Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
Animal said:
Wasn't there a Ltd. Ed. 12C CanAm version?
yes, but it was track onlyhttp://cars.mclaren.com/12c-can-am
I probably know the answer to this but thought I'd ask anyway.
A small midlands garage owner told a friend of mine he owns a McLaren F1 and that he bought it from Ron Dennis.
He apparently used to work in F1 as an engineer and then had a serious accident that resulted in a 6 figure pay out which allowed him to afford the F1 from Ron.
He apparently said it was chassis 14, but that is the ex sultan of brunai car that now live in New York with the LM aero in white (formerly yellow). So of course that's not possible.
So, did Ron Dennis ever own any other car than the silver final car?
If not, it's the most bizarre lie I've ever heard.
A small midlands garage owner told a friend of mine he owns a McLaren F1 and that he bought it from Ron Dennis.
He apparently used to work in F1 as an engineer and then had a serious accident that resulted in a 6 figure pay out which allowed him to afford the F1 from Ron.
He apparently said it was chassis 14, but that is the ex sultan of brunai car that now live in New York with the LM aero in white (formerly yellow). So of course that's not possible.
So, did Ron Dennis ever own any other car than the silver final car?
If not, it's the most bizarre lie I've ever heard.
Racing provenance is a bizarre thing, isn’t it? For me, who as a child stood at Donington, Silverstone and Oulton during the mid-90s watching F1 GTRs in action, I would sooner own a car I’d seen racing (ideally, winning…) than one which had won Le Mans; a race I didn’t attend. For example, I bumped into 023R at Mont Tremblant quite unexpectedly (perhaps if I’d known beforehand the identity of the circuit’s owner I’d not have been so surprised). I’d seen that win in FIA GT at Silverstone in 1997 and still remember crouching on the infield at Maggotts, huddling under an umbrella with my dad. That memory carries such strong resonance that I’d favour that chassis above all other long-tails. For most folk, though, overall victory at La Sarthe is the ultimate goal for the ‘typical’ collector.
The great thing with a GTR, when compared to any other Le Mans (or sports car racing, more broadly) racer of the last 50 years is that so many are road-ready. That means you can own a slice of Le Mans history and drive it over the Furka pass or max it on the autobahn, should you wish to. Thinking out loud, I can’t imagine there’s much since the Mk 1 GT40 which has translated so readily – though not necessarily comfortably – to road use. Given the F1’s inherent value in the market already (scarcity, engine, weight, blah, blah, blah), the opportunity to add genuine race provenance into the mix makes it pretty much unique as an ownership proposition.
The issue of one’s willingness to drive a bewinged, liveried race car on the streets is a matter of personal preference. My own weekend toy features some track-derived aero addenda (directly the result of the race programme, not ad hoc additions through the aftermarket) and I feel like a total berk most of the time. But I take that awkwardness as part of the experience and the driving / ownership pleasure I derive from the car makes up for it. For me, I’d probably prefer a GTR converted to road use than one of the original road cars. This is because I saw pretty much all of the race cars competing in period and adored them all. By contrast, my most marked memory of the road car is Jonathan Palmer’s amazingly spirited ascent of the Goodwood hill in (perhaps…) 1995.
Horses for courses and what a wonderful quandary in which to find oneself.
The great thing with a GTR, when compared to any other Le Mans (or sports car racing, more broadly) racer of the last 50 years is that so many are road-ready. That means you can own a slice of Le Mans history and drive it over the Furka pass or max it on the autobahn, should you wish to. Thinking out loud, I can’t imagine there’s much since the Mk 1 GT40 which has translated so readily – though not necessarily comfortably – to road use. Given the F1’s inherent value in the market already (scarcity, engine, weight, blah, blah, blah), the opportunity to add genuine race provenance into the mix makes it pretty much unique as an ownership proposition.
The issue of one’s willingness to drive a bewinged, liveried race car on the streets is a matter of personal preference. My own weekend toy features some track-derived aero addenda (directly the result of the race programme, not ad hoc additions through the aftermarket) and I feel like a total berk most of the time. But I take that awkwardness as part of the experience and the driving / ownership pleasure I derive from the car makes up for it. For me, I’d probably prefer a GTR converted to road use than one of the original road cars. This is because I saw pretty much all of the race cars competing in period and adored them all. By contrast, my most marked memory of the road car is Jonathan Palmer’s amazingly spirited ascent of the Goodwood hill in (perhaps…) 1995.
