Re: Harrell Website
 

Frank, no disrepect but you or no one else will tell me what to do. I hope that is very clear!

Guess you've never been married----

Re: Harrell Website
 

Frank,
I am actually laughing. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/haha.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/haha.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...iggthumpup.gif

Rick H.

Re: Harrell Website
 

[ QUOTE ]


Frank, no disrepect but you or no one else will tell me what to do. I hope that is very clear!

Guess you've never been married----

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok I stand corrected.

Rick H.

Re: Harrell Website
 

Man..the Rabbit boys are just on a roll here lately https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/crazy.gif They banned me from their piece of crap site the other day because I made an objectional post to something someone said and then they edited my post... After I re-edited it they deleted it... After I was banned from the site I told them to delete all my posts.

here's the crybabys reply

[ QUOTE ]
as soon as all the other sites including your favorite removes all my pictures and info.let me fill you in too mr motion guru.you recently told someone who posted they didn't have a motion car with the expert knowledge you have from reading magazines.well guess what!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Gilpin
To: Tim Lopata
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: DETROITHORSEPOWER


I want all my posts on your site (including the pics I've posted) removed.

Thank you.

Re: Harrell Website
 

Good morning all.

First my statement to follow is not to place quilt, blame or any sort of bashing on anyone involved on this or the other site. Just a remark about this whole mess. I am actually writting this in a calm manner, hoping to get my point across without malice.

I am not taking sides either way on the issue of the car because I don't know a thing about the vehicle. I am just stating my feelings based on what has been said.

As in all disputes there are 2 sides to every story and like most story's it's the strongest writting or push if you will that win's out 99% of the time. When differences flare up between two parties it will always be the one shouting the loudest that gets the most attention and can sway even the most deadfast individual to the other side.
As in any court of law, it's the best use of supporting evidence that convinces the jury of either guilt or innocence. (Ok, except for the OJ case).

I am not taking sides on this but after awhile the silence generated by the ummmmmmmm, silent party will start to cast doubts to even those who have in the future stood in defense of the him.
Think about it. Haven't you always believed in something only to hear another version and found yourself saying, hmm that just might be. The power of persuasion is very strong.

In this case there is some pretty strong slamming going on and I don't care who you are but to the casual observer and even the most supported member it has to but some sort of doubt in your mind.

I am not saying that Tom has to refute any of what has been said, it's his car no matter what the pedigree and he can say what he wants about it BUT I got to believe that there are others who would want to remove any sort of doubt and know either way so as to get this mess resolved and move on.

My point? (not sure I had one) As long as the bashing continues without rebuttal it's going to leave some doubt in the minds of supporters, I don't care who you are, that's my belief.

Ok now please don't shoot me.

Rick H.

P.S. Everyone have a safe New Year

Re: Harrell Website
 

I don't know much about funny cars, but I was sitting at the table in Englishtown several years ago with Libby, Tom, et al, discussing the unique characteristics of Tom's car - which was why it was confirmed as being the real FC. I was a sponge to this type of info. The best part? The owners of DH's '67, & '68 were sitting at a table with DH's mechanic - how can you beat that?

Re: Harrell Website
 

[ QUOTE ]
After looking at these two pictures you can tell the cars are not the same. Like I said before show me pictures of the car before the resto. The question is easy Tom is your car real or a clone,a simple yes or no will do. Ed
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d46/RPOZ28/DHFC5.jpg
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d46/RPOZ28/DHFC6.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

I will run through this once quickly so listen up. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ns/scholar.gif

1. The picture you are comparing the completed car to is one of 3 that was used to restore the car. In order for it to be posted it had to be scanned and put back together since it was larger than the scanner would do. The angle of the two pictures is not exact though close.

2. There are 2 or 3 things that anyone can see is different. Rear wheels (still looking for the right one's),

rear quarter windows (at the time of this pic., which was about 1 hour after completion, we had not found any of the blue shaded plexiglass that they used)

Fuel and water tanks (after ordering and returning 3 sets of tanks to an outfit in California we decided to go with the closest they had come up with, not right but we needed to get the car to a show the next week I think)

Rear spoiler ?????? maybe there is a difference, maybe not. The spoiler was almost completly broken off the car when we started on it. The previous owners had used aircraft stripper and putty knives to remove old paint and even the gell coat from the body. In places the fiberglass was eaten all the way through.

