41C-GT40

[Ecclesley]

One of my fav Sports/Racing car of all time; the GT40.
Welcome in my stable.

[Squid]

The GT40 is a favorite of mine, too...the only American car to win Le Mans outright (the 1975 and 1980 winners were Ford-Cosworth powered, but the chassis were European). If I can find enough beaters, I'll customize them to replicate the 1966 Le Mans finish!

[GHOSTHUNTER]

The GT40 is a favorite of mine, too...the only American car to win Le Mans outright (the 1975 and 1980 winners were Ford-Cosworth powered, but the chassis were European). If I can find enough beaters, I'll customize them to replicate the 1966 Le Mans finish!

That will look good, I'd like to see that happen.

Ghosthunter.

[cOO7rgi]

Very nice custom - the gold colour is reminiscent of the 1966 1-2-3 GT40 victory where a gold Mk II placed third.

gt40_1966.jpg (37.22 KiB) Viewed 1090 times

The GT40 is a favorite of mine, too...the only American car to win Le Mans outright (the 1975 and 1980 winners were Ford-Cosworth powered, but the chassis were European). If I can find enough beaters, I'll customize them to replicate the 1966 Le Mans finish!

Except that all GT40s except the Mk IV were built in Slough, England. So, of the 1966, '67, '68 and '69 LM victories only the 1967 Mk IV can be counted as an American car.

[Ecclesley]

Very nice custom - the gold colour is reminiscent of the 1966 1-2-3 GT40 victory where a gold Mk II placed third.

The attachment gt40_1966.jpg is no longer available

The GT40 is a favorite of mine, too...the only American car to win Le Mans outright (the 1975 and 1980 winners were Ford-Cosworth powered, but the chassis were European). If I can find enough beaters, I'll customize them to replicate the 1966 Le Mans finish!

Except that all GT40s except the Mk IV were built in Slough, England. So, of the 1966, '67, '68 and '69 LM victories only the 1967 Mk IV can be counted as an American car.

The 1966 result at Le Mans was an American win under Shelby American Inc. management. As J. Wyer was forced to surrender the racing operation to the US from 1965.
No 7 ltr. MKII (Le Mans winning Ford GT) was ever built in Slough. Slough continued the production of the GT40 road cars.
The only exception is Alan Mann racing of Byfleet, under who's banner three MKII's were entered Le Mans 1966, but they were American built cars.

1966-ford_car2.JPG (68.45 KiB) Viewed 1083 times

Later on A.M. produced their ultra light GT 40 MK I cars, with their own AMGT chassis numbers

I know there is a vivid debate going on for decades over the UK and US involvement, but the truth is that Shelby won the day in 1966.
One consolation for the Slough managemnt was that they supplied the bare chassis to Shelby, but that was about all.
See also:
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4739

[cOO7rgi]

The 1966 result at Le Mans was an American win under Shelby American Inc. management. [...] I know there is a vivid debate going on for decades over the UK and US involvement, but the truth is that Shelby won the day in 1966.
One consolation for the Slough managemnt was that they supplied the bare chassis to Shelby, but that was about all.

That the 1966 winner was entered by Shelby American doesn't necessarily make it an American car. The 1965 winning Ferrari was an American entry by N.A.R.T. (North American Racing Team - not Scuderia Ferrari), and nobody would argue that a 250 LM is an American car (and the 1965 Ferrari even had an American driver, not like the 1966 GT40 with its two Australians).
But a British-built chassis seems like a good argument to me that this was not an "American car".
I don't claim to be a GT40 specialist although from my knowledge the Mk IV was the only American built. I am not even British or American so there is no national pride involved. A quick search got this result:

Dearborn's Own Mark IV Proving that the victory over Ferrari and the others was no fluke, Ford entered and won Le Mans in 1967, this time in all-new car! The GT40 Mark IV was an all-Dearborn creation, born to some degree in response to criticism that the earlier cars were simply English machines funded by big American pockets. So different were the Mark IVs, for example, that they were constructed of aluminum honeycomb bonded with the latest aerospace techniques, instead of steel.

