Hello,

I don't find in DA how to read the VIN. Someone can help me please ?

Phil

Unfortunately I have never seen a concise breakdown on the VINs for F1s either in "Driving Ambition" or anywhere else.

Here's the basics on VIN numbers for those who have no clue what the 17-digits might mean.

http://www.vehicleidentificationnumber.com/vehicle_identification_numbers_vin_overview.html

http://www.vehicleidentificationnumber.com/vehicle_identification_numbers_vin_detail.html

Obviously the specifics as they relate to F1 would be unique, and conflict with some of the data at that second link, such as: 2nd digit = Manufacturer. In the case of the F1s it's an A, which according to that site should equal "Audi". We know that is not correct and the reasoning for that could be related to the third digit being a '9' for manufacturers who produce less than 500 vehicles per year.

Comparing the VINs provided does offer some clues:

F1 - SA9 AB5AC 1 P 1048 002

F1 - SA9 AB5AC 3 R 1048 005

F1 - SA9 AB5AC 9 R 1048 008

F1 - SA9 AB5AC 4 R 1048 014

LM - SA9 AB5AC 9 T 1048 LM1

LM - SA9 AB5AC 4 T 1048 LM4

LM - SA9 AB5AC 6 T 1048 LM5

GT - SA9 AR5BC 8 T 1048 054

Pos. 000 00000 0 1 1111 111
123 45678 9 0 1234 567

Lining them up like that allows the similarities and differences to pop out a little better I think. Here's the breakdown as I see it by VIN position.

WMI - World Manufacturer Identifier
01 - S = England
02 - A = should ID the manufacturer
03 - 9 = Always 9 for mfgrs who build less than 500 vehicles per year

VDS - Vehicle Descriptor Section:
04 - A - unknown
05 - B or R - possibly related to the chassis since only the longtail is different
06 - 5 - unknown
07 - A or R - possibly related to the chassis since only the longtail is different
08 - C - unknown
09 - various - Check digit

VIS - Vehicle Identifier Section
10 - P, R & T = Year of manufacture (1993, 1994 & 1996)
11 - 1 - identifies the assembly plant of the vehicle
12 - 0 - Second portion of WMI
13 - 4 - Second portion of WMI
14 - 8 - Second portion of WMI
15 - various - Chassis number sequence
16 - various - Chassis number sequence
17 - various - Chassis number sequence

It would be nice to find out the specifics of positions that I've left as "unknown". The description from that site on positions 4 through 9 states "These 6 characters occupy positions 4 through 9 of the VIN and may be used by the manufacturer to identify attributes of the vehicle."

It would be easy to assume that one character identifies the 6.1L V12, one may relate to the 6-speed manual transmission, one may identify the 3-seater configuration of the cockpit, and one may identify two doors. The fact that all those details would be the same on all the F1 road variants that were ultimately built means there'd be little chance of determing it by assumption or educated guess though. With two of those positions being different specifically on the F1 GT, that also throws into question the exact list of attributes I lined out.

I will add that I was surprised that the VINs on the LMs don't offer a unique character in the VDS section as I would think the engine was different enough to allow for the VIN to show that. Seems it doesn't...

>8^)
ER

Waouh Erik !

A very good job, BRAVO :)
Ine the VIN of my S2000, there were digits standing for seats, doors etc, it's true.
It would be cool to find anothers VIN because we cannot be sure on Brunei's F1s, mistakes are always possible.
Otherwise, GTR's VIN would be cool.

I finf strange the letters to say the year of construction. On the S2000, it was "T" for 99/00 then "1" for 2001 or "6" for 2006.

Phil

:iagree: It's good to have him back ;)

Thanks guys! It's good to be back. :cool:

*** Anyone have a problem with me breaking these last few posts out of this thread and creating a new one dedicated to VIN numbers starting with Phils post asking for help? I don't believe we have had one before.