3. Look at the lower ladder bar bracket...we were told that this was wrong on the car at Englishtown. When we showed Mr Libby these pictures he said that he must have forgot that they were on the car. We chose to install the front ladder bar in this bracket until we could run the car and find out how much traction the car had. We figured that wheel spin would be better than too much traction the first few times out. Now here is a question...if the car that Mr Libby worked on most of the time didn't have the lower bracket...then could it have been a different car?

4. Now for the tinwork...the chassis and body had been cut and redone several times in it's life. Engine had been moved who know's how many times. I cut off at least 3 different rear mounting tabs from the chassis. Every time the engine was moved the body was cut to fit. The body tin work had at least 3,000 rivets in it and needed another 1,000 to make all the metal stop flapping. We spent several day's tring to find pictures good enough to restore the tin work back to origional, but no one took detailed pics of the tin work that we could find. The tin work in the car had been cut and modified several times, moving engine, manual trans. with hand brake, etc. After talking to Bob Gibson from Ill. (who has done several funny cars) he told us that no 2 cars were ever done the same on tin work. Usually simpler was better, if the tinwork done its job then that was all that was required.

5. I know that the car is not 100% correct....but I will bet that it is at least 85%. We knew when restoring the car that there was some things that we didn't have enough information on. At Englishtown Mr. Libby was telling us a story of how the car was wrecked and the left front fender busted and repaired. We all walked over to the car and sure enough there was the patch on the fender just like what he described. Dale P. pointed out 2 or 3 safety items that we needed to address on the engine. Bruce Larson was very helpful that day at Englishtown with advice and help that was priceless. But at no time, not from anyone there, was the authenticity of the car questioned.

So to answer your question:

All the stories and history of the car fit when restoration was started. Besides modifications done to chassis and body the parts matched the pictures.

When car was shown for the first time Mechanics and Drivers from that time period verified the car. Some with stories of things that happened, some by looking the car over and just saying man that brings back some good memories.

I can say that Tom and myself have had a blast restoring, showing, talking about and running the car. Lots of hours and miles have been put into this car over the last 3 or 4 years.

So is it real because They said so?

Or is it a fake because They said so?

Re: Harrell Website
 

I guess after reading all of this crap on both websites is the one thing that still amazes me, is if Tom feels he has a legit DH car, as he has been claiming all these years (even on business cards) then why hasn't he produced the documentation to the car, whether paperwork or otherwise....As someone else pointed out..not saying anything in a public manner when confronted with possible contrary evidence leads to an assumption the evidence is correct. Tom should want to rectify that...

I think it is evident to many that there are a lot of morons on that site, but truth be told there are morons here as well..complete with their "stars"...just read some of the post when someone post an umpopular thought or subject. One side can't hold themselves above others when some of the same people posting on this thread have at various times been EXTREMELY confrontational and downright asses (I'm sure I fall into that catagory at least once as well..)

It goes without saying that since this site was the first "supercar" website and the owners (the Clary's) felt to need to remove certain people, that when those people feel the owner's car is now is in question they might be alittle overzealous. It still doesn't excuse the manner in which they post however. This along with just some really stupid people overall on both sites, leads to the discussion being more on a 6th grade level and folks "forgetting" that there is an actual bonafide topic to discuss... Amazing that some people on both sites probably run companies and decide the fate of way bigger things other than cars that hardly get driven...makes one wonder.

I guess I'm amazed that this car was allowed to be called a DH car since at least 2000 (based on Tom's post) without someone stepping up and actually asking what proof there is... What paperwork is there? What research methods were used to find evidence? What sources were used? Old memeories, photos, etc? How were the final conclusions made? Maybe as a result of this website and who Tom is (in my limited knowledge of the man, he seems to be "ok") the normal questions didn't come up or were assumed to be ok. I know from dealing with military after action reports details and memeory can be sketchy after only a few hours...So if relying on 20+ years they can be wrong..Not saying that was done here, but if that is the only means of confiming something then IMO it is shaky from a research prospective.. Also let's face it people make honest mistakes and confirm wrong things..happens all the time..Ask people who witnessed a tramtic event...many views of the same situation..Not sure if that happend here as I obviosuly wasn't around for the conversations..just food for thought..

