The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

I think that your post is an example of why Paul is so adamant in his beliefs. Not picking on you DM, but you state that you "respect the hell out of Jim for what he's done with 0846". So you're saying that you BELIEVE and ASSUME that JG's car IS 0846????? It amazes me how numerous postings simply refer to the car AS 0846. Not the "frame scraps" of 0846, or the "reincarnation of" 0846. Isn't this exactly what I was talking about a year ago when I wrote that, given enough time, the provenance of the car would "DRIFT" toward it actually BEING 0846? It sure looks like this is exactly what has happened. Call me Nostradamus. http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18595&page=2&pp=100 (post #307)

To lay some groundwork for furthering the debate, can somebody supply a precedence whereby any other valuable vintage car is assumed to be an authentic original WITHOUT its frame serial number stamping and its serial number plate being present??? If so, what was the determing factor for establishing it's authenticity? POPULAR OPINION on an internet bulletin board? I think not. Open market value? Well, I can't doubt that. Some people will buy anything. Look at Enron and Worldcomm stock.


Sincerely, The Current Reincarnation and/or Frame Scraps of Horsefly

 

This one ....
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yes the most famous American Racecar in the world. The only car ever made in America to have won Le Mans. The Big Red 1967 Ford MK-IV. The Ford that beat Ferrari. The MK-IV sitting in the Henry Ford Museum.
J5 is missing it's chassis plate.

 

Note the rubber being transfered to the road...

 

I can hear it. Along with all the other sounds eminating from that picture. Heck I even smell it.

 

Maniac!

 

I hadn't but now you mention it .....

 

I wasn't aware that J5 was rebuilt from a small scrap of unauthenticated frame that was discovered beneath a kit car that was alledgedly built from scraps that were "assumed" to have been retrieved from a junkyard years after the Ford factory said that it was destroyed.

 

Arlie
This is the question you asked:

"To lay some groundwork for furthering the debate, can somebody supply a precedence whereby any other valuable vintage car is assumed to be an authentic original WITHOUT its frame serial number stamping and its serial number plate being present???"

What part of my answer don't you understand?

As an aside it was me who's research was instrumental in authenticating J5 as the Le Mans winner even though my car J6 was for years thought to be the Le Mans winner.

That too is fact.

 

What's the word? OWNED?

 

Light years away from being owned by any means. Just an example of myopic logic. Just because a Ford GT exists with a series of provenance that had to be unraveled after the passage of time, this in no way validates a piece of metal that is being "assumed" to be from 0846. The whole basis of the supposed rediscovery of 0846 lays upon the "assumption" that somewhere, somebody, retrieved the remains from some Modena junkyard and cobbled up another frame for Piper's kit car project. That's a quantum leap of logic from being able to track down the known ownership of any number of other automobiles such as a Ford GT. I'm sure that the Ford GTs never left the sight of any number of car buffs. But to "assume" that a pile of twisted frame wreckage in a Modena junkyard was retrieved by some of Piper's chassis builders and Piper himself somehow "forget" about it being built into one of his kit cars is,.....well,....pretty far fetched in my book.

 

Jim, he is still reading...if Arlie reads to fast, he gets blisters.

 

I disagree. It sounds reasonable that someone building lots of cars over a long period of time with pieces from lots of different places would not know/remember the story behind any particular part. He probably got frames and parts of frames from all over and likely didn't pour over each one documenting every little detail.

Ken

 

Ken
You disagree - on what basis? Do you know how many cars Piper has built over the years? I doubt it. So where does this 'building lots of cars over a long period of time' come from?
Don't forget - this auction description was written (with Piper's input) in 1987 - not long after the car was built. Certainly not long enough for Piper to 'forget' what HE had built.
Nathan

 

Jim's response:

1. Provided an anecdote that suggests that he is not most interested in value or having the world think he owns something he does not but, rather, the truth. His Ford would likely be worth more if he had not made his findings public.

