Our friends at JamesList present a 1937 Bugatti Type 57/59 Roadster Supersport. GM’s ex-Director of Design penned the restomod’s basic shape and details in 1982, imagining a sports car that Jean Bugatti might have offered to the American market. You know; if he had. Clicking over to Deansgarage.com reveals that the realization of Dave Holls’ alternative universe owes its existence to deep-pocketed California collector Ron Kellogg. Aside from a slightly widened replica T59 frame, Palmer Coachworks built l’homage de Bug‘s major bits using genuine GM— I mean Bugatti parts, including a T57 powerplant (with an added blower and dry sump) and a 73C gearbox (no.6) with synchromesh. Even so, one wonders if Bugatti purists would be amused. That’s not an original thought. “The Kellogg project required climbing special challenges,” Deansgarage reports, using the adjective favored by people for whom “handicapped” is too pointed. “Not the least of which was getting the approval of the Bugatti Trust for permission to go ahead with the program. So the Kellogg Bugatti has a legitimate historical production chassis number. This is no small accomplishment. [It was] assigned the number #128, year 1937.” Needless to say, the new seller agrees: provenance is no biggie. Well they would say that, wouldn’t they . . .
This is a no expense spared coach-built Bugatti using only genuine Bugatti parts. The craftsmanship and attention to detail as well as the distinct styling of the vehicle would have made Ettore and Jean Bugatti very proud. The car comes with extensive documentation from conception to completion. It has been shown in numerous prestigious events in the US over the past years.
August 2005 1st Display of this Concept Bugatti at Quail Lodge, Carmel, CA.
July 2006 1st place National Auto Show Pomona, CA.
May 2006 Best in Show, Fullerton, CA
July 2006 1 place Custom Design, Art Center of Design, Pasadena, CA.
June 2008 2nd Concept Cars/Manufacture Dream Cars, Houston, TX.Specifications:
Chassis: Type 59 widened and Bugatti Trust sanctioned #BC 128
Engine: 3.3 Liter 8 Cylinder D.O.H.C. Dry Sump, Roots Supercharger
Type 57 #453 Ignition Vertex Mag.
217.8 hp at 6000rpm. Engine built and dyno-tested at Phil Reilly & Cop. (Dyno sheets and 4 hour DVD of running available).Coachbuilder: Palmer Coachworks
Wheelbase: 102.25 inches
Front tread 55.25 inches, Rear tread 55 inches
Weight: Approx. 750kg (1600 lbs)
Body: 0.063 Hand formed aluminum
Fenders: 0.090 Hand formed aluminum
Transmission: 4 speed Bugatti #73C
Rear Rend: Bugatti Double Reduction
Steering: Left Hand for World SalesThis is a true Masterpiece and a very rare opportunity for the most discerning collector. The car is registered as a 1937 Bugatti and part of a private collection in California. Extensive information including photos, articles and dyno sheets are available for the serious prospect. Please contact us for details.
Price on request, of course. So, how much would YOU pay?
It looks like a Bugatti as if it were built in Auburn, Indiana.
Plenty was lost in translation along the way.
–chuck
Nice dash, but otherwise, meh. Show me something in an Alfa Romeo from the same era. Say, 8C Spyder.
Could it be that they believe that Jean Bugatti would have “Malibuized” the Type 57?
I think it’s beautiful. And perfect to the counter-factual thought of an americanized Bugatti. It looks something like a cross between an Auburn Speedster, and Alfa Romeo 8C and a Ferrari 250 Spider California, with just a hint of American chutzpah. It looks like something a californian playboy actually would run in 1937. It follows that mindset perfectly. Whether you like it or not is another question, the point is that it is true to the thought and the inventors intentions.
Junk. It comes with an second tach that shows how much faster Ettore is spinning in his grave.
Folks: Ettore was a black sheep in his family….a family of artists, all of them. He descended from art to make gloriously beautiful and powerfully functional machines. He didn’t tinker, virtually *everything* he touched showed the integrity of an artist at the height of his powers with a *consistent* vision.
This looks like something thrown toegther by one of those idiot computer design programs…1st, select the wheels -click-, then select fenders, -click- then select…and so on.
This is a Rembrandt paint-by-the-numbers or a Matisse with additions by Mrs. Jones’ kindergarten class. The muffler heat shield looks like one of those sheets of decorative aluminum screening from the Reynolds Aluminum materials section at Home Depot. Effing Basta!
Compare and contrast with this from my website .