Horses for courses and what a wonderful quandary in which to find oneself.
SydneyBridge said:
Animal said:
Wasn't there a Ltd. Ed. 12C CanAm version?
yes, but it was track onlyhttp://cars.mclaren.com/12c-can-am
thegreenhell said:
I think they've already produced far too many cars in far too many slightly different variations and different 'limited editions' based on the 12C platform for any of them to really become worthwhile future investments, and I include the P1 in that too.
It works for Ferrari and Porsche though, so why not McLaren? The prices of the many special edition Ferraris and GT3 RS 911s are pretty crazy at the moment and that has to have an effect on other similar cars. Including the P1 with others on the 12C platform seems a little harsh, a LaFerrari uses something unique for the tub because Ferrari don't have any other carbon tub, if they did it is unlikely they would do something completely bespoke. McLaren have a good basis so are building from that, in my opinion.AshBurrows said:
I probably know the answer to this but thought I'd ask anyway.
A small midlands garage owner told a friend of mine he owns a McLaren F1 and that he bought it from Ron Dennis.
He apparently used to work in F1 as an engineer and then had a serious accident that resulted in a 6 figure pay out which allowed him to afford the F1 from Ron.
He apparently said it was chassis 14, but that is the ex sultan of brunai car that now live in New York with the LM aero in white (formerly yellow). So of course that's not possible.
So, did Ron Dennis ever own any other car than the silver final car?
If not, it's the most bizarre lie I've ever heard.
You are correct re chassis 14, and Ron doesn't own the silver final car. He does own a silver car with the Flemke mirrors, however.A small midlands garage owner told a friend of mine he owns a McLaren F1 and that he bought it from Ron Dennis.
He apparently used to work in F1 as an engineer and then had a serious accident that resulted in a 6 figure pay out which allowed him to afford the F1 from Ron.
He apparently said it was chassis 14, but that is the ex sultan of brunai car that now live in New York with the LM aero in white (formerly yellow). So of course that's not possible.
So, did Ron Dennis ever own any other car than the silver final car?
If not, it's the most bizarre lie I've ever heard.
I am aware of a (almost) Midlands garage 'owner' who has an F1, but it's not the one you have heard.
mikey k said:
flemke said:
How about a 675 roadster version, called "Can-Am"? That would be different from almost everything else out there, whilst more consistent with the original racing cars.
That's what I was getting at 
hurstg01 said:
AshBurrows said:
I probably know the answer to this but thought I'd ask anyway.
A small midlands garage owner told a friend of mine he owns a McLaren F1 and that he bought it from Ron Dennis.
He apparently used to work in F1 as an engineer and then had a serious accident that resulted in a 6 figure pay out which allowed him to afford the F1 from Ron.
He apparently said it was chassis 14, but that is the ex sultan of brunai car that now live in New York with the LM aero in white (formerly yellow). So of course that's not possible.
So, did Ron Dennis ever own any other car than the silver final car?
If not, it's the most bizarre lie I've ever heard.
You are correct re chassis 14, and Ron doesn't own the silver final car. He does own a silver car with the Flemke mirrors, however.A small midlands garage owner told a friend of mine he owns a McLaren F1 and that he bought it from Ron Dennis.
He apparently used to work in F1 as an engineer and then had a serious accident that resulted in a 6 figure pay out which allowed him to afford the F1 from Ron.
He apparently said it was chassis 14, but that is the ex sultan of brunai car that now live in New York with the LM aero in white (formerly yellow). So of course that's not possible.
So, did Ron Dennis ever own any other car than the silver final car?
If not, it's the most bizarre lie I've ever heard.
I am aware of a (almost) Midlands garage 'owner' who has an F1, but it's not the one you have heard.
In the event, Ron did not like the paint choice, and had them make him a second car, in silver. The brown car was then sold by the factory to a customer, in a deal with which Ron had nothing to do.
The chap who bought the brown car told me that, during the sales process, he had been grossly misled by the McLaren salesman who flogged the car to him. When the truth came out, the buyer went to Ron to complain. Ron was appalled by the salesman's behaviour. He made things right with the buyer (took back the brown car and let him spec a new car at the same price) and, AIUI, sacked the salesman.