Also, I don't have evidence of too many other VINs for the overall comparison. I think #013 and #016 are the only ones I can recall seeing any evidence of. I looked them up and they match the pattern for road cars exactly.

SA9AB5AC2R1048013

SA9AB5AC8R1048016

Anyone have any others they can produce from their records?

>8^)
ER

^^ sounds like a good plan to me; It'll be another hunt to get the full VIN as well as the chassis plate shots!!.....Add it to your sticky collection too!

I think I have another full VIN somewhere, let me do a hunt.........

Thought so, the ex-Mr. Bridger F1 chassis #007
http://img7.imagevenue.com/loc699/th_01188_21385530-L_122_699lo.jpg (http://img7.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=01188_21385530-L_122_699lo.jpg)

SA9AB5AC7R1048007

And here are the shots of #013
http://img130.imagevenue.com/loc347/th_01934_DSCN2172_122_347lo.JPG (http://img130.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=01934_DSCN2172_122_347lo.JPG)

and #016(stamped/scribed rather than plaque shot)
http://img16.imagevenue.com/loc700/th_01936_016_VIN_122_700lo.jpg (http://img16.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=01936_016_VIN_122_700lo.jpg)

Otherwise, GTR's VIN would be cool.

Just looked back and saw this comment. The GTRs should not have actual VINs - those are typically reserved only for road legal variants. Racing cars normally have some sort of chassis number - such as "09R" in the case of the F1s.

>8^)
ER

This is the road registration of #051

http://img180.imagevenue.com/loc378/th_69109_KFZ-Brief_V.I.N._051_122_378lo.jpg (http://img180.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=69109_KFZ-Brief_V.I.N._051_122_378lo.jpg)

This is the chassis-No incl. engine-No of #014

http://img189.imagevenue.com/loc414/th_69417_V.I.N._014_Fahrgestellnummer_122_414lo.jp eg

I thought I might have had one more VIN somewhere, and indeed I did, chassis #014 just like Roger posted :thumbsup:

Cheers for the chassis #051 VIN; I thought you may have something to add here ;) :worshippy

The GTRs should not have actual VINs - those are typically reserved only for road legal variants. Racing cars normally have some sort of chassis number - such as "09R" in the case of the F1s.

>8^)
ER

I'll see what I can find out if I get to see one (hopefully) next month :wink: - rest assured I'll take my trusty camera with me.

GTR's definatley don't have VIN's

GTR's definatley don't have VIN's

i.e. MCL F1 GTR NONE FIGTR009

:) http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=605473

I had a "Duh!!" moment just now...

In looking back at one of the links I provided - the "Eleventh vehicle identification number digit reveals the assembly plant for the vehicle." I added that info to the line in my original post so it no longer says "unknown".

With the F1s, it's always going to be a 1 as they were all assembled in the same place. :)

>8^)
ER

GTR's definatley don't have VIN's

What about the VIN of #11R which Jota 5084 wrote some time ago?

"I got this info when i was looking at the Swedish roadregistry."


Regnr: UAX806 Färg: ORANGE
Fabrikat: MCLAREN F1 GTR
Årsmodell: 1996 Fordonsslag: PB
Chassinummer: SA9AB5CC6T1048R11

I guess GTR's that have been converted for road use have to have a VIN, hence why #11R has one and #09R hasn't. Hopefully I'll soon be able to confirm if #13R has one too!......

Ralph Lauren's Chassis #055 - I have some of the VIN, can someone fill in the blanks?......I guess it starts like the rest IE SA9AB5AC_ _1048055
http://img165.imagevenue.com/loc807/th_29985_055_Lauren_122_807lo.jpg (http://img165.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=29985_055_Lauren_122_807lo.jpg) http://img183.imagevenue.com/loc454/th_29991_055_18_122_454lo.jpg (http://img183.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=29991_055_18_122_454lo.jpg)

The VIN on the Ameritech label will be different because it's an Ameritech VIN and not the original McLaren one. The partial VIN referenced on the lighted sign is the real McLaren one, but you can see the one on the door label ends in what appears to be 99L1SA398055. The first 5 postions are unclear to me except maybe the 3rd which appears to be a 9 as it (most likely) should be regardless of who's VIN it is. If Chris still has the original hires version of that image we may be able to determine the entire VIN Ameritech assigned to the cars they imported.