The original of these make this look like what it is: a Frankenstein knockoff, a bad kitcar.
Yeah, I had the incredible good fortune to experience these machines directly as a kid having very little clue of just how magical that was, but crapping around with glory is just flat inexcusable. The idiots involved with this should have bought an Excalibur and left Ettore’s spare parts alone….or done a bolt-for-bolt copy with them of what was one of the pinnacles of Jean and Ettore’s designs
So it’s a kit-car built from left overs that weren’t originally supposed to be together? (Or something like that).
I’m confused, why is it supposed to be valuable again?
The instrument panel says it all.
“The Bluetooth generation need not apply.”
Personally, I’d prefer a Caterham Super 7 with a basic 2.0 Duratec 175 hp engine.
Those gigantic cam housings remind me of GM’s Quad-4.
Like all hot rods, they’ve taken parts of historical value and cobbled them together into a machine of exceedingly poor taste.
The best fate for this “Bug” is to become a parts donor car.
I think it’s a real “doozy”…no, wait, I can’t use that…it is a stunner, for the terminally stunned.;)
Well, I know I’m in the minority, but I don’t really see anything wrong with this – except for a styling critique which I’ll get to in a moment.
The fact is that many Bugatti cars had coach-built bodies, designed to the tastes of their purchasers, and many had their bodies changed a second or third time when a new buyer aquired them.
No car was “destroyed” in the making of this car, and it’s all Bugatti. If it had an SBC in the engine bay but was labled a Bugatti, then I’d be upset.
In this case, the fundamental Bugatti parts are unharmed, and if the current owner tires of it, it can be sold to someone else who can rebody it differently.
I don’t believe that the styling is 1937 – I’d say that it’s more a late 20’s car with the flying fenders.It’s not to my taste. However, if an owner wants that coachwork, it’s his car, and his money.
it is beautiful whatever it is. very beautiful. but its not a bugatti.
For anyone that’s interested I have placed an 8MB 2000×1350 .bmp image file (usable as computer monitor wall paper) of my father’s T40 Bugatti body prototype of the famous T57SC on my website for download. Fell free to pass it on, but do not sell it; all rights reserved and I (Stewart Dean) would appreciate attribution. Copyright 2009.
What a ride it was. An image this big fully conveys its poise and utter pur sang class.
I’d drop everything and fly to Chicago for an hour with it, but the family that owns hasn’t returned any of my attempts to communicate.
Are we all looking at the same car? It’s beautiful! It looks to me that the builders were completely aware of the Bugatti legacy and went to incredible lengths to be as faithful to it as possible. And the price? At least a million, I’m guessing.
I think it looks awesome. Gordon Buehrig would be proud. How much would I pay? More than I’ve got.
“Those gigantic cam housings remind me of GM’s Quad-4.”
It certainly is an interesting looking engine…a neat choice for hotrods.
I like the look of this car, but to me it is a kit car and nothing more.
in a word its stunning. like nothing i’ve ever seen, just light and aerobeautiful. would kill to tear around a track with such a graceful grandame.
Very graceful and beautiful. One contributing factor is the huge wheelbase and the absence of the G-D overhangs, which make so many of today’s cars, except RWD ones, look ugly and nose-heavy, and as if their structure beyond the wheelbase will come off and fall on the road any time.
Quite nice, not a Bug. It’s a sort of a caricature of one.
Put it this way, if you hadn’t been told it was supposed to be a Bugatti homage, what would you have guessed?
How much would I pay for it? Doesn’t Matter. Leno will just out bid me.
It will go for $600,000 to $750,000 …or twice that.
I am really kind of amazed that there are so many Bugatti purists. Folks, are you aware that the old man died more than 60 years ago, and that the Company’s glory days ended 70 years ago?
I like the pictures above, and I would probably admire the car if I saw it in the flesh. But, it is not relevant to my life and its existence discommodes me not at all. Purism is not something that amuses me.
“Put it this way, if you hadn’t been told it was supposed to be a Bugatti homage, what would you have guessed?”
That’s a good question. It has too much pizzaz to be an Italian design. They usually have more clarity in line. It’s too deliberate an attempt, and have too much flow to be an English design, those happens to be more haphazard. It looks a little bit haute couture, like something a french fashion designer would design for someoneelse. It actually looks like something a Californian playboy would order at a renowned french carrosier, like Figoni & Falashci or Saoutchik. Or perhaps the anglo/french Hibbard & Darrin?