The buyer, who the last I knew (this was a few years ago) still owned the (replacement) car, was located in Lincolnshire. He was in a very different industry from being a garage owner, and had not come from F1 nor made his money through a compensation pay-out.
thegreenhell said:
I think they've already produced far too many cars in far too many slightly different variations and different 'limited editions' based on the 12C platform for any of them to really become worthwhile future investments, and I include the P1 in that too.
They have used the same "monocell" tub for all their cars, and used the same basic engine. I'm not sure that one could call that "slightly different variations". They are not completely different, but there is a pretty meaningful difference between a 12C and a P1. As has been said, one can look at Porsche. For years they used the same basic car for everything from the plain vanilla Carrera 2 to the GT2 Clubsport.
The price differential between the two ends of the 911 product spectrum was 2-to-1. Nowadays the price differential between those used two cars, in 993 form, is more like 40-1.
I would also say that, even if one were to aggregate all the cars that McLaren Automotive have produced since inception, the total would not be that big - maybe equal to 1 year's Ferrari production, or 3 months' 911 production. The market is far from being swamped with McLarens. They are less rare every day, but that can be said for many things.
I agree that it might be nicer if the different McLaren versions were less similar to one another. The thing is, as with Porsche, by sticking with the same basic template, McLaren have been able to hone and refine it into a far better machine than what they could have done if every separate model were started from scratch.
flemke said:
If you have a need, as you do, that's a different story. If one had a towing need, also a need for long distance driving, and could have only one car, then the Range Rover could be ideal.
I would guess that less than 1% of Range Rover owners have that need; for them the car is a fashion statement.
I took note when someone told me that she liked driving a Range Rover in town, "because the other cars are scared of me". Said a lot, I thought.
I wouldn't describe myself as 'needing' it intrinsically as I don't need to ride horses - I just enjoy it.I would guess that less than 1% of Range Rover owners have that need; for them the car is a fashion statement.
I took note when someone told me that she liked driving a Range Rover in town, "because the other cars are scared of me". Said a lot, I thought.
The fact that I enjoy it is all the justification I need!
I don't drive that much in town to be honest and if I do, I usually take the old Vauxhall I've had for years as I'm not bothered about the odd scratch from inconsiderate people passing.
chevronb37 said:
Racing provenance is a bizarre thing, isn’t it? For me, who as a child stood at Donington, Silverstone and Oulton during the mid-90s watching F1 GTRs in action, I would sooner own a car I’d seen racing (ideally, winning…) than one which had won Le Mans; a race I didn’t attend. For example, I bumped into 023R at Mont Tremblant quite unexpectedly (perhaps if I’d known beforehand the identity of the circuit’s owner I’d not have been so surprised). I’d seen that win in FIA GT at Silverstone in 1997 and still remember crouching on the infield at Maggotts, huddling under an umbrella with my dad. That memory carries such strong resonance that I’d favour that chassis above all other long-tails. For most folk, though, overall victory at La Sarthe is the ultimate goal for the ‘typical’ collector.
The great thing with a GTR, when compared to any other Le Mans (or sports car racing, more broadly) racer of the last 50 years is that so many are road-ready. That means you can own a slice of Le Mans history and drive it over the Furka pass or max it on the autobahn, should you wish to. Thinking out loud, I can’t imagine there’s much since the Mk 1 GT40 which has translated so readily – though not necessarily comfortably – to road use. Given the F1’s inherent value in the market already (scarcity, engine, weight, blah, blah, blah), the opportunity to add genuine race provenance into the mix makes it pretty much unique as an ownership proposition.
The issue of one’s willingness to drive a bewinged, liveried race car on the streets is a matter of personal preference. My own weekend toy features some track-derived aero addenda (directly the result of the race programme, not ad hoc additions through the aftermarket) and I feel like a total berk most of the time. But I take that awkwardness as part of the experience and the driving / ownership pleasure I derive from the car makes up for it. For me, I’d probably prefer a GTR converted to road use than one of the original road cars. This is because I saw pretty much all of the race cars competing in period and adored them all. By contrast, my most marked memory of the road car is Jonathan Palmer’s amazingly spirited ascent of the Goodwood hill in (perhaps…) 1995.
Horses for courses and what a wonderful quandary in which to find oneself.
