Author Topic: COX6010  (Read 12776 times)

aaron

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
    • View Profile
COX6010
« on: April 28, 2014, 18:37:49 »
This car was cut up to repair CSX2142
   
   So I wonder how much this replica will go for at auction ?
   
   Privateer-entry AC Cobra an early addition to Artcurial's Le Mans Classic auction
   12 April 2014
   
   
   
   
   Artcurial has announced the fitting inclusion of a 1964 AC Cobra 289 – the very car in which a pair of gentlemen racers campaigned the entire 1964 Le Mans 24 Hours – in its sale at the Le Mans Classic, taking place in July 2014…
   
   
   
   
   In the mid-60s, there were plenty of amateur racers competing in the Le Mans 24 Hours – and two such individuals with the means to do so were Count Jean de Mortemart (descended from a noble line of French aristocrats) and Régis Fraissinet (the heir to a dynasty of industrialists). In search of a respite from the monotony of everyday life, the duo bought a 1964 AC Cobra 289 – chassis #COX6010 – and steered it to an 18th place finish. “There are those who like to play tennis and those who prefer golf,” proclaimed Fraissinet. “I play tennis and golf but, most of all, I prefer to race cars…”
   
   The plucky privateers’ Cobra is an early entry in Artcurial’s sale at the Le Mans Classic, taking place 4-6 July 2014. Its estimate has not yet been revealed.

rstainer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
COX6010
« Reply #1 on: April 28, 2014, 21:21:00 »
The history is convoluted. In 65 Jean de Mortemart sold the damaged 6010 to Jean Marie Vincent who used its physical remains to repair 2142 and its paperwork (carte gris) to get road registration for 2001, his other Cobra, which he had imported with a view to entering the 64 Le Mans. When it arrived by air the formalities were abbreviated, so 2001 was nor road legal until it 'became' 6010.
   
   2001 was '6010' for twenty years, but reverted to its original identity in 85, when the '6010' identity was transferred to a new Cobra replica constructed that year using a David Sanderson chassis and Angliss body.
   
   It will be interesting to see how much of this historical record will be in the Artcurial catalogue.
   
   RS

rstainer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
COX6010
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2014, 17:26:37 »
A To Whom It May Concern report dated today explains why COX6010 is classified as a Replica constructed in the mid 80s. Artcurial and other interested parties have copies.
   
   If anyone would like this report (2 pages plus 6 pages of attachments) please email me.

aaron

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
    • View Profile
COX6010
« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2014, 20:08:12 »
quote:
Originally posted by rstainer
   
A To Whom It May Concern report dated today explains why COX6010 is classified as a Replica constructed in the mid 80s. Artcurial and other interested parties have copies.
   
   If anyone would like this report (2 pages plus 6 pages of attachments) please email me.
   
   

   
   Have they now changed the description of the car in the Auction advert ?

rstainer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
COX6010
« Reply #4 on: June 07, 2014, 18:25:17 »
Artcurial has the Register entry for COX6010, destroyed in 1965, and the replica appendix entry for the car built by Bernard Afchain in the 80s.
   
   How Artcurial describes the car's origin will be revealed shortly when the auction catalogue is published.
   
   This month's ACtion has a fuller account of the 6010's 65 demise and the later creation of a car bearing its identity.
   
   RS

rstainer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
COX6010
« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2014, 09:24:23 »
The Artcurial catalogue is now published. The car is Lot 240 of:
    www.artcurial.com/en/asp/fullCatalogue
   
   Or:
    http://www.artcurial.com/en/asp/fullCatalogue.asp?salelot=2535+++++240+&refno=10487929
   
   I will comment on Monday.
   
   RS

aaron

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
    • View Profile
COX6010
« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2014, 14:11:38 »
What an interesting write up on the car in the auction description .
   
   The estimate of 1 300 000 - 1 700 000 € for a car with a new chassis and body sounds very optomistic.

rstainer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
COX6010
« Reply #7 on: June 09, 2014, 20:42:33 »
The Artcurial catalogue wording implies that 6010 has continuous history as a vehicle.
   
   The historical record demonstrates conclusively that it doesn’t: the car was destroyed in continuous history terms in 1965 (see register). No historian has been found who supports Artcurial’s catalogue account and steps that are better not disclosed are currently being taken.
   
   RS

rstainer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
COX6010
« Reply #8 on: June 11, 2014, 14:09:22 »
The facts of the car offered by Artcurial are beyond dispute: 6010 was destroyed in 1965.
   
   In the mid 80s another car was made (see Register):
  • The chassis and substructure were by David Sanderson
  • The body was by Brian Angliss
  • Material mechanical components are per the Artcurial catalogue
  • Some minor items with the 6010 stamping were taken from CSX2142, where they had been for many years
  • The 6010 footbox i/d tag (the chassis plate) was taken from CSX2001, where it had been for many years

  •    
       The ACOC classifies this car as a Replica and the SAAC classifies it as an Air Car.
       
       Artcurial has received proceedings in this matter. Anyone requiring further information should contact me.
       
       RS

    aaron

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 481
      • View Profile
    COX6010
    « Reply #9 on: June 12, 2014, 20:52:55 »
    "Some minor items with the 6010 stamping were taken from CSX2142"
       "The 6010 footbox i/d tag (the chassis plate) was taken from CSX2001"
       
       Maybe this is the reason they are advertising the car as they have on the website.

    SunDude

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 211
      • View Profile
    COX6010
    « Reply #10 on: June 12, 2014, 22:16:11 »
    The Artcurial Le Mans Classic auction catalogue is now available for download as a PDF: http://www.artcurial.com/pdf/2014/2535.pdf

    rstainer

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 339
      • View Profile
    COX6010
    « Reply #11 on: June 20, 2014, 15:37:22 »
    Artcurial are increasingly anxious to have the 6010 ACOC Cobra Register entry changed, but haven't provided any hitherto unknown information about the car.
       
       Their argument, instead of dealing with the facts of 6010, relies on an obscure part of French law that neither I nor our legal advisers conclude can possibly apply.
       
       Vive la différence!

    TLegate

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 748
      • View Profile
    COX6010
    « Reply #12 on: June 20, 2014, 17:53:38 »
    I think the word that applies in this situation is: obfuscate. Our european cousins, and especially auction houses, are past masters of the art. Great word, use it often and wisely... :)

    SB7019

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 237
      • View Profile
    COX6010
    « Reply #13 on: June 21, 2014, 02:18:02 »
    When it comes to "la difference" there are often huge differences between French Napoleonic law and our own so they may ( or may not) be correct?   As the market ( and hence values)  for all such cars is a global one  ( as acknowledged by them when providing the details in English) there argument on this point is totally irrelevant.
       
         It will be fascinating to see what the bidding goes to, assuming the lot is not withdrawn.   I can only hope that anyone with sufficient funds to contemplate spending the sort of money that the estimate indicates will have sufficient sense to have done a reasonable amount of due diligence.

    Cobra Ned

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 76
      • View Profile
    COX6010
    « Reply #14 on: June 21, 2014, 23:51:24 »
    And, a new owner will likely also have the funds to direct legal action towards the party who presented the erroneous and misleading data in their catalog. The registrars did their jobs, and anyone who willfully ignores the facts does so at their own risk, n'est-ce-pas?