1967/1968 Dick Harrell funny cars

I wouldn't be too sure those were holes in the valence..More than likely paint..Wouldn't actual holes negate the oversize sheetmetal front spoiler all of these cars ran? The front spoiler I would think would help to keep air from getting under the car and creating unwanted lift. Same reason these cars sat very low on the track. Not to mention the front spoiler might in some way create downforce on the front end to keep nose down and an realtivly even although slightly rear biased weight transfer..

Race cars move around...wasn't ZL1 #1 at one point in TX or Fl?

As everyone can see there are quite a few 1968 cars that are very similar to Tom's car.

Was DH receiving any money or sponsorship from Fred Gibb in 1967 or 1968?

[Kim_Howie]

I was reading on the Harrell site that Dave Libby stated the frame was not right because the cage was too high maybe the frame is for a cuda or a mustang.Quote "roll cage too tall for the body" Also the body quote "Body needs to be 3-4" lower" Please look at all of the cars on both sites. The front lower valance panel on Tom's car is level with the spindle!!! Look at the old pics and the new pics. There all the same height!!! I don't see any of the lower than the spindle.

[Kim_Howie]

NO, Bill's # 1 ZL-1 was found in Des Moines ,Ia. Jim Cooper owned it. I use to watch in race at Eddyville,Ia I just about crapped when I found out in was the org. ZL-1. Des Moines is 149 miles from Laharp,Ill.

I'm sorry..I was going off memory..I thought the car had been campagined or was going to be by a guy owning a Pizza Hut and he was somewhere south..


What about DH and Gibb in 1967 or 1968???

It is interesting to me that the 1967 DH car is shown with a black top..I would think he would have used that color scheme as his first color scheme on his 1968 car. But if he did and Tom's car is "Car 1" as he puts it..no door..how can that be..Wouldn't his first Car have the door like the 1967 car, which I don't think is in dispute? Why go from "door" (1967) to "no door" (TC's car), then back to "door" (Car 2 in Tom's hypothesis the burgundy car)???

Also is it possible that DH painted his cars in the same schemes as Gibb (look at Lil Hoss) because he received money or some sort of support there..After all the 1967 car while carrying both "Courtsey" and "Yenko" sponsorship was painted and looked very similar to "Lil Hoss" red/blk top, and Tom's "Car 2" looks like a very similar paint scheme to ZL1 #1 which was certainly a Gibb/Harrell collaboration. I guess I'm lost as the only way I can see Tom's hypothesis working is if his car is the first car and it has a door (which it doesn't).. he thinks his is Car 1 as well, However there isn't a door and general common knowledge, he evens makes reference to it in a previous post..about MB is this door..So if the Harrell, Burkhart, and Kirby cars were from the same mold and were identical..Where is the door?

[olredalert]

-------Greg,,,Several posts ago you said you were done. Whats changed??? Can we please count on you really being done the next time you say you are???.........Bill S

[Kim_Howie]

He owned a Pizza Hut in Des Moines, Ia. His dad Louie was a track offical at E-ville for years. Kim

[Belair62]

Jeff....see if you can dig up a 68 F/C in the Coke Cavalcade for me !

[ANDY M]

Greg, or GS Carlson, please allow me to offer some observations I've made in watching this whole clusterf*#k unwind:

1)I have never met most of the guys on this site, including you, yet I feel like I can call them friends.
The reason why I can say this is that there is no sense of hostility that can't be resolved with more than a simple PM. I have never met you, yet I seem to already know you.
2) As Bruce (Xplantdad) pointed out, these are just cars, THINGS that guys like to talk and argue about, but at the end of the day, they are still just things.
3) As someone who IS heavily medicated, I am truly amused as to why all of this BS is so critically important. Like several people have pointed out, the cars are not for sale, so is there nothing else to talk about than piddly details of a car that was probibly modified on a weekly basis?
If the crew chief thought he could shave a 100th off his ET by using Turtle wax instead of Simonize, he'd do it. If he thought a grade 8 frame bolt would save a 10th over a grade 5 bolt, guess which one he'd use. They didn't keep a diary for future documentation for guys like you. They worked their butts off to shave a 100th off their ETs, so their sponsor wouldn't hire someone else for next years season.
4) I too own a COPO with no documentation. Its been discussed on this site, but not argued about. Why? Because I don't care that it's incorrect, incomplete, and poorly detailed. I drive it, beat on it once in a while, and enjoy it. It's not for sale, so nobody has seen fit to try and tear it apart. If anyone wants to come to Columbus to look it over, give me a call. I would be happy to show it off. If you want to rag on it afterwards, be my guest.
My medication helps to keep me from getting overly emotional. (Check my signature)
Did I mention that there are other things in life that are more important?
Tom Clary is a credit to this hobby, and he will be the last guy to let you down.
Thank God we have the freedom to waste time like this.
Andy

[Seattle Sam]

[ QUOTE ]
But if he did and Tom's car is "Car 1" as he puts it..no door..how can that be..Wouldn't his first Car have the door like the 1967 car, which I don't think is in dispute? Why go from "door" (1967) to "no door" (TC's car), then back to "door" (Car 2 in Tom's hypothesis the burgundy car)???

[/ QUOTE ]

Greg,
The terms Car 1 and Car 2 were used to easily identify one car from the other, not to indicate which one was built first.

Greg, I don't know you and I have stayed out of this until now, but it becomes increasingly more clear with each of your posts that you are NOT trying to be objective and research a car, instead you are trying to discredit Tom's car as a DH car.

If you in fact think that you are neutral on the matter, I urge you to go back and re-read all of your posts, why have you taken it on your shoulders to question this so closely? What's in it for you?

I believe Tom has gone above and beyond where he "needed" to go to present why he believes his car is a DH car, and I for one believe him. You can't get away from the point that folks who were there have validated this car when it didn't make any difference to them one way or the other. Now that some of these same people have a dog in the hunt, they suddenly change their stories.

Greg, as Mr. Neutral, why don't you call them to task for changing their stories? Their motives should be clear to you from reading their web postings, why are you in support of them? Why, instead, are you challenging the integrity of the family who clearly has done far more than anyone to promote and preserve all these supercars?

I'm personally insulted by your insinuations and innuendos against the Clary's, you have stepped way over the line here.

[55chevy]

[ QUOTE ]
Yet another Dixie Twister photo. Notice how the openings in the front valance appear to be cut-out?.(Also notice the '67 Altered wheelbase Camaro in the far lane?)

[/ QUOTE ] This is the same pic I posted earlier in this tread. I cropped and enlarged it. Look on page 3 for a better view.
.
.
.

Also about the 1967 FC (Dicks 1st FC).. Look at the photos I posted. It is clearly a different car (body and chassis) than the 1968 car/cars.. What does the damn door and paint job have to do with the '67 car as compaired to the '68?? The '67 is a longer nose front engine setup that has lift off hood and poor fitting panels. It's NOT the same car as the '68 car. That's obvious.