You make a lot of good points.The great thing with a GTR, when compared to any other Le Mans (or sports car racing, more broadly) racer of the last 50 years is that so many are road-ready. That means you can own a slice of Le Mans history and drive it over the Furka pass or max it on the autobahn, should you wish to. Thinking out loud, I can’t imagine there’s much since the Mk 1 GT40 which has translated so readily – though not necessarily comfortably – to road use. Given the F1’s inherent value in the market already (scarcity, engine, weight, blah, blah, blah), the opportunity to add genuine race provenance into the mix makes it pretty much unique as an ownership proposition.
The issue of one’s willingness to drive a bewinged, liveried race car on the streets is a matter of personal preference. My own weekend toy features some track-derived aero addenda (directly the result of the race programme, not ad hoc additions through the aftermarket) and I feel like a total berk most of the time. But I take that awkwardness as part of the experience and the driving / ownership pleasure I derive from the car makes up for it. For me, I’d probably prefer a GTR converted to road use than one of the original road cars. This is because I saw pretty much all of the race cars competing in period and adored them all. By contrast, my most marked memory of the road car is Jonathan Palmer’s amazingly spirited ascent of the Goodwood hill in (perhaps…) 1995.
Horses for courses and what a wonderful quandary in which to find oneself.
IMO, when one isolates from the equation the value of the racing element, that value is not very substantial.
If you're driving the GTR on public roads for an hour, maybe up to 2 hours, it is absolutely fantastic. For a whole day, however, it would be simply awful.
The noise is unbearable, without a/c it gets damn hot in there, the turning circle is a joke, the instrumentation is inappropriate. In a road car, these things matter.
If one wanted to, one could have the factory take a standard road car to (short-tail) GTR spec. I think the biggest snag would be the straight-cut gearbox, but AFAIK, unlike engines, there is no shortage of 'boxes. Would that GTR spec make it better? For most of us, no.
Which leaves us with the provenance element. For you, the resonance with races you enjoyed as a boy is significant, and fair enough. For a similar reason, I especially value the racing cars driven by Eddie Flemke.
However, what resonates for you, or for me, is individual. We ourselves value such things highly, but those resonances would not apply to most people, and the market is made up of most people, not just you and me.
If the GTRs had a great provenance, it would be different, but I don't think that they do.
The Le Mans win was a fluke. I am very, very thankful that it happened, but truly it was a fluke.
In '95-96, there was little real competition in sports car racing. To begin with, there was barely an international sports car racing series. BPR? Not exactly on the level of the great sports car wars of the '60s and '70s. Not on the level of Can-Am. Not on the level of modern WEC.
During '95-96, what was the GTR's greatest competitor - the F40, an 8-year old design run by a factory whose attention was almost entirely focused on Formula One, where they were doing quite badly?
Then '97 came along, Porsche and Mercedes got serious about sports car racing, and the GTRs' success quickly waned.
How much of the GTRs' provenance might derive from the greatness of the drivers that drove them? Yes, we had JJ Lehto's amazing drive at Le Mans, but that was the exception that proved the rule.
The BPR was a pro-am series, with a lot of "am". I'm not knocking that, but how many regular drivers of GTRs in the BPR are really going to add to the value of a given car?
You can go out and buy proper racing cars driven by Senna, Schumacher, Clark, etc., for a tiny fraction of what an F1 GTR will cost you. The provenance of one of their cars is surely, beyond question, worth more than the provenance of a GTR campaigned by amateurs X and Y. That leads me to think that provenance in itself is easily mis-valued.
In the case of GTRs, I think the market was aggressively talked up by one or two influential persons who had a major axe to grind. They succeeded in conflating the idea of "provenance", as it might be applied to other cars with a truly special history of results and drivers, with the idea of "the worlds' best road car" - "that won Le Mans". The outcome, in my opinion, is that a couple of racing cars have recently sold for prices that substantially outweigh the cars' inherent or relative value.
flemke said:
AIUI, Ron did have a previous F1, which he had spec'd from new in brown paint. That was a brave choice, for which I give him credit, although I am not sure that the result worked well.
In the event, Ron did not like the paint choice, and had them make him a second car, in silver. The brown car was then sold by the factory to a customer, in a deal with which Ron had nothing to do.
