Gooding & Co to auction #062 in Monterey

[arjan916]

Chassis 062 will be offered in an auction at Pebble Beach, august 2010:

http://www.goodingco.com/stories/alf...n_pebble_beach

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/news/...monterey-block

The 1995 McLaren F1, Chassis No. 062, A Rare California Registered F1
Enthusiasts the world over recognize McLaren’s F1 as a prime example of automotive excellence. The 1995 McLaren F1 car being offered was sold new to Larry Ellison, the co-founder and CEO of Oracle, who is also a major financier of the BMW Oracle Racing team. An elite car by many standards, it is one of a few McLaren supercars registered, titled and certified for use in California. Finished in Magnesium Silver over a black interior, this car is in original factory-delivered form and will arrive at auction complete with the factory-delivered luggage and tools. Gooding & Company’s estimate for this car is between $2.5 - $3.5 Million.

[Peloton25]

File Photo:


Well for starters, it's not a 1995 McLaren F1...

Also, no mention of it's "Ameritech F1" history in that brief snippet of the description. I wonder if they will expand on that in the full description or mention the car's has two VINs? I'd say that is pretty important information because it's currently registered under its Ameritech VIN in CA and that is clearly something a buyer might want to know ahead of time.

>8^)
ER

[tortoise]

Originally Posted by Peloton25

File Photo:


Well for starters, it's not a 1995 McLaren F1...

Also, no mention of it's "Ameritech F1" history in that brief snippet of the description. I wonder if they will expand on that in the full description or mention the car's has two VINs? I'd say that is pretty important information because it's currently registered under its Ameritech VIN in CA and that is clearly something a buyer might want to know ahead of time.

>8^)
ER

Not even a '96.
The buyer might also want to know if the car has a genuine OBD II certification, as required by law.

I'd like to know why anyone in his right mind would buy a car at auction in the first place.
You've got maximum competition amongst other potential buyers, the agent is working for the seller, despite that fact the buyer has to pay the agent a commission on top of the hammer price, and it's difficult if not impossible to give the car complete scrutiny and test-drive or be driven in it before committing to buy it.
Crazy.

[Peloton25]

Originally Posted by tortoise

Not even a '96.
The buyer might also want to know if the car has a genuine OBD II certification, as required by law.

Well that's the thing about its Ameritech VIN: 1A9MC99L9SA398062

The 'S' in the 10th position = 1995

So therefore in this particular case there would be no requirement for the OBD-II certification which is perhaps a good thing as that would be altering the car further from it's original configuration and might turn some buyers off?

Quite the paradox I guess.

I agree with you on the auction bit. Unless the car is 1 of 1 you should perhaps look elsewhere.

>8^)
ER

[tortoise]

Originally Posted by Peloton25

Well that's the thing about its Ameritech VIN: 1A9MC99L9SA398062

The 'S' in the 10th position = 1995

So therefore in this particular case there would be no requirement for the OBD-II certification which is perhaps a good thing as that would be altering the car further from it's original configuration and might turn some buyers off?

Quite the paradox I guess.

I agree with you on the auction bit. Unless the car is 1 of 1 you should perhaps look elsewhere.

>8^)
ER

The Department of Transportation are aware of the Driving Ambition book, and recognise the build dates in there as an authoritative reference.

What you say about the Ameritech VIN of this car is, shall we say, "interesting". The tub will have its own VIN moulded into the floor, and that will be a McLaren VIN (unless it has been defaced). The VIN that you quote is quite different from the McLaren VIN.
I don't suppose that there was anything physically preventing Ameritech from labeling this car with a '95 VIN, even though #062 obviously was not built in '95. The only explanations for this anomaly that occur to me are that this car is not #062, or that it is #062, built in '97 and received by Ameritech in that year, but Ameritech gave it a '95 VIN either by mistake or because - just hypothetically, mind you - they wanted to avoid the OBD-II requirement.

You're importing into the US cars that were built in tiny numbers. This meant that there were not a lot of examples for the authorities to use for reference or to record a history. That made easier the importer's task of certification.
This also meant, however, that there were not many cars available for the importer to procure and bring to America. If the importer's desired universe were further limited, to cars built prior to 1996, the task of procurement would be that much more difficult. It perhaps would not have been that easy in 1997 to buy F1s that had been built in '94 or '95 but still had only delivery miles.
If however, the importer were able to bring in '96-or-later cars, which except for their VINs were identical to pre-'96 cars, and give them its own, pre-dated VINs, then the importer would not have to deal with that nasty OBD-II stuff.

I don't know that that happened; I hope that it did not happen. It is true that there have been all sorts of shenanigans with F1s that came in under SorD, so we're not talking about an industry populated exclusively by Boy Scouts.
The incorrect VIN of #062 does make one wonder what the real story is: another reason for anyone to be very careful about bidding for this particular car.

[mini magic]

Originally Posted by tortoise

I'd like to know why anyone in his right mind would buy a car at auction in the first place.
You've got maximum competition amongst other potential buyers, the agent is working for the seller, despite that fact the buyer has to pay the agent a commission on top of the hammer price, and it's difficult if not impossible to give the car complete scrutiny and test-drive or be driven in it before committing to buy it.
Crazy.