Also note the "S" on the Ameritech label in the 8th to the last position. That implies the year of manufacture was 1995. In addition, that label states "Date of Mfg: OCT 1995". Anyone with a copy of "Driving Ambition" can see that is false, as chassis #055 was built in 1996. :nono:

>8^)
ER

I had a list of ALL Ameritech VINs somewhere. I'll try to find it

Erik, I thought that was the case; Will there be a Mclaren VIN where the others are?, as in #013, in the engine bay.

LM3 VIN as offered by gerd on a post here (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=148406)

SA9AB5A6277048LM3 (changed '5' to '9' to read correct)

I had a list of ALL Ameritech VINs somewhere. I'll try to find it

I have just compiled a nearly completed list, call it work in progress, it just needs the gaps fillling

SA9AB5AC_R_____42
SA9AB5AC_R_____44
SA9AB5AC_R_____45
SA9AB5AC_R_____55
SA9AB5AC_R_____62
SA9AB5AC_R_____67
SA9AB5AC_R_____74

:)

Erik, I thought that was the case; Will there be a Mclaren VIN where the others are?, as in #013, in the engine bay.

Hard to say without someone sticking their nose in there.

One would hope that the McLaren VIN tags were not altered or removed during Ameritech's changes.

>8^)
ER

Erik, i can't find the list of ameritech VINS but i know i sent it to you a while back, do you still have it?

Chris- I do have what you sent me, but it will be a little while before I can get to it to share. I am hoping they are the Ameritech-sourced VINs and not just the McLaren VINs from the Ameritech cars. I can't recall...

Greg- The 8th to the last (or 10th) character of the VIN identifies the year of production. None of them will be "R" as that equals "1994" and all seven of the F1s that would eventually be converted through Amerispec were built in 1995 or later. In the true McLaren VIN it will be the actual year that is referenced - so "S", "T" & "V" on these particular cars.

In the Ameritech VIN it's probably going to be an "S" in all cases regardless of the actual year the car was built since they were "working the system" and had to show the cars as 1995 (or older) to get around the OBD-II requirement (and possibly others) for cars built 1996 or later.

To modify the list you presented above, making use of a web-based calculator to validate the check digit (http://www.autocalculator.org/Free-VIN-Lookup.aspx), these should be the complete McLaren VINs for the 7 Ameritech F1s.:

SA9AB5AC1S1048042
SA9AB5AC5S1048044
SA9AB5AC7S1048045
SA9AB5AC8T1048055
SA9AB5AC1V1048062
SA9AB5AC0V1048067
SA9AB5AC8V1048074

Calculating the check digit was going to be the painful part if I had to use the mathematical equation to factor each one. Now that I have that web tool, I could easily produce a complete list of the VINs for all the F1 road variants (F1s, LMs, GTs*).

To figure out the ones to complete the above list I simply entered all the characters that were known and then substitued "1" through "X" in the check digit position until the check digit came up as "Valid [#]" on that site. Not exactly quick, but rather painless. Someone who is really smart could code a table that would factor them all automatically, I am sure. Also, to make sure that website was giving accurate answers I checked the other F1 VINs that are known with certainty and each one checked out, until I got to the F1 GT. :uhoh:

* The Brunei GT's VIN it says the check digit should be a "3", whereas the list shows an "8". Maybe it was a keying error - 3's do look like 8's sometimes when written down, but really it calls into question the other positions of the VIN in the 4-8 range on the GTs in my mind. We'd need to have another GT's VIN to cross-reference and determine where the error occurred. Anyone seen the Burgundy one recently?? :grinno:

It is worth noting that even the VIN on GTR #11R checked out so we probably have all the pieces there like we do on the LMs and F1s. :cool: One would assume that all the road legal GTRs may have VINs and if so they should also be quite similar.

