Chassis 1C/10S Updated Information

This discussion is very interesting!

I have a quick question: Wasn't the first Gilco chassis that was delivered to Ferrari rejected for being too heavy. What became of that chassis?

Regards,

Art S.

 

No one knows...and there were TWO designs that were rejected, designed by Busso....info directly from Busso himself!

 

Possible. At least 50 chassis were built by Gilco BEFORE they built anything for Ferrari!

 

but do they have any records for 01C???

 

The absence of the Ferrari type/part number/version stamping on the front suspension boss does not necessarily mean that the GILCO chassis was not for a Ferrari as it is missing on some of the early, well documented, "no story" cars. If present it would have been a very strong indication that the chassis was in fact for Ferrari.

The numbering and dating of the steering boxes need not have any bearing on the date of the car assembly. For example 0556(0446) was assembled in May 1955. The steering box is dated February 1954. From the serial on the box we have determined that it originally was on the 1954 LeMans winning 375 Plus which was subsequently crashed in the Carrera Panamericana, returned to Ferrari for rebuild and eventually found its way to the assembly of 0556(0446).

 

Quite glad I am subscribed to this thread - very interesting reading from all contributors. The Vintage section here at F-Chat always pleases!

I am curious - has there been any attempt to determine the origin and history of this chassis prior to it's coming out party (if you will) in Palm Springs last year? If one person has had continuous possession of this car for the length of 4 decades, it would seem that doing this kind of research quite a while ago would have been more prudent. You'd have fresher memories and many more documents, drawings, and people to have used as resources back then. I guess if I was in a similar situation I might have wanted to know exactly what I had. Was this just not considered a priority for the owner until recently?

>8^)
ER

 

For Jawsalfa... you seem to be pushing for a conclusion I simply can not make. Others may add more but based on what I saw, photographed and measured on the frame stamped 10S did not have the machined and drilled pick-up points for the early type shocks. The lever actions ones fitted to the frame had frame aligned bosses and where quite professionally fitted. The front suspension was a standard type 1949 set up seen on various Ferraris and the rear suspension and frame type / shape / configuration was not even close to any of the early Gilco variations provided to Ferrari in 1947 and 1948. The steering box is a production 1949 piece seen on all 166 Inter, Export and MM models. I have photographs and NI recored for many similar steering boxes.

The frame may have had its origins with Gilco/Ferrari or possibly another manufacturer. That I can not tell at this time. The 10S number looks real and is in the correct position but does not follow patter or sequence nor does Ferrari identify any record for such a numbering sequence. The other stamped "1" on the cross member is more than a bit suspect and I simply won't go into that further.

I still think the body, steering wheel, gauges, wheels etc... are fantastic pieces. The chassis plate not so... proper looking... but kinda cool in an odd way.

My conclusions is that this is a very cool period "Special" possibly based on an original Ferrari Chassis. Certainly with an early 1950s Ferrari engine and gearbox...

Others are of course welcome to disagree.

Bill

 

We need to find out what Classiche has (if anything) on 001C....

 

Bill,

I think everyone agrees that this is a bitsa / special with bits from numerous sources. You say that the car has professionally fitted lever shocks which, to me, does not discount the early chassis theory since the factory would likely do a professional job if they recycled/upgraded the chassis. However, I'm a bit confused; jawsalfa (the son of the owner) states that there are signs of a previous suspension set-up and you emphatically disagree. What does the owner claim is present and what are you expecting? There are pictures of the suspension in the first few pages of this thread for us to refer to.


Regards,

Art S.

PS. Can someone post pictures of the various early chassis as some of the links from the early part of the thread are now dead.

 

The early frames had machined bosses with reenforced areas that were then die-tapped and drilled on all four corners. On top of each of the corners on most of the early frames was a single digit number and sometimes a number and a letter. All four where the same and are a classic early Gilco frame feature.

The frame stamped 10S has none of the areas machined and built up to mount these types of shocks. The lever actions ones fitted look like normal set up for any late 1940s early 1950s Italian oval tube frame car. There are lots of signs that the 10S frame was worked on and over in years gone by but no provision for the mounting of the large, heavy castings that made up the housings for the early shocks.

The use of these type of shocks as in the early 5-speed gearboxes and large wall main engine bearings were all dead-ends from an engineering perspective. Thin wall bearings, off-the-shelf lever action shocks and a heavily revised 5-speed gearbox quickly replaced the earlier designs. Even the 5-speed gearbox was deemed a dead end and replaced for a while by a well designed four-speed unit in the early 1950s.

By the time Ferrari started supplying 166 Inter / Export and MM cars to clients and team racers on a regular basis, most of the early faults had been well sorted out. The last real dead end from an engineering perspective was the short period in which Ferrari thought building his own bodies might be a good way of saving time and money. The few in-house bodies done in the early 1950s where not much of a success and Touring, Vignale and later PF remained the staple body suppliers until Scaglietti showed he could do the same work in less time for less money.

The rest as they say is history.

Bill

 

Bill,

What is your take on the brakes? Setting aside discussion on the frame there is an allegation that the brakes are of the very earliest design with marking that pre-date those on Napolis' car.

Jeff

 

Art

The one thing you have to keep in mind is that Ferrari does not recognise a chassis stamped "10S", nor has there ever been any record of a "10S" Ferrari racing anywhere in period, nor does "10S" fit into any Ferrari numbering system. When you say modified by the factory while it may have been modified in a factory in period IMO until the riddle of the stamping is solved one can not assume that Ferrari had anything to do with this car. Ferrari has publically stated that 01C was used for 010I by issuing a Classiche Chassis Plate to that effect. "1" nor "1C" are the number thought for years and in Ferrari records as the first car: "01C".

