250 Le Mans 5899

babci,

Everything you have said I agree with but as far as Ferrari are concerned that new engine that they have stamped, or permitted an outside company to stamp, is now that engine. So if the original engine was found it would get complicated.

We have seen over and over that Italians and Ferrari have a very different concept of originality than we do. Their view is they built the car in the first place so they can do what they like, ie. they could build a 250SWB engine with a Motec engine controller running the show and in their eyes it would be 100% original, because they are Ferrari.

Not saying I agree at all but that is how they appear to think.
Pete

 

+1!

 

Everything you have said I agree with but as far as Ferrari are concerned that new engine that they have stamped, or permitted an outside company to stamp, is now that engine. So if the original engine was found it would get complicated.

Their view is they built the car in the first place so they can do what they like, ie. they could build a 250SWB engine with a Motec engine controller running the show and in their eyes it would be 100% original, because they are Ferrari

Nice to see you agree with me.

"but as far as Ferrari are concerned that new engine that they have stamped, or permitted an outside company to stamp, is now that engine."

Of course Ferrari in their own mind would consider the engine they have stamped as the current correct engine for the vehicle it is installed in (it is still not the original period in wall foundry struck and machined engine as produced by them. In addition they always add their Classiche stamp along with a new Numero Interno different from the original period Numero Interno number to the new copy engine) but that simply does not change the actual real world fact that the new engine is a non original, non factory produced copy and the relevant vehicle it is installed in is not a factory original matching number car nor will ever be.

"So if the original engine was found it would get complicated."

Not complicated at all. The real original engine would still be the real original engine and the copy will always be the easily identified non factory subcontractor produced copy. Real world market reality and fact: Penultimate vehicle content originality and value would be original engine with original vehicle. Vehicle with copy engine= diminished originality content and diminished value as witnessed time and again in public auction market results.

 

Interesting, thanks! The "new" engine might be a *certified non period works replica* but the "old" engine remains anyhow the *car and period original* motor. Of course, the certification process does not really distinguish these criteria and the essential question, what is car and period original, remains usually blurred. Classiche claims of course, that any of its replacements are original parts, approved with the Certificate and do no harm on originality. This puts Classiche in the position to produce and certify brand new cars as was the case with #6045. But yes, some buyers obviously don't really care for car original period hardware but much more for a Classiche Certificate. This puts up the question, whether a classiched car with a new replacement frame would be worth more today than a non classiched of the same type with all car original period parts? Therefore, I am not so sure, whether a Classiche non period replacement does really diminish value for those. Classiche seems to successfully create a new market. And yes, if this trend should continue, two separate markets could become reality.

 

Does anybody know to which part of the world the car went?

 

And it just gets more complicated.

Imagine trying to work out what is original and correct in 50 years time! The real experts would have passed away ... nightmare.
Pete

 

North America.

 

Fully agree!

So, let’s talk about the available information and try to find out, what was red Red Book certified and sold for 8.75 m. May be the add below from 1986 helps to put Ferrari’s statements and RM’s sales description in a context.

After in 1989 Ferrari officially revoked in writing (“non e da ritenersi più valida”) any permission for a reparation (“ ‘riparazione’ “), stating that the showed tubes are a reconstruction (“ ‘reconstruzione’ ”) and #5899 is destroyed (“distrutto”), these tubes were confiscated (“sequestrato”) by the Tribunale di Modena subsequently (post 50+51).

Positivism is certainly a wonderful thing but can hardly help to clear whether #5899 is a certified works replica or not. And yes, some are indeed interested to learn the true past, because it clearly has an implication on concourses, races and #5899’s history in general. And no, there is not the slightest reason to romantically blur the car’s history and friendly applaud RM’s legend building sales description with its wrong information.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

@Terra: Do you have more information? Will we see the car in the future?

@lgs: Great reputation in that file. Bluemel, Colombo, Massini. They are all men who know what they're talking about. And back then they had the advantage that everything happened right then and not 20 or 30 years ago like today.
The basic tenor states that the car has a very small amount of original parts. And today there may be even less original parts in it, because the level of originality on a car can only decrease and not increase ;-)

Fascinating is, that a little bit of sheet and a certificate by somebody who certificates newly built engines as original are worth more than 8,000,000$...

OT: Isn't that Don Walker mentioned by Massini a collector from Texas who owned many of the Lauren cars before they went to him?

 

Well, you are right. But please quote Mr. Massini precisely: He states that #5899 has a newly made repro chassis and a wrong repro body and is a replica with nearly no original parts. And back in 1986 Mr. Massini did not provide this statement as hired expert but as an engaged enthusiast.

Most interesting is also your other remark and you really put the issue in a accomplished form. Time is certainly a relevant factor and can hardly increase originality and period content. Probably this can be taken as a general rule, especially after multiple restaurations and rebuilts even if they are connected with ‘certification’ and declared as ‘preservation’. And of course, with this background #5899's metamorphosis to a rosso certified car is fascinating indeed.

As already mentioned, there is another #5899 around, certified from Christian Huet. For this creation the original front and rear end tubes were used, sawed from Hans Illert for the “LMP” version (modified #5899 chassis with Porsche 906 body). Any Information about the car’s whereabouts?

