rdj-pics
CA Veteran
Jr. Member
 Offline
Posts: 50
I'm a llama!
|
 |
« on: October 16, 2005, 07:27:28 pm » |
|
We have had new Toyota Dealership open here in Wakefield and they have this on display. http://img417.imageshack.us/my.php?image=toyota018du.jpgIt's a Toyota 90CV, I had a quick look through the window and located the chassis platle, and it says that it is chassis number 6. Now according to the information sheet it says it raced at Le Mans, but i'm sure about that. The drivers names which appear on the door are Geoff Lees and John Watson. I have had a look on a couple of websites and can't find any race history for the car. I have a feeling that the car was a show car, but I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
garystout
|
|
« Reply #1 on: October 16, 2005, 07:32:19 pm » |
|
Very likely, a lot of these type cars were indeed show cars, sometimes devoid of major running gear. Just look at the Jag in the Le Mans museum.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Le Mans is for life, not just for Christmas
|
|
|
|
Lorry
|
|
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2005, 09:38:04 pm » |
|
Was this the car that clipped the leading Nissan and took out the armco at the end of the pit straight? Radio Le Mans couldn't work out what the safety car should do - quite funny.
They may have made something from the bits. There were 3 Toyotas at LM in 1990, with Lees and Dumfries, but no trace of Watson.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
GENTLEMEN - Start your livers
For and on behalf of the Kent Kronenberg Owners Club
|
|
|
|
Werner
|
|
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2005, 09:30:32 am » |
|
Tom' Team Toyota ran 2 cars in 1989, oo. 36 + 37, with the no. 37 car being driven by Lees, Dumfries and Watson, see details and pics at http://www.tte.de/1999/le-mans/le-mans-museum-1989-89cv.htmlMay be it was one of those? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"… to be honest, I did it purely for the money at first. I went to Le Mans
hoping that the car would break down. I came away in love with the place." - Eddie Irvine
|
|
|
|
jpchenet
|
|
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2005, 10:32:47 am » |
|
Where's The Rickmeister when you need him!!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mgmark
|
|
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2005, 10:50:58 am » |
|
This reference one shows that the drivers ran as no 37 in the 1989 race, classed as DNF having suffering an accident on lap 58. http://wspr-racing.com/wspr/results/lemans/lemans1989.htmland they drove No 37T during practice. MG Mark |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough." Mario Andretti
|
|
|
|
mgmark
|
|
« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2005, 10:56:48 am » |
|
Sorry - I forgot to add that the 37T Car is listed as chassis 06 on the same link above, so it may well be the actual T car rather than a pure show car.
MG Mark
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough." Mario Andretti
|
|
|
|
clkgtrlm1
|
|
« Reply #7 on: October 17, 2005, 11:31:35 am » |
|
Images are here: http://www.racingsportscars.com/photo/Le_Mans-1989-06-11-photo.htmlThis shows that Toms entered 4 cars, with one, #06 being the T car. All cars are very different livery to yours rdj. but all other information seems to be confirmed. I would think that this probably IS the original vehicle rather than a show car. I would expect show cars to remain in 'Le Mans' livery. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Baldrick, my Lord! But I can change it to Ploppy if it'll make things easier.
|
|
|
rdj-pics
CA Veteran
Jr. Member
Offline
Posts: 50
I'm a llama!
|
|
« Reply #8 on: October 17, 2005, 12:35:12 pm » |
|
Thank's for the information so far. I went up for a look at the car one day last week, but they where close and as I saw it I worked out the livery was wrong, I have now watched back Le Mans 1988, 1989 and 1990 on video this weekend to confirm this.
Now I have posted the same information on another forum and someone says that the car has a rear wing is from the 89-CV, the nose is from a 90-CV.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 17, 2005, 12:36:53 pm by rdj-pics »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Nordic
|
|
« Reply #9 on: October 17, 2005, 12:53:44 pm » |
|
1990 was not a good year for toyota, before Le mans it had lost 2 90 CV chassis's in crashes and then another was damaged beyond repair there in the crash with Braca's Nissan.
It is highly likely that an older car was pressed in to action later in the year as the company would not have wanted to make any more as the car would not have seen sevice in 91 due to the rule changes.
The results from the later rounds of 90 show the Watson/Lees car was a hybrid 89/90 car #10. if there was one I am sure there would have been more.
Both the 89 & 90CV's used different rear wings and front bodies throught the year, the Le Mans wing for example is completely different from the Brands one.
Have a look at the racingsportscar site and compare.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Some people will tell you that slow is good - and it may be, on some days - but I am here to tell you that fast is better.
H S Thompson 1937 - 2005
|
|
|
rdj-pics
CA Veteran
Jr. Member
Offline
Posts: 50
I'm a llama!
|
|
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2005, 01:32:34 pm » |
|
I have just had a good look at the 1989 and 1990 cars, the front ends on the Le Mans cars are the same as the one I have uncovered, as for the rear wing they look different, from the pictures it looks like they used several different configeration's. I have got some further pictures of car that is in my local dealership. I'll sort them out and post them this evening.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 17, 2005, 02:18:26 pm by rdj-pics »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Harper
|
|
« Reply #12 on: October 18, 2005, 12:48:25 am » |
|
I wonder where Toms Toyota got the inspiration for the design of this car - it looks vaguely familiar to me - not that the Japanese are plaguerising bastards, you understand.......
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Andy Zarse
|
|
« Reply #13 on: October 18, 2005, 01:50:14 pm » |
|
I agree Matt, it looks just like the contemporary Nissan of it's day.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I wouldn't sit there if I were you, it's still a bit wet.
|
|
|
|
