Chassis 1C/10S Updated Information

Responding to the remark about Bamford, Phil Hill used to tell the story about going to pay a courtesy call on Enzo years after he had retired, and as the conversation was winding down Phil idly asked if the the old "junk pile" was still out back. The old man became enraged, and accused Phil of only coming to see him to talk him out of it! We can conclude from that that the old man knew what he had, and realized that it had value. It is true that Bamford later bought some or most of it, all in one batch, I think. I saw, at Bamford's, several strange engines, including 206S, 246S, I think a 248 or 268, and of course the infamous 2-cylinder.

 

Hi Bill

Can you clarify/enlarge on some of your statements please? I (and probably others) would really appreciate your insights into this interesting puzzle.

(posts 476/7 appeared while I was writing this but I'll let it stand)

1. ''Possibly of Ferrari origin but even so it had none of the 1947-1948 style (version 1 through 3) features found on the earliest cars.''
-Please specify which features you mean.

2 '' The "1" stamp... lets just say not quite so legit and in an obviously wrong and inappropriate location.''
-I understood this stamp wasn't revealed until after your inspection, and also that it was later found in the position in which Napolis indicated to look (from comparison with his car). If so how come ''wrong and inappropriate location''?

3.''I have my ideas but only Nowak's details and correspondences on the car tell the real story. (They are not mine to print or post, so do not ask.)''
-Will you be asking the current holder of Nowak's info for permission to share this?

4.''The only really early components on the car were those from the Spyder Corsa. The engine and all other bits and pieces all early 1950s components and none cast or assembled prior to 1950.''
- Do you not agree it's possible that the chassis, steering box, pedals, front suspension, brakes, hubs & wheels COULD all be ''really early''?
- If not which of these definitely aren't?

5.''Nowak was involved with this car prior to its sale and long after as he communicated frequently with the owner. Those who want the real truth need to focus there research here on what he and the owner did and stop guessing what might have happened before their involvement with the car.''
- Which owner are you referring to, the present or previous?

Many thanks in anticipation of your response...

 

For Jim; No one I have spoken with or corresponded with nor have I ever seen in any publication any indication that any Ferrari chassis sequences even remotely relates to a "10S." The "10S" stamped in number is however does look real and period correct. Just not exactly "Ferrari" correct. It is a stamping that I believe I found and uncovered purely by accident during my inspection of the car. It was covered by period flat-black / grey paint as well as more than a few layers of dirt, grease and oil. It was in the more or less correct area that Ferrari used as did other "Gilco" frame consumers from 1950 on to about 1956.

For Jeff; I have copies of the Nowak letter with a paragraph related to this specific car. It states:

RE: Ed William - Years ago I removed the Motto spyder body from 002C and sold it to a man in upstate New York. William bought it from him and put it on an old chassis he had - probably a 166 Inter with an odd chassis number. I don't know what he claims he has bit it isn't 002C and it isn't 0002M. you might tell him I will be there to carefully inspect his car!!

I do not have permission to post the letter as his has "dirt" on many of Nowak's other treasures and trash that went through his hands over the years.

Nowak did however inspect as well as correspond with the owner eventually realizing he was the original source of the chassis the body was fitted to. He never knew what the chassis originally came from but thought it was similar to a late 166 Inter.

What is interesting is that this letter was written on November 3rd, 1987 and even then, he knew that the chassis number on the frame was odd and out of sequence.

I do not know how Ferrari was organized initially with relation to clients. From my conversations with Rogliatti and the Prince, It sounded rather chaotic and not very profitable. At least initially. Ferrari's decision to cancel circa 1947 their existing fastener contracts shocked both management and his workers. The decision to build race cars put them in a panic as few could see anyway of making any money with such a venture. The earliest clients where always told they were the "only clients" and they were shocked on more than one occasion to find themselves gridded up at a race alongside another privateer in another early Ferrari! The Prince also told me he had a very angry phone call with Enzo directly over receiving his new Ferrari just prior to a race and finding the car completely thrashed or "Usato!"

Bill Noon

 

Bill,

I am trying to fully understand what is meant by "original source of the chassis". Is the implication that Ed William built up the car using various bits and pieces around a chassis he acquired?

Is it known who else Gilco was making chassis for in this general timeframe and if any of these others used frames that were of similar design to the Ferrari?

Jeff

 

Ok... I just spent 20 minutes going through the 66 photos and measurements that I took of the car during my inspection as well as Nowak's private correspondences. My thoughts and conclusions on what the car was assembled from and by whom remain the same. The thing that really stands out is the late style frame points and shock mounts. These are obvious late style features found on the Gilco frames. There used to be an Alfa Nardi with an old racer in New York that had the same suspension set up. I wonder if the brakes were the same as well. Stu Schaller probably has some thoughts on this.

Cheers,

Bill

 

Bill, can you post some of your pictures. Many of us would really like to see them thanks tongascrew

 

Could this frame be from something other than a Ferrari?

