If the calculation is correct, engine 41141

Dear 7th Royale Group:
I spoke at length yesterday with a well-known US collector and racer whose name would be known to many of you as he owned several significant Bugattis in the past. He was associated with Harrah's after the Holiday Inn's acquisition of the Harrah Casino and Auto Collection and was asked by Holiday Inn to make a complete accounting of the collection and all associated spare parts which filled two massive warehouses. It took him and six other guys nine months to catalog everything. The cars and parts were all inventoried and listed in 22 huge binders...copies of which he made for himself and retains to this day. I asked him if there was any record of a spare T41 chassis frame and he said no. He also said that Harrah would not have bought such an item, if it existed, as he already had two complete examples and would not have had an interest in "building up" a third, particularly when one considers how incomplete this alleged 7th example would have been at the time.
Again...I am not saying the story is "impossible"...but this part of the fable does not checkout...
Cheers,
Sandy

There are at least two respected historians who believe, truly believe, the prototype chassis survived and is soon to be the 7th Royale. The Registrar of the ABC (and protégé of Andy Rheault don't forget) posted the above on Friday and certainly to my inexpert eye it would seem to all but blow this chassis' reputed provenance clear out of the water ; yet so far not a single word from any of the men who have staked their hard-earned reputations on this car being genuine. Most odd.

On a not entirely unrelated matter : Shortly after completion Tom Wheatcroft put his Royale replica through auction and if memory serves correct it did not break the 1 million mark. A genuine Royale is worth more I believe.

Kind Regards
Johan Buchner

you may note that this respected gent made a list of Bill Hurrah's stuff AFTER the aquisition by Holiday Inn.It is not impossible that Bill sold this chassis BEFORE his death.I have been invited to see the chassis,but as i have said before,Royales are not my cup of tea.I really could not care less.I considered the fact that they invited me to see this chassis significant in itself.[ not wishing to seem to have an inflated opinion of my expertise ] If it was their intention to show me a replica chassis they were taking a risk.

Yes Jean, showing you a replica would have been very risky indeed. Mind you, is announcing to the world (Inviting at least two renowned historians to view the chassis is announcing it to the world) you have dicovered the 7th Royale and then to not offer a shred of proof any less risky?

Perhaps time for a little perspective : The guy paying the bills is free to believe he is the rightful owner of chassis 41100 just as we are free to believe he, in actual fact, does not. The only circumstance where opinions count for nought and verifiable proof is everything is when the For Sale signs come out, only an auction can separate the wheat from the chaff to a legal certainty.

Johan Buchner

Cant be bothered to get involved.

Perhaps you can be bothered to answer a simple question : Do you still believe?

Speaking from experience, my feelings have not changed in the slightest.
Its just not my business to discuss any further.

Thank you for your answer Greg, much appreciated. My faith in your integrity remain rock-solid Sir, I just fear the harm to your reputation in the event you may be wrong.

Let us hope that I am the mistaken one.

Johan

"I just fear the harm to your reputation in the event you may be wrong." is patronising Greg and I apologise - what I meant to say is I fear you may lose faith in yourself and all you have achieved should you discover you've made a terrible mistake and find yourself too far along to simply own up to the mistake.

It was your article on the elephant mascot which really made me sit up and take notice Greg, it was no stretch to put your theory about the prototype's exact length to the test either - result? I think you've proved they were all the same length. I care for you, seeing you diminished would hurt me.

Take Care
Johan

Hi Johan
Its not about my reputation. Its just none of my business. If the owner has no wish to speak about it then who am I to do so?
I was surprised to hear that a multi millionare kleptomaniac with a 1500 odd car collection would have not been interested in owning what is probably the ultimate prewar classic car because he had two of them already slightly curious though.

Today I spoke with an old Bugatti club member, who had more information about the prototype royale chassis.
He told me, that the bare chassis was in france approx 1975, owner Mr. Michel Menarge, owner of a hotel/ restaurant in the congac.
He was also owner of a T40.
I tried to find out where he is living today, but no results.

I hope that my information could trace the 7th Royale, the original chassis exists.

I believe that the chassis in question was still in the USA at this time.

Jean B wrote : "I hope that my information could trace the 7th Royale, the original chassis exists."

The original chassis may very well still exist (probably in the Schlumpf Collection wearing the Coupe Napoleon body and chassis number 41100 but I digress) but this is what we are currently debating : Is this Royale being resurrected on the genuine prototype chassis frame.

Is there a way to start a poll on this forum? I would like to know how many contributors think this chassis is :
a) Genuine.
b) Not Genuine.
Speaking purely for myself I choose option c) : I'm not convinced yet.

Kind Regards
Johan Buchner

From the article from 1960 by Gene Cesari, the frame must have been there. In 1960 Bugattis were worth only slightly more than scrap value (even Royale's!), so there was no need to invent stories at that time.

I since contacted Gene, and he confirmed that Jean de Dobbeleer was after the (original) Royale chassis.

Chances are it was scrapped anyway, but the owner probably convinced himself that the frame was a bit special, so that is not very probable.

Conclusion: The frame was there in 1960; it is not destroyed, so it must still be around. Anybody claiming this chassis therefore may well be right, though not necessarily so (the original chassis may be somewhere else still!).

Logically: without photographic or other evidence, we (amateur historians) can not be sure!

_________________
www.BugattiPage.com
www.BugattiRevue.com
www.BugattiAircraft.com