Last but not least, the VIN gerd provided for LM3 was all jacked up.

SASAB5A6277048LM3 <-- bad
SA9AB5AC2T1048LM3 <-- good

I see no reason why LM3's VIN wouldn't match the ones that went to Brunei. I reformatted it to match those and the check digit was valid which kind of proves that point. If he was pulling that VIN from someone's handwriting or from a grainy photograph I can see where he might have guessed wrong on some of those positions.

>8^)
ER

Here's the list of Ameritech VINs Chris had. According to the check digit calculator, about half of these VINs are invalid. On the ones that didn't match up I put what their actual check digit should have been in parenthesis to the right.

1A9MC99L7SA398042 (3)

1A9MC99L7SA398044

1A9MC99L1SA398045 (9)

1A9MC99L1SA398055

1A9MC99L1SA398062 (9)

1A9MC99L8SA398067

1A9MC99L5SA398074

>8^)
ER

top work :thumbsup:

The request from Chris had me digging through my archives this evening and in the process I found some other VINs I had reference to, most in text format from old emails. I got started compiling the rest of the list based on known patterns, however I can not be totally confident in my results due to a problem I will explain later. :uhoh:

If the VIN listed below is simply based on the known pattern and calculated check digit I have marked them as "assumed", otherwise I left a note as to the reference/s used to verify them. I put them in Code tables so the post wouldn't be a mile long.

XPs:

SA9AB5AC8N1048XP1 - assumed
SA9AB5AC6P1048XP2 - assumed
SA9AB5AC8P1048XP3 - assumed
SA9AB5ACXP1048XP4 - previous post, text based reference
SA9AB5AC1P1048XP5 - assumed

F1 road cars:

SA9AB5AC6R1048001 - assumed
SA9AB5AC1P1048002 - Brunei list
SA9AB5ACXR1048003 - photo source
SA9AB5AC1P1048004 - assumed
SA9AB5AC3R1048005 - Brunei list
SA9AB5AC5R1048006 - assumed
SA9AB5AC7R1048007 - photo source
SA9AB5AC9R1048008 - Brunei list
SA9AB5AC0R1048009 - photo source
SA9AB5AC7R1048010 - assumed
SA9AB5AC9R1048011 - auction description
SA9AB5AC0R1048012 - assumed
SA9AB5AC2R1048013 - photo source
SA9AB5AC4R1048014 - Brunei list, photo source and text based
SA9AB5AC6R1048015 - text based reference
SA9AB5AC8R1048016 - photo source
SA9AB5ACXR1048017 - assumed
SA9AB5AC1R1048018 - assumed
SA9AB5ACXR1048020 - assumed
SA9AB5AC1R1048021 - assumed
SA9AB5AC3R1048022 - assumed
SA9AB5AC5R1048023 - assumed
SA9AB5AC7R1048024 - text based reference
SA9AB5AC9R1048025 - assumed
SA9AB5AC7S1048028 - photo source
SA9AB5AC6R1048029 - assumed
SA9AB5AC7S1048031 - assumed
SA9AB5AC0S1048033 - assumed
SA9AB5AC6S1048036 - assumed
SA9AB5AC8S1048037 - text based reference *see below
SA9AB5ACXS1048038 - photo source and text based reference
SA9AB5AC1S1048039 - assumed
SA9AB5AC8S1048040 - assumed
SA9AB5AC1S1048042 - assumed
SA9AB5AC3S1048043 - assumed
SA9AB5AC5S1048044 - assumed
SA9AB5AC7S1048045 - text based reference
SA9AB5AC9S1048046 - assumed
SA9AB5AC9T1048047 - assumed
SA9AB5AC0T1048048 - assumed
SA9AB5AC2T1048049 - assumed
SA9AB5AC0S1048050 - assumed
SA9AB5AC2S1048051 - photo source (registration)
SA9AB5AC2T1048052 - assumed
SA9AB5AC6S1048053 - assumed
SA9AB5AC8T1048055 - assumed - text based reference *see below
SA9AB5AC8V1048057 - assumed
SA9AB5ACXW1048059 - assumed
SA9AB5AC1T1048060 - assumed
SA9AB5ACXV1048061 - assumed
SA9AB5AC1V1048062 - assumed
SA9AB5AC3V1048063 - photo source - sales flyer
SA9AB5AC5V1048064 - previous post (registration)
SA9AB5AC7V1048065 - photo source
SA9AB5AC9V1048066 - assumed
SA9AB5AC0V1048067 - assumed
SA9AB5AC2V1048068 - text based reference
SA9AB5AC2W1048069 - assumed
SA9AB5AC0V1048070 - assumed
SA9AB5AC2V1048071 - photo source
SA9AB5AC2W1048072 - text based reference
SA9AB5AC4W1048073 - auction description
SA9AB5AC8V1048074 - assumed - text based reference *see below
SA9AB5AC8W1048075 - assumed


