The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Never knew the frame actually ran THROUGH the spaghetti exhaust, pretty wild!

 

More like the spaghetti exhaust runs AROUND the frame ... .

Chassis would have been made/designed first in this case and exhaust made to work with whatever space left.
Pete

 

But what they don't have, if they've been 'lovingly' restored to Concours standards, is the scars that would bear witness to their known history, as Jim's car does. They're like old boxers who've had so much plastic surgery they look 18, rather than having every fight showing on their faces.

Those three damaging incidents, in Sicily in '66 and '67 and the '67 Le Mans fire damage, are like signatures - and 0846 only ever did SEVEN proper races plus the LM test weekend.

Funny, I didn't get get an anonymous e-mail...........but then you-know-who doesn't know my e-mail address...........but I did get an anonymous phone message on my machine!


Paul M

 

Is btconnect.com British Telecom?

 

Yes it is.

 

That's kinda what I suspected.

 

Eric
As you know this anonymous bullsh*t is nothing new. Years ago replica Paul and or his crew started a poll. 0846 Real or Replica? As I remember it 13 voted replica. Replica Paul and or his crew under the charming name of "Sh*t Stirrer" announced the "Bombshell" that he had spoken to David and David had stated that he had build the chassis that was in my car. This time "Sh*t Stirrer" lauded the "Lucky 13" for being the ones to see THE TRUTH. ("Lucky 13" "Fortunate Few" anyone see a pattern?) Paul without Max's permission posted an email from Max where Max confirmed David's statement.

"The chassis is the same batch as mine." (0900a and by inference David's 0900).

I responded:

"That's pretty funny. Lets see, in an email Max admits committing a crime. ("I swaped out the body he was going to get (Alegertti) with my Turin Body.") David admits committing a crime: and as my chassis was made in the same batch as 0900 and 0900a it's exactly the same as theirs. (Not)"

Max rushed to deny that he had "swaped out the body" calling the email Replica Paul had posted without his permission: "Not my finest moment". He further stated he had not stolen/substituted the body I bought. I wasn't surprised that I remember him referring to Replica Paul as a: " Menace" but I was a bit sad when I remembered him having told me on the phone that: "Hopefully the old fooker (David) would die soon." David neither of these guys are your friend.

(Once again see pages 48-50 of the 0846 papers.)

The great thing about Replica Paul is that every time he's dropped his "Debate Ender's" these "Bombshell's" have actually strengthened my case. The example above and the second instance where Replica Paul published the auction description that David once again, as Replica Paul pointed out citing Doug Nye, under the penalty of law confirmed that he (David) believed my chassis/frame was built to P4 blueprints which it clearly is not. Replica Paul's posting also proved exactly what David believed the gearbox and engine block he sold me to be. A long time ago Macca proved both Replica Paul and David were wrong about both of those things as well. ( Pages 49-58 0846 Papers)

Pete

Once again Ferrari S.p.A. has not stated that 0846 no longer exists. Exactly what they've stated is quoted in my letter to Cavallino.



June 14, 2005

Dear Cavallino:

Bill Wagenblatt's letter to Mauro Forghieri and Mauro Forghieri's response reprinted in Cavallino 147 is very interesting but as regards Bill's question # 4 Mauro's answer # 4 is incorrect by 12mm.

Question #4 Bill Wagenblatt:
The dimensions, such as wheelbase, are the same as the 330 P4 and is
2400 mm.

Answer # 4 Mauro Forghieri:
Yes. The database for the P4 was originally the same as the P3.

As the "TECHNICAL DATA SHEET" of "330 P3/P4 Chassis n.0846" clearly states the P3 wheelbase of 0846 was 2412mm and was changed in December 1967 to 2400mm when 0846 was converted by Ferrari from a P3 to a P 3/4 the "bastard 330 P3/P4" Mauro referred to in his answer #6.