(quoted from http://www.gizmag.com/go/1230/)

And just to keep splitting hairs: The Matchbox model is of one of the twelve 1964 prototypes which are not GT40s: They predated the Mk I, didn't have GT40 chassis numbers and were just named Ford GT - exactly what Matchbox wrote on the baseplate and box.

[Ecclesley]

The 1966 result at Le Mans was an American win under Shelby American Inc. management. [...] I know there is a vivid debate going on for decades over the UK and US involvement, but the truth is that Shelby won the day in 1966.
One consolation for the Slough managemnt was that they supplied the bare chassis to Shelby, but that was about all.

That the 1966 winner was entered by Shelby American doesn't necessarily make it an American car. The 1965 winning Ferrari was an American entry by N.A.R.T. (North American Racing Team - not Scuderia Ferrari), and nobody would argue that a 250 LM is an American car (and the 1965 Ferrari even had an American driver, not like the 1966 GT40 with its two Australians).
But a British-built chassis seems like a good argument to me that this was not an "American car".
I don't claim to be a GT40 specialist although from my knowledge the Mk IV was the only American built. I am not even British or American so there is no national pride involved. A quick search got this result:

Dearborn's Own Mark IV Proving that the victory over Ferrari and the others was no fluke, Ford entered and won Le Mans in 1967, this time in all-new car! The GT40 Mark IV was an all-Dearborn creation, born to some degree in response to criticism that the earlier cars were simply English machines funded by big American pockets. So different were the Mark IVs, for example, that they were constructed of aluminum honeycomb bonded with the latest aerospace techniques, instead of steel.

(quoted from http://www.gizmag.com/go/1230/)

And just to keep splitting hairs: The Matchbox model is of one of the twelve 1964 prototypes which are not GT40s: They predated the Mk I, didn't have GT40 chassis numbers and were just named Ford GT - exactly what Matchbox wrote on the baseplate and box.

Just like you I am neither British nor American, so no nationalistic influence there.
I fully agree with you on the MKIV, based upon the ill-fated J car.
Concerning the MKII. That we are talking about a British built chassis is clear.
But like I said before, it stops there. Engine, transmissing, brakes, testing, development; in fact putting/making it into a car, was Shelby American's work; no MKII was built in Slough in them days. The argument that a British chassis makes it a British car is not what I can support. The whole of the car is more than the sum of its (chassis) parts.

That Shelby was also the entrant is not relevant for the origin of the car. Moreover I mentioned the British based Alan Mann team as well, who was the entrant for
3 other Shelby built cars. This was aimed at shifting part of the big load to an extra (capable) team. That does not influence or change the origin.

The fact that Rolls Royce Ltd. (German owned) chassis are built in Germany does not make it a German built car, it is merely a German built chassis, And to make it into a real car, these chassis are transferred to Rolls Royce at Goodwood and the car is construced there.
The question; is Rolls Royce a German car because of its chassis or is it a British car because the car is built in England.
As far as I am concerned it is a British car, part of and funded by the German BMW group.

[Idris]

The argument that a British chassis makes it a British car is not what I can support. The whole of the car is more than the sum of its (chassis) parts.

A steam locomotive's identity is considered to be tied to its frames (the equivalent of a chassis). In the UK, a car's identity (i.e. its registration no.) is tied to the chassis.

[Ecclesley]

The argument that a British chassis makes it a British car is not what I can support. The whole of the car is more than the sum of its (chassis) parts.

A steam locomotive's identity is considered to be tied to its frames (the equivalent of a chassis). In the UK, a car's identity (i.e. its registration no.) is tied to the chassis.

Not fully clear what you mean to say.
For instance, the hull (chassis) of a ship, built in Glasgow, sailing under a Panamese flag, is that a UK vessel?
According to international shipping law it is not; it's registration/identity is connected to the flag it is flying.
And so there will be other examples and/or exceptions regarding trains, cars, boats and planes.

Returning to the Ford subject; the Ford MKII had an American passport.
But I love to agree to disagree on this subject and I can live with a split decision, no big deal.

[Squid]

Seems we're being overly pedantic about this. Sure, some GT40s were built in England, but Ford remains the only American marque to win overall at Le Mans.