LMs:

SA9AB5AC9T1048LM1 - Brunei list
SA9AB5AC2T1048LM2 - assumed
SA9AB5AC2T1048LM3 - photo source
SA9AB5AC4T1048LM4 - Brunei list
SA9AB5AC6T1048LM5 - Brunei list

GTs:*

SA9AR5BC3T1048054 - Brunei list
SA9AR5BC0T1048058 - assumed
* Assumes that only the check digit was inaccurate on the Brunei list.

I did not include 'XP1 LM' or '56XPGT' on those last two lists as I am really not sure how they would have formatted the final three positions of their VINs to denote chassis numbers. Maybe the GT prototype simply ends in "056", but the LM prototype is anyone's guess. I also think the year on the LM prototype will be an "S", not a "T".

It's late, so I'm not going to put together the list of potential GTR VINs now. Actually, I am going outside to watch the lunar eclipse. :popcorn: If someone else wants to do a list for the GTRs we've seen plates on, be my guest. :)

Now for the problem, and it's a big one - a lot of the "assumed" VINs may be inaccurate. :yikes: :disappoin

I first stumbled upon it with the VIN for #051. We know #051 was built in 1996 so the VIN should contain a "T" to designate the year of manufacture in the 10th position. However, in the registration that Roger provided it's clearly an "S" identifying 1995. It's hard to say just how many VINs in the list above may be wrong because of a difference in the year of manufacture and the year the VIN was assigned. For all the ones with a variance, both the 9th and 10th positions will be inaccurate. I'm betting towards the end of the list that there may be a problem with many of the assumed ones, so do not take this list as even being close to 100% accurate until each one is confirmed through another source. In fact, once I discovered the problem I almost didn't complete the post as I don't like wrong information floating around. :shakehead

= = = = = =

As for the text based discrepacies I encountered from my sources:

Chassis #037 listed VIN SA9AAB5A6851048037 - for starters, that's a total of 18 characters - the "A" in the 5th position is a duplicate of the previous character. Also the "6" should be a "C" and the 8th to the last should be an "S". The VIN checks out when I make the logical corrections.

Chassis #055 was listed with VIN SA9AB5AC6W1048055 - the "W" was horribly inaccurate for the year and the check digit was not valid even before I corrected the year to a "T". What was listed was an invalid VIN so I think the assumption on the list above is accurate or at least closer to it. You'll notice that the first 14 characters here are identical to the next entry, so I think someone just goofed on Ralph's F1s.

Chassis #074 listed VIN SA9AB5AC6W1048074. This discrepancy could be identical to the chassis #051 scenario where the car was assigned a VIN that doesn't match the year it was completed. In fact the check digit on this VIN checks out, so it could be that the one on my list is inaccurate and this one is correct.