This is a small but very significant difference that is confirmed by physical measurement of my 412 P 0854 and LS's 330 P4 0856. (Links to the 0846 Papers which go into this in detail and contain the "TECHNICAL DATA SHEET" of "330 P3/P4 Chassis n. 0846" and other reasons why I, and others now believe that the car I own contains substantial portions of the original chassis remains of 0846 are listed at the end of this letter).

I have no quarrel with your “* Publisher note,” except of course, when you refer to 0846 as "s/n 1046” in the latter part of the note.

“* Publisher note: Readers should know that there is presently a great deal of controversy over the current car that carries the s/n 0846. The car is presently under discussion between the owner, the Factory, and a large group of experts. It is not our intention here to enter this controversy. This letter is simply presented as a clarification of what s/n 1046 (sic) was, and other "P" cars were at the time they were racing."

I do take issue with your use of the word "destroyed" in your second Publisher's note, especially if taken to mean that the chassis remains of 0846 no longer exist.
** “Publisher's note: “At the present time, the Factory considers the original
car destroyed”.

In an email dated 6/10/2005 Joanne Marshall of Ferrari S.p.A. wrote:
"We confirm that, as far as our factory records are concerned, the chassis in question (0846) was totally written off in 1967 after the Le Mans incident."

"Written off" does not mean ceasing to exist.


There is not, nor has there been for years, any question that, under the definitions that Ferrari has chosen for their "authentication" process, 0846 as it exists today could not be "authenticated" by Ferrari. As an aside, under those same criteria the Le Mans winning Ford MK-IV J5 couldn't be either as it, unlike my Ford MK-IV J6, no longer has its original chassis plate.

The only question was, and is, if my beliefs, as stated below are correct:

"After Le Mans 1967, Ferrari 330 P 3/4 0846 was returned to the Ferrari
factory where it was deconstructed, investigated and scrapped. Years later, James Glickenhaus acquired remains of 0846, including remains of the original
chassis, and with help from Ferrari S.p.A. who recast suspension uprights,
commissioned Sal Barone, Alberto Pedretti, Bob Wallace and John Hadduk Jr.
to restore 0846 to original specifications."

(My recent acquisition of 412 P 0854 and its original coupe tail and doors
will enable me to restore 0846 to it's original spyder configuration and 0854
back to it original coupe configuration using the spyder tail that is now on
0854 which, by the way, is originally from 0858.)

In a letter dated October 5th, 2004, Umberto Masoni of Ferrari Maserati
Classiche described the research and documentation that is behind my beliefs:



"Subject: Ferrari 330 P3/4 Chassis 0846

Dear Mr. Glickenhaus
We wish to thank you for the extensive documentation that we have received
for competence, from Mr. Montezemolo's office.”

This "extensive documentation" “the 0846 Papers" is posted on a website
copyrighted by Ferrari S.p.A. CLick Owners/ Classiche/Forum.

For those without access to that website click:

http://www.glickenhaus.com/jim/project.pdf_


It's interesting that over many years while some continue to scream fake, no one including Ferrari S.p.A. has refuted the "extensive documentation" behind my belief as to what happened to the chassis remains of 0846 and how they wound up where I believe they did.

Sincerely


James Glickenhaus




My response to Joanne's email speak's for itself as well.