002 is in Modena and available for comparison and Ferrari has already spend time with "01C/010I". At this point the only way I see this chassis being recognised as a Ferrari is if Ferrari or someone else can show that a Ferrari with "10S" ever existed or that
this chassis is a Ferrari Chassis and that for some reason someone removed it's original stampings and stamped 10S/1/1C on it in various places. (Some believe/believed this chassis is 031S for example.) IMO "10S/1C/1" still make no sense.

Best

 

The brakes are early Type 125 road car units with a part number 68222. These correspond to normal 166 Inter type brakes used well into 1950.

I had the same set up on my own 166-195 Inter, s/n 0079S.

The early competition cars had brakes with three to five radial cooling slots as well as front plate lightning holes. The ones one 010I were magnesium and I believe the one's on the Clark 166 Spyder Corsa are also made of magnesium.

As an interesting point with Ferrari Type numbers, they were never replaced with a new type number until a better design came along. I am continually amazed when opening up early 1960s era Tipo 168 engines and finding parts like water pump housings etc... with a 125 casting number. Some of the mid-to late 1940s castings remained in use on the colombo engines up to at least 1964! Not all the early designs were as bad an idea as things like the thick-wall bearings, cast hydraulic shocks etc...

Bill

 

Classiche SAYS it was built as 001C...but has anyone seen the documentation they have to substantiate this as fact?

 

Two separate issues here. 01C and 10S. I met the owner of 01C/010I and he told me that Ferrari did have records that showed 01C's scrapped chassis was repaired and used to make 010I at a later date by Ferrari and that that documentation was part of the Classiche process and the chassis plate Classiche issued which lists both 01C and 010I.

The issue of 1/1C/10S not being Ferrari chassis numbers remains.

 

Jim G.,

I'm discounting the stampings already and, of course I don't expect Ferrari's input on a car they have not reviewed. Actually, the fact that everything seems to be stamped 1C reduces my confidence; I don't recall the same being true with your car. However, there are aspects of this frame that closely match aspects of your car and I am trying to understand if this is simply a result of its gilco ancestry or specific to a Ferrari ancestry.


Bill,

I kind of understand what you are saying but still don't have a clear vision. I guess this is one of those times where a picture is worth a thousand words. So far, for me, this whole thread sounds like the story of the group of blind men and the elephant.



Regards,

Art S.

 

It's the 10S stamp that bothers me. 10S isn't a Ferrari number.

Best

 

It would seem that the time has come where the only way to progress this is going to be to remove the body and strip and measure the chassis.

I get the impression that Ed isn't planning to drive the car much beyond maybe taking it to the occasional show, and hope that maybe he would enjoy the forensic process enough to undertake or allow this.

Have you discussed this with your father, John?

 

Are we back to talking about 01C/010I or 10S??

What I would like is copies of whatever documentation Classiche used to state 01C(125)/010I(166) actually is the first Ferrari, plus I would like to know where the S/N 10S fits in, as I agree with Jim that it is a strage chassis number........

 

seems from the hard times after the war, nothing was "thrown away".


very interesting thread.

 

1C/10S (as in the thread title)!

Remember this chassis has '1', '1C', and '10S' stamped on it, and we don't know when any of them were stamped and what they refer to. My suggestion is that if the body is removed and the chassis taken back to bare metal there is a fair chance that it will be clearer what was original to the chassis, and what was added later, and what was removed - especially the question of the shock absorber mounts.

Also it will be easy to measure the positions of whichever original front suspension pivot points & steering mounting points remain, and to compare them with for example Jim's chassis. Ditto the front crossmember, and the other chassis bracing as once it's stripped it should be clear which welds are original and which are later. This should show pretty clearly if it's a Ferrari chassis or some other Gilco chassis modified after the event.

I'm also curious why Bill Noon is so sceptical of the '1' stamp which seems to have been there for 40 years and was revealed in the position corresponding to the stamp on Jim's car. If it's not something that can be made public for whatever reason perhaps he could share his information with John (Jawsalfa). In fact Bill, why not be completely open with John in private about the nature of all your reservations which are only hinted at in your public posts?

 

Really! Being relatively new to early Ferrari provenance compared to those contributing to this thread I am trying to follow the reasoning and data being discussed about this car. I have followed this thread from the beginning when the car was just coming "out of the closet".My file on this car continues to grow and what strikes me is how the interest in this car has grown and changed from"just another fake" to the possibolity of it having real Gilco/Ferrai connections. Without going back I believe I entered a post long ago that this could possibly be a back yard special using many discarded Ferrai parts. I particularly like Bill's post #508 about the possibility of a "very cool period"special"..." Personally I think he is probably spot on. There are other "sery cool period special" out there such as the Biondetti Ferrari Jaguar for one which are accepted in the hallowed Ferrari historicals. If in fact Classiche is correct that 10S was originally built as 001C then this car belongs in the fold. There are many possibilities of where the various Ferrari parts on this car came from. The one I like is of course, my own, which states that the chassis and other parts were "pinched" from the Ferrari scrapheap over time and then assembeled in someone's barn as a home spun spare time project with no real malicious intent. Sort of a "flat head T bucket" home built hot rod. I really hope this discussion continues and Bill will post some of his recent photos. just one man's opinion tongascrew