Conway has this to say about 51144 :

Engine number 33 ; delivered to Marcel Lehoux, Algeria either Oct. 1933 (Grand Prix - 2004) or Jun. 1933 (Magnum)

Herewith the entire Wiki entry, with photograph. Neither of the Conway tomes list this car as a survivor. I have heard that even the Great Conway made the occasional mistake. Say it isn't so.




Engine n° : 33, now replica
Year : 1933

Licence plate: ESC 56 H (D)

Owner : Dino Bertazzoni

Former owners: Lehoux, Algeria. Col. Giles. A.A. Garthwaite, Conshohocken, Penn. USA.

Type 51 Grand Prix Route


Meetings:

- Festival Bugatti, Molsheim 2003,

- #49 Festival Bugatti, Molsheim 2004,

- #49 Festival Bugatti, Molsheim 2005,

- #49 Festival Bugatti, Molsheim 2006,

- #49 Festival Bugatti, Molsheim 2007,

Retrieved from "http://www.bugattibuilder.com/wiki/index.php?title=51144"

Who would like to go first?

Regards
Johan

In fact there are two entries for this chassis number 17th october 1933 and 15th june 1933.
This car was probably a works car because it was in fact "revised" in june 1933, that probably means, preparing a works car for a customer.
In the 80's this car was untraced.
I heard that the car was broken up. I know where is the original rear axle of that car.

I can't say nothing about the car claiming that chassis number.

Who has more information ?

Without obligation:

Lehoux sold the car to compatriot Jean Bénéjean.
27.5.1934, GP de Picardie, # 14, heavy crash, lost leg and stopped racing

Everyone makes mistakes, even the Great Hugh Conway sr, but this time he did not. This car is a replica which has received the chassis plate BC 087 issued by the BOC. It does have the numbers 33 and 51144 on the engine. A proper inspection of the car and the engine by an expert is mandatory to validate these numbers and to verify whether this is the original engine of 51144

Issued with chassis plate on 17th October, 1995.

Should correct description be a 1995 type 51 "recreation".

Another Triumph for Truth! Thank You. Merci. Dankie.

Thank you in Kees and all the participants.
wiki updated according to your information:

BC 087: http://www.bugattibuilder.com/wiki/inde ... tle=BC_087

51144: http://www.bugattibuilder.com/wiki/inde ... itle=51144

As we restored this car it is incredible to read that keesj calls it a replica, what it is definitly not. It would be nice to talk to the persons which have a relationship to the matter of fact before you throw a statement into the public.
The BOC gave this car in the 1980th the BC Nr. 87 and not 87/R after Hugh Conway first claimed it as 51144. The problem was, that the provenance of it was unshure, and the framenumber stamped 691 on the rear cross member exists twice. It was mentioned, that this part of the frame has been replaced with a new part. After having it exminated metalurgically last year we found out, that it is made out of old steel. It doesn't sound too bad but it says not really much. Interesting is, that the aluminum connection blocks never have been removed before we did. After talking with David Sewell about this fact, he told me, that there exist some other cars with the same frame number that are undoubtly molsheim made.
Anyway, it was examined by a type specialist of the club a long while before I bought it, who estimated it as a late Molsheim GP car, with connections to 51144. So the backaxle.
As we got the car it was in a desolate condition. There missed some major parts of of the engine, but most of the rest of the car was there. So we replaced the missing parts and tried to restore it carefully. Wich I think we reallised not too bad. What we wanted was to make it look nice and not like a thousend year old one, what it nowadays much hiper.
During the restoration we found some interesting details that brought out some new connections to 51144 like the correct assembly number 33 on parts of the chassis, that werend restamped from anyone.
I'm quite shure that my toy has more than a connection to 51144.
Anyway, what really matters is the fun it makes, to restore it, to drive it and maintain it, like any other old machine does. Even when it is a Fiat Topolino C or a Vespa 50 N that are worth nothing compared with a GP Bugatti. But it is a great difference to any fake made in Argentina.

Marco

Thank you for writing to clear up any misconceptions that may exist with your Bugatti. I wonder if you could just clear up something for me : I take it that you have unearthed evidence that the chassis frame is indeed ex-Molsheim, but I am not sure if you mean it is ex-51144. Certainly if your car has the original engine and the original frame the term replica would not apply.

Perhaps in the interest of clarity you can state the origins of both the original and the replacement components. For instance, did you manage to obtain the original rear axle?