Dear Joanne
I have been forwarded the email you sent to FerrariChat by Wayne Ausbrooks.
Your statement: "There is no mention of chassis number 0846 on any official Ferrari web site," is completely untrue. For many years there have been many mentions of my chassis number 0846 on a official Ferrari web site copyrighted by Ferrari S.p.A. Go to the Official Ferrari Owners site. Log in. (My Username is *** Password ***) Go to "Your Garage" Note 330 P4 sitting there. Click on 330 P4. Note page that comes up with photos of my car undergoing restoration. Note 330 P4 Factory specifications, date and month of my purchasing this vehicle, and color of my vehicle. Note that this posting was done by Ferrari S.p.A after I typed in the mandatory (*) chassis/VIN# 0846 and Ferrari S.p.A. took weeks to evaluate my information, confirmed by email to me that before my car could be put into "Your (MY) Garage" that careful examination was necessary due to the special circumstances surrounding my car and the necessity to have my information checked by "Ferrari Classiche" Only after this careful examination occurred did Ferrari S.p.A. place P4 0846 into "Your (MY) Garage" on an official Ferrari web site. Most importantly this posting obviously involved research by Ferrari S.p.A. as Ferrari S.p.A. corrected the mandatory required information I typed into the Ferrari web site correcting the date of manufacture of Ferrari 330 P 3/4 from my erroneous 1967 to 1966 which now appears on the web page.
There are many, many more postings of my car 0846 labeled as 0846 including photos and discussion on official Ferrari web sites and have been for years. If you go to the forum in the Classic section you can view them. On the original forum there was an entire posting of the restoration of 0846 and the fact that I had years ago, after giving Ferrari S.p.A. notice of my intention to so do, registered my 330 P4 Chassis # / Vin# 0846 with the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles. Mr Montezemolo and other officers of Ferrari S.p.A were informed of that registration with the New York State Department Motor Vehicle of Motor Vehicles years ago and that The New York Department Of Motor Vehicles had registered Ferrari 330 P4 Chassis # / VIN# 0846 in my name and had issued New York State Licence Plate "330 P4" to my car. Photos of that Licence Plate, "330 P4" are on the web site as well. There is also a link on the Ferrari web site to "The 0846 Papers" which Umberto Masoni of Ferrari Maserati Classic described in a letter to me dated October 5th 2004:

"Subject: Ferrari 330 P3/4 Chassis 0846

"Dear Mr. Glickenhaus
We wish to thank you for the extensive documentation that we have received, for competence, from Mr. Montezemolo's office."

Umberto Massoni had a long conversation with Sal Barone where he stated that Ferrari wanted to find an acceptable way to describe my car and stated that Ferrari wanted to be fair to me and the car. The description which I believe is fair and accurate and have given to the FIVA and will and will be soon giving to the FIA is as follows:

After Le Mans 1967, Ferrari 330 P 3/4 0846 was returned to the Ferrari factory where it was deconstructed, investigated and scrapped. Years later, James Glickenhaus acquired remains of 0846, including remains of the original chassis and with help from Ferrari S.p.A. who recast suspension uprights, commissioned Sal Barone, Alberto Pedretti, Bob Wallace, and John Hajduk, Jr.to restore 0846 to original specifications.

Ferrari S.p.A has been aware of all of this for years and many postings have been made on an official Ferrari Web Site copyrighted by Ferrari S.p.A..
I did not make post 147 but in light of the postings that have been made on official Ferrari web sites including Ferrari S.p.A.'s placing of " 66 Ferrari 330 P 4
month of purchase 07 year of purchase 2000 color Rossa Corsa " into "Your (MY) Garage" on an official Ferrari web site, can understand how the poster could come to that conclusion.

As for what I have posted I stand behind it 100% including all beliefs that are expressed in the 0846 Papers, http://www.glickenhaus.com/jim/project.pdf which Ferrari S.p.A. have had for years.

In closing 330 P 3/4 0846 will be in Italy for the summer and Ferrari S.p.A. is more than welcome to inspect it.

Very Truly Yours

James Glickenhaus

Pages 111 and 112 of the 0846 papers also speak for themselves and prove that P4 0846 was placed in "Your (My) Garage" by Ferrari S.p.A years ago where it still resides.

Best

 

True, but as you have just said "they have a known history." The problem with Jim's car is that it DOESN'T have a known history - there are years missing from it's history. The Ferrari-scrapyard-Piper bit is just a theory. No more than that, with absolutly no proof to even one section of that theory. Therefore with no "proven history".

