Chassis 1C/10S Updated Information

Hello John
According to Prancing Horse #III (1966) "Also another Farina in Colorado with a Buick Spl. V-8 engine, No 031-S".
So, Buick engine fitted?
Nathan

 

The rectangular steel (I agree) does not look original here at all, its not even well fitted nor does it appear to even be welded at the top. It looks to me like it was installed to support something above, like the floor or perhaps a seat.

It would not in any case add much if any to the torsional strength but it would stiffen the side rail of the frame in case of an impact.

Just my opinion.

Tom W

 

The oval tubes were used in the thirties, I happen to have read recently, in BMW motorcycles. For a given bending strength they are lighter than round.

I suspect if one looked one could find them in race cars from the thirties too such a alfa, Mercedes and others. I don't know how they're made but I suspect one might take round tube and put it in some kind of oval clamping device and heat to shape them.

It would have been a fairly expensive process and not used in inexpensive machines or where weight was not a premium.

Tom W

 

Hi Tom
You're quite right. According to a Ferrari authorised source the chassis tube was 92 x 55. I quote "After that he (Ferrari) called the man who had done the drawings for the chassis and asked (Gilbert 'Gilco') Colombo to make two of those; glancing at the drawings Colombo saw that the design asked for oval tube of 80mm x 40mm; he suggested that an elliptical tube of 92 x 55mm and a wall of only 1.5mm be used instead, as this was the wall size that could be obtained from a round steel tube of 89mm diameter and a 3mm wall thickness and that was adopted"
Nathan

 

I'm not sure when the drawings in post 315 and 316 first became available, but I first saw them about 20-25 years ago. I don't think Nowak modified 01C/010I. As far as I am aware, he never had any involvement with the car. What I am saying are there are too many things about the chassis that don't seem fit, yet Ferrari has certified it as being real.


As to ovoid tubing; it's my understand that Gilco was the first company able to extrude tubing that was ovoid in section and tapered in length.

 

If I was building that chassis, and I wanted to add strength, I would have used more oval tubing. If I was a hot rodder in the US, and didn't have oval tube, I would have used rectangle tubing.

 

Nathan,

I thought that it was concluded that this chassis is not 31S.



Michael and Stu,

Thank you for your responses.

Regards,

Art S.

 

Tom you are right. The Mercedes W125 had tubular frame members and so did some 540Ks. I'm sure other cars did too although I don't know which. Oval tubes are not stronger in all dimensions. Round tubes are equally strong in all directions. Ovals are not. They are strongest in the widest direction and weaker in the narrow dimension. This is why the oval chassis tubes are installed vertically...

It's hard for me to imagine that oval tubes were made by compressing round ones. Note the picture above, the tube dimensions taper from front to rear.... Does anybody know how the Gilco tubes were made?

 

I am confused... is there a typo or translation glitch here? Or was the wall thickness changed? Seems hard to believe that a 3mm wall thickness could have been reduced to 1.5 if this is what is meant in the quote....

 

I think he means that with a taller oval section the thickness could be reduced enough to save weight overall.

I imagine the tapered ovals were cut in a pie shape and welded to bring back their integrity. Tricky stuff, but Modena is historically a region of metal workers, before there were cars I think they made body armour, among other things, so when you think about that, maybe the oval tapered tubes were child's play for them!

Tom W

 

Yes....exactly.

Tom W

 

It's my understanding taht the tubes were extruded.

 

Tom you are right, a taller section allows for thinner metal in regards to the strong (long axis) direction but it also weakens the horizontal strength of the tube. Of course, as with most things, it's a matter of balance as you allude.

And yes the tubes could have been fabricated in pieces as you suggest and welded back together. I'm sure the talent was available to do that. And we're talking about the first frames too, so this technique might have been tried once or twice. But this method is lot of work and a structurally questionable way to go. Each weld has to be done properly to maintain the tube's integrity. dretceterini's extrusion is a far stronger solution and seems more likely. Note Web research suggests that Gilberto's father was tapering tubes for airplane production in the 1920s.

 

Hi Art
This chassis was SOLD by Ferrari on 9 Jun 1949 as 031S - a 166 Inter. Stabilimenti Farina Berlinetta. This is well known and well documented. In the years after it was bought it lost its engine and also the bodywork, but the chassis still remains as 031S.
Recently, questions were asked as to whether 031S was built on an older chassis as Ferrari had done with 010I for example. This chassis appears to be an earlier chassis but as yet no one has established what.
But back in 1966 - which is the year the quote came from - this car was known as 031S. What it's called when/if any definite decision is made remains to be seen.
Best
Nathan

 

Unless there is another definition of extrusion, the only extrusion method that I know of is used for aluminum and plastic, that I am aware of, and by definition would be a constant diameter over its length and by definition could not be a circle as the inside surface length and the outside surface length must be equal. This type of extrusing uses a die and the material is forced through it under very very high pressure.

Tom W

 

Try this link:

http://www.heavytubes.com/process2.htm

 

Tom, I'm no expert on this subject but there are numerous ways to extrude any kind of metal etc. (as referred to above). In the course of researching Gilco last night I learned that Colombo's father produced tapered tubes in the 1920s. I would guess that this was done with cold drawing (metal pulled through dies of decreasing sizes). Perhaps something like this was done to create the frame irregular frame tubes. It seems that similar tubes could have been drawn for the car frames and the heated and re-formed to create the car frames. Just a guess....

Can anybody with access to the subject cars tell us if the side rails are one piece or welded up from pieces?

Jon

 

Nathan,

I was basing my comment on Kare's post #43 earlier in this thread ( http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=203274&page=3 ) and the discussion which surrounded it. Are of the opinion that this is 031S?

Regards,

Art S.

 

Art the ONLY stamping (So Far) on the chassis is 10S so why would this be 031S?????

Interesting discussion of the Provenance of a car coming up to Auction in August...

http://forums.autosport.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=101499

 

Thanks for the link. I looked at that and wanted to look at the illustration referred to in the text but did not see how to do that ( I am a computer dummy).

I did not see the word extrude used there. They talked of "Drawing", "annealing" and another word I am not familiar with (Pildging?).

It referred to seamless tubes but I did not see any illustration of how they would be manufactured. I did not see any reference to making tapered tubes this way.

I am not saying extrude is a wrong term I am just saying I have no knowledge of it in this application.

Tom W

 

I'm not sure of the actual date of this photo, but it is from Ludvigsen's "Ferrari the factory: Maranello's Secrets 1950-1975. It dates the photo as 1951, and shows two chassis with the notches in the front crossmembers. Can't make out any chassis numbers on the front chassis, but the rear chassis has 150A chalked on it's side..


[img=http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/9656/ferrarichassis1951fx3.th.jpg]

 

Typical 166/195/212 Inter road car chassis as posted by me in #288.
Welded X section and underslung frame.