It is funny to me though how everyone is glossing over the real topic here...After all someone post a car on Ebay and within hours guys here and everywhere pick it apart. People are quick to point out "caution fan" issues, but apparently not wanting to discuss the vaidiaty of someones claim to have a historical car??? Doesn't make much sense to me..IMO the current situation with respect to the "DH" car would be like me saying I own one of Erich Hartmann's BF-109G's "Gustav" (the highest scoring fighter ace in history, 352 confirms)and never having to prove it...Then when someone post what could be credible evidence to the contrary people just minimzing it..It would be a historically significant piece and worth more than another BF109G based on WHO it belonged to..I know Tom is being quoted as saying his car is worth upwards of 200k, BUT that is really probably only IF it is a DH car or has a direct lineage to DH..Another fliptop car more than likely wouldn't be worth that..So as long as Tom's car is called a DH car it will always be worth more, and generate more interest (magazine, trackside, etc).

To me it appears that instead of looking at the info that one person (USA1) on the "dreaded" other website provided..apparently through some significant research..people on BOTH sides are focusing on extra BS..lawsuits, name calling, personal attacks, etc. I don't knwo "USA1" from Adam..based on his profile there it appears he is an attorney, and I would suspect if true well versed in researching a topic. He has posted pics of Huston Platt's (another known drag racer..although certainly not as popular or maybe more importantly marketable as DH) drag car and provided actual documentaion to his points. People seem to be "overlooking" this and trying to make the discussion about other BS topics..Everyone keeps talking about "pics" of the Clary's car before it was restored..where are these pics? Do they exist? IMO "USA1" seems like he makes valid points to why he feels Tom's car ISN'T the DH car it is reported to be. Why haven't his post been directly addressed in a public manner (this is the way they were evidently presented) by Tom? If someone reports a car to be something and there is ANY skuttlebutt to the contrary I would think the owner would want to squash it. After all in this market it can be damning..

I guess being an "outsider" on all three sites (here, there and Rabbitt's) means I have a different prospective. I'm not bound by friendships, loyalty or a sense of "holding my tongue." I have and always will be a student of history, and I'll always appreciate research and finding the truth to a question. I can see the irony IF Tom's car isn't a DH car as afterall this site has made it a focal point to call out questionable cars and makes no bones about doing it... IT is a really good thing that has helped everyone gain knowledge about correctness and made people aware of potential fakes. It would suck though if the "head guy" was guilty of being "overzealous" in his interest to bringing a potential historical car to light and then when confronted with possible photographic contrary evidence didn't address it..Hope that isn't the case as it is a neat car either way..if the car is proven to be another car hope the same "zeal" will go to righting the wrong.

In closing I truly have no stake in any of this..it really won't affect me in any way..whatever the outcome is..I would only hope as being an avid "musclecar" enthuiast the truth comes out. Hope everyone has a safe and prosperous New Year.

G S Carlson

Re: Harrell Website
 

Greg, The question I have is USA1 has made all these statements. WHO is he "BATMAN" I would like to know??? https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

Re: Harrell Website
 

Greg, what type of paperwork do you expect to find with a FC? I think it was already said that there two DH cars in '68 - hence the obvious differences, what's the issue?

Re: Harrell Website
 

I have no idea who he is or his motivations..Frankly "who" he is really shouldn't be an issue...The issue should be if his evidence and research methods are credible and they open the door to other research or another conclusion. Just like it shouldn't matter if Tom Clary is the owner of this site. It isn't a big secret that I don't like and have little use for someone with a red 1970 Chevelle here, but if his research opened up new doors on "pilot" cars for 1970 LS6's (even though I don't own the car any longer) you better bet I'd be interested..whatever his motivation for doing it.

I have no idea of the paperwork availble...sales receipts, paperwork from the design of the molds, anything tying that particular car to DH..no matter how small..Sure it isn't a buildsheet, but if only using an old memeory then again IMO it is shaky research and shakier to lay that conclusive of a claim. Isn't it possible it is another car??? After all I'm sure the cars would have been similar anyway as everyone is trying to get a competive advantage and "stealing" from one another...much like 30 years from today saying a car is a Dale Jr. car vs. another Chevy NASCAR driver.

Re: Harrell Website
 

Marlin..Greg makes valid points. It was said there were two 68's but if there were we need more info.