No one can say EXACTLY what any of this damage was.
Jims theory that the damage on the right side at the TF bent a chassis tube on the left side is just a theory that conveniently fits the damage that 0003 chassis has.
It also flies in the face of logic, as any damage would (more than likely) have been on the side that was hit.
0003 was raced extensively (Japan, Bahamas, France etc. etc.) and could have been damaged in transit or racing. In 30 years of racing can you, or anyone, say that 0003 was never damaged? Doubtful.
Nathan

 

Nathan
It does not fly in the face of logic as anyone with any knowledge of physics knows and those with such knowledge including engineers have inspected the tube and agree that it was caused by an accident as described on pages 60, 99-102. More importantly as pages 99-102 state, Wayne Sparling after inspecting the chassis in my car, in a verified statement, unequivocally stated that he remembered the damage caused by Nino's 1967 Targa Crash and that he, at the behest of Mauro Forghieri had personally repaired the chassis tube damaged in that crash, and that, that repair, which is still visible in the chassis tube in my car, is the repair he made.

Gerald Roush Publisher of The Ferrari Market Letter who was present when Wayne inspected my car is quoted in full on page 99.

As for the physics of the crash you don't have to take my word. Build a model of the chassis. Transmit force to the right rear wheel sufficient to break the right rear lower A Arm. The force will travel across the strongly braced tube the lower A Arm is/was attached to and attempt to torque the strong, rigidly braced, rear engine bulkhead and that twisting force will leverage across the length of the rear engine bulkhead and bend the longest unbraced chassis tube that is attached to it at it's weakest, unbraced point.

 

After following this saga for so long, all I can say is there must be a high corolation with the people thinking this ISN'T 0846 to thinking Oswald didn't kill Kennedy. I mean, neither may ever be 100% but every time someone tries to show a second gunman or conspiricy, it gets shot down. Over and over. At this point the obvious story must be the truth.

Similerly, every bit of evidence that the frame is 0846 has stood up to scrutiny over and over. The welds, the length, the crash damage, the fact no one ever said it was destroyed, even the tag on it...the fact the frame was "lost" for so long is the only question and it doesn't disprove a thing. The fact that if it isn't 0846, massive fraud and remanufactring would have had to have been done also weighs heavily in the car's favor. Therefore, if it isn't 0846, you really have a much better story than if it is (except to Mr. Glickenhaus, who I'm sure would not be thrilled!). The amount of effort to pull of such a fraud would have been massive!

As far as the debate goes, what's the problem?? The frame must be 0846. It's like the "controversy" between evolution and creationisim: there is only debate in the latter's camp; grasping at straws to keep the subject alive.

Ken

 

I agree with most of your post. However, evolution and creationism are not mutually exclusive nor are either perfectly defined and agreed upon by all interested parties! OF course thats another topic and for another forum....



Terry

 

Trying to remain civil and toss in a bit of levity.

Oswald wasn't dead in 1967. He drove 0846 during secret test trials at Sebring.

What fraud are you referring to? Piper never signed anything indicating that he was selling a P4 Ferrari with the serial number 0846, did he?

Napolis said on 8/26/05 at 9:48AM:

Napolis said on 8/6/05 at 7:00AM:

Just curious as to WHO is studying the car in Italy if, as indicated in your posting of 8/26/05, the car could not be "authenticated" by Ferrari as it exists today? How can one "study" authenticity into a car that "could not be authenticated by Ferrari as it exists today"???
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Here's one of my favorite stories concerning the "authenticity" of long lost items. Ironically, it sat for years in the Ford Museum that also houses a few cars like the Ford GT, eh? http://www.hfmgv.org/exhibits/pic/2000/00apr.asp

My favorite line is this: "The article described in great detail how the chair was aged and how a fake provenance was imagined to provide a rationale for every one of the dings and nicks that represented centuries of wear."

