allow the car to be lower at the A pillar-cowl.At this point that is what I have in mind for the stocker to lower it and not use drop spindles.You couldn't do it on a street car because of the inner fenders and hood lines.

i dont get the point of this..you can back out the torshon bar adjusters till the K frame almost hits the ground. you do nead to work on the uppers to not bind the ball joint , but it creates less hassle than pre bending the stub does. simple chassis geometry says bending the car like that will put so much caster in the car you cant keep it from wandering on the straights

[69_500]

I found the article yesterday and read it again, it is identical to the first HEMI 500, in options and everything.

[chargervert]

Turn three at Darlington had the same type of guardrail! It was famous for leaving the Darlington stripe down the side of the car!

[Ghoste]

Hey Danny, if Cotton Owens personal car has the same options as one and two, is it possibly car number 3?  It was afterall, initally another road test press car.
If it is, maybe THAT is the car where the broadcast sheet to the first one has gone?

[hemigeno]

I've read that the car was to low to pass tech.inspection in NASCAR and that is how it got to be a test vehicle.I am guessing they cut a notch in the top of the frame just behind the K frame.This would allow the car to be lower at the A pillar-cowl.At this point that is what I have in mind for the stocker to lower it and not use drop spindles.You couldn't do it on a street car because of the inner fenders and hood lines.

     i dont get the point of this..you can back out the torshon bar adjusters till the K frame almost hits the ground. you do nead to work on the uppers to not bind the ball joint , but it creates less hassle than pre bending the stub does. simple chassis geometry says bending the car like that will put so much caster in the car you cant keep it from wandering on the straights

Chris,
Lowering the car didn't necessarily mean lowering the frame, although you're right that they could crank the adjustment out and scrape the pavement if they wanted to.  NASCAR had minimum clearances for the cars, so there was a limit to what they could do with the torsion bar adjustment and still pass tech.  But - if you lowered the body on the frame (a little more difficult with a Unibody chassis but still possible) a couple of inches, you have to push less air out of the way going down the track.  Cars modified in this fashion still had to clear the minimum height requirements, so it usually took a modification to the rocker panels to accomplish this.  Chrysler was tinkering with this concept on the #6 car, and they were eventually caught.  The car had been chopped around on, so rather than do the surgery required to make it "legal" again, it became the car they used to test-fit the Daytona noses, etc.

Ford had already lowered the bodies on the Cyclone and Talladega, as evidenced by some trick (not as tall) rocker panels they created for those cars to semi-conceal their tactic.  They did the rocker panel treatment on their street version cars too, so I suppose NASCAR let them get away with it on the track like they let Chrysler get away with their slippery aero shapes.  Whatever they did had to be on the street versions of the cars (the homologation rule strikes again!).

Think of how much stronger the 500/Daytona/Superbirds would have been on the track if they'd have chosen to incorporate a rocker panel modification on the street versions in addition to the other aero tricks they employed...

*edit*
Also, Al's right, you couldn't quite do the same thing on a street car due to the inner fenders (not used on a race car) and engine/hood interference (not as much of a problem with a race car since they can position the engine a little easier where they want it).  FoMoCo's Talladega and Cyclone had the modified rocker panels, but they didn't modify the street car's ride height or make any other mods to the frame itself.  The street versions just looked like they were a little higher off the ground than a normal car due to the smaller profile rocker panels.  Hardly noticeable, but it allowed them much greater flexibility for the race cars.

[Highbanked Hauler]

 hemigeno,thanks for explaining what I am getting at.I didn't know about Ford and the rocker panels,that is a good idea.This car will most likely have 2x4 tubing behind the rockers as they aren't structurely sound.I am looking to get the car lowered the way they used to do it.

[69_500]

I don't know what VIN number the Cotton car is. I only know of the first one, and then the 5th one built. Don't know about the ones in between. But I know the buildsheet that was in the first one went to the 5th one, and the 5th one doesn't have a buildsheet in it. However the buildsheet to the 5th one makes it identical to the first one other than it being an AT and the first one is a 4 speed.

Also doesn't the first one have a letter from a magazine with it explaining how they dented the quarter and repaired it? Just wondering if they might have damaged 2 cars in the same area. Watched the Bud Lindeman tape and see a dent in the drivers side quarter panel, right above the wheel lip molding. Which is also the same area that was repaired on the first car right? However it is the same car in the whole program, I enhanced the video on the computer and it has the same liscense plate throughout the program. So I'm assuming it is the same automatic car, but has the same damage as was said to be done to the 4 speed car.

[Mike DC]

In regards to lowering the car by moving the K-frame:

--------------------------------------------------------

Literally notching the front framerails & setting the K-frame 1-2 inches higher?  It would seem to create more than just a slight issue with the rear torsion bar mounts in the tranny crossmember if you move the K-frame without moving the rear torsion bar mounts accordingly.  (And that probably wouldn't even clear the floorpan of the car if you moved things that drastically.  At least not on a stock Charger, although I know they were already hand-assembling their NASCARs from the framerails up by 1968, so they did have a little leeway.) 

So what steps am I missing here?

.

[Highbanked Hauler]

You don't set the K frame up into the frame rails.IF I AM RIGHTand I am NOT SURE I am,there was a notch cut in the top side of the frame rail  in front of the firewall.When the notch was closed up (and welded) it raised the front end of the frame rail 1-2 inches dropping the cowl the same amount.It would use the front wheel as a pivot point.As far as the T bar crossmember I am guessing that the mount itself(the piece about six inches long that is welded in the crossmember) was raised 1/4 inch or so in the front so it would line up with the T bar angle.This is all speculation and studying the front end itself.I maybe wrong and I'll be the first one to admit it.

[Ghoste]

I think the first car had more damage than that.  It has bondo all over the lower rear of the quarter.  The valence corner on the driver side is carved out of bondo.

[69_500]

So did the wreck both cars? Or does it appear to be a dent in the video to you? maybe I just watched it frame by frame 1 too many times.

[Ghoste]

I'll have to watch it again.  I honestly don't remember a dent in it.  Is it possible they had both cars and we only see the exterior of the 4 speed car?

[69_500]

Not unless they switch the liscense plate between the two cars. Because the plate on the car with the dent, is the same plate as the car they test drive. And I also noticed both cars have the marker light bezels body color not stripe color.

[Ghoste]

It's an mfg plate is it not?

[69_500]

Not as far as I can tell just a Michigan plate.

[Ghoste]

That is weird.  I'm going to watch it again.

[nascarxx29]

I was curious to find this 500 of Cotton info in my old wingcar newsletters.I didnt see a 69 500.But he did or still does own a 440 daytona though

[69_500]

I believe that Cotton sold the car to a friend or a employee of his in 1970. A few months after he got it back from Creative Industries when they used it to test fit nose cones. And I don't know if it was ever registered in either of the clubs.

[nascarxx29]

I show it recorded back in the day as a R4 red club car vin and all.Same goes for a 440 Daytona of Buddy Arrington.It to is in the old newsletter listings

[hemigeno]

Speaking of old newsletter lists and Charger 500's,

What is the deal with XS29J8B360711?  It's always shown as the first Charger500.

   

[nascarxx29]

Thats the car with 68 side lights .The first hemi 69 500

[69_500]

Yeah it is the 68 car, but it looks like I was beat to the answer on that one.