All true. I had the good fortune in 1994 to spend a day at Sheerwater, which included a tour of the race and road car manufacturing areas. There were 3 or 4 F1s being built at the time, one of which was the nearly-completed brown car. It was a genuine chocolate brown with a beige interior, a combination which did not show the design to its best advantage. We were told that this was Ron's car and that he had already decided that he didn't like it. It would have disrupted the production schedule to strip and repaint it, apparently, so they were going to sell it and build Ron another one.In the event, Ron did not like the paint choice, and had them make him a second car, in silver. The brown car was then sold by the factory to a customer, in a deal with which Ron had nothing to do.
El Guapo said:
flemke said:
AIUI, Ron did have a previous F1, which he had spec'd from new in brown paint. That was a brave choice, for which I give him credit, although I am not sure that the result worked well.
In the event, Ron did not like the paint choice, and had them make him a second car, in silver. The brown car was then sold by the factory to a customer, in a deal with which Ron had nothing to do.
All true. I had the good fortune in 1994 to spend a day at Sheerwater, which included a tour of the race and road car manufacturing areas. There were 3 or 4 F1s being built at the time, one of which was the nearly-completed brown car. It was a genuine chocolate brown with a beige interior, a combination which did not show the design to its best advantage. We were told that this was Ron's car and that he had already decided that he didn't like it. It would have disrupted the production schedule to strip and repaint it, apparently, so they were going to sell it and build Ron another one.In the event, Ron did not like the paint choice, and had them make him a second car, in silver. The brown car was then sold by the factory to a customer, in a deal with which Ron had nothing to do.
flemke said:
chevronb37 said:
Racing provenance is a bizarre thing, isn’t it? For me, who as a child stood at Donington, Silverstone and Oulton during the mid-90s watching F1 GTRs in action, I would sooner own a car I’d seen racing (ideally, winning…) than one which had won Le Mans; a race I didn’t attend. For example, I bumped into 023R at Mont Tremblant quite unexpectedly (perhaps if I’d known beforehand the identity of the circuit’s owner I’d not have been so surprised). I’d seen that win in FIA GT at Silverstone in 1997 and still remember crouching on the infield at Maggotts, huddling under an umbrella with my dad. That memory carries such strong resonance that I’d favour that chassis above all other long-tails. For most folk, though, overall victory at La Sarthe is the ultimate goal for the ‘typical’ collector.
The great thing with a GTR, when compared to any other Le Mans (or sports car racing, more broadly) racer of the last 50 years is that so many are road-ready. That means you can own a slice of Le Mans history and drive it over the Furka pass or max it on the autobahn, should you wish to. Thinking out loud, I can’t imagine there’s much since the Mk 1 GT40 which has translated so readily – though not necessarily comfortably – to road use. Given the F1’s inherent value in the market already (scarcity, engine, weight, blah, blah, blah), the opportunity to add genuine race provenance into the mix makes it pretty much unique as an ownership proposition.
The issue of one’s willingness to drive a bewinged, liveried race car on the streets is a matter of personal preference. My own weekend toy features some track-derived aero addenda (directly the result of the race programme, not ad hoc additions through the aftermarket) and I feel like a total berk most of the time. But I take that awkwardness as part of the experience and the driving / ownership pleasure I derive from the car makes up for it. For me, I’d probably prefer a GTR converted to road use than one of the original road cars. This is because I saw pretty much all of the race cars competing in period and adored them all. By contrast, my most marked memory of the road car is Jonathan Palmer’s amazingly spirited ascent of the Goodwood hill in (perhaps…) 1995.
Horses for courses and what a wonderful quandary in which to find oneself.
You make a lot of good points.The great thing with a GTR, when compared to any other Le Mans (or sports car racing, more broadly) racer of the last 50 years is that so many are road-ready. That means you can own a slice of Le Mans history and drive it over the Furka pass or max it on the autobahn, should you wish to. Thinking out loud, I can’t imagine there’s much since the Mk 1 GT40 which has translated so readily – though not necessarily comfortably – to road use. Given the F1’s inherent value in the market already (scarcity, engine, weight, blah, blah, blah), the opportunity to add genuine race provenance into the mix makes it pretty much unique as an ownership proposition.
The issue of one’s willingness to drive a bewinged, liveried race car on the streets is a matter of personal preference. My own weekend toy features some track-derived aero addenda (directly the result of the race programme, not ad hoc additions through the aftermarket) and I feel like a total berk most of the time. But I take that awkwardness as part of the experience and the driving / ownership pleasure I derive from the car makes up for it. For me, I’d probably prefer a GTR converted to road use than one of the original road cars. This is because I saw pretty much all of the race cars competing in period and adored them all. By contrast, my most marked memory of the road car is Jonathan Palmer’s amazingly spirited ascent of the Goodwood hill in (perhaps…) 1995.
