yannsaunders@gmail.com

Thanks Chaz; I agree that your explanations are perfectly plausible.

That scenario matches more an more my own confirmed opinion, i.e. the registration stub was made to look as if the vehicle had been always registered in the State of NY. Such a "forgery" could have been only to import a US vehicle from Europe without paying any dues. It must be possible to find out where and when the car was registered in Scottsdale (or Phoenix), in Arizona, during the first or second quarter, 1985.

That MIGHT help, John, but I'm too old to start that research. Obviously, Lockhart had an interest in classic cars ... but NOT necessarily in this 1937 V16 Cadillac. IMHO, lines 5 to 12 of Mr. Lockhart's 1955 renewal stub have been forged. Did he KNOW about that and condone it, well, that's another question.

This is another interesting and plausible explanation WHY someone would create a forgery of Mr. Lockhart's 1955 renewal stub. On the other hand, I don't think the VIN could have been misread; if either number "3" in that VIN (5130328) were changed to an "8" (5180828), the description of the car (1937 V16) would gave been "impossible". All 50 of those 1937 V16s had a VIN starting with "51", as shown in this case. So ... the last 2 digits would have, of necessity, read from "01" to "50".

Now THAT is a good tip. I found another such NY registration renewal stub, this one from a a 1956 Chevy. I have used PhotoShop to make it look like the 1937 Cadillac stub we are discussing. Isn't it possible that Mr. Lockhart had another year and model of car and whoever "worked" on the 1937 Cadillac simply got a copy of THAT registration stub and modified lines 5 through 12?

Please keep this going, where is this car now?

I like your approach, Püenske PC-7. Yes, I have done much research on Cadillac styling, production and survival, starting at the age of 16 (I'm pushing 80 as we speak). Like you, I am aware of certain questionable "practices" among less-than-honest car collectors/dealers. In this instance, I tend to believe that the description (and VIN) for this car indeed WERE "borrowed" from an unscrupulous person who knew it to be extant and thus (as you rightly point out), there was "little chance of any problems" deriving from the "made up" renewal stub. Then again, since the car effectively returned to the USA from Switzerland and France, in 1985, perhaps the person who acquired it needed some "evidence" that it had either never left the USA or someone else had gone through proper import procedures 30 years or more beforehand. Thanks again, and do keep the thread open.

Thanks for the suggestion, Craig. Right now I don't have time to start looking for an identical 1937 V16. In 1937, only 50 such V16s were built; ALL of their VIN's are accounted for, one way or another. If anyone wants to tackle Craig's recommendation about finding another 1937 V16 with VIN 5130328, pls. let me know?

If that turns out to be true (but please allow me to doubt it very much) , then one of them obviously has usurped the identity of the other. Attached is a poor copy of the factory microfiche for 1937 Cadillac V16 chassis #5130328; that document is still available from "GM Historical" in Warren, MI. IMHO, the theory of a 2nd car with the SAME serial number is too far off what I believe to be much simpler reality: the document lists a FAKE DESCRIPTION AND VEHICLE ID on an otherwise authentic vehicle renewal stub from NY State.

Thanks, Bloo, for your continued interest in this "saga". At this rate I feel confident we will eventually solve the "mystery". I honestly believe that incredible machine NEVER set foot (or tires) on US soil after 1937 and before 1985. All other opinions are welcome!

The plot thickens!

Much appreciated, thanks. One question: Would not the owner of the car have to present the car to the licensing authorities "in person", to guarantee its physical existence?

What would be the purpose of a forgery? As I may have mentioned earlier, this vehicle was acquired in the fall of 1985 by Tom Barrett of Barrett-Jackson auctioneers. The vendor was an Iranian-American car collector/dealer (P.A. Parviz) who had bought the unique V-16 in Paris, France, "from under the nose" of Don Williams, owner of the Blackhawk Museum in Danville, CA. Is it possible that a "fake" transaction took place between Barrett and Lockhart (whose residence in Buffalo, NY, in 1955, seems to have been authenticated by others on this site)? Could this have been a subtle way to have the car previously registered in the USA (NY state) simply to avoid paying taxes or import duties in Arizona? I'm only guessing because I don't see any proof (other than the "questionable" renewal stub) or other reason for the car to have come from and gone back to Lausanne between 1955 and 1959. The car's history is fully documented from 1937 up to 1949-50, and again from spring 1964 up to the present time. Its history for the 14 years from 1950 through 1964 are NOT known ... so anything is possible. I grant you, therefore, that Philippe B. (the first owner) could very well have sold the car to a buyer in the USA. However, the fact that it was found in a dilapidated state, in a Swiss warehouse in 1964 suggests it may have been stored there for 5 years or more. Philippe certainly never used it in a dilapidated state. Assuming for a moment that the car effectively made its way to the USA (and specifically to Buffalo, NY), why would the assumed US owner (Mr. Lockhart) have returned it to Lausanne, Switzerland (around 1951-1959); and why was such a rare car never seen or heard of again in collector circles (either in the USA or in Switzerland) until it turned up in a "pitiful" state in the Ouchy warehouse in 1964? Am I missing something?