Now I'm not accusing anyone of deliberately conspiring to FAKE anything, but the above quote had me laughing.

The words
"fake provenance was IMAGINED to provide a rationale for EVERY ONE of the DINGS and NICKS" could have easily been applied to an old car chassis that some people want so desperately to believe is from a former LeMans racer.

 

That's a great story and a warning to everyone to not believe everything you're told. But the fact the chair is a fake doesn't apply to the matter at hand.

Ken

 

Only a blind man would fail to see the parables. Years of missing provenance, numerous witnesses testifying to its "authenticity", plausible explanations for every nick and ding, (this bent tube was caused by the wreck in 1966 or whenever, we think,....possibly,....well, it could have happened,....maybe,....don't you agree?.....please agree,.....just nod your head and we'll add that confirmation to our documentation....)

 

So what your saying is that an expert (let call him David) could purchase one thing (lets say a new 330p4 chassis) and it turns out that he's been ripped off and the thing turns out to be something else that looks similar to what he thought it was (in this case David bought a "new" 330p4 chassis that turned out to be the repaired remains of the "written off" 330p3/4 0846)

As always Arlie there are lies, there are damn lies and then there's your evidence

 

On the surface you seem to make a point, but it's not comperable. It's easy to see how the chair could be a fake as no one was alive when it was supposed to have been made, or for most of its supposed history. Make it look old and tell a story; voila.

The car frame is different. We KNOW of the accidents, they are documented beyond reproach (not so with the chair). The welder said he recognized his work (no one could claim he worked on the chair in 1850 say, and recognized his work). We can measure the size and we KNOW only one frame was built this way. With the chair, that became its undoing: it was built with a modern drill.

See, the more you try and tear the story apart, the stronger it gets. A more detailed examination of the tubes will undoubtedly support the claim, while a more detailed examination of the chair turned out to prove it fake.

Ken

Ken

 

Not true. According to this link, the guy who made the fake chair apparently was alive and well in the 70s and admitted to the whole thing. He just wanted to take a jab at the snobby experts who were so sure of themselves.
http://www.courierpub.com/articles/2004/12/30/lincolncountyweekly/local_news/n4digest.txt

 

Arlie - ever watch Antiques Roadshow?

I've seen a late 19th century Tibetan Necklace purchased for $2.00 at a Thrift Shop appraised for $10,000.00.

Saw one a few weeks ago where a guy bought a chair at a yard sale the very morning of the show, decided, "what the heck" and took it in to be examined. His $3.00 investment increased over 2,000-fold in a few hours.

The people who they bought 'em from weren't aware of any "it's been here, it's been there" documented history. They had no idea what they sold any more than when they'd bought 'em at yard sales themselves.
__

That's just from the show - this isn't, nevertheless...

With your logic, you would probably dismiss one of the few surviving Original Declarations of Independence as being unworthy of consideration, as according to one source, it apparently disappeared after 1871 and before 1950 (that's a 79 year window) - no matter, in 1989, it was found at the back of a painting - the guy who bought it at a yard sale bought it for the frame - $4.00. Turned out he had something worth a fortune.
http://www.maineantiquedigest.com/articles/decl0800.htm
__

Back in the day, they were like
"Hey-a, Tony, take-a this-a off-a my hands, will-a ya?"
'Where to? Boneyard or with the others?'
"Ah, got too many - boneyard."
'grunt' *clang*

'Napolis has a retired race car. Several, actually. Piper's got a bunch, too. Easy come, easy go. They're all good, it's all good.

 

You missed my point. The chair maker had a story for every nick and dent. But none of those were documented (because it was fake). No way to check it out even if it were real.

The car HAS documentation for 'every nick and dent' or at least the major ones. Welds have been identified by the guy who welded it. If the chair were real, that wouldn't be the case. Read my above post again and you'll see how you missed the point.

I'm beginning to feel Mr. Glickenhaus' frustration.....

Ken "Beating His Head Against A Wall" Butler

 

Oh come on now. Documentation for every nick and dent??? One or two grainy photographs from the 60s that show the car from 30 feet away? And you call that "documentation for every nick and dent"??? Hardly.

Yes, it's a good show. I remember seeing the one with the guy who made the "incredible discovery" of an original civil war sword that some other guy had found in the attic of his house in South Carolina when he was growing up. And if you remember the scandal that ensued afterward, the whole bit was a fake, fraud, phony, whatever you want to call it. The appraiser on the show was in cahoots with the individual who supposedly found the sword. Turns out the appraiser and the "individual" were buddies and conspired to orchestrate the entire farce just to appease their desires to have made an "incredible discovery" and increase the value of a large stash of civil war goodies that the appraiser was dealing in. Later on, he had a lawsuit filed against him from some poor widow who got taken to the cleaners when he bought a batch of civil war memorabila from her for a song.

Not that the above situation has any bearing on the 0846 debate, but you mentioned the Antiques Road Show.

 

That photograph is important. It shows that if any frame claims to be 0846, it will have damage or replaced tubes at that spot. Like the one in question.

Funny how you say the ARS episode has no bearing, but say the chair story does?

Ken

 

Sure, but again, would you believe it is in any way feasable that mr Piper actually did sell and deliver a full on P4-chassis to Jim and that Jim had it replaced with a chassis that bares all the marks of #0846 (The modified P3-chassis, with the damage-marks)?

All the 'nay-sayers' consequently fail to adress the consequences of their believe that Jim's car does not consists of the remains of #0846.

Well, some just come out and say Jim is a fraud, but fail to document their claims.

I'm justs wondering you know.

 

Not funny at all. The chair story was not an attempt at fraud. Only a little guy's way of getting a jab at the supposed "documentation" of the big boys who repeatedly believed what they were told instead of questioning the entire tale.
The Antique Road Show "sword" episode was a deliberate attempt to deceive the public on a public television show. In other words, the entire situation was fabricated, a la, the game show scandals of the 1950s and could have caused PBS some BIG trouble if the network or its stations had willingly participated in the fraud. (The FCC likes to revoke licenses, levy big fines, and and send people to jail for THAT kind of stuff.)

I don't for a minute think that anybody in the great 0846 debate is guilty of any deliberate misdoings. But I don't buy the GIGANTIC leap of faith concerning a few bent pieces of tubing will undeniably confirm that what one is looking at is the chassis of a race car that disappeared 35 years ago.

Even IF we all jump on the bandwagon and say once and for all that YES, Jim's car contains 80 per cent of the chassis of 0846, what does that mean? Does it mean that 80 per cent of a chassis equals a whole car???

No way in my book. A chassis is only about one fourth of a car (chassis, engine, transmission, body). So even IF we assume the attitude of blind faith and say that 80 per cent of Jim's chassis is from 0846, that only means that 80% of 1/4th of the car is real and that means that the entire reconstructed vehicle now has the right to be referred to as THE 0846???

Not by a country mile in my book.

 

I think this is were the debate goes (both now and before)a little askew.
..by your reckoning,Jim's car is 20% 0846 if the chassis' proved true..
..if this as the case ,what would you call it?
A replica?
Continuation?
A P3/4?
0900?
..or the closest thing to 0846 still in existence?

In some ways this debate seems to be two headed (A) The proof,and (B) our interpretation of said proof ..and the resulting item.

I agree when some say photos don't do it justice,but I'd go one further and say "being stationary" does'nt do it justice,and in some ways I'm hoping it's not proved(outright) to be 0846,resulting in it becoming too precious to drive...

Personaly(for what it's worth),after having seen and heard the vehicle with my own eyes,I consider it to be one of the most fabulous cars on the planet.
That's good enough for me.

..though I'm hoping that if I ever see an F3L being driven in anger the thrill will be reasonabley close

over and out