Re: Harrell Website
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea who he is or his motivations..Frankly "who" he is really shouldn't be an issue...The issue should be if his evidence and research methods are credible and they open the door to other research or another conclusion. Just like it shouldn't matter if Tom Clary is the owner of this site. It isn't a big secret that I don't like and have little use for someone with a red 1970 Chevelle here, but if his research opened up new doors on "pilot" cars for 1970 LS6's (even though I don't own the car any longer) you better bet I'd be interested..whatever his motivation for doing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, this post went over my head - I was just asking what paperwork is expected with a FC purchase. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/dunno.gif

Re: Harrell Website
 

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no idea who he is or his motivations..Frankly "who" he is really shouldn't be an issue...

I totally disagree, based on this persons motivation/stake, he could be biasing/manipulating his evidence to suit his desired outcome. Cars are hard enough to document, but Funnycars by their nature morph into many configuration... especially after 35 years of abuse. In addition they must be reconfigured to meet the latest safety regs.

Re: Harrell Website
 

Troy, Where did you came up with this info???

Re: Harrell Website
 

Steve,

I agree race cars change over the years..this is why sound research is even MORE important..

So using your logic..should we then look at Tom Clary's motiviations?? If you are questioning and holding this "USA1" to a standard then why not Tom? After all Tom has publicily said it was a DH car, had business cards made up saying it, promoted not only this website with it, but I would bet other business ventures. Made money in some fashion off it being a DH car..This car has been one of the catalyst for Tom's notoriety, he has gotten press coverage (magazine and otherwise)as a result and let's be honest..If it isn't the DH car Tom has the proverbial "egg on his face." Not the place to be...especailly given his zeal in promoting it. I agree that looking at "Why" someone reveals any info is always in the back of "your" mind, BUT it can't squash if there are credible research based questions.

Again not bashing Tom, but like in a football game "you" can't play only one half and win a game

G S Carlson

Re: Harrell Website
 

Kim, what are you talking about? Call me, check your emails for my number...........RatPack.................

Re: Harrell Website
 

Hey Hotair I speak for myself and have no marching orders,unlike you. If you would take the time to look at the facts you would see the truth. I have met some good people on this site,but if this is the way things are here count me out. I think Tom needs to speak for himself and tell the facts about the car. Ed

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...elairSucks.gif

Re: Harrell Website
 

This topic is unreal and makes me sick! Race cars were wrecked. frames and bodies repaired and replaced. Race cars change hands often and are stripped of parts and parts changed. Previous owners memories are foggy at best usually. Next to impossible to prove or not prove this and that! What a waste of bandwidth! I am done with this thread! Roger

Re: Harrell Website
 

I first learned about my car from a friend who sells classic cars. He gave me the guys name and number, which I used to inquire about the car. At the time, the owner told me he had 3 vintage funnycars, one a 1967 Dick Harrell flip top car. Even though he told me the DH car was not for sale, I asked if I could see it, which I later did. Not only did the guy have in his shop 3 vintage funnycars, but more racing and hi-performance parts then I have ever seen in once place. Everything from wheels, blowers, injection setups, 348 & 409 engines, the list goes on and on.

While there we discussed at length the DH car. The car was in poor shape, the body in primer, no glass, portions of sheet metal missing, , the chassis in not much better shape, with a brackets for a radiator, hand brake, forward mounted engine brace, etc. The body had been stripped using a chemical stripper and a putty knife, at times going past the gel coat. He did tell me that in the removal of the paint is when they first saw signs of the car possibly being a DH car. Also, he had spoken with Don Hardy, who built chassis’ for Dick. Unfortunately he was not the type of person who was into taking pictures (documentation). While there he tried to sell me another early Camaro funnycar he had, but I told him I was only interested in the DH car, that if it ever came up for sale, I would be interested.