Finally I noted on the list that I had a photo reference for chassis #028's VIN. Most will have this shot already, but probably just forgot about it:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%20F1%20E/photo_7.jpg

>8^)
ER

Here are the ones i had:

SA9AB5ACXP1048XP4
SA9AB5AC1P1048002
SA9AB5AC3R1048005
SA9AB5AC7R1048007
SA9AB5AC9R1048008
SA9AB5AC9R1048011
SA9AB5AC2R1048013
SA9AB5AC4R1048014
SA9AB5AC6R1048015
SA9AB5AC8R1048016
SA9AB5AC7R1048024
SA9AB5A6851048037
SA9AB5ACXS1048038
SA9AB5AC2S1048051
SA9AB5AC6W1048055
SA9AB5AC5V1048064
SA9AB5AC6W1048074
SA9AB5AC2V1048068
SA9AB5AC6R1048069
SA9AB5AC2W104072
SA9AB5AC4W1048073
SA9AB5AC9T1048LM1
SA9AB5AC2T1048LM3
SA9AB5AC4T1048LM4
SA9AB5AC6T1048LM5
SA9AR5BC8T1048054




Note, 069 is new for you based on your list above

Finally I noted on the list that I had a photo reference for chassis #028's VIN. Most will have this shot already, but probably just forgot about it:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%20F1%20E/photo_7.jpg
>8^)
ER

Cheers for that pic Erik, I didn't have that one!

Cool, this thread is now added here (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=664313). It could run and run when 'assumed' becomes 'confirmed' .......just like the chassis plate one. :)

http://img179.imagevenue.com/loc135/th_08512_6cd01352-c372-4bd8-9888-b1d0cea31605_122_135lo.jpg (http://img179.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=08512_6cd01352-c372-4bd8-9888-b1d0cea31605_122_135lo.jpg)

This one can be confirmed now ?
Even if they list SA94B5AC3V1048063 instead of SA9AB5AC3V1048063

SA9AB5AC6R1048069

Note, 069 is new for you based on your list above


Well unfortunately that VIN is not valid based on the check digit calculator. For it to be valid, the check digit would need to be a "7".

Also, the "R" in the 10th position implies 1994 and while there is some variance, I highly doubt that #069 would have had a VIN assigned that early.

http://img179.imagevenue.com/loc135/th_08512_6cd01352-c372-4bd8-9888-b1d0cea31605_122_135lo.jpg (http://img179.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=08512_6cd01352-c372-4bd8-9888-b1d0cea31605_122_135lo.jpg)

This one can be confirmed now ?
Even if they list SA94B5AC3V1048063 instead of SA9AB5AC3V1048063

The check digit does not validate on the first version, but is accurate on the second where the pattern matches all the other VINs. I'd say who ever put that flyer together made an error, but it would be safe to call the VIN on the list accurate now.

Thanks!

>8^)
ER

The LM VIN reported is straight from the DOT/EPA submitted paperwork by the RIs/ICIs/fake manufacturers (Ameritech). Only McLaren can verify for certain any VIN. There are many mistakes, mostly intentional, on VINs submitted to DOT and EPA.
Ameritech VIN'd cars don't exist except to illegally import the cars as was done. In a letter from EPA lab manager D Smith, the person responsible for EPA testing on the Ameritech/JK/ Mclarens, Smith wrote that the seven Ameritech cars were in fact McLarens and were approved intially with two VINs for each car. But Smith confirmed that the cars were in fact McLarens.
In a letter from Pacific Appraisers to DOT OVSC, Pacific inquired about one of the seven McLarens when the owner went to insure it because the owner was using the McLaren VIN. At this point, DOT was caught in a lie they knew existed but were hoping they would not get caught . The solution according to a DOT memo posted here some time ago was to cover it up.