Horses for courses and what a wonderful quandary in which to find oneself.
IMO, when one isolates from the equation the value of the racing element, that value is not very substantial.
If you're driving the GTR on public roads for an hour, maybe up to 2 hours, it is absolutely fantastic. For a whole day, however, it would be simply awful.
The noise is unbearable, without a/c it gets damn hot in there, the turning circle is a joke, the instrumentation is inappropriate. In a road car, these things matter.
If one wanted to, one could have the factory take a standard road car to (short-tail) GTR spec. I think the biggest snag would be the straight-cut gearbox, but AFAIK, unlike engines, there is no shortage of 'boxes. Would that GTR spec make it better? For most of us, no.
Which leaves us with the provenance element. For you, the resonance with races you enjoyed as a boy is significant, and fair enough. For a similar reason, I especially value the racing cars driven by Eddie Flemke.
However, what resonates for you, or for me, is individual. We ourselves value such things highly, but those resonances would not apply to most people, and the market is made up of most people, not just you and me.
If the GTRs had a great provenance, it would be different, but I don't think that they do.
The Le Mans win was a fluke. I am very, very thankful that it happened, but truly it was a fluke.
In '95-96, there was little real competition in sports car racing. To begin with, there was barely an international sports car racing series. BPR? Not exactly on the level of the great sports car wars of the '60s and '70s. Not on the level of Can-Am. Not on the level of modern WEC.
During '95-96, what was the GTR's greatest competitor - the F40, an 8-year old design run by a factory whose attention was almost entirely focused on Formula One, where they were doing quite badly?
Then '97 came along, Porsche and Mercedes got serious about sports car racing, and the GTRs' success quickly waned.
How much of the GTRs' provenance might derive from the greatness of the drivers that drove them? Yes, we had JJ Lehto's amazing drive at Le Mans, but that was the exception that proved the rule.
The BPR was a pro-am series, with a lot of "am". I'm not knocking that, but how many regular drivers of GTRs in the BPR are really going to add to the value of a given car?
You can go out and buy proper racing cars driven by Senna, Schumacher, Clark, etc., for a tiny fraction of what an F1 GTR will cost you. The provenance of one of their cars is surely, beyond question, worth more than the provenance of a GTR campaigned by amateurs X and Y. That leads me to think that provenance in itself is easily mis-valued.
In the case of GTRs, I think the market was aggressively talked up by one or two influential persons who had a major axe to grind. They succeeded in conflating the idea of "provenance", as it might be applied to other cars with a truly special history of results and drivers, with the idea of "the worlds' best road car" - "that won Le Mans". The outcome, in my opinion, is that a couple of racing cars have recently sold for prices that substantially outweigh the cars' inherent or relative value.
chevronb37 said:
What you're saying is basically that 'Driven by Ray Bellm' does not necessarily carry the same level of gravitas as 'Driven by Ayrton Senna'?
I did not wish to mention specific names as I did not wish to insult anyone. You are free to mention whom you wish. 
Most of the other amateurs were slower than Ray.What some of the amateur drivers of GTRs accomplished was quite impressive for amateurs, but relative to what professionals would have done it obviously was not in the same league.
Lehto's 20 sec/lap gap over his competitors during the rainy night was partly due to his being a fine driver, but it was also due to his having no serious competition. Does anyone really think that, had they been in the sister GTRs, Schumacher or Hakkinen would have been 20 sec/lap slower, or indeed slower at all?
As it happens, Ray Bellm told me himself that, although he had felt comfortable driving the short-tail GTRs, when he drove the long-tail it was quickly obvious to him that the racing car's abilities exceeded his own.
He also told me a funny story about how, on the evening before the 1995 LM, he drove his F1 road car for about 40 mi on the French D-roads. There was a reservation at a posh restaurant for which he was quite late. JJ Lehto was his passenger.
He said that, because they were so late, he drove his absolute balls off, scaring himself continuously. The difference between a professional driver and an amateur was put into perspective, he said, when passenger Lehto tapped him on the shoulder and shouted, "Man, can't you go any faster? We're going to miss the first course!"
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff