Messages

The forgotten ones

Roger that. We overlook the magic that Carroll worked with Chrysler's vehicle line up. And that was thanks to Lee Iacocca retaining him. I recall at a Hot Rod Drag Week, one Dodge Omni (I think) was running low 11 second quarter-mile times. As enthusiasts, they deserve our admiration.

Interesting information and no suprise it has taken over over 50 years to surface. And it raises new questions.

Who ever swapped the rotors had to know which was which. As for the AOC changing their minds on a dead heat that's no surprise.

"Ken said, 'They don't want me to win the race. They want the Amon/McLaren car to win.'

Who the heck is they? HFII? Leo Beebe? Lee Iacocca? Is there any historical clues or witnesses for this animosity? Where was CS during this time? What did he say/do?

In Ford V Ferrari (a very lazy and sloppy script IMHO) it was suggested that the media would promote a Ken Miles hat trick victory (with Daytona and Sebring) and not a Ford victory. There might have been an element of Ford corporate pr paranoia. 

Ultimately, Miles was team player which may not always pay off for the individual involved. Nonetheless, I always wonder why Miles just say to hell with it and win. What was Ford going to do, fire him? He was at the top of his game and I presume he could have written his own ticket with another team.

While I throughly enjoyed Ford vs Ferrari, was disappointed more credit wasn't given to Phill!

Phil Remington deserved better - much better - than the obtuse caricature in the film.

IMHO the screen writers didn't know, or particularly care, who he really was. Guess they wanted a Jar Jar Binks character (See Star Wars) for laughs.

Nice concept.

However, IMHO the hood scoop sucks.

Thank you for the historical perspective. I have nothing but comtempt for the villification of Leo Beebe's character in the film. But you have to have a corporate villian in films today. 

Here's a quote from Leo Beebe, on page 112 of Shelby GT40 by Dave Friedman:

".....When Henry Ford saw me at the starting line before the race, he handed me a card that said, "You better win, HFII."

Not much pressure there.

Out of 7 Mk. ll's entered (4 Shelby American and 3 Holman Moody) only three finished. Imagine Beebe's mindset if they hadn't.

As for the US verus THEM, Ford funded the racing effort, so I don't think managment was all bad.

PS: I know: FvF isn't a documentary.

According to McQueen's Machines - The Cars and Bikes of a Hollywood Icon by Matt Stone, he didn't.

In the sidebar, he was given use of CSX2174 for a few months with the goal to convince McQueen to buy it. "When he showed no interest in doing so the car was returned to the factory at Shelby's request. . . ." It was then sold to the Francis Motor Car Company in Portland OR.

Steve:

Keep up the good work. These photos are priceless documentation and many have been unseen. Even if the photo has been published before, you can look at it for more critical details that you might have missed the first or fifth time. Plus internet searches for photos and details aren't always found under the usual search terms like Shelby, GT350 et al. The RIR publication is an obvious example, plus it brings up other questions. Like does anyone know the author's name Eric Hauser?

IMHO mid-engine styling is difficult to create a distinguished look. View the cars in profile. There's air intakes behind the rear door edge and the shape is dictated by air flow management. Big C8 styling twitter complaint was that it looks like a Ferrari which looks like a Lamborghini. . .

Ford pulled off a unique profile thanks to the GT's flying buttresses. Glad Corvette "borrowed" Ford styling and not the other way around. 

Hope SEMA is tracking this issue.

Don't lose sight of the fact these car building reality programs are aimed toward the visual. So if the construction details, parts etc aren't exactly right, it doesn't matter. What matters is the visuals and the dramatic story arc such as how they replaced the floor pan in half an hour in order to meet a car show or auction deadline.

Interesting observation. The miracle is that Ford even built it to begin with.

I would at least change the steering wheel. (File under comment; snark)

Curious juxtaposition of the display being positioned in front of graphics illustrating some heavy-duty military hardware.

Not so curious after all, he replied.

A reminder that Ford had their Ford Aerospace Corporation that was a contractor for air-to-air and ground-to-air missiles and space systems. Ford Aerospace was also involved in building the Mustang GTP's carbon fiber tub. Then it was tested using computer finite element analysis, which was a big deal in 1985. 

just chiming in on the Henry Ford II scene:   first of all, Tracy Letts is one of our greatest living actors (and playwrights), and he kills it in this film . . . second, the particular scene we're discussing is funny as hell, and has some unexpected nuance.  yes, he's scared shitless, but he's also very emotional about being in such a fast and highly developed automobile that bears his grandfather's name.  so, yeah, he's crying, but he doesn't come across as a sissy.  on the contrary, the movie makes it clear that LeMans is "the Deuce's" no-expense-spared vendetta to get even with Enzo for humiliating him over a possible sale of Ferrari to Ford . . .   guys, the movie isn't perfect, and every time Ken shifts from third to fourth and the revs go UP, you will cringe.  but it's a very good (Hollywood) movie (NOT a documentary), and i think you'll all be satisfied watching it on the big screen.
JMHO,
Alan

Crying and being scared shitless doesn't come across as a sissy? Really?

I never expected a documentary, but creation of a narrative spell that isn't broken. HFII crying; spell broken. Revs go up; spell broken. IMHO

Check Edsel Ford II's twitter feed and see what he thinks of the trailer.
BWT I wonder if the screen writers interviewed Mr. Ford. He was there.   

My hopes for this film are totally corroded.

Start with the images of the replicas in reply #66. The real cars didn't have mirrors and that would be a simple thing to correct if they had researched original photos. Then there's car number 98. Who drove that?

Did anyone see the interview of Matt Damon and Christian Bale up in the flag station just prior to the Indy 500? The interviewer asked what was one thing they took away from doing the film. Damon answered, paraphrasing, ". . .that driving 230 mph, they didn't know whether or not they could slow down. . .".  Really? I think adequate braking capacity would be a key design feature of car entered in a 24 hour race.

Check out the iMDb listing for the film https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1950186/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 where they included a picture of a 1966 Ford. Also check out the technical advisor in the cast and crew list.

As a final annoyance, even the media coverage sucks. In the Entertainment Exclusive https://ew.com/movies/2019/05/24/ford-ferrari-first-look-matt-damon-christian-bale/?utm_source=instagram&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=entertainmentweekly_entertainmentweekly&utm_content=like2buy&utm_term=curalate_like2buy&fbclid=IwAR3XypZzJ4fNWXgLmYQRIIONoB6BQm4RyjNzHT_2YxnQdh9FGYd8Nz_lszg write up, the writer describes the film as

. . ."this true story of the triumph of the misfits."

Misfits? They were a talented group of racers and fabricators that were at the top of their racing game.

For me, it'll be the little visual things that would be so simple to make accurate that'll be most annoying because people making the film didn't really care. It's Hollywood, but ultimately, maybe I'm too close to the subject.