The LM VIN reported is straight from the DOT/EPA submitted paperwork by the RIs/ICIs/fake manufacturers (Ameritech). Only McLaren can verify for certain any VIN. There are many mistakes, mostly intentional, on VINs submitted to DOT and EPA.
Ameritech VIN'd cars don't exist except to illegally import the cars as was done. In a letter from EPA lab manager D Smith, the person responsible for EPA testing on the Ameritech/JK/ Mclarens, Smith wrote that the seven Ameritech cars were in fact McLarens and were approved intially with two VINs for each car. But Smith confirmed that the cars were in fact McLarens.
In a letter from Pacific Appraisers to DOT OVSC, Pacific inquired about one of the seven McLarens when the owner went to insure it because the owner was using the McLaren VIN. At this point, DOT was caught in a lie they knew existed but were hoping they would not get caught . The solution according to a DOT memo posted here some time ago was to cover it up.

So, if I get what you are saying... before the DOT/EPA verify something as simple as the basic formatting of the VIN that is provided, they count the number of zeros on the check that is included with the application. ;)

>8^)
ER

SA9AR5BC8T1048054
huh? They didnt do a #054 did they?

huh? They didnt do a #054 did they?

GT :)

But keep in mind what I stated earlier - for that VIN on F1 GT #054 to be accurate the check digit needs to be a "3", not an "8" as the Brunei list shows. If the check digit is not a typo (as I suspect it is), then one or more of the positions 4-8 are wrong as the entire VIN can not be validated as provided.

>8^)
ER

So, if I get what you are saying... before the DOT/EPA verify something as simple as the basic formatting of the VIN that is provided, they count the number of zeros on the check that is included with the application. ;)

>8^)
ER


I can't recall the last time that either DOT or EPA verified a VIN. The S&D list has dozens of mistakes. VIN's are designated through SAE and ISO. WMI is a joint process involving the Feds. But their is no verification process other than asking the states who do verfiy more often, VINs. Another of those "we make rules for emotional/political/Swiss Bank account reasons without determining how we will enforce it".
DOT and EPA could care less about accurate VINs, unless it comes back to bite them.
As for counting zeros and Swiss Bank accounts, there is someone in approval power whose wife is a Swiss national....

As for counting zeros and Swiss Bank accounts, there is someone in approval power whose wife is a Swiss national....
:naughty: :evillol: :naughty:

http://img179.imagevenue.com/loc135/th_08512_6cd01352-c372-4bd8-9888-b1d0cea31605_122_135lo.jpg (http://img179.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=08512_6cd01352-c372-4bd8-9888-b1d0cea31605_122_135lo.jpg)

This one can be confirmed now ?
Even if they list SA94B5AC3V1048063 instead of SA9AB5AC3V1048063

What is that?

It comes from here :

http://www.turbo-car-trade.com/viewCars_1452.aspx

1 - Assigned by SAE
A - Assigned by SAE
S - Assigned by SAE
M - Series - CS
D (on file with Ameritech letterhead) or C as filed on EPA documents - Body
Type - Coupe
9 - Engine ype - BMW, 12 cyl, 627 hp, 6.1 litre, gas
9 - Restraint system - 3 point intertia
L - Line - F1
0 - check digit varies
S - Year
A - Plant of manufacture - Danbury, CT (yea right)
3 - Assigned by SAE
9 - Assigned by SAE
8 - Assigned by SAE
0 - sequential number
0 - sequential number
1 - sequential number

All data supplied by Ameritech to DOT dated 4/25/1997

Just realized I had this image for #038's VIN as well. :cool:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%20F1%20E/1015021_12.jpg

What I had not realized is that this one has a larger engine than all the other F1s... :bs: :uhoh:

>8^)
ER

your post prompted me to see if I had the same shot - I didn't (but :cheers: for the pic ;)) but I did have this

http://img25.imagevenue.com/loc703/th_79664_6_122_703lo.JPG (http://img25.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=79664_6_122_703lo.JPG)

Just realized I had this image for #038's VIN as well. :cool:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%20F1%20E/1015021_12.jpg

What I had not realized is that this one has a larger engine than all the other F1s... :bs: :uhoh:

>8^)
ER

Erik,
I have the information of the first owner of #038 that, as long as he had the car, the engine had 6.1 liter and that there isn't available souch an oversize. It seems to be a transfer error.