2. Provided an anecdote in which similar sceintific investigation was successfully conducted on another car.

3. But most of all, directly answered the question that you posed. No?

 

Don't you seee? When it comes down to it, it doesn't matter what Piper remembers or forgets. It doesn't matter how sure he is of what happened. It doesn't matter how "far-fetched," to use Horsefly's words, the story seems to be. A helio-centric universe was once far-fetched too, to some of the brightest minds in the world.

What matters is what the scientific evidence proves. At the end of the day, what Piper recollects doesn't hold up. Argue what you want about the status of the car that Jim owns, but one thing is for sure: (1) whatever Piper thinks about it, and (2) however "far-fetched" the idea that Piper got it wrong is, have absolutely no bearing on what the car is. You can legitimately argue about what actually constitutes a car such that it can be called that specific car. (A chasis? A chasis and engine? A chasis and engine and continuous history?) But what you can't do is ignore scientific evidence simply because the conclusion that it reaches is "far-fetched."

 

I don't know. We know for a fact that the chassis of Jim's car is a P3-chassis which is modified into a P4-chassis. We know for a fact that the particular tube-structure shows signs of crash-damage of the sort #0846 would've sustained during it's crashes which are recorded in history.

Well, what seems more farfetched? The explanation that the chassis in Jim's car actually is #0846, or the explanation that David Piper built a P3chassis, modifying it to a P4-chassis, adding some signs of crash-damage typical of for the #0846 chassis, then selling the whole thing as a Piper-replica, not making any mention of these particular features?

 

So now we're going to start analyzing the line by line logic of individual postings instead of concentrating on the issue of 0846 originality? Oh well, if that's what you want....

Which in no way validates the current "reincarnation" of the alledged 0846.

I wasn't going to bring this up, but I asked if any other valuable vintage car is assumed to be an authentic original WITHOUT its frame serial number stamping and its serial number plate being present??? JG indicated that J5 did not have its serial number plate. But what about its frame serial number stamping??? If it doesn't have a stamping either, then the car's validity must rely upon it's known provenance, which, the "current reincarnation of 0846" does not have!

Not exactly. He left out any response concerning the frame stamping. (See point 2 above). And I'm not picking on JG on the issue of J5 or any other car. I honestly don't know, that's why I asked about other cars that are "assumed" to be original even though they are missing all known ID numbers. And don't start chomping at the bit because I may not know the intricacies of the Ford GT serial numbers. I honestly do not know if they have serial number frame stampings as well as body serial number plates like most cars of that era. (The only Ford GT that I personally possessed in 1965 was a scale model that I was given as a Christmas present.)

 

I have read Jim's thorough explanation of why he believes his car is 0846. I've read Paul's explanation, about 300 times, of why he believes it is not.

Both are entitled to their opinions, and I'm entitled to make my amateur opinion, based on 100+ pages of explanation from Jim, and choose to believe him.

Certainly Jim has a vested interest in getting the car certified as 0846, and Paul wants to be right, too. But, if I am going to place my trust somewhere, it's more likely going to be with someone who did exhaustive research, with the car in hand, than with someone who speculates from bits and pieces of information from various sources, without having had significant time (at least not that I'm aware of) in the actual presence of the car in its current or former state.

I suspect that Paul would continue to insist the car is what he thinks it is if Enzo himself rose from the grave and declared Jim's car #0846. On the other hand, should the opposite occur, Jim would gladly take Enzo's word, and move along.

And, as an aside, will there ever come a day when you don't stir **** just to stir ****, and instead attempt to invoke thoughful discourse with reasoned and well toned questions?

DM

 

Hold breath.....NOW

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

( standing ovation ) , nice to see one, on the street, IN TRAFFIC!!! at night no less

 

i dont recall seeing that pic before, WOW! thanks for sharing that!!! WOW!

 

That one is not a photo.

Arlie
MK-IV's or GT 40's don't have frames so if you are offered one with a frame it's likely a replica. MK-IV's and GT 40's have tubs. They are not stamped.

 

How childish Mr. G, blackening out the white stripes on a pedestrian crossing! Over here only the sub 23 year olds do that on club meets, though mostly in a GTI of some sort, not a P4.

 

Jim
Fabulous photo !
Nathan