R
Edited by rorym, 03 June 2009 - 11:06 PM.
Posted 03 June 2009 - 11:04 PM
Edited by rorym, 03 June 2009 - 11:06 PM.
Posted 04 June 2009 - 02:05 AM
Edited by vbvbvb088, 04 June 2009 - 02:07 AM.
Posted 06 June 2009 - 10:26 PM
For a total laugh here is a drawing I did on the 6th June 1985..of the 05. I seem to remember it was a copy the Bill Tuckey 1984 Bathurst story.
Posted 08 June 2009 - 08:17 PM
There certainly is a BIG checking going on at the moment.There is a HUGE shit fight going on at the moment about falsified documents/papers on lots of Group C cars...dont see why any other ex race cars escaped the dramas...the someone that could be signing off the authentication papers is maybe the person in question.....lots to be revieled yet. RED knows where I am at on this one. We are all keeping quiet, hopefully the full force of the law will prevail.
R
Posted 28 June 2009 - 08:04 PM
Posted 29 June 2009 - 10:28 PM
Posted 29 June 2009 - 10:33 PM
Case closed, 05 is at Bathurst!
Posted 30 June 2009 - 08:11 AM
Posted 30 June 2009 - 09:09 AM
Posted 30 June 2009 - 10:25 AM
Posted 30 June 2009 - 10:53 AM
Posted 30 June 2009 - 01:10 PM
Posted 30 June 2009 - 01:54 PM
Posted 30 June 2009 - 04:45 PM
Posted 01 July 2009 - 12:28 AM
There is a thread on bertie street, only corsa level members can view it though. Several paint tests and measurements were done. The evidence is unquestionable, right down to the stone chips on the cars. Also, 25 took a hit to the rear left quarter at Bathurst, the car at Bathurst has no repairs at all on that quarter, it's all original. As I said, i have known 100% for years now as I know people with evidence, this just confirms it.
Posted 08 July 2009 - 11:11 PM
There is a thread on bertie street, only corsa level members can view it though. Several paint tests and measurements were done. The evidence is unquestionable, right down to the stone chips on the cars. Also, 25 took a hit to the rear left quarter at Bathurst, the car at Bathurst has no repairs at all on that quarter, it's all original. As I said, i have known 100% for years now as I know people with evidence, this just confirms it.
Edited by bruceRycom, 08 July 2009 - 11:15 PM.
Posted 08 July 2009 - 11:14 PM
corsa member is 10 posts
Posted 17 March 2013 - 08:05 PM
From the Brock Commodores forum, 3 months and no one has been able to answer the "how come question"
Edited by Balfizar, 17 March 2013 - 08:06 PM.
Posted 17 March 2013 - 08:25 PM
Posted 17 March 2013 - 08:30 PM
From the Brock Commodores forum, 3 months and no one has been able to answer the "how come question"
If the signage etc have never been changed or tampered with, how come the alignment of the top of the "M" in Marlboro in the
build photo (relative to the top of the "05" is lower (meaning a smaller font) than the "M" in the 2009 Telstra 500 photo of the NMRM car?
also to give you an example of the font size change, the whole of the first "R" in Marlboro in on the front door in the build photo and it is
split across 2 doors in the NMRM photo. (Font change!)You see it was changed, pre photo shoot, it would seem Philip Morris wanted a bigger font on the Marlboro sign. Seeing that
this was in the era or hand painted signs, this can only mean a rub back and respray and re-sign write of the "Marlboro" sign. So how come the investigation
could find no indication of repaint on the "doors".You believed it just because "they" told you to. Now you can see with you own eyes. If HDT had not changed the "Marlboro" sign font size it would still be the same today and
it isn't.
Either the investigation got it wrong with the paint Gauge and what has or has not been repainted or its not 05, take your
pick. And even if that got it right with the paint Gauge and and there is no respray of the doors, than it is still not 05.
A lot of interesting reading in that thread.CheersBalfizar
You do realise that you're the first person to comment on this in nearly 4 years right?
And if the rear of the car at the museum is original, and the PC one has been repaired, it would suggest pretty strongly that the one PC has is the one that was damaged, ie 25 not 05.
Paint and fonts etc can be changed, repaired damage can't.
Just sayin.
Posted 17 March 2013 - 08:47 PM
You do realise that you're the first person to comment on this in nearly 4 years right?
And if the rear of the car at the museum is original, and the PC one has been repaired, it would suggest pretty strongly that the one PC has is the one that was damaged, ie 25 not 05.
Paint and fonts etc can be changed, repaired damage can't.
Just sayin.
Simple question:- requires a simple answer.... No they got it wrong with the coating thickness gauge or Yes they were right with the coating thickness gauge.
"Either the investigation got it wrong with the paint Gauge and what has or has not been repainted or its not 05, take your
pick. And even if that got it right with the paint Gauge and and there is no respray of the doors, than it is still not 05"
There has been great debate over 05/25 for a lot more than 4 years more like 12 years
Cheers
Balfizar
Posted 17 March 2013 - 09:00 PM
Jesus , a four year old post renewed and with such enthusiasm
Not bad for 90 posts
Do you have any recent Torana news to contribute to the forum or are you just really excited ??
No nothing since I talked to the 2 EX-cop NSW workshop foremen about the fit-out of GTR's and XU1's
or all the Torana newspaper ads I posted, no been pretty quite lately!
Cheers
Balfizar
Posted 18 March 2013 - 11:45 AM
Simple answer here is, PC has now conceeded he has the 25 car, case closed.
Posted 18 March 2013 - 11:58 AM
Simple answer here is, PC has now conceeded he has the 25 car, case closed.
Where did you find that out. I always thought he had 25 as Brocks words nothing, people seem to forget the polarizer bullshit.
Posted 18 March 2013 - 04:16 PM
Simple answer here is, PC has now conceeded he has the 25 car, case closed.
Well that would have to be conceeded in the last 8 days since I spoke to him and forgive me for wanting to see it in writing.
Cheers
Balfizar
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users