Dr. Stu?

 

This one has been making me nuts for 20+ years! I would like to see what Classiche has to say, and the documents they have. I am not sure what the chassis started out as; S/N #001..but it MAYBE NOT FERRARI! (Although I think that it IS one of the first 3 Ferrari chassis, but maybe not the first Ferrari chassis). I NEED to see what Classiche has!!!

I would also like to hear what Mr.Massini has to say, but for some reason, he doesn't wish to comment on this car...which is, IMO, certainly understandable...possible legal BS, you know

It appears to me 001 was modified by Ferrari into one of the 159/166 styles circa 1948-1949; S/N #010I.

Gilco made chassis for a LOT of people; some to their own design, and some to the designs of various companies, including Ferrari.

There are other Gilco chassis that have been making me crazy for a LONG time. One is under a car that was called the Goldmanini (or Cisitalia Gilco barchetta with Motto coachwork). It is ABSOLUTELY a Gilco chassis, but was designed by Savonuzzi. Gilco has no drawings of it, other than notes that more than one chassis was built to Savonuzzi designs!

I have found at least 3 other Gilco Cisitalias, but they are siluros. The car above is a barchetta! The barchetta was an ex-Paul Farrago car, and has been owned by Peter Zobian in Cambria, California for 40 years. When he found it, it had a Mercedes 190 motor in it! He got the original Cisitalia/Abarth 204 style motor later that Farrago got directly from Savonuzzi. The car MIGHT be an SVA and NOT a Cisitalia (Tipo 203??!!). It is undergoing restoration VERY slowly, as Peter (and I) want it to be put back EXACTLY as it was built!

I am also researching a car that came to the US as a Giaur, BUT IS NOT! It has a Gilco chassis, a body by Luigi Fabbri of Bologna WITH THE COACHMAKER PLATE STILL THERE (Fabbri DID work for Giaur at times). The first motor was a Lancia Ardea destroked to 750cc from 903cc, and with 2 1bbl Weber 22DRS downdrafts, a trick crank, etc. It later had a Moretti 750 bialbero, and still later, a Keikhoffer modified Mercury outboard! Gilco has no blueprints of the chassis. I am trying to find a proper Lancia Ardea gearbox and 5-speed for the owner WITH the proper "hot rod" stuff, but even finding a dead stock engine and gearbox that needs to have a crank made to destoke it is VERY difficult. The body is decent, but the chassis needs a LOT of work, and it's impossible to figure out exactly how it was originally, due to the various motors that were in the car. All we can do is the best we can do...

Gilco (now called Trafiltubi) has a website, but it is far from complete. There is some stuff that they DO have, but it is not catalogued.

Website link:

http://www.gilcodesign.com/


The Nardi chassis are somewhat different than the Gilco chassis; and generally have more and smaller tubes..

 

Interesting.

I agree at this point Classiche may have some answers. It would be very interesting to know if they have any records regarding a chassis stamped 10S. The other parts are early and special but IMO one can't assume they were originally attached to this chassis.

As an aside 002 (C) is back in Modena for a final restoration.

As for Stan. He was a friend but I think it's fair to say that not everything he wrote, thought or said turned out to be correct.

Best

 

I have the following.

odd #'s

001S/003S/005S/007S/009S/0011S

even #'s

Consecutive including 0010M

I don't see room for a 166 Inter as an even # 10S

I don't see any missing chassis.

Other's????

 

I made an officially request to Ferrari in May of last year just prior to the RM Auction. The very short and simple answer was; "We hold records for 010I and 0010MM but not for a 10S, 010S or 0010S."

The earliest records are not as well organized as some of the later vehicles. This was a straight enough answer for me and I did not enquire further.

I still believe the "10S" to be a period correct stamping, just not necessarily one from Ferrari.

I have had a lot of requests for more info and details on 010I (01C/010I.) Although I have not been involved with this car for more than ten years, the simplest answer I can give to most of the questions is that I met with Rogliatti at the Factory in May of 1997. We had already been corresponding for a couple of years specifically about the car. At that point he worked only a few days a week usually on Friday. He was most polite and extremely informative. Ferrari's internal records for 01C simply state that the chassis was given the latest updates, engine, gearbox and bodywork etc... and sold new as 010I to the first private owner. During my meeting in Paris with him, he stated emphatically he was displeased with the car specifically because it was both used and that he felt he had an exclusive agreement to be Ferrari's only private racing client. He had other issues and problems with Ferrari over this car and the others he purchased and became an official non-Ferrari client after 1950.

Bill Noon

 

The question of this being a Gilco made chassis for a manufacturer other than Ferrari seems most improbable.

That Gilco could offer a similar overall frame design to another customer is possible, but to incorporate the exact front suspension wishbone pick up points & steering box/steering arm pivot locations of the Ferrari for another manufacturers frame - surely not, as it would require someone else to be using copies of the Ferrari components.