I was explained once by a friend who's also a high end car dealer that the open bar and tv cameras help

[Peloton25]

tortoise - this old post from gerd was made before your time and might go a long way to explaining some of the questions you have about how the government agencies ultimately resolved the issues with the Ameritech F1s. It also might raise more questions too, but it would be to your benefit to read it I believe:

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...&postcount=127

For certain the cars were re-VIN'd as 1995s to avoid the hassles of OBD-II but also the VINs were altered because, as the story goes, to get them into the USA in the method that was used at the time Ameritech Corp was shown as the Manufacturer. Check out this photo from mini magic of the alternate vehicle ID tag fixed to the door of Ralph Lauren's F1 (#055) which was imported the same way as #062 and was also not built in 1995.



= = =

I think the auction scenario definitely helped move chassis #014. When presented with a room full of people who had the capability and perhaps the desire to purchase that car the selling dealership finally realized its true value was not equal to the amount they had been trying to obtain for the car. After a bit of stalling they lifted the reserve in an effort to spur more bidding and a few moment later it was sold. This after sitting in their showroom for nearly a year and having offers made that may have even been slightly better than what they ended up with. At least the car found a great new home and I don't think the buyer's overpaid.

>8^)
ER

[tortoise]

Originally Posted by Peloton25

tortoise - this old post from gerd was made before your time and might go a long way to explaining some of the questions you have about how the government agencies ultimately resolved the issues with the Ameritech F1s. It also might raise more questions too, but it would be to your benefit to read it I believe:

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...&postcount=127

For certain the cars were re-VIN'd as 1995s to avoid the hassles of OBD-II but also the VINs were altered because, as the story goes, to get them into the USA in the method that was used at the time Ameritech Corp was shown as the Manufacturer. Check out this photo from mini magic of the alternate vehicle ID tag fixed to the door of Ralph Lauren's F1 (#055) which was imported the same way as #062 and was also not built in 1995.



= = =

I think the auction scenario definitely helped move chassis #014. When presented with a room full of people who had the capability and perhaps the desire to purchase that car the selling dealership finally realized its true value was not equal to the amount they had been trying to obtain for the car. After a bit of stalling they lifted the reserve in an effort to spur more bidding and a few moment later it was sold. This after sitting in their showroom for nearly a year and having offers made that may have even been slightly better than what they ended up with. At least the car found a great new home and I don't think the buyer's overpaid.

>8^)
ER

Thanks for that.
Dick Merritt told me (this would have been after the date of the e-mail correspondence in Gerd's post) that NHTSA had concluded that the 7 Ameritech cars were a fait accompli, and there were no real grounds for challenging the importation of cars that the DoT had already specifically approved.
Of course, this would not relate to OBD-II, which is not a safety feature and exists under not only the DoT domain.
For the same reason, SoD approval does not exempt a car from OBD-II requirements, which were imposed by the Clean Air Act and are monitored and enforced primarily by the EPA, not by DoT.
Therefore, regardless of what NHTSA may think about a particular car as regards its own criteria, if the car is from '96 or after, it has to comply with OBD-II. Perhaps #062 does indeed comply, but the mere fact that it's a '97 car with a '95 VIN would not exempt it from the requirement.

[tortoise]

Originally Posted by Peloton25

For certain the cars were re-VIN'd as 1995s to avoid the hassles of OBD-II but also the VINs were altered because, as the story goes, to get them into the USA in the method that was used at the time Ameritech Corp was shown as the Manufacturer. Check out this photo from mini magic of the alternate vehicle ID tag fixed to the door of Ralph Lauren's F1 (#055) which was imported the same way as #062 and was also not built in 1995.




>8^)
ER

Interesting foil label there.
What would one call the information on it - fraudulent, maybe? If someone bought the car with that label, and with the expectation that it was exempt from OBD-II, and subsequently he was pulled up short by the EPA, I wonder if he would have grounds to sue either the seller or the outfit that created and put on the label?
Ameritech exploited the kit-car loophole, but they did that openly, right in front of the regulating authority. For a while DoT said, "Okay", then they said, "No more." That was fair enough.
This, however - putting '95 VINs on '97 cars - that's not a loophole.

[Peloton25]

Therefore, regardless of what NHTSA may think about a particular car as regards its own criteria, if the car is from '96 or after, it has to comply with OBD-II. Perhaps #062 does indeed comply, but the mere fact that it's a '97 car with a '95 VIN would not exempt it from the requirement.

I certainly agree with your final statement on principle, but if the only VIN the EPA have ever seen connected with this car is the Ameritech one then there wouldn't have been any point in the process where OBD-II compliance would have been a requirement for importing this car. If at some point the McLaren VIN is realized by the EPA and determined to be the actual valid VIN for this car one would assume that it could become an issue, but even that I am not sure of?

