Buddy Bakers Daytona

[therealmoparman]

💩

[Aero426]

We believe the pic of Cotton with crew and #6 was from end of 1970. After the car was first built back for showing. That would explain the single #6 on the front nose, and the small spoiler.

However, it does not have the crew painted on the fender nor the same decals as it did in the museum. It appears to have the 1970 Goodyear decals, which would coincide that it was rebuilt in 1970. The car did some shows in late 1970 and 1971, visited the Chrysler dealers, ending up in Atlanta and then back to Cotton. Not sure how long he kept it before putting it in Darlington museum, but at some point he must have changed the fenders again, putting on the 1971 decals (long Goodyear) - again jiving with the timeline - and him wanting to put the crew member names on it for the museum and posterity.

Don Moody received this exact photo from the hand of your grandfather on the weekend of May 3, 1970 at Indianapolis Raceway Park.   Don was a crewman on Butch Hartman's USAC team in 1970.    Your grand dad was friendly with Butch and Dick Hartman and helped them get their Charger 500 converted to a Daytona among providing other advice.    Don has an interesting and pleasant story about Cotton's interaction with the Hartman Racing Team.    Perhaps he will chime in.

[Aero426]

NO - THIS PARTICULAR #6 car's last race was Charlotte (10.11.1970). I stated this many times. Nobody said anything about THIS #6 running at Rockingham. They obviously had more than 1 race car. Here is THIS car's record again:

July 4, 1970 Firecracker 400 at Daytona
Finished 2nd
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-24&series=W

Aug 2, 1970 - Dixie 500 at Atlanta
Finished 4th
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-31&series=W

Aug 16, 1970 - Yankee 400 at Michigan
Finished 6th
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-34&series=W

Aug 23, 1970 - Talladega 500
Finished 5th
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-35&series=W

Sept 7, 1970 - Southern 500
Finished 1st
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-38&series=W

Oct 11, 1970 - National 500 at Charlotte
Finished 26th (crash)
http://racing-reference.info/race?id=1970-44&series=W

You just got done telling us yesterday after you talked to your dad, that there was only one Daytona.

[chargerboy69]

NO - THIS PARTICULAR #6 car's last race was Charlotte (10.11.1970). I stated this many times. Nobody said anything about THIS #6 running at Rockingham. They obviously had more than 1 race car.

You just got done telling us yesterday after you talked to your dad, that there was only one Daytona.

And here.

"So you suggest a duplicate show car was built - that looks exactly like the race car down to the very last detail? And this show car was put in Cobo and the museum, while the original race winner was forever lost? Does that make sense, that Cotton would somehow lose the 500 winner, whip up a show car built out in race trim, dry sump and race hemi and all - and just keep a car that was for show only? No it does not, and if doesn't make sense, then it isn't true.

So don't get too wrapped up in your trivia nonsense. You don't know enough about the reality of the time. The truth is really so simple. Only when you try to discredit it do things get really confusing."


And here too

"I just called my dad. He was part of the team, and his memory is (arguably) better than Cotton's in some aspects. He tells me:

They only had 1 wing car that he can remember."

[Ghoste]

You also posted this;

therealmoparman
Junior Member
Online
Posts: 57
   Re: The REAL story of the Cotton Owens/Buddy Baker 1969 Dodge Charger
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2010, 06:50:06 PM »  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is the race history of the car:
http://www.canepacollection.com/detail-1969-dodge-charger-daytona-5111490.html
Race History Cotton Owens Dodge Charger Daytona driven by Buddy Baker
Daytona, qualified 2nd, — DNF
Rockingham — DNF
Atlanta — DNF
Alabama 500, led for 101 laps, first race lap at over 200 MPH — DNF
Firecracker 400 — 2nd
Atlanta — 4th
Michigan — 5th
Darlington Southern 500 — 1st
Charlotte — DNF


Which doesn't exactly jive with this;

There was never a claim anyway that the Southern 500 winner ran at Daytona in Feb. It was the July 4 Firecracker race where it ran 2nd.

[therealmoparman]

💩

[Aero426]

Obviously it was a pretty damned good replica. Ray Nichels was capable of that.

In fact, I'm sure this car eventually went on to race, just not for COG. Ray Nichels could have taken it back to his shop in Indiana and made a car for Goldsmith or Glotzbach out of it.

Back then, they just didn't built show cars. Nobody did. They showed them, and raced them. They cut these cars up and rebodied them, reconfigured them, whatever - all the time.

Ray Nichels, Cotton Owens and Chrysler were all very tight.

http://raynichels.com/id2.html

If Ray Nichels built a show car for Chrysler for the 1970 Chicago Auto Show, it would be highly unlikely he would build it in ANY colors other than his own.   And he certainly would not put a COG decal in the window!    He'd put a NIchels decal there.