Roger

Yes, I would certainly agree with you Roger. In fact, I was trying to be funny with that comment, but I guess it did not translate well. :)

>8^)
ER

Now I have a picture of the chassis number of #071. Here it is:

http://img31.imagevenue.com/loc1136/th_35354_1_122_1136lo.JPG (http://img31.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=35354_1_122_1136lo.JPG)

Roger

SA9AB5AC0W1048071 - assumed


Interesting... I had selected a "W" for the year as this car was built in 1998:

071 - 1998, 61st car built, Historic Orange

However it seems the VIN was assigned in 1997 based on the "V" in the position for the year. I had suspected this could be the case and wonder how many others are like this...? I guess we will need photographic proof on most of the later cars in order to get the VINs right. :(

Anyway, thanks for the help Roger! :sunglasse

>8^)
ER

Today I went to see #009 and went with the special request of Greg to capture the VIN plate.
He showed this example: http://img191.imagevenue.com/loc432/th_24120_DSCN2172_4Large7_122_432lo.JPG (http://img191.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=24120_DSCN2172_4Large7_122_432lo.JPG ) which I took to be standard.
Today I took this image: http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/9430/pict0022ng2.th.jpg (http://img156.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pict0022ng2.jpg) showing the same structure, but with an extra "entry" if you will.

Does anyone know what this extra set of numbers and letters (511O1T for #009) might mean? And why they're not on #013's plate?
Also does anyone have images of any of the other cars' VIN plates both for further reference and extra clarification?

Great pic!

You might find some answers / pictures here (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=742258). As for the number difference, is it something to do with the Australian import law?

To save some redundancy on the discussion of VINs, I merged Sauc3's thread into this one with his permission.

I haven't a clue what the importance of the "511O1T" on #009's VIN plate means, but as I noted to Sauc3, the one Roger shared from #071 has even more nonsense listed there. The only other one I think we have reference of is #007's, but it is blank in that section like chassis #013's.

While I was here I also updated the VIN List (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=4920206&postcount=28) in this thread to show #009's VIN is now confirmed by photo source. Thanks Daan!! :cool:

>8^)
ER

Chassis #003 now confirmed by photo courtesy of Symbolic Motorcars. This is the first time I have seen a tag like this and it appears to be embeded in the epoxy layer of the carbon fiber in one of the passenger footwells at the kink where the floor kicks upwards towards the dash.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%20F1%20E/th_resizer.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%20F1%20E/resizer.jpg)

The VIN List (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=4920206&postcount=28) has been updated to reflect this.

>8^)
ER

Chassis #065, courtesy of the posting by jayfive :thumbsup:

http://img104.imagevenue.com/loc130/th_19419_rm_auction6_122_130lo.JPG (http://img104.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=19419_rm_auction6_122_130lo.JPG)

A friend reminded me of this LM3 photo which doesn't appear to be included here yet, however it was originally shared back in 2004 by drewwtms.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%20F1%20H/3522932-O.jpg

Unfortunately his flash, coupled with the weave of the carbon and the polished resin did a number on the clarity of the VIN as you can see. I figured it was still salvageable for our purposes here so I played around with the brightness and contrast levels in Photoshop. I feel pretty confident about being able to confirm - SA9AB5AC2T1048LM3 - which had previously been labeled as "assumed" on the list in post #28.

Here's an altered version of the image for those who think I am crazy. I actually had to raise the levels up and down several times in order to be confident about each character. Also enlarging the critical area was quite helpful. I have presented the top half at the middle of the range of adjustments I was making. The bottom half is pretty self explanatory I think.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%20F1%20H/3522932-O_edit.jpg

I marked #065 as confirmed by photo as well, since I hadn't done so after the earlier post.

>8^)
ER