Fast forward a few months, I get a call from the guy, in desperate need of cash. He quotes me a price, and only gives me a couple of hours to make a decision. That afternoon we make the deal.
After getting the car back to my shop, and not having a clue about vintage funnycars, I begin searching the internet for information and pictures of DH and other vintage FCs. As we all do, I began buying any era magazine I could that had a pic of a DH FC in it. I too contacted Don Hardy. In addition, I purchased several individual pics off of Ebay and other sites. But it seemed, the more I learned, the more confused I became. The question kept coming up, how many 67/68/69 FCs did DH have? Fortunately two things happened that helped clear up a few things. I got to visit with Jim Kirby about his car and where it fit in, and the biggest break, I ran across Dave Libby. Once I began conversing with Dave, I felt I knew enough to begin the restoration process, but still by no means an expert on vintage FCs. Mo and I simply went by what we could see in the various pics, what was the simplest (sheet metal, etc) and what Dave was telling me. More then once I told Dave that once finished, I hoped he was not disappointed, that I would be satisfied if the car was 50-60 correct (due to the shape the car was in when I got it and my limited knowledge of FCs. Also, the guy who I bought it from said he bought it at a flea market somewhere around the Chicago area. Well, shortly after I bought the car, I talked with Bob Gibson (who lives in Springfield, IL, and is considered by most to be a vintage funny car guru) who told Mo and I that he had heard of an early Dick Harrell car being for sale in his area (this is the same Bob Gibson who discovered the “alleged” ‘69 DH funny car). In fact, the first show we attended (Hot Rod Reunion in Bowling Green) the car was parked in the American Racing Wheels booth, in which Bob Gibson was in charge.

The car was shown at the Hot Rod Reunion, then York, and then the biggee, the 2nd Annual FC Reunion at Etown, where Dave, Valerie and Pulde first saw the car. It was a special weekend, with many photos taken. The best part was listening to Dave as he walked around the car. A lot of things he complimented us on, others, such as the stance, no front sheet metal and the lack of nitro, he told me he would suggest changing. He told me he was well satisfied, that I had done well, with the car about 80% correct. IMO, the key moment took place while Dave, me, Mo and Marlin Spotts were having lunch and looking at pictures, not too far from my car. Dave asked if there had ever been any repair work done to one of the front fenders, which I replied I did not think so. Mo disagreed, went up and checked, and low and behold, repair work right where Dave said it would be. Seems Charlie Therwanger had a slight accident with the car. Since that time, Dave has appeared in several magazines standing by the car, and in a couple, answering questions about the car and its history.

While at Etown, Dave and I discussed something else, were there at least 2 ’68 cars, not counting the Kirby car. I felt there were at least two ‘68s, and 1 ’69, Dave said 1 ’68 and 2 ‘69s (more on the ’69 later). My theory is this. Judging by the photos, magazine articles, the video of the door car I have, I feel there were two early cars. The first one, most likely a ’67 Camaro, built in late ’67, one of the first one piece Camaro bodies ever produced, and needless to say, somewhat crude. And not out of the same mold as the second car nor the Kirby car. Then in the spring of ’68 the second car, the door car with the vanes on the rear deck. An interesting side note is a portion of “Agent 1320 Reports” article in SS&DI magazine. “..the poor funny car guys, the ones who took delivery on their ’67 body shells six weeks before the ’68 announcements”. Also of note, a side note in the September issue of SS&DI, where it says “The tricolor burgundy on the new Camaro was sprayed by Corky Larson of Phoenix, AZ, Harrell’s original hometown. The car took eight weeks and $12,000.00 to complete, and has run 7:80s at almost 190 mph against all kinds of tough competition. Since Dick has another similar car, he has appointed his top wrench, Charles Therwanger, to drive the new car”. Remember, back in the day, information contained in magazines was a lot more current then today. It is well documented the Red/Black car was running in early ’68. If the R/B car was simply redone, would it have cost $12,000 in 1968, and would Dick, who we know was over booked in ’68, taken the car off of the race circuit to completely redo the car?

To continue on with what Dave and I disagree with, he has gone on record saying there was one ’68 car, 2 ’69 cars, with the back-up car’s chassis used for the ’70 car. I say there were two ‘68’s, the R/B and the Burg, with the chassis from the Burg. car going under the ’70 and the body being attached to another chassis, which Steve Bimbi has a pic of from 1969. In 1968, Dick was only racing a funny car, in 1969 he was racing both a funny car and the ZL-1, thus seems he would have more need for 2 FCs in ’68 then in ’69. And I want to make it clear that I have nothing but the up most respect for Dave Libby. Even though I may disagree with him on some things from the past, he was there, I was not, so I will tip my hat to him for everything he has done for our hobby. Having the opportunity to spend time with Dave, visiting about my car has been a blast.