Funny enough, this car had some past issues with it's emissions testing here in the State of CA. At one point it had a fraudulent SMOG certificate issued for it by a mechanic who was apparently supplying them by mail without even looking at the car. When his operation got busted Ellison's F1 was one of the many cars that was determined to have been 'involved'. Of couse this sparked a bit of public controversy, even making the local newspapers at the time since Ellison is a big name in the Bay Area and not everyone has reason to like him.

State records show that after that issue surfaced the car was tested twice in March 2004. The first test was aborted and then it failed during the second test about 20 minutes later. Then a full 8 months went by before it was tested again and passed. Since then it has been tested twice according to state records (in 2008 and 2010) and passed both of those times as well. There should also be an entry for 2006 when the car was sold, but it doesn't appear online for some reason? All records the State has for this car reference it with the Ameritech VIN and the car as a 1995 McLaren F1.

BTW: Our SMOG tests are mandated and processed by California's Bureau of Automotive Repair and have no direct connection to the EPA which is a federal agency for those not familiar.

>8^)
ER

[tortoise]

Originally Posted by Peloton25

I certainly agree with your final statement on principle, but if the only VIN the EPA have ever seen connected with this car is the Ameritech one then there wouldn't have been any point in the process where OBD-II compliance would have been a requirement for importing this car. If at some point the McLaren VIN is realized by the EPA and determined to be the actual valid VIN for this car one would assume that it could become an issue, but even that I am not sure of?

Funny enough, this car had some past issues with it's emissions testing here in the State of CA. At one point it had a fraudulent SMOG certificate issued for it by a mechanic who was apparently supplying them by mail without even looking at the car. When his operation got busted Ellison's F1 was one of the many cars that was determined to have been 'involved'. Of couse this sparked a bit of public controversy, even making the local newspapers at the time since Ellison is a big name in the Bay Area and not everyone has reason to like him.

State records show that after that issue surfaced the car was tested twice in March 2004. The first test was aborted and then it failed during the second test about 20 minutes later. Then a full 8 months went by before it was tested again and passed. Since then it has been tested twice according to state records (in 2008 and 2010) and passed both of those times as well. There should also be an entry for 2006 when the car was sold, but it doesn't appear online for some reason? All records the State has for this car reference it with the Ameritech VIN and the car as a 1995 McLaren F1.

>8^)
ER

The vulnerability of this (or any) car to OBD-II scrutiny is perhaps not different from the vulnerability of any SorD car to scrutiny of its 2500 mi annual limit. The chances may be slim that the truth will ever come to light, but if it did come to light, the owner could have a bit of a problem with the law. Most of us could tolerate having a problem with the law about an old Beetle, but we'd rather not have one about a multi-million $ unrepeatable piece of motoring history.

Wrt the EPA certifications for SorD, at least a few years ago there were only a handful of approved labs in the US for testing conformity to Federal emissions requirements. The ones I recall were in Houston, N Cal, S Cal, and Baltimore. As it happened, at least two of those four did not only the testing, but they also did modifications to make a car compliant - or at least that's what it said on the certificate that was produced by the same people who did the modifications.
I found their certifications very credible. Then again, just this morning I sent my Christmas list to Santa Claus.

[hurstg01]

Originally Posted by tortoise

Then again, just this morning I sent my Christmas list to Santa Claus.

[Peloton25]

I seem to recall that JK Technologies prepared the certificates for the Ameritech cars as Amerispec was not yet a certified RI or ICI at the time. I'd have to dig through more of gerd's posts than I'd care to read right now to confirm that though.

I also remember that he stated two of the cars were inspected by the EPA at their headquarters in Ann Arbor, MI. Perhaps they sent #042 and #045 as those were the 2 out of the 7 which were actually built in 1995.

I agree that legal troubles of this magnatude should be avoided as often as possible. The government was not shy about holding onto chassis #069 for several years while that mess was sorted out - eventually forcing the vehicle to be exported. In 8 more years (assuming the laws remain the same) it won't matter one way or another as a 1997 MY car will then be exempt from the EPA's requirements, but that's a long time to be potentially looking over your shoulder.

There is another owner of one of these Ameritech F1s who I believe looks in on the forum from time to time. Perhaps he'll have some further insight to offer on all of this if he catches the thread?

>8^)
ER

[tortoise]

Originally Posted by Peloton25

In 8 more years (assuming the laws remain the same) it won't matter one way or another as a 1997 MY car will then be exempt from the EPA's requirements...

What exemption is that?

[Peloton25]

Vehicles 21 Years Old Or Older

If the vehicle is at least 21 years old, there are no EPA compliance requirements upon importation. The age of the vehicle is determined by subtracting the calendar year of manufacture from the calendar year of importation. If the calendar year of manufacture is unavailable, the importer may substitute the model year or year of first registration. For instance, to qualify in 2001, the vehicle must have been manufactured in 1980 or earlier. The vehicle must be in its original unmodified configuration. Vehicles at least 21 years old with replacement engines are not eligible for this exemption unless they contain equivalent or newer EPA certified engines.

No approval or Customs bond is required by EPA.

Of course these cars have already been imported so...

Also - the DOT still has their 25 year restriction on non-conforming vehicles in place.

>8^)
ER