In any event, any new information is more than welcome; the history of, especially, Grand Prix Bugattis are still shrouded in mystery. Being not only the owner, but also the restorer of this car, you are in a unique position to unlock all her secrets. That you are prepared to share your findings with the rest of us is an added bonus.

To conclude : Are you prepared to state categorically that your car is a Bugatti T51, chassis number 51144?

Thank You
Johan Buchner

Who is the "type specialist of the club" and which club are we talking about.

It seems to me the car can best be described as a modern "recreation" containing original type 51 components.

Perhaps the BOC can enlighten us as to what proportion of original componets a car must have to be classified as a type 51 rather than a type 51R.

If the figure is 50%, is it measured by value ? or volume ? or weight ?

As an aside, I heard with my own ears a member of the eligibility committee of a leading historic car club offering his GP for sale saying that he would make sure that the car got its "papers".

The car in question was a beatuifully made tool-room "recreation" but there were certainly not three major original components. In fact there were NONE.

This is the first time, to my knowledge, where we have an owner writing to set the record straight. This is yet another indication of the stature that Bugattibuilder.com is gaining. This gentleman, who writes in a reasoned and reasonable manner seems to have a good faith belief that the information in Wiki pertaining to his car is wrong.

The writer also believe the esteemed historian, Mr. Kees Jansen, to be mistaken. And looking at Mr. Jansen's reply to my initial post, he does allow for the possibility that there may very well still be facts waiting to be discovered. Bugfan claim to know the whereabouts of the rear axle, now, if the rear axle is still around, can the possibility that more components survive really be excluded?

In the interest of verifying disputed history, may I suggest we refrain from attacking Marco until he's had time to prepare a proper report on a car obviously of great importance to him?

Insulting one of the wealthiest and most powerful "collectors" in the world is one thing. Mocking a guy who has poured his heart, soul and good old fashioned hard work into a single car resurrected from incomplete remains is simple bullying. I will not be part of trashing a man's dream.

I am
Johan

Reading the notes, J really shouldn't care about childish opinions. If you are honest, you schould, espescially Hunter, think about what originality of a racing car means. Think about a Formula 1 in the 90th when they have blown up to three engines only in the practice. Or what about Auto Unions? There never existed a "proper" car. There where only bits and peaces which where assembeled to a car short before a race only to be compleately dismanteled after it.
The only notes by the factory about 51s we know are the invoices, where you can read things like the number of the sump, the gearbox and the backaxle. But this are notes of a certain timepoint. Lots of the 51s have been used by the works before beeing sold. What about blown, restamped or even replaced components that where joined to a car before it came to its customer. There is no real documentation how assembly numbers are used on 51s, they where often confusing. You can't compare it with the numbers you can find especially on the "production" GP cars like on 37s.
You can find the engine number on the steeringbox support or like on my car on the front crossmember. But only sometimes. So it can say something about a car but it mustn't. The cars have been sold for racing. In the first few years of their life they had a real hard life, with crashes destroied engines, broken backaxels and in nearly all cars compleatly worn out drivetrains. The correct roller bearing 51 engine has so much torque that you easily destroy even a modern cardanshaft. All the cars have been modyfied or upgradet privately or by the works. Some cars have been compleatly desroyed and they have been rebuild out from spareparts or with parts from donor cars like 37s. And what about the replicated components that have been fitted to them since the spareparts wore out? Most of the 51s have limited slip differentials, but there where only two known originals, wich one of them is broken. How many of them have their original wheels or even an original body. With a close look it will be verry hard to find one "original" proper GP 8 cylinder racing car. Propably the Escudier car. But is there an other? Perhaps 4941? Not really, at least an admirable wonderfull car, but it has the wrong engine and the wrong wheels. So where will you start to discuss and where will it end?
So please don't bother me. I know what I have, it is an original car with lots of proper 51 parts including a late original frame with conections to 51144, a correct original hollow front axle, the original backaxel that you find on the invoice of 51144, a nice mostly original body a very rare original big Targa Florio radiator, an original bulkhead and much more. About the engine I'm still in discussion with the only person I really trust what matters bugatti 51s. By the way he is the one who examined the car two decades ago. It's Geoffrey St. John. There is noone around who knows more about the whereabouts of these wonderfull cars.
And so long as noboy else conjures out a car of a cylinder hat with more relation to 51144 as my car does, I'll claim it as it. By the way it is not the only car on your list of real chassisnumbers that has a BC number.

All the best,
Marco

Which bits on your car does St. John say were definitely on the car driven by Lehoux.

Has St. John inspected the car ?

