|
hgb
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2003, 06:20:01 pm » |
|
BTW, the car no. 19 on one of the pictures looks suspiciously like the Aston Martin DB2 which finished in fifth overall in 1950. The car was driven by Abecassis and Macklin and was the winner in the up to 3 liter class. A bit of googling around sometimes does the job.  Edited because I cannot write properly. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 15, 2003, 06:23:22 pm by hgb »
|
Logged
|
I don't care - I'm a racing driver and I'm here to win, not to finish third.
|
|
|
|
Matt Harper
|
|
« Reply #16 on: July 15, 2003, 08:16:02 pm » |
|
I've been out of town for a few days - so apologies for resurrecting something that may have been hammered flat. Dreamracers pix really interested me and are really quite a find.
For what it's worth, I think:
pic #'s 1 and 8 are the pre- "technical section", between Maison Blanche and what is now Virage Ford
pic #'s 5 and 6 are not where the current Dunlop bridge stands (or, for that matter the 'other' Dunlop, between the Esses and Tetre Rouge). The curve in the track and the service road merging with the course rule out the current bridge location. Was there a 3rd bridge in the immediate post WW2 era? (I suspect that some of these pictures were taken in the late 40's, which would explain the reconstruction. A lot of the circuit was used by the Luftwaffe during the war and they left it in a right old mess).
pic #11 has perplexed me. I suspect it is the pit straight from what is now the pit entrance, with Tribume Wimille(?) in background. If that is the case and the car is heading towards camera, it is going in the wrong direction, per the race.
Absolutely fascinating pics - can't wait to see some more.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If it\'s good and fast, it won\'t be cheap. If it\'s fast and cheap, it won\'t be good. If it\'s good and cheap, it won\'t be fast.
|
|
|
|
Rhino
|
|
« Reply #17 on: July 15, 2003, 11:29:59 pm » |
|
Didn't the Luftwaffe use the straight as emergency runway?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Never argue with an idiot, they'll only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
|
|
|
|
Bobblehat
|
|
« Reply #18 on: July 16, 2003, 12:22:05 am » |
|
hgb, yep you are right just looked up it up in Dominique Pascal's book British Cars at Le Mans and 19 is an Aston DB1 it did 2094.17 miles at an average of 87.26mph. What is the other car at a pit stop? Simca?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bobblehat
|
|
« Reply #19 on: July 16, 2003, 12:35:26 am » |
|
Sorry back again, just spotted somthing in this book, the view to the bridge could be earler, maybe pre war as the photo I have here of 1950 shows the Dunlop bridge the same shap as today ie tyre shaped. The other thing is that the trake side has this garden fence look to it wich matches photos of the 1930's. The car in the pits I think must be from the 49/50 race as the pits has bigger advertising and the white fence in front of the pit it self is not a picket fence style so the car might be a 49 Aston DBR1. Dreamracer is the number 31 and can you make out the car in section through the trees?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ruptured Duck Motorsport
|
|
« Reply #20 on: July 16, 2003, 10:34:30 am » |
|
Is very tricky to make out anything as the pictures are so small anyway - I will try a hig res scan and see what I can make out.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Scarred old slaver know he’s doin’ alright.
|
|
|
GeeBee
CA Veteran
Newbie
 Offline
Posts: 32
MORE BEER GARCON!!!
|
|
« Reply #21 on: July 16, 2003, 12:13:45 pm » |
|
Fabulous stuff! Keep drip feeding it.
GeeBee
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
GeeBee
|
|
|
avsfan733
CA Veteran
Newbie
Offline
Posts: 2
I'm a llama!
|
|
« Reply #22 on: July 16, 2003, 06:04:05 pm » |
|
You Might try either scanning the negatives themselves with a negative scanner, or finding a local proffesional photographer and have him reprint the photos in bigger sizes, the technology has improved a lot making bigger print cheaper and easier so you can probably gain more physical detail by doing it that way than scanning the pictures itself at a higher res
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ruptured Duck Motorsport
|
|
« Reply #23 on: July 17, 2003, 10:47:54 am » |
|
You Might try either scanning the negatives themselves with a negative scanner, or finding a local proffesional photographer and have him reprint the photos in bigger sizes, the technology has improved a lot making bigger print cheaper and easier so you can probably gain more physical detail by doing it that way than scanning the pictures itself at a higher res
No negatives as we know them - I have the glass plates   |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Scarred old slaver know he’s doin’ alright.
|
|
|
|
mgmark
|
|
« Reply #24 on: July 17, 2003, 12:53:17 pm » |
|
Amongst other things, I collect old cameras - if you have the glass negatives and they are in reasonable to good condition, look after them - you will get superb large size prints from them, but don't try to get them printed over the counter at your local Boots or Tescos, and don't send them to prontoprint! Speak to a few of your local professional photgraphers to find out if there is decent print house near you that could do the job. All the best and keep them coming,
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough." Mario Andretti
|
|
|
|
mgmark
|
|
« Reply #25 on: July 17, 2003, 12:59:02 pm » |
|
P.S. Don't try any cleaning of the negatives yourself - the image is really easy to irreversibly screw up - leave it to the printers.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough." Mario Andretti
|
|
|
|
Ruptured Duck Motorsport
|
|
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2003, 01:17:06 pm » |
|
Thanks for the advice chaps - I realised that glass was a differant matter to normal negs, and as they seemed in reasonable nick, I have kept them stored in the same way.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Scarred old slaver know he’s doin’ alright.
|
|
|
krt917
CA Veteran
Newbie
Offline
Posts: 5
I'm a llama!
|
|
« Reply #27 on: July 20, 2003, 11:47:36 pm » |
|
Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum - I got here via ten-tenths and saw what a good forum this is! What a find all those photos are. I believe that the number 19 car in question is the 1949 DB2 which was fitted with the 2.6 Lagonda engine (the other DB2s had 2 litre 'Aston' engines), chassis no. LMA 49/3. A DB2 #19 was also entered in 1950, as you have already identified, but looking at some of the pictures I've got, the 1950 is much more like the more 'common' (if such a word can be used for an Aston!) roadcar. There was also a DB1 entered in 1949, but its number was 29! The car therefore pictured is, I believe, the Johnson/Brackenbury 1949 car which managed just 6 laps before it boiled its water away and, due to the regulations stipulating a minimum of 210 miles between water replenishments, had to be withdrawn. It did make up for that poor performance somewhat at the 1949 Spa 24hrs, however, when it came home 3rd overall and 2nd in class. As for the other pics, I'm not so sure - I'm better with cars than tracks! I hope that has been helpful. Right, I'm off to explore the rest of this forum! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Andy Zarse
|
|
« Reply #28 on: July 21, 2003, 12:02:46 pm » |
|
Welcome aboard krt917.
You may find this Forum is not quite so earnest on the racing front as the excellent ten/tenths. Seemingly sensible posts here soon become side tracked into something resembling the bastard offspring of Monty Python and Murray Walker.
But we are all Le Mans nuts and motor racing enthusiasts to boot. Just a bit odd sometimes...
Enjoy!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I wouldn't sit there if I were you, it's still a bit wet.
|
|
|
krt917
CA Veteran
Newbie
Offline
Posts: 5
I'm a llama!
|
|
« Reply #29 on: July 21, 2003, 04:53:09 pm » |
|
Sounds good to me!! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