Now, can I say that I am 100% sure DH had 2 ‘67/68 car fliptop cars, and one of them is mine? No. Do I still believe that? Yes. But, as I have done for the past several years, I will continue to do research on my car. And to guarantee that no one gets “taken”, the car is not for sale (not that any one would want to own it). For now, it will simply remain another item in my personal collection of supercar memorabilia.

And now I see why Bill Porterfield removed the name Dick Harrell from ZL-1 #1. Some days it just is not worth it.

A few emails...

[ QUOTE ]

From: Ken Boje
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 5:00 PM
Subject: Funny Car

Rob,

Sounds like you have your hands full of a bundle of joy!

Could you pass this on to your dad. I was fortunate to talk to Dave Libby this week, he told me he is sure the funny car your dad has is Dick's red/original funny. I don't know how much he told your dad so far, but it seems the burgandy car was a leased car, being rebodied by Jim Kirby the owner with a 70 body for the 70 season, and he still owns it. Also, said Dick was killed in the 71 "mini" camaro, as I posted on the site. Does anyone have a compendium list of magazine articles compiled about Dick? I am trying to buy whatever article related to him I can fin, regarding his work with the different dealers.

Ken Boje


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: (no subject)
Dear Tom,
Glad to hear all is well with you. I'm sure you are eager to get the car finished. If you would, please send me a few pictures of the car. I would be honored to sign the car and I too am looking forward to it's completion. I also would like to authenticate your car with a Dick Harrell Licensing Agreement signed by you and me, that is if you plan on having Dad's name on the car. Moreover, since it was you who guided me in the right direction in getting his name licensed & trademarked and I am especially grateful that you helped me financially get the trademark started, I am only asking for $1.00 for a signed licensing agreement. I hope you will not be offended. I am honored by all that you have done to help keep Dad's name alive. Dale and I will not be at the Hod Rod Reunion, however, we do plan on being at the Funny Car Reunion in Englishtown the weekend of July 25, 26, & 27th. How about you? Again, it is always so good to hear from you. Hope your family is doing well and everyone has their health.
Warm wishes,
Valerie

Valerie Harrell
Dale Pulde
H.P. Racing, Inc.
Sylmar, CA


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:22 AM
Subject: Fwd: (no subject)

Rob,
Just checking email before going to work. Thank you for getting back with me right a way. I hope to see you both again on of these days. Issues are still unresolved as far as the divorce goes, however, our home did finally sell and I paid all money from that to my attorney. Oh, and by the way, please tell your father that the DH Licensing Agreement fee ($1.00) is already paid in advance.
Thanks.
Warmly,
Valerie

Valerie Harrell
Dale Pulde
H.P. Racing, Inc.
Sylmar, CA


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2003 10:00 AM
Subject: Fwd: Final proofs

Tom,
After Englishtown....... it would really nice to create a 1968 shirt for your car. Let me know. Here is what Dale helped me put together. I need to get Helen's approval, as well as Nickey.... your input please on this. I need contact info for these people too, if you have them to seek permission. As always, Val

PS: I have been meaning to tell you that I I just haven't had time to follow up on that licensing agreement for you. Just so you can have it for your records and to let others know that you have my full approval for what you have done with the car. Warmly, Val

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Harrell Website
 

Troy, I would like to know where you got the info on my car being worked on by Dick Harrell at the Bristol. Are you sure it was mine or Harry K's car??

Re: Harrell Website
 

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...iggthumpup.gif

Re: Harrell Website
 

Now that everyone else is telling all, I guess it is time I come clean.

<font color="red"> Chapter two. The 1969 car.