Is he the "marque specialist" previously mentioned ?

Does he have any official position in the UK BOC ?

Does Mr. Cardy agree with St. John's opinions about this car ?

Dear Marco.

I tried very hard to create an atmosphere for you to produce actual evidence that the Wiki entry (which corresponds with Conway's books and the opinions of Kees Jansen and the other historians who contributed) is indeed factually incorrect. Instead you chose to respond in a barrage of moral indignation which calls to mind the Shakespeare quote : "Methinks the lady doth protest too much." I was primarily interested in whether the components on your car, whether they be ex-Molsheim or ex-Dutton, Argentinean etc, were originally fitted to 51144. From your response I glean the following : The engine may be ex-51144. The frame, while possibly original, are probably not original to 51144. (I do not understand what you mean by a late frame with connections to etc.) The front axle and the radiator, both of which may be ex-Molsheim, were not, so it would seem, ever part of 51144's specification until recently assembled as such. Ditto the bulkhead and the body. From your post it would seem you claim that the back axle is original to 51144; if so, and if the esteemed Mr. Geoffrey St John proves that the engine is indeed original to this car, then these two components would seem to be the only two original fitted to 51144. On the face of this evidence, the amended entry in Wiki for 51144 stands. Please correct me if I'm wrong,

Bugatti ownership must be an intensely emotive experience (I wouldn't know) but just because you do not like what you read about your car, does not make it wrong. By all means, should further research provide proof, and this proof commonly accepted by St. John, Cardy, Sewell, Jansen and the few others who qualify as first rate Bugatti historians, let the world share in your joy. I assure you no comments on either this forum or the Wiki has been rendered in stone, if proved incorrect it will be corrected. No such proof has been submitted by you. Yet?

Yours
Johan Buchner

Dear Johan,

you must understand, that I'm a bit upset to read wrong assertions about my car from people who hide behind an alias in a webside forum, who perhaps saw it in Molsheim or elsewhere or ewen only on a photograph. I'm always interested in discussions about Bugattis and espescially about my car, but I think such an open platform like yours is the wrong base to do it. Cause you can't handle facts when you can't proof them. And to prof things you have to dismantle them and you have to go inside, its history and itself. We aren't buddhists who see an item on the way and get the wisdom over it by looking at it.
Fact is that my car has the BC number 87. The late Hugh Conway first claimed it as 51144 but after the discussion in the BOC the decission was made that it was too uncertain to keep it in the clubrecords as 51144, even if it has the corect backaxel build originally in 51144. But neither Hugh Conway nor any other of the relevant chaps of the BOC put the car in peaces. The real problem of 51144 is that it was disappeared for a period of 40 years. So there misses the continuos history of it. It is much easyer to handle a 51 like the Lindsay Eccls car, that has an continuos history. But it has after its fatal crash hardly parts in it from the car that came out of the factory.
On my car the frame has been recognsed by the BOC as an original one. Beside its originality it is a late type frame like it was used after 1929 on supercharged 8 cylinder cars. All the aluminium parts that where fitted on the frame, like the bulkhead the litle sheets before the bulkhead or the connecting blocks on te back havent't been removed for decades. I can claim this because of the corosion they have schown as we removed the parts. If it was originally 51144 I don't really know. I wasn't in the factory when the car was assembled, but with the 51 bulkhead on it, in the matter how it was there it looks to me as a frame that comes from a 51. What I found during the restoration the assembly number 33 on the front crossmember that was used on the engine of 51144. Front crossmembers are spescially made for each frame so it belongs to the frame. And now the front axle. It isn't numbered. so how will you identify it? I was told from Geoffrey St. John that it wasn't common to mark the frontaxels, even when you can find nowadays numbers on them.
The 12 Targa Florio radiators that have been made in 1926 where only fitted to works cars. They fitted them to cars that have been used in hot races like Monte Carlo, Monza or the Targa Florio. They have been used on 35s as on 51s and later on 59s. 51144 was a works car even when it was then sold to Lehoux and it ran at Monza. What else interests you. You see I'm not the one who is hiding something. I wil not sell the car for anything so why should I be interested in creating fairytales. When I say that the car has connections to 51144 it will mean that it is probable that the parts belonged originally to 51144 and not more. But with the correct bits it is also probable that it is the car. But anyway it has a BC number like other very good original cars. As an historian I am verry carefull in claiming things that don't stand a proofement. So think what you want but be carefull when you call a car a replica when you don't know anything about it.

So long,
Marco