:lol: :lol:

Fixed it for you ;)

No disrespect........
Didnt the corrections already happen?

Mile high review:
CSX2049 was wrecked in the 60's, the car was pulled apart and the 1/2 of frame used to reconstruct the current car now in the UK after it was passed along for no doubt $$ only as it was loosy goosy in those days. It does not have the CSX2049 title thus a reconstruction however gorgeous car.

The car in CA was passed through the court system (Lawyers) awarding title on paper to the current owner. The frame once thought a Cobra frame was a 427 frame in the courts and an AC Ace frame in later depictions thought to be of historical value and legend.

CSX2049 is no longer, its taken into the wind by fate and only exists in pictures and stories alone.

That sum it up? Phew!

So much easier to live with a tribute, replica, reincarnation, reconstruction, kit car, custom ....... :)

Yes. I think so. And the wagons have circled probably at least three times. No new information. But he did say in one of the first replies that he had remnants of a frame and was looking for someone to help build an air car. It feels like this is all about trying to dredge up something that will add legitimacy to that above the others that already exist (My air car is better than yours.) For the experts, this seems like baiting and expect to get subpoenaed for a deposition or court appearance. Personally, I'd stay away from adding any more info to this.

I'll add that the latest round of "Shelby must have notified my mom of the lien on the car because my dad owned it and the records were lost in a move". Of course, the alternate, and most likely event, is Shelby notified the owner [from the best info available at the time]. And the mom wasn't it.

Cunningham
 

Not so, there is a serious problem with the chain of title, I am awaiting the receipt of the court documents so that I can speak to fact, not hope, I have said all along that I believe that Ann Abidin story is fabricated, yes people have shown paperwork but there are great forgers out there and when you are dealing in multimillion dollar automobiles it has all been tried before, IMO, the story is not over.

Paperwork shown by Ned is "vintage", long before todays modern technology was even on the drawing board to be invented and mass produced. In addition, 2049 in "concours" condition, would not be a "multimillion dollar automobile", on this you have been mislead by "Mr C". You paid him for a story, and since you have yet to post a copy of his report, a story is all you have. Given his reputation for twisting history to suit his own narrative, anything he gave you is suspect from the onset.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving

Bill S.

Yes it is. It's not yours. Never was.

That horse left the barn.

The water is under the bridge.

Good luck though. The only ones that are going to make out in your assertion are the lawyers.

if you compare the CompClassics pictures of the chassis in #5 and Nedsels pictures of the wrecked car in #38, there is no doubt that the chassis is from 2049, the rocker panel cover of the drivers side has exactly the marks of the accident, Connie Moore found that chassis in a Long Beach wrecking yard around 1970, these chassis remains are consistently trackable to David Harts car. I just read the whole story in the new book from Robert D. Walker which dedicates 2049 an eleven pages story.

Michael,

Even if you get all of the court papers, the only thing that might be accomplished from that is you could point out that pictures of parts don't match up with CSX2049. And that the car in California is essentially a replica being attached to a title.

I don't think there will be anything in the court papers that could support your conspiracy theory of forged paperwork. And the only evidence of forged paperwork seems to be something that you imagined in your head as a theoretical explanation for what you think in happened back in 1963.

Like I said earlier, it is possible that your father owned the car in August before the crash and Shelby sent the car to the junkyard and the Abidin family purchased the wreck from the junkyard. That sound like a much more plausible theoretical possibility than forged paperwork.

Another possibility is that the Abidin family always owned the car and your father just drove it. Does it matter if you never saw Ann Abidin at the race track in the pits, etc.?

It seems to me that you want to prove that your father owned the car as a first priority (and as a secondary priority you would like to point out that the California car is merely a replica being attached to a title).

If you want to address the first priority it seems that looking at the court papers will get you absolutely nothing. If you want to address the first priority, I think your only possible chance at this point is to see if there is any living Shebly employee that remembers anything about the wreck of CSX2049 sitting around the shop for 4 or more months. I suggested that before. So why not pursue that instead of the court papers? I have got an idea. Here's a lead for you: https://bre2.net/ There's a phone number. Maybe if you are nice when you call, they will let you talk to Pete Brock. Maybe Pete remembers the wreck. Maybe he doesn't, but he knows another former employee who might remember something. Perhaps someone will remember having to constantly try to contact the Cunningham family to pick up the wreck? Or maybe someone will remember having to constantly try to contact the Abidin family to pick up the wreck? Or maybe nobody alive remembers anything.

Deleted

I don't think "merging the two" would accomplish much, given that the bulk of the original car is long gone. Having the original VIN-stamping (assuming it still exists) on the reconstructed car would likely be of minimal value to an owner, given that 99% of the rest of the car is new. And it goes without saying that even if the two were combined, it would have no effect whatsoever on the supposed Paul Cunningham ownership claim.

Deleted

It was said the original frame was bent in the accident, and what was acquired by Connie Moore was roughly the front 60 - 70% of the chassis. I know from photos of the car in the Netherlands that it uses a rack and pinion steering setup. Hence major frame replacement is a given. There appears to be a superfluous bracket from the original worm and sector system welded to the left front of the chassis, and since this is the piece that would have the original VIN on it, its existence here is not that surprising. I believe the Bauerle organization in Addison, IL supplied the chassis, and possibly they could recall how much of the original they mated to the chassis they built.

Deleted

(2009 is actually reconverted to w+s)

What Connie Moore acquired was actually less than what is shown in post #5. What he had in the back of his pickup at SAAC-4 was a lot less, with the rear of the chassis missing.

As for the frame inspection, who knows. In any event, it has no effect on the link between 2049 and Paul Cunningham.

Deleted

The chassis remains of 2049 that I saw at SAAC-4 in Downingtown, PA in the back of Connie Moore's pickup truck were nowhere near as complete as those in your post #5.

Maybe the pictures in post number #5 are pictures taken earlier than the SAAC 4 timeframe? Like before the frame was cut up into the smaller fragment seen at SAAC 4?

If the pictures from post #5 are from a later time than SAAC 4 then perhaps more pieces of the frame were found after SAAC 4 and reassembled for a later picture (which seems unlikely).

Or (Micheal might be inclined to go with this possibility) there is a forgery wrecked 2049 frame and a real wrecked 2049 frame. After all it would be simple to get some old folk in merry old England (who coincidentally have a 1960s typewriter) to build a nice replica of 2049 that you could wreck on a racetrack and then remove all the other bits to get a fragment of a wrecked frame . When big money is at stake, someone could make a wrecked frame forgery.

Or is it just much more likely that the pictures from post #5 were taken at a timeframe earlier than SAAC 4?

The pictures from #5 are from the Connie Moore collection. Isn’t it evident that they show the frame when he discovered it at the junkyard? Why should he have cutted away parts of the frame before showing it at SAAC4? Or why should he have added some random parts after SAAC4 for some crappy pictures?