I have known about that car for several years, actually getting to see it while being stored in a shed in KC. In rough shape would be an understatement. I have also have spent considerable time visiting with the guy who first “discovered” the car, which happend to be the same guy, Bob Gibson, who knew of my funny car. As happened with my car, as he was stripping the car with a cheap hardware store chemical stripper, he discovered remnants of a prior paint job and lettering, which led him to believe it might have been one of Dick’s. But because he saw no historical significance in the history of the car, he finished stripping the car, painted it (I believe Blue) and went on about his business, finally selling the car to a racer in Las Vegas. Once again, as with my car, he felt no need to photograph what he saw. I have no reason to doubt what he told me, just think it is ironic the parallels between my car and the ’69.
In the past, there was quite a discussion on here about the ’69 car, and did Valerie have what she said she did, with a lot of the critics coming from the same folks who now say the ’69 is legit and mine is not. When you can some quite a bit of time, check out this thread.
https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/show...0/fpart/1/vc/1

The good thing, the ’69 car would be easily to indentify, as the gentleman who worked for Dick in late ’68 through ‘69, who transported the car 1000s of miles as well as worked on it, is alive and well, living it New Mexico. That is Mr. Glenn Powell, who incidentally, was one of the sYc’s guests at SCR8. He has told me on more then one occasion he would be glad to look at the car and give his opinion.







Chapter three. The legal issues

First, in regards to the rights to the DH mark. If I had wanted control of the mark, I could have done so very easily. You see, when we first met, sometime in late 1999 or early 2000, I am the one who advised Valerie that she needed to register the mark, and GAVE her the money to do so, with no strings attached. I did this because I had learned the hard way about registered trademarks with the Yenko mark. Even though I had received written permission from the Yenko family to use the Yenko name, they could not give me permission to use the Yenko name in commerce, as a guy in Texas held those rights. Unfortunately I was unaware that there was a DHPC still operating in New Mexico, owned by Dick’s sister Betty Hall and her husband Charles. Betty is in poor health and Charles passed away not too long ago. The business is now being ran by their son Rick. Rick and Valerie have been engaged in a long running dispute, over several issues, including his rights to use the DHPC name in conjunction with his business, Their disagreement has entered the legal system, where, unless a compromise can be reached out of court, a Federal judge will decide things. My involvement in the case, as with other sYc members, has been as a friend to Rick. Unless I am called as a witness, I am not an actual part of the suit. It is because of our friendship with Rick, and the other legal action you are about to read about, that several sYc members, and their cars, have been bashed on the DH site.



Chapter 4, the Gibb trademark.

To me this is the most important issue, at least to our hobby that needs to be brought out into the open. A while back, it was reported on this site that Valerie Harrell had applied for the trademark rights to ALL things related to Fred Gibb Chevrolet. If approved, Valerie would have complete control over whom, and how the Gibb mark could be used. Anyone wanting to use the Gibb mark would need Valerie’s permission, including Helen Gibb, the city of LaHarpe, the sYc, etc. As soon as this was posted, I was swamped with calls, emails and PMs from folks wanting to know what could be done to prevent this. I assured everyone I would do some checking, which I did. At this past Vettefest, Helen and I had a nice visit about this. Helen, realizing just how damaging this could be to the Gibb name (look at what Valerie and friends have done to the DH mark), asked if the sYc would help her retain the rights to the Gibb mark, one she had been using for over 40 years. After checking with a few friends, we agreed to support Helen, as we felt it was the right thing to do. So “yes”, the sYc is directly involved in a legal issue, but over the Gibb mark, not the Dick Harrell mark.
</font>

Re: Harrell Website
 

First off let me congratulate both sides for being able to type so fast------Unfortunately SYC had to make a public comment because of all the cage rattling and he said she said inuendos-------Just remember, This argument has rolled out into the street where all eyes are upon you so it's very easy to see thru private agendas if one keeps going up the same avenue on hot air alone----Alot of what's in the SYC statement was revealed by SYC when the car was first shown on the SYC site----IMO SYC has honestly represented the car with the information presented to them---

Re: Harrell Website
 

Joe...you are right on. The agenda is not the car either....Ed...thanks for sharing your last self-serving useless comment on this board...

Re: Harrell Website
 

Tom,

Thank you for the reply..It makes for really good reading, and goes to showing your thought process. Please understand that my previous post and this one are simply as a researcher...nothing more nothing less..one who has had unique cars that were diffulct to document. So I certainly can appreciate the "leap of faith" you must have taken to secure such a neat car as the FC.

Repectfully though I must ask a few questions and make a few observations...

It doesn't appear from reading your post that there was really any concrete documentation saying that particular car was a DH car. It seems reading your post that the former owner said it was and you bought it based on that and then tried to research it back to DH. You even mention only being interested in the DH car.