Considering the sheet metal and paint details on the shop car, the Chicago car, the Detroit car, and the Darlington museum car seem to match - I find it tough to believe they are not the same car.    Forget about stick on decals.   Each of these cars have their own fingerprints in the metal.  

[therealmoparman]

💩

[therealmoparman]

Just to clarify - because I know I need to - by HIS car I meant one that looked like BAKER's car. Baker was #1 Chrysler driver, and they would want to display his car, not Goldsmith's or Glotzbach. At least not in 69-70.

[Aero426]

Just to clarify - because I know I need to - by HIS car I meant one that looked like BAKER's car. Baker was #1 Chrysler driver, and they would want to display his car, not Goldsmith's or Glotzbach. At least not in 69-70.

Ray Nichels and Charlie would probably disagree with you on that.

[therealmoparman]

💩

[hemigeno]

Feel the force, Luke - you know it makes sense.

I disagree with your pop culture analogy... this whole storyline appears more like a Don Adams (of Maxwell Smart fame) "Would you believe" routine

Faversham: You think you've got me, but I have you surrounded by the entire mounted 17th Bengal Lancers.
Khan: I don't believe you.
Faversham: Would you believe the First Bengal Lancers?
Khan: No
Faversham: How about Gunga Din on a donkey?


Would You Believe

[hemigeno]

Just to clarify - because I know I need to - by HIS car I meant one that looked like BAKER's car. Baker was #1 Chrysler driver, and they would want to display his car, not Goldsmith's or Glotzbach. At least not in 69-70.

Ray Nichels and Charlie would probably disagree with you on that.

So would Bobby Isaac and the #71 K&K team, who had already won at College Station in '69.

[Ghoste]

Which is why they didn't feature Glotzbach or Issac (or even a nobody like Don White) in any of those Scat pack ads, correct?  I suppose they would have been especially pissed at Issac after the way he went and agreed to drive that first race at Talladega when the rest of their guys walked out.
Baker was an important driver and is a legend in his own right but I wouldn't go so far as to assert that he was their main number one guy.  Wylie has stated that the reason he chose Buddy for the 200 mph run is because he knew that he wouldn't lose his nerve at the last minute, that he would definitely go for the record.  But at no time have they ever said he was their best or number one or most important member of the team.

[Aero426]

Chrysler had no such thing as a "number 1 driver".    All the full factory supported teams and drivers were treated equally.    

[Ghoste]

Which leads to an obvious outstanding question, how would one team get picked over another to have a representative race car displayed at the 1970 Chicago Auto Show right immediately before the Daytona 500?
One answer could be that Chrysler told a shop (such as Nichels or even in house) to build them a car for the show that looked like "X".  Maybe "X" was left up to the shop to choose (which would probably eliminate Nichels) or maybe it was drawn out of a hat or maybe McCurry really liked the number "6".  Who knows?
Another possibility might be (and this is 100% conjecture too) someone had an extra car available that was free to use in 1970?  If that were the case, why would they not contact that same team in the fall to see if they could use a car again for the next round of shows?

Note that I am asking hypothetically and not making an accusation here.  I'd like to know the answer as much as anyone.

[therealmoparman]

💩

[therealmoparman]

Back then the teams received from the mfg what are called "bodies in white" which basically were non-VIN chassis with no paint or anything really. Sometimes the teams would add the body, othertimes it may have come with a body.

I cannot say that Ray Nichels built that show car. I think it is likely. Ray basically worked for Chrysler. But where do you draw the line between a factory man and a factory car? Is it a Nichels car or a Chrysler car. I do not know. Don't know really why they chose to promo the #6, I am only offering reasons why I think so. Not sure who ultimately made that decision.

[therealmoparman]

💩

[Ghoste]

No one has offered an explanation for why the COG race cars have four A pillar screws and 5 door handle cover rivets but BOTH show cars have two screws and six rivits?

[therealmoparman]

💩

[therealmoparman]

💩

[therealmoparman]

💩

[Ghoste]

Or it could also mean that Dodge as a brand was a winner, or it could mean that a car that looked just like that one won something, or it could be merely a marketing effort to tie the image of a winner with the image of buying a Dodge.  To state that the reason for that sign being there was to promote THAT car as a winner is not something you can state as fact.  It could be fact, but you have no more idea that it was than I do it wasn't.

[Aero426]

My bad on those races - those were pulled from Canepa's site in haste. They have changed over time. I can only stick with my previous statement and those exact races. Not sure where Canepa got that info. A brand new car would have debuted at Daytona in Feb.

You pretend to speak with authority, yet it is obvious you have not truly done the research.   You are willfully blind to any evidence contrary to what you've been told.   It would seem you MO is to throw enough junk, and hope that some of it will stick.