 

Strong statement about Massini, but eligible.

You have to realise that a car even loses by certificating it a (little) bit originality. Which LM had a Classiche badge or stamp in the 60s? Just sayin'... O

Which chassis number carries this car? Also 5899?

 

Yes, see here at the bottom: 250 LM 5899.

 

When one reads this there is a very detailed description by M.M.which seems to indicate that if not completely original this is the only 250LM #5899 which could be considered as being as near to original as is possible for a car with this kind of history. Yes this car was in Japan briefly in the early 1990s and not to be confused with "the other one". tongascrew

 

May I kindly ask what tread you are exactly quoting?

 

As there are various similarities between 6045 and 5899 also in this thread:

There is another LM crossing the auction-block at Monterey this year.

Thinking of 5899's lack of originality this one could even triple its price? What do you think?

1964 Ferrari 250 LM by Scaglietti | Monterey 2015 | RM Sotheby's

Having the current bubble in mind I've been amazed when I noticed, that the most expensive public sold LM was 6107 sold at RM's New York auction in 2013!

 

I just noticed that this car seems to be lost, too?

Does anyone on ferrarichat know where this car remains?

 

Autodiva - Connexion

 

???
Link not working.

Marcel Massini

 

Autodiva is a french forum and you have to register to view the threads.

 

By coincidence (yes, not being the smartest) and after ‘5899’ popped up elsewhere again, I just found your mentioned post: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/vintage-thru-365-gtc4/109016-250-lm-9.html#post138212189. But is this really “a very detailed description”? And is the car really “the only original 250LM #5899 which could be considered as being as near to original as is possible for a car with this kind of history”? I rather feel that the question what was offered and sold from RM for 9.6M is even more blurred then before. However of course, not the auction but history is the relevant question here.

In 1986, Mr. Massini explained – replying to Massimo Colombo, who claimed to own the original 5899 chassis: "... David Piper in England had built at least two or eventually three brand new chassis for 250 LMs during 1980-81. One of these new chassis frames was used for the reconstruction of 250 LM S/N 5899 which was then owned by Mr. Eric Stewart in Great Britain. The rebuild was done by Rosso Limited/Victor Norman in England, using a few original parts. They also built a complete new body for LM 5899 … . In fact, one could say that LM 5899 is a replica, since there were nearly no original parts left to build the new car. ..." (Sept. 24, 1986, in Cavallino n. 39, http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/vintage-ferrari-market/470656-250-le-mans-5899-a-5.html#post145370583 post 83).

In the same Cavallino, Massimo Colombo had pointed out having bought and being the owner of Vic Norman’s original 5899 chassis. 1989, this chassis went to William Vaccari and Fulvio Visioli in Italy. However, after inspection of this frame, Ferrari officially stated to Vaccari in writing, that it’s a reconstruction (‘ricostruzione’) and for reparation no permission was given. And Ferrari further specified, that chassis 5899 is destroyed, exists no more and is cancelled in their books (http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/vintage-ferrari-market/470656-250-le-mans-5899-a-3.html post 50). This entire Ferrari reconfirmed to Visioli in a second statement (http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/vintage-ferrari-market/470656-250-le-mans-5899-a-3.html post 51).

Well, what is original of ‘5899’ upon this background and - over all - how got the car Red Book certified? And how could Mr. Massini explain in 2008 about this particular ‘5899’ (http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/vintage-thru-365-gtc4/109016-250-lm-9.html#post138212189 ): “ ... The chassis is original (has been x-rayed, measured and very carefully inspected, even metallurgically tested, also repaired by Ferrari SpA after the modifications)”? Super cool LM for sure, but what chassis is certified and in the car today?

 

Not 9.6M but 8.75M. Obviously that's today's market value of Ferrari's red book certificate.

 

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/138212189-post167.html

Stop badmouthing this car.
5899 never got a Piper frame.....
PS (NL) sold the original car to ES (UK) incl an original spare nose and LM parts.
5899 original frame must have been restored by Classiche. Classiche will never manufacture a new frame and tag it with sn xxxx unless they mark it with a Classiche stamp or write it down in the Red/White book.
Ferrari made a mistake in 80s declaring the car was a reconstruction and cancelled it in their books.

If not it might all be very strange that Marcel would say: Piper chassis in 80s and now the original frame is back with the car and certified. Contradicts?

Ferrari must have changed the files from reconstruction/cancelled to "active" and correct/certified otherwise it can not get a red book.

The original frame has weld markings if repaired by Classiche, so all evidence is in the current frame. An owner wants authenticity so damage repair / old & new welds / new tube sections should be visible otherwise specialist/historians would say: new frame with new body (or a complete reconstruction)

Or is Ferrari reconstructing complete replicas with some original parts/engine etc?

 

The antonym of 'bad-mouthing' is 'good-mouthing'...but is behind this about-face to 'good-mouthing' a car just pure devotion to tell history correct or to something else...?
This will probably remain the undisclosed secret of real Ferrari-historians.

 

God is the highest power, but some delusional historians and companies place themselves on the same level as God and think they have the authority to bless a replica to become "original" or create a new reality and change history.

"the most dangerous liars are those who think they are telling the truth"