Csx3272

[eelarom]

Does anyone out there know the history or whereabouts of CSX 3272?

[mrmustang]

Originally Posted by eelarom

Does anyone out there know the history or whereabouts of CSX 3272?

Here you go:

CSX 3272 - which one is the original?

I'll cut to the chase for you though:

[quote author=Cobra Ned link=topic=18582.msg150523#msg150523 date=1340542331]
The car in the US was constructed with the title of 3272 but used a new Angliss chassis/ body composite. It alone has the legal chain of title for CSX 3272, even though it is not the original vehicle from the 1960s. The damaged chassis and body of 3272 was used in the construction of another car, but a car that did not have a identity until this car appeared and claimed a VIN that was actually someone else's. It was sold to Europe and existed there until the legal title for the VIN it was using was granted in the northeastern US, at which point the dealer who had the car did the right thing and removed the improper VIN. The car was then sold as a legitimate Cobra, but absent a VIN. A buyer was told that (a) the former VIN could not be proven, and (b) the former VIN could not be claimed by that car again. Apparently, however, the smell of cash has again warped people's perceptions if the car in Europe is attempting to call itself 3272. It has no claim to that number.
[/quote]


Bill S.

[SunDude]

The real one is in the U.S. and the replica is in the U.K. (reg. plate 222 UBX).

[eelarom]

I know where the UK car is, and am trying to track down the US car.

[mrmustang]

Originally Posted by eelarom

I know where the UK car is, and am trying to track down the US car.

Since you are asking for personal information, and SAAC knows the history and locations of both, what are your intentions ?



Bill S.

[OnyxRider]

Originally Posted by SunDude

The real one is in the U.S. and the replica is in the U.K. (reg. plate 222 UBX).

Where is REAL_1 when you need him. The title is real according to the story.

[eelarom]

No sinister intentions! I'm based in the UK and have been talking to John Stokes about his vehicle and it's history. Given that 222 UBX is very visible here in the UK, I wondered whether the US car was equally high profile.

[SunDude]

I don't think the original CSX3272 is "high profile" in the way the U.K. replica is. IIRC, the real 3272 suffered a shunt this summer.

[eelarom]

Having just joined the blog, I've no idea what the etiquette of the site is, and whether I can be put in contact with the owner, or visa versa. Can someone please let me know.

Thanks

[DMXF]

Originally Posted by OnyxRider

The title is real according to the story.

OnyxRider, you have a good handle on things. The US car in the purest sense is not the original car, the UK car really is. The US car, however, just has the legal right to use the VIN.

[mrmustang]

Originally Posted by eelarom

Having just joined the blog, I've no idea what the etiquette of the site is, and whether I can be put in contact with the owner, or visa versa. Can someone please let me know.

Thanks

You may PM me your contact information and I shall forward it on, but I cannot guarantee the current owner here in the states will respond to you given you location and your previously mentioned review of the known "copy of said vehicle"


Bill S.

[Nedsel]

Originally Posted by DMXF

OnyxRider, you have a good handle on things. The US car in the purest sense is not the original car, the UK car really is. The US car, however, just has the legal right to use the VIN.

This is the purest form of taking a bit of information and expanding on it inappropriately. DMXF, no one can prove conclusively that the car in the UK was in fact based on 3272, as the car's VIN was obliterated. It is hearsay and speculation that the car in the UK is the rebuilt 3272, and that evidence is shaky and unconfirmed. This is neither the place nor the time to make broad pronouncements that are unsupported by proof. The car in the UK MAY very well be 3272, we will likely never be able to confirm that.

[Racer_X]

I have a right side front clip intact that could really be used to repair 3272's damage.

[DMXF]

I understand your argument Ned and I should have tempered my post a bit. It would be difficult to prove without a doubt that the UK car is really 3272, although there is a notable amount of evidence, including many attributes of the car. At the same time, I think people who call the US car the "original" just because of hokey "continuous history" are stretching things a bit too, by scientific standards.

[Nedsel]

Originally Posted by DMXF

I think people who call the US car the "original" just because of hokey "continuous history" are stretching things a bit too, by scientific standards.

Fully agreed!!

[OnyxRider]

Originally Posted by Nedsel

This is the purest form of taking a bit of information and expanding on it inappropriately. DMXF, no one can prove conclusively that the car in the UK was in fact based on 3272, as the car's VIN was obliterated. It is hearsay and speculation that the car in the UK is the rebuilt 3272, and that evidence is shaky and unconfirmed. This is neither the place nor the time to make broad pronouncements that are unsupported by proof. The car in the UK MAY very well be 3272, we will likely never be able to confirm that.

Read post #2 in thread. Mr. Mustang posted a quote of yours.

[mrmustang]

Originally Posted by OnyxRider

Read post #2 in thread. Mr. Mustang posted a quote of yours.

He did