Chassis 1C/10S Updated Information

The 1946 drawings from the Colombo book appear to show a 1255mm front track and a 1200mm rear track. The w/b doesn't show, but based on trying to measure it by scaling up the drawing, it appears to be about 2500mm.

What is more interesting is that on this drawing, the center cross-brace just rear of the tail end of the gearbox is a simple "X", rather than the more complicated brace shown on the 166 on the Gilco site, as below..

http://www.gilcodesign.com/doc/des/Ferrari125.htm

This page from the Gilco book is also very interesting, as the "photo" at the top of the page seems to show a simple "X" cross-brace, but the line drawing seems to show the more complicated one!

 

Great Link!

More 002C @ Targa:

http://www.youtube.com/user/napolisjmg

 

Here is the 1946 Colombo drawing, showing the cross-brace as a simple "X".


By dretceterini at 2008-07-02

 

You car really see the smaller rear track in that drawing.

Best

The chassis on the web site looks very much like 002C's.

Best

 

Wouldn't track be measured from the center of the rim?

Are some tires not symetrical side to side?

Tom W

 

Yes, technically from center of rim to center of rim. Back then, (as far as I am aware) all tires were symmetrical

 

Not to kick in an open door, but neither car would have come with a Smiths revcounter (Jaguar?)

 

I was talking about Bill Noon's measurments in the field of 1C front track. As the car was sitting with tires mounted on grass the measurement would not be exact.

002C's Jaeger rev counter is correct.

 

Yes, of course.

Measuring track is pretty tough in the field with a tape, if you want it exact.

Tom W

 

Jim,

Not attacking your revcounter's originality!

The first series of pics posted of 1C shows a Jaguar-style (not Jaeger) Smiths revcounter on the right hand side, and I think it highly doubtful that such an instrument would have been original to the car when it left the factory, nor to the Mtta body.

Btw, the youtube links show me a NLA; is that right?

 

Hi

I thought you meant the shot of 002C's rev counter in one of the videos.

NLA ???

Best

 

No Longer Available?

There are three videos on my page:

http://www.youtube.com/user/napolisjmg

 

Jim,

Yes, no longer available.

I just tried again and the same message was displayed.

 

Strange as it comes up for me. Try rebooting. I'll check from a different computer.

Best

 

They just worked for me.

 

All 3 work for me...

 

These are the drawings made up by Colombo.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Once again, Amazing pics Boudewijn! keep up the good work!

 

The problem is that there is no record of any chassis stamped 1C or 10 S that has come to light anywhere. The other problem is that there is no stamping on the left side of the front cross member where it would normally be. That is probably the next step. Removing the paint on the front cross member to see if there is any trace of a stamping on that tube at all or to try and determine if that tube is original.

It would also be telling to see a shot of that entire cross rail. If it is from an early car it will have a cutout in it to allow a hand crank to pass through and engage the crank like 002C chassis does.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

One stamping on the left side of the front cross tube. (Left side facing towards the nose) (Right side facing rear)

Facing the rear the stamp reads 002.

 

Typical, I go away on vacation for a week and miss everything.

jawsalfa,

Thank you for posting the pictures and starting this thread. I enjoyed meeting your father at the Palm Springs show and having a chance to look around the car.

 

Is the center of the front crossmember notched like this to allow a Hand Crank to reach the engine?
Image Unavailable, Please Login