Steve McQueen Car or not?

[alfacat]

Hi All
This makes interesting reading..
Quoted from the bottom of page 28 of the October 2019issue of Classic Cars...

'Following our feature in the August 2019 issue about the 1969 Porsche 911E that was once owned by Steve McQueen, solicitors for his son, Chad,
have contacted us to say that Steve McQueen 'never drove the subject vehicle at any time and never made use of the vehicle for any purpose'.'

I have no axe to grid on this subject but I'm sure there's a story here somewhere!

All the best
Ian F.

[yoda]

You mean this story? viewtopic.php?f=17&t=65053

[alfacat]

Hi Yoda
Yes, although it seems to me (having read the story) it’s more about the presumptions made in the Classic Car article than disputing the car was once owned by McQueen!

All the best
Ian F

[yoda]

Hi. So it was owned by him but never driven by him?

I have not read the article.

[alfacat]

From what Chad's lawyers are saying (or not saying,) that would be my take on it...
However I can't help thinking these's moe to this story!

[McQueen911]

Hello everyone,

It is Steve McQueen's 1969 car I assure you and I'm happy to prove it. It's just an inconvenient truth which I've been trying to discuss discreetly with Chad for over two years but got blocked at every turn. But as we can't do that privately now, I'm inviting public scrutiny of all the facts.

To bring everyone up to speed, here's what Chad's counsel posted here:

https://drive-my.com/en/test-drive/item ... -911e.html

Dear Mr. Smith:

Please be advised that the undersigned acts as counsel on behalf of Chad McQueen the son of Steve McQueen as well as members of his family. I write to you with reference to your article discussing the 1969 Porsche 911E that had once been owned by Steve McQueen. Unfortunately, your article is plagued, in many instances, with factual inaccuracies. From the outset, you should understand that Mr.
McQueen never drove the subject vehicle at any time and never made use of the vehicle for any purpose. Rather, his purchase of the vehicle was solely as a gift for his wife Barbara Minty-McQueen. Thus, the car was never “regularly occupied by Mr. McQueen” and it is further entirely impossible that there could be “McQueen DNA” anywhere within the vehicle.”

Later in the article you go on to say “I know McQueen will have ragged it most of the time,” which obviously is impossible as he never operated or drove the vehicle.

Lastly, you describe a feeling that Mr. McQueen might have had while operating the vehicle which again could never have occurred. While you are certainly entitled to some literary license, the fact remains that you have misrepresented the vehicle as having been driven and used by Steve McQueen.

and my response:

Thank you for publicly engaging on Chad’s behalf. I own the Porsche 911 featured in this article and have been trying to discuss my concerns with him for some time.

As for Steve McQueen’s DNA ever being in it, the evidence always said otherwise. Photographed by Barbara Minty-McQueen in 1979, she identified it in her book of 2006 as the Porsche 911 that was “pushed to the limit by Steve, who drove down Pacific Coast Highway in excess of 100 mph.”. She did not say it was the car McQueen bought for her and is on record recently about that one saying “it ended up with Chad”.

Published information says that until 2007, Chad falsely believed the Porsche 911 he had was the one from his father’s movie Le Mans. But when the real one turned up elsewhere, an ambitious rookie author told him otherwise but got it massively wrong. A mistake proven to him in October 2017, “you’ve invested many paragraphs to make certain I know I’m an idiot”. With his offer in February 2018 “to put this right” panning out as just more lies. It’s not Classic Cars who need to retract, it’s Matt Stone but he refuses to.

You’ve declared yourself as Chad’s counsel, so please tell him I didn’t go public long ago because I think he’s being conned by someone he considers a friend. When the truth was clear to me but aware of his head trauma in 2006, the car told me he should hear about this betrayal from me first. I now consider that obligation met, with the offer to fully read you in on all the information I can provide to better inform Chad about what’s going on.

Academic protocol with issues of disputed history allows the published authority the last resort of insisting I publish my car’s history for wider adjudication. The Classic Cars article was the start and it’s future history file is soft launched online now. I would prefer to resolve this without embarrassing Chad but will establish the truth publicly if that’s what it takes. With Matt Stone already blaming Chad for misleading him, my concern is that the press will focus on the scandal rather than what’s important, the cars involved and their true histories.

Daniel Parker
therealmcqueen911@gmail.com

Mr. Gooch has yet to respond and I see the Classic Cars statement as a right of reply and not a retraction. My substantial grounds for doubt about Matt Stone's identification of Chad's car being the 1969 car are already posted here:

https://therealmcqueen911.com/Where-did ... e-go-wrong

For anyone interested, my account of the history of all McQueen's 911's is posted here:

https://therealmcqueen911.com/McQueen's-Porsche-911s

Which car is which is pretty clear now and as Shakespeare said, "the truth will out". My car went from being the prior claimant, to being called a mystery in Matt Stone's first edition in 2007 and was then the only car deleted from his second edition of 2010. When the inconvenient truth first got swept under the carpet.

Despite my best efforts to do this decently, it looks like it's the car's living history that's going to be the focus now. I think McQueen fans, classic car and Porsche people will be appalled by the hypocrisy this is going to expose in all those who promote themselves as the caretakers of McQueen's car guy legend. I already know what McQueen would think,

"I'm out of the Midwest. It was a good place to come from. It gives you a sense of right or wrong and fairness, which is lacking in our society."

So time to blow the whistle.

[gridgway]

It's always strange when you come to a story that you have absolutely no idea about what it is and what it means. You think what on earth does it matter whether he drove it or not to the extent that a lawyer representing SM's soon writes a letter about it.

Then you realise there's much more to the story than you realise.

Could anyone precis it for the uninitiated please?

Thanks
Graham

[964RS]

One thing is for certain, the McQueen family will do everything they can to desperately protect every cent associated with Steve McQueens financial legacy....

Personally I've always preferred Paul Newman as an actor, racer and individual...

Neither of them cared what I thought though

[cubist]

Didn't Paul McQueen once drive a Ford Capri in a film about mullets? Or was it Steven Newman in that film with Rene from 'Allo 'Allo about borrowing paintings? Either way, i'm not so sure it really matters...

[alfacat]

Hello There
Thank you for filling in the detail.
I was sure there was an interesting story behind the ‘note’ and it’s odd wording.
I hope done of this gets in the way of your enjoying driving and owning of the car!

All the best
Ian F.

[Sam]

I think McQueen fans, classic car and Porsche people will be appalled by the hypocrisy this is going to expose in all those who promote themselves as the caretakers of McQueen's car guy legend.

I suspect a more likely reaction is nonplussed.