Another mystery car
Discussion
dandarez said:
eccles said:
GT6 ?
Spot on!! For years (I'm searching along with some others - some have given up - for a very rare Ginetta) we thought GI6 in that old 'owner's cars' snippet in Practical Motorist meant a Ginetta (but the G16 never had a hardtop, it was an open top racer).
The Registrar of the Ginetta club twigged the answer only this week that it must have been a typo and that it was meant to be (Triumph) GT6 - the chances of any rare Ginetta having crashed and having its hardtop used on an Ashley had to be remote. But panic for us searchers set in back then in the 80s and it overruled our sensible thinking, and still did up until this week
Also, it's been established now that a Richard (Dick?) Voss had a Ginetta G15 in the 80s too. Perhaps he still has?
So, the search for the missing Ginetta carries on.
If you think you can find it, all I can say is I/we've spent over 35 yrs looking for it!
Some rare forgotten models do appear, a yellow G15 posted on here recently which had been stored in the owner's garage for many years turned out to be a car missing on the Club's listings too.
The road going left hand drive Ginetta G10 exported to the USA in the 60s went off the radar for many years and turned up in recent times too, still in the USA.
This guy seems to have a G16 with a hard top. Not saying it's not a typo above but this is a pretty cool looking Ginetta with that top.Wish there was a picture of it painted
threespires said:
I believe Mr Sorted has said that it's 100% based on an Alpine in various places.
Personally I don't subscribe to his theory.
There seemed to be quite a lot of that on here: https://forum.retro-rides.org/thread/191783/myster...Personally I don't subscribe to his theory.
Stigproducts said:
dandarez said:
eccles said:
GT6 ?
Spot on!! For years (I'm searching along with some others - some have given up - for a very rare Ginetta) we thought GI6 in that old 'owner's cars' snippet in Practical Motorist meant a Ginetta (but the G16 never had a hardtop, it was an open top racer).
The Registrar of the Ginetta club twigged the answer only this week that it must have been a typo and that it was meant to be (Triumph) GT6 - the chances of any rare Ginetta having crashed and having its hardtop used on an Ashley had to be remote. But panic for us searchers set in back then in the 80s and it overruled our sensible thinking, and still did up until this week
Also, it's been established now that a Richard (Dick?) Voss had a Ginetta G15 in the 80s too. Perhaps he still has?
So, the search for the missing Ginetta carries on.
If you think you can find it, all I can say is I/we've spent over 35 yrs looking for it!
Some rare forgotten models do appear, a yellow G15 posted on here recently which had been stored in the owner's garage for many years turned out to be a car missing on the Club's listings too.
The road going left hand drive Ginetta G10 exported to the USA in the 60s went off the radar for many years and turned up in recent times too, still in the USA.
This guy seems to have a G16 with a hard top. Not saying it's not a typo above but this is a pretty cool looking Ginetta with that top.Wish there was a picture of it painted
Original Ginetta G16s were race cars and never had hardtops. The nearest a G16 came to a hardtop was the attachment fitted to the top of the screen surround to the roll over hoop!
droopsnoot said:
threespires said:
I believe Mr Sorted has said that it's 100% based on an Alpine in various places.
Personally I don't subscribe to his theory.
There seemed to be quite a lot of that on here: https://forum.retro-rides.org/thread/191783/myster...Personally I don't subscribe to his theory.
What he posts is a complete load of tosh.
I'm not going to rule out any Alpine connections because the first time I ever saw the picture, the first thing that came to mind was "Alpine" and I know that's true of a lot of other people too.
But his theories are based on nothing more than pure guesswork and are full of holes. There's no way that you can be anywhere near sure of what it is you can see through the window. He appears to be buying items and doing measurements and all sorts, but it's all made up based on reference points that don't exist and is all a smokescreen for his feeble argument which is simply "it IS an Alpine because I said so....."
I'm not going to rule out any Alpine connections because the first time I ever saw the picture, the first thing that came to mind was "Alpine" and I know that's true of a lot of other people too.
