Page 1 of 1

Bonhams Scottsdale, Mk IV, 100/61

Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:30 pm
by philbel

Re: Bonhams Scottsdale, Mk IV, 100/61

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:06 pm
by Victoracing
Very interesting history put forth.

Jakob claims this to be an alloy bodied car now but is it one of the two (?) factory alloy Mk.IV?
100/69 and 100/70 were accepted as those two cars. *

He claims this to be the #49 Sebring1959 car of Burdie Martin. Did Burdie confirm this? He would know if it were alloy.
Big deal about the "bicycling" photo proving Burdie & Sebring '59. Well I thought the dune berms looked like Sebring but I was surprised to hear Martin say that photo was from Wilmot, IL in his talk at the IMRRC Watkins Glen in 2012. That even made my notes from the weekend. Did I hear this right?
Pardon my cynicism, but this ad raises facts in question only one month after the death of Burdette Martin, the only person who could set them right!

It was generally accepted that all three 1959 Sebring race cars (100/71,72,73?) were lost to time. Is 61, and even 67, a case of George Washington's axe?
Years ago Edgar Costley confirmed 67 to be his ride from Sebring 1960, which he knew to be the 1959 class-winner. Not lost, yet Wimpffen would not write this as fact.
Long a vintage race car with new frame and body (to be safely raced, its true use) worthy of the history of that transferred VIN tag?
Is this the significance to the stated VIN 4L100/61 ? . . it is not LHD or long wheelbase. Fourth iteration?

I don't wish to dive into this mess; it sounds like sour grapes on my part. I am not the expert, but FGN, Jon Clifton, Chuck Dietrich, Bob Engberg, Alan Patterson, Costley, and Burdie Martin are not here to ask.
Can Roger Dunbar, Stan Mason, or Janos Wimpffen clarify this story? . . If there were a solid history would it not be found in the book?
There is so much confusion surrounding chassis 61.

I hope the auction does well for many reasons. I hope the deciding factor is not "Burdie's alloy Sebring car"

* 69 & 70 ... this puzzled me that they would be numbered so late, if 58 and 61 were Mk.IV, where did the fiberglass mould come from? One theory was that the prototype alloy (no VIN) was used to make the mould then pushed into a corner for 6 months until thrifty Frank was making room for the Mk.V and sold off all the old stock. The Mk.IV was commercially successful so there could have been a buyer. Finish the prototype, stamp a number, sell it cheap. But then, two?

If Tweedale were here would his 21st-century statement be ..... ELVA, it happens

Gary Cossaboon
5 January 2021

Re: Bonhams Scottsdale, Mk IV, 100/61

Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:17 pm
by Victoracing
I heard from Stan B. Mason, the go-to guy in the USA for front-engine sport racer information…..


Thanks for forwarding information on 100/61. I am familiar with this car. This MkIV was rebodied for Jack Leiss from Chicago area maybe in the 80-90s circa. It was alleged to be one of the 59 Sebring Cars Fiberglass. 100/61 has always been a little confusing knowing that the first cars were alloy bodied (100/69 70) and then molds made from these cars for future fiberglass. I assume this chassis number was assigned later…[ Edit 69,70? gc]
During the 1958 Season, which was the year of MkIII there was a MkIV prototype with IRS assumed for sorting out before going into production with the MKIV in mid-late 1958. I am unsure of what the body style was for this MkIV prototype. 100/61 was at Amilia Island several years ago and is a very professional restoration. The body is close to originals with some variation, which is always an issue when you are panel beating without original patterns. I am curious about history since Leiss.

Happy New Year.