2) It seems to me at least IMO that really the fact the car was a DH car was sort of taken for granted and maybe I'm reading into too much, but that you more or less worked to prove that the car was a DH car..vs. trying to prove or verify really WHAT it was. Another words if I go into something with a predispositon as a researcher more than likely that will be the outcome..even if evidence surfaces that might lead me in other directions.

3) While in your post you mentioned you aren't sure the car is a DH car or even that he had 2..it seems to me that both are only specualtions and as yet 100% unproven...yet you have been marketing the car as THE 1968 DH FC...which is a definitive statement without interpetation..How does this seem like the right thing to do as with something of such a historical nature? IMO it would make more sense to make a "Generic" notasolgia car and market it as such until the true identity could be learned. Isn't it possbile that the car is another , maybe equally interesting and historically valuable car..just not one with the instant marketing and recognition as DH?

4) I guess I'm alittle confused as reading your post and eagerly awaiting your response I expected a point by point rebuttal to the pics on the other website..not just a recap of the "how and why" you bought the car..I guess I'm looking for "more" when someone goes out on a limb as you have and say "this is THE car.." especially with the marketing that you have done with it. To many this is THE car because you say it is, and I guess for one I'm alittle disappointed knowing that there is are doubts.

5) You mention Bob Gibson and talk about his being the guru, yet IMO it seems like you are questioning his knowledge as he found what he feels is a 1969 F/C but the impression I get from your words are you feel it isn't real..I'm not sure how whether you want the reader to believe he knew your car was a DH car because he heard one was for sale or not..maybe I'm confused.

6) I guess for me you mention a big break came from this Dave Libby and he more or less initally verified your car as a DH car...yet now I guess he doesn't or at least has doubts? You two disagree over whether there are 1 or 2 cars, yet he was there and you by your own admission weren't... Wouldn't he be the best source for this?

Tom please don't take offense to my observations as they aren't meant to be critical of you the person. I personally would have approached this car completely different then you did as far as research goes that is all.

I guess in closing isn't it entirely possible that you have another car, and not DH's car from 1968? IMHO the right thing to do..I'm sure I'll catch hell for this..is to post a retraction and stop the marketing of the car until more is known, beginning the research process again. IMO Tom didn't try to deceive only that he went into it with a preconceived answer...

Respectfully,

G S Carlson

Re: Harrell Website
 

[ QUOTE ]
4) I guess I'm alittle confused as reading your post and eagerly awaiting your response I expected a point by point rebuttal to the pics on the other website..not just a recap of the "how and why" you bought the car..I guess I'm looking for "more" when someone goes out on a limb as you have and say "this is THE car.." especially with the marketing that you have done with it. To many this is THE car because you say it is, and I guess for one I'm alittle disappointed knowing that there is are doubts.


[/ QUOTE ]

You have to be a member of that group to view pics. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...thumbsdown.gif

Re: Harrell Website
 

I guess that would be hard to do at the moment..lol However I'm sure given cooler heads people would allow Tom and others to be members if it cleard this up..can't swear to it as I'm certainly not in the "in" over there or anywhere else but who knows...Hell I bet someone can/would forward the pics..I wouldn't let not being a member stand in my way if I were Tom or use that as a basis for an excuse....I'd want to find out more info on my car if I was Tom. He has a really neat old race car, one whose potential history there are credible questions about right now, but extremely cool nevertheless...I'd love to own it..love those '68's...

Re: Harrell Website
 

Kim, here you go, these were removed from that video we talked about earlier. Shows Dick working on that car. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/grin.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/grin.gif.......Call me I am at home and we can finish our converstation..........RatPack...........

PS call on the home phone, cell phone died...........

Re: Harrell Website
 

Kim, here is another picture showing the car without Dick standing there...........Notice there is no lettering on the front fender other than the Carter fuel pump decal.. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/grin.gif.........RatPack.................


Tom, you made some good statements but I feel you need to post some pictures showing the car as you found it to put this topic to rest............RatPack....................

Re: Harrell Website
 

I think it is obvious there is a major difference of opinion, and agendas between sites, so rather then propogate the hatred between the two sites, I have instructed our moderators to delete all messages referencing the other sites or their owners.

Also, now that everyone has had a chance to voice their opinions on this subject, I am locking the thread.

Time to take this off line and move on to more enjoyable topics.