This is assuming that the 1C/10S chassis is showing no signs of these points having been altered, and certainly there has been no mention of this. Can this be confirmed please?

 

GILCO sold finished and un-finished chassis to anyone who wanted to purchase them up to about 1956.

You could provide them with your own drawings and design or buy what they suggested based on desired dimensions and weight.

Even some 1940s and early 1950s Maseratis were fitted with GILCO Chassis. Stu probably knows the other manufacturers that used them.

The 10S car I saw, measured and inspected had no provision or pick-up / mounting points for the original early style and ludicrously inadequate hydraulic tubular shocks. The late style lever action shocks fitted to 10S were the same found on most early 1950s Italian cars and quite common.

The wheel-base measurements I took were close but front and rear track where way-off. Check with Tom Shaughnessy for what he came up with as did others the same day.

Bill Noon

 

As Bill said, Gilco would build chassis for anyone. They did Maseratis, and even Nardi used their tubing in the 1948 Nardi Alfa 6c2500s which are pretty big, as is the Alfa 6c2300 AMP special!

Gilco tubing was also used in the AMP....Alfa/Martignoli/Prete 6c2300...and no, the M is NOT for Maserati, it is for Tino Martignoli, the guy who designed the and built the car for Prete. There is not a single Maserati piece on the car!) Tino passed away about 15 years ago in Hollywood California, and for a long time had a Ferrari shop called Marcor 1/4 block south of Santa Monica Blvd, about 1/2 milke east of La Brea.

I would still like to know what Marcel thinks and see what documentation Classiche has, as they say this IS the first car, built as a 125, and later modified to a Tipo 159/166...

Nardi Alfa 6c2500 and Alfa AMP special pictures below...
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

You must remember that Busso and Colombo were bouncing up and back between Alfa and Ferrari, and their stories are TOTALLY different about which one of them did what!!

 

I would ASSUME that 01C crashed and was turned into 010I..but I have no evidence of this....

I have no idea why you are bringing 001S into the equasion...

 

Stu & Bill:

I understand that Gilco would build a chassis for anyone, but surely the unique layout of the pick up points for the double wishbone Ferrari suspension would not be used (or useable) by others. In order for these points to work it would require the Ferrari (or exact dimensional copy) wishbones & front uprights to be used. Also of course the use of an identical transverse leaf spring, the same steering box, and the same steering idler box and steering arms.

Can you point to any other car of the period using Ferrari's front suspension & steering components?

I note that Colombo states (page 19) that the first chassis was designed to have 'The pivot of the upper rod ((he means the upper wishbone pivot rod)) directly controlled by the internal lever of the special hydraulic shock-absorber of the Ferrari type, made by Houdraille (sic)'. This is clearly a design for a lever shock, and thus one would not expect to find a mounting point for a telescopic/tubular shock.

 

No, but we have only about 1/4 the early Gilco information available. A LOT of the early Gilco stuff was trash binned many years ago That's part of the resaon I want to see what Classiche has, and would love to hear Marcel's thoughts....

 

How many specials were built at this time? Does it seem reasonable to you that one could have been built on this chassis and stamped 10S by it's mfg.?

 

I'm sorry to go banging on about this, but this chassis can't be from a special unless that special WAS MADE USING FERRARI FRONT SUSPENSION & STEERING. If that were the case then I am pretty sure we would have heard of such a car.

Or does someone disagree?

 

The steering box on the 10S car has a sequential NI "numero interno" of "M02" that puts its casting date sometime in late September through to early November 1949. They appear from the cars I have been able to inspect to have been fitted rather randomly and not always in sequence to the numbers and assignments to various chassis. In any case, steering boxes rarely wear out or are thrown away. There are a few references and I have had several Ferraris with old / new / out of sequence boxes fitted to various cars. I therefore can draw no hard conclusions one way or another about this box only that it was cast sometime late in 1949.

The front suspension on 10S are parts bin production 166 / 212 items. The lever actions shocks much later pieces and not early Ferrari items in anyway. The early 1947-1948 Ferraris all used crappy piston / hydraulic shocks that were a joke. The frame of 10S lacks any provision / bosses and pick-up points for this obvious early Ferrari specific feature.

The frame of 10S visually looks closely like a production Gilco 166 Inter item but the odd track dimensions make me think it was used by another builder, privateer or somehow was modified from the original 166 design. By whom and when, I have no idea.

Gilco stamped the production Ferrari Frames with their own part number (drawing reference number) as well as the "NI" of the car it was assigned to by Ferrari and the type number. I found no hidden Gilco numbers on the front boss suspension pick-up points on these cars. Admiral Philips and his son might pipe in hear as they are the ones who first taught me about these numbers and their importance. Their absence does not mean it is not a Gilco chassis but this process started sometime in 1951-1952.

All of which combined with everything else still makes me think this car was put together no early than September of 1949 and no later than the Fall of 1950. If you take into account the engine and gearbox the private assembly and fitting of the various pieces based on production and casting dates this makes very good sense.

Bill