But his theories are based on nothing more than pure guesswork and are full of holes. There's no way that you can be anywhere near sure of what it is you can see through the window. He appears to be buying items and doing measurements and all sorts, but it's all made up based on reference points that don't exist and is all a smokescreen for his feeble argument which is simply "it IS an Alpine because I said so....."
Funnily enough, I was looking at his images on Retro-Rides last night, and he posted some nice 3D scans of the Alpine and the Mystery car mixed together, occupying the same space, if you follow.
Just as an exercise, I thought I'd try overlaying a couple of other sports-car images (all side-on), expecting they would all fit in a broadly similar way. They didn't.
The one thing that did strike me was just how tall the Alpine was compared to other sports-cars of the time. It's obvious when you think about it, as it's essentially a Hillman Husky/Minx underneath. But then I realised why he thought the idea was worth exploring. It kinda, almost fits in a way that the MGB and TR4 just don't.
There's no problem with the quality of the work. He's actually produced a CAD model that fits the original image very closely, and that isn't an easy thing to do. The real problem, as I see it, is that If you set-out to prove something from the start, then you will end-up being either right of wrong. Whereas, if you set-out to discover whether a theory is correct or not, you're right either way.
I think he's done a pretty convincing job of showing how you could make a look-alike from an Alpine. But at the same time, I think he's shown that so many things don't quite fit. And nobody is going to conduct major surgery on a unitary construction shell to shave-off or add a couple of inches here or there, for no real reason.
I for one would like to see more of what he's been doing, and I really, really hope we can all just get on and respect each other from here on in. We still don't know for certain what the damned thing is, but we've all been on the same bloody journey. Let's all try and finish it together, shall we?
Sorry if that sounded like a bit of a rant. Certainly not aimed at anyone in particular.
Just as an exercise, I thought I'd try overlaying a couple of other sports-car images (all side-on), expecting they would all fit in a broadly similar way. They didn't.
The one thing that did strike me was just how tall the Alpine was compared to other sports-cars of the time. It's obvious when you think about it, as it's essentially a Hillman Husky/Minx underneath. But then I realised why he thought the idea was worth exploring. It kinda, almost fits in a way that the MGB and TR4 just don't.
There's no problem with the quality of the work. He's actually produced a CAD model that fits the original image very closely, and that isn't an easy thing to do. The real problem, as I see it, is that If you set-out to prove something from the start, then you will end-up being either right of wrong. Whereas, if you set-out to discover whether a theory is correct or not, you're right either way.
I think he's done a pretty convincing job of showing how you could make a look-alike from an Alpine. But at the same time, I think he's shown that so many things don't quite fit. And nobody is going to conduct major surgery on a unitary construction shell to shave-off or add a couple of inches here or there, for no real reason.
I for one would like to see more of what he's been doing, and I really, really hope we can all just get on and respect each other from here on in. We still don't know for certain what the damned thing is, but we've all been on the same bloody journey. Let's all try and finish it together, shall we?
Sorry if that sounded like a bit of a rant. Certainly not aimed at anyone in particular.
Edited by borrani72 on Tuesday 20th April 12:19
anonymous said:
[redacted]
As on the Mercedes Gullwing, where the side windows don't open. Instead you have to unbolt them and take the whole window out and stow it. Or drive along with the doors open if you're really hot. At least the 300SL has opening quarterlights for ventilation, but they probably had a bigger development budget than this car.
Congratulations. 98 and a bit pages is some undertaking!
Binary12 is the member that created the CAD model.
He posted it a few days ago, but they have been removed/deleted, which is why you didn't see it.
Binary12 is the member that created the CAD model.
He posted it a few days ago, but they have been removed/deleted, which is why you didn't see it.
Edited by borrani72 on Wednesday 21st April 21:32
Edited by borrani72 on Wednesday 21st April 21:32
http://tardis.dl.ac.uk/Mercia/killeen_book/node13....
Obviously not the same, but could there be any parallels?
Similar time and a few small details that looks like they could be similar.
Obviously not the same, but could there be any parallels?
Similar time and a few small details that looks like they could be similar.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff