250 LM at Auction - s/n 6045

I feel that all available original and period parts of a car should be preserved, rebuilt and used at any rate. All these parts created the car's identity and any replacement, scrapping or destruction eliminates history and is just absurd and stuperous.

 

It was a detailed lecture followed by a Q&A session around the car with a massive documentation file tracing right back through the years. The Q&A went on for many hours and there were lots of interesting questions asked; needless to say with detailed and informed responses all backed up with documentation.

In response to PsK I don’t think you quite understand the car well enough. The Freshman car was a new chassis with the exception of the one tube that has the chassis number on (as previously noted on many well raced LM’s this tube is removable to aid engine removal!). the Freshman (“babci”) car was metal tested (and Marcel Massini was there when this was done) and then again by Ferrari, the results showed it was the wrong steel. Tests on the correct car showed it was the correct steel. Not a new chassis.
The original car was the original chassis but repaired at restoration, this is the same chassis and car that is now certified and being sold. Now it has the original engine back in it and the replica claiming the number has been destroyed. The car is classiche certified as having its original chassis, and engine .

It looks very good value in comparison to other estimates over the weekend!

 

Does anyone has any idea how the 250LM chassis is made and how it works? very simple to say lets keep original parts...me too, i want the original sandwich of Napoleon at Waterloo,,,for a comparison,,but it did not survive well...incidentally the LM we saw at Le Mans Classic was dripping fluid from ..the chassis...some of the sixties prototypes among which LM, Porsches and Alfa 33 had complex chassis that were used for fluid (oil and water) circulation as they are rear engined,,,so not just a piece of strong metal like the fifties chassis, they are hollow tubes that have to support the car but also withstand high pressure of super hot fluid, you burn yourself ( i checked) if you touch the chassis of the LM. So when you restore them you have to pressure test them and repair is not as simple as putting a little bit more metal.

Same applies to some metals like magnesium that oxidates badly. Anyone who pretends driving with original magnesium wheels of the sixties is a lunatic that sooner or later will have an accident as they can disintegrate instantly. So you can have them on he side and drive with brand new ones,,,what i did with the Stratos. and same applies with magnesium sumps as well that corrodes badly with time.

So restoring is not just philosophy and making a general statement, it is how actually we solve all the issues related to a car between making it a museum piece, a drivable piece, or a car racing piece again...last example NOS Englebert tires or Pirelli Stelvio look good at concours,,but the first thing one reasonable person does when buying a car is changing all the tires. I learnt that decades ago from the esteemed Brandon W (of GTO fame) and i still stick to this!

 

This is true, and very valueable information!

Sal Barone spoke to me about this when I visited Jim Glickenhaus' shop last year and saw both the P3/4 and the 412P under restoration. IIRC he had pressure tests undergone on those chassis semi-regularly. It's too bad he isn't here to share that information with us anymore, as it is very interesting and important.

 

Thank you.

So we can now say that Ferrari did not in fact start again and make a new chassis. Excellent news. We now have a repaired original chassis (as good as it can get for this car) and the original engine and I'm sure many other original parts. Good job Ferrari IMO.
Pete

 

Hilarious and very informative post. Thanks for sharing!

 

Interesting and much appreciated!

Was this detailed lecture given from RM or the seller? And which original period components of the frame were finally used *apart* of the original Freshman tube with the original chassis number? Pictures?

 

Any idea why this very estimate is in comparison that low?

 

+1! … feel free to take a McDonald’s burger but please keep Napoleon’s sandwich anyhow...

 

How do you know that ? I don't see an email address in babci's profile ? Maybe you are Mr Freshman ???

 

I have been watching this site for some time but have had no reason yet to post. However, having read the above and with my active interests beyond the marque in information security, I feel compelled to do so now.

As I see no way to contact babci, I must wonder how it is that you have acquired your information? This is heavy accusation and ungentlemanly behavior. You ought to prove your accusation, otherwise give up your attempts to discredit, if it can be called that. Further, your argument is completely irrelevant to the discourse at hand, s/n 6045.

I find it incredulous that moderators of this forum allow such behavior. My apologies for further derailment, but it must be said.

 

As a Moderator, and specifically as a Global Moderator, I feel compelled to respond to your post.

We moderators are not responsible for what users of this forum post. They are.

Our responsibility starts and ends with ensuring that the rules and terms of use of the forum, as designated by the forum owner, are followed.

A user being 'ungentlemanly' or making unfounded accusations is not against the rules.

It is, however, a clear exemplification of the type of person the user is. Once a user posts, it is up to the other users to decide whether or not they agree, disagree, support, or don't support the users' posted position or statement.

We rely on other users to report violations of the rules and terms of use. Please feel free to let us know of specific instances by clicking on the '!' in the upper right-hand corner of every post.

Mike

 

+1 Additional comments to follow when I have the time.

 

Welcome to the jungle. Very well said.

 

Thank you for that. As some one on this site who has been vilified by people who don't know me or my business ( even to the point of comments about my wife/marriage and personal a problems) and also been praised to the heavens on here by people whom I've helped over the years, I can tell you all without bias of the integrity of the moderators.

You will all forgive me if I get upset when someone I admire and look up to has his integrity questioned by morons.

I totally support this community, as it pays my mortgage...best thing I can hear from a client is " I read on Ferrarichat".......

I've only been working on Ferrari's for 30 years, so I am far from an expert in any shape or form...although I have met hundreds of them over the years , but I will tell you this, when I have questions about an old "dancing donkey" there is only two people in the world I call and trust. The first is Terry Hoyle and the other is Richard Freshman, ( who I met through Terry in 1987).

Neither of these two gentleman have a profile on or follow F-chat because they have bigger fish to fry, neither of them need anyone of us on this forum or care about our opinions, they have had more of the most valuable and significant Ferrari's pass through their hands, whether it be for restoration or as personal ownership, than most can dream about.
The first Ferrari I got to "play with" was Nick Masons 250GTO at Terry's shop...I was only 16 and to me it was just another old car ( I grew up with them ) , and now its still just another old car, just worth more....and if I showed you pictures of Richards personal cars you would all weep.

Bottom line regards this thread and car is I have implored Mr Freshman to log on here and set the record straight regards this/his car, I know the facts, but its not my place to say, and unless you where involved you are just passing on speculation and rumors.

The car being sold in Monterey is worth what someone is willing to pay for it ( just like any thing else). For the money it will probably fetch , to me personally is stupid, I would rather buy a TBM900 and put the rest under the mattress.

But it is what it is. Davidmo obviously has some interest/concern in the vehicle being sold
( DK engineering perhaps) which is why he is talking it up, and trashing Mr Freshmans car...but I will be there watching with interest.

As I have not yet seen this car I will be interested to see how close they got to the original 1mm aluminum body work. I hate working on it, but it impresses me every time I touch it. Can you say paper thin !!!

I will just sign off by saying if you have the money to buy this car, get a P1 or an F1 instead...you can drive and scare the **** out of yourself and I can get you help from the factory in the mother land....

 

Ive seen a body being built at carrozzeria sportscar a few years ago, could it be for 6045?
1mm is original and yes paper thin. Wonder what 6045 currently wears..
Imho a nice "new" "250LM"
Nice story by RM, wonder where they got all that correct info from.
sometimes its like a wonder tale

 

Which shop do you mean?

Marcel Massini

 

"Nice story by RM, wonder where they got all that correct info from. sometimes its like a wonder tale "

Comes from the vendors consigners DK Engineering and Luay Allawi who is noted as owner according to Barchetta .cc and page 9 item four of the RM Monterey digital (available on line) auction catalogue. +1 on your closing remark.

 

It is raining in Portofino and I enjoy time, unread magazines and to play with the computer …

I really trust that Classiche would sell a new chassis for a hard leaking LM, order one from Vaccari and certify it as an original. And if the Classiche inspector checks the right tubes, all leakadge problems would be solved and you have a much stronger chassis with much better measurements than in period. But is this really the best solution? Woudn’t the car have then an even bigger problem, especially when Classiche really destroys the replaced chassis (for being able to rectify the new one and the certification process)? And woudn’t such a *certified* replacement support the confused situation we already have in Goodwood and also in Le Mans, where hidden hybrids and full replicas are racing against mostly original cars? To go this way is a matter of taste, see GT40s. But if we do so, full transparency should be provided because there is no reasonable competition between a perfectly built new replica and an original car with a period chassis. I have no problem with this mix and Goodwood as well as Le Mans are really wonderful events. The cars are built to be used and without such a mix we would have – let’s be realistic - a rather poor show and only few cars. But this mix should be kept transparent and how can you ensure such transparency if you can replace and certify almost everything with the right financial set up?

But yes, it is no task for the faint to keep a sixties prototype fully functional and competitive with original bits and pieces (not talking about consumables). The early Tipo 33’s Electron parts are a very good example (as well as the aluminium H-chassis itself that contains the fuel tank). The Elektron doesn’t just weaken and break, it fell apart and “pulverizes” especially when the surface is hurt and doesn’t seal any more. You can try to stop the process with some resealing but the parts can’t be used any more. What to do? NOS parts (if available) have after fifty years the same problem and duplication with modern alloy is the only thing you can do. This is a logical and necessary replacement that keeps the car functional and if properly documented (e.g. in the FIVA-papers) *and* the original parts kept, the perfect (and only possible) solution. The same with all other security relevant bits and pieces like fuel tanks etc. BUT: if you can repair and preserve the original material - which created the car’s history - and continue to use it safely, this is certainly the way to go if you really care for originality. And this can be done from experienced specialists with every hard used and battled LM chassis.

6045 is what it is and this is the very question here. The sales description puts up more questions than answers and hardly provides any transparency. We can learn that the original engine, the original chassis tag, body remains and other original bits and pieces were with the Freshman car. Nevertheless it is claimed that the engine-, number- and bodyless remains should be the “original”. We further learn that the remains of this car were restored four times over a period of more than twenty years. DK did the Job 2009/10. Finally Classiche from 2011-2013 and they brought the chassis “… back to as-new condition”. What does that mean? A heavily damaged and repaired chassis never looks (and shouldn't look) "as-new". New chassis? What original chassis parts were used for that rebuilt *apart* of the original tube with the original tag? Pictures!? Why another rebuild from Classiche after DK already did a perfect job in 2009/10? David Moses was “most fortunate to attend a very interesting seminar … about this very car” (post 49) with a “very conclusive” documentation (post 53) and I would really appreciate, if he could kindly answer for transparency the open questions may be with a *relevant* documentation and pictures.

 

I think the cost would be supperior than a "normal" restoration.
A car not restored but preserved it s very complicated to have, to maintain.
We distinguish purist and conservative collector. In reality I prefer the second category.

 

I meant Autosport, Bacchelli & Villa

 

+1. Great post. Good questions.

 

A short film produced for RM Auctions about 250 LM #6045 which is up for sale.

250 LM on Vimeo

 

Sorry for the delay, I'm currently bobbing up and down in the Mediterranean and Internet access is sketchy! Hope its not still wet there, beautiful here! I'm afraid I possess no documents relating to the car. I'm sure they will be available for viewing at RM next week, I saw them in January at Palm Beach and they were very thorough, well worth going through if it clarifies things for you..