The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Now THAT is hilarious!

 

Er, strangely from you:

Reference: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/143154309-post3086.html
Pete

 

There is a vast unwritten David Piper story.I don"t know when or if it will ever be told.He has always had a single minded dedication to his most unique and wide variety of specific endeavors.Enzo Ferrari saw something there when he turned over so much of the remains of the P series effort to him. Details of that meeting I guess will probably never be told which just adds to one of the great Ferrari mysteries.The outcome of that meeting is legendary which, for the moment, is what we get and the mystery of it is probably a good thing. Anyone who looks at life through a David Piper type lens will always be controversial but isn't that what keeps us on the edge of our seats. tonga'screw

 

So should we paint blonde hair on the Mona Lisa if we can get more money for it?

Nothing wrong with profit but what you are advocating is profit without conscience, or with any respect towards history. It shows your true colors, money over passion.

Should we kill all the GTE's to make GTO's? I'm sure there is profit in that.

Laughable.

 

Jeez, the same over and over again. Off topic and missing the point as usual.

 

How is this missing the point?

This is in direct response to Paul 500's and Miura's statements.

Is not the ENTIRE point of both the 0858 threads and the 0846 threads about the preservation of Ferrari History? I'll take it even one step further isn't the whole Vintage section about the preservation of Ferrari history, let alone Classiche, FCA Etc.

How is discussing the preservation of Ferrari history off topic? I am pointing out that there is no double standard, that in one case History was preserved and in the other it was destroyed.

It is entirely what these discussions are about.

 

...

 

I did not say it was done because they did not like the quality of the work, they wanted the earlier style body is my understanding

 

If the Mona Lisa was originally a blonde before being overpainted as a brunette then yes, why not, you are the one harping on about originality and preservation.

 

Why not?

Because it is not the work of Michelangelo, it is the work of another artist at that point. If the work of original artist survived, even if it was not how the painting was first done, but was later changed by the artist, it is the work that survived and thus IS the work of the artist. Having someone else paint it is just recreating history. It is not the actual history.

In other words you are not preserving history, you are recreating it.

In Instances where say something has been destroyed you have to do the best you can to preserve what you can and recreate what you cannot preserve.

This is clearly not the case here as what had been preserved was destroyed and replaced with a recreation.

 

historical note: The Mona Lisa was painted by Leonardo da Vinci (at least originally!)

 

Ha classic, but which version!

 

Paul, everybody even my wife, who pretty much hates cars, could see that the body was very very wrong.

The person who purchased 0858 paid the money because the Can Am body had already been removed and therefore they could "not be the naughty person who ruined a piece of history" and make themselves a P4.

IMO Talacrest would have sold the car just as well minus their body. If it was done right I'm sure 0858 would still be wearing it ... again IMO
Pete

 

So on the basis of your theory then Talacrest/David Piper "destroyed" 0858 and now the new owner has done the best he can with what remained, and made it a P4 once more, the same thing you claim in relation to 0846, Ferrari destroyed it, someone tacked a few of its tubes onto a new chassis, sold it to David Piper who sold it to Jim who " discovered it" and turned it into the car you cherish today.

So stop moaning about the past life of 0858 and appreciate what it is today!

 

Its all pretty irrelevant now anyway, as the car no longer wears the Talacrest body!

 

Dumb mistake. Thanks for pointing it out. And appreciate the intended comedy of you poking fun at what I (originally)(historically) said.

Dumb mistake but the point still stands.

As in the version done by the real artist is the one that preserves history.

Am I wrong?

No. You are wrong as the car did survive through time and Talacrest butchered it as I originally stated, and not just once but twice. 1st time being when they destroyed the Can Am version and the second time being their far miss of an attempt on recreating a P4 body.

I am talking about what Talacrest did as that is what your point originally was, how well Talacrest did in recreating the P4. I am not talking about the current owners attempt at correcting their mistakes.

The difference between the two is huge and if you can't see that, oh well. One was not complete and made complete, the other was a complete survivor and was butchered for profit.

And don't tell me what to do. I appreciate the history of the actual car, not what it has become.

 

As Vincent is obsessed with preserving Ferrari history it must be stated that as far as Ferrari and Ing. Mauro Forghieri are concerned the history of 0846 ended in the scrap yard in 1967. It is no more. 0846 is dead. Nobody can bring it back to life. Nobody can take the number 0846 for any replica P4 they may have built. Not even Mr James Glickenhaus.

If Tom Meade actually had used part of the front, percentage unknown, of the scrapped chassis to make a new chassis he didn't do it with the intention of claiming it to be the 1967 24 Hours of Daytona winner. If it had been used it should not have been, as Ferrari have stated. If someone later comes along and claims the chassis to be 0846 and the 1967 Daytona winner then this is actually perverting the course of Ferrari history, NOT preserving it.

All the above is irrelevant anyway as the car has nothing of 0846 in it.

For those that may have missed or have chosen to ignore it, after looking at the pictures of the chassis, Ing. Mauro Forghieri has stated that the Glickenhaus chassis is not the one he took to Daytona for testing. It is therefore not the 1967 24 Hours of Daytona winner. He has stated that the rear of the chassis has been made new and with details (not discussed here on FerrariChat before) that would not have escaped the chassis builders of the real P4s. It is at the front of the chassis that has even greater differences to a genuine P4. He refers to the Glickenhaus car as a false P4.

 

Now That he is going in your direction again, he is again the "ultimate witness"; laughable.
He is still a 80 years old man, a genious who has done so many Great cars in his life That his memory may not be at its best on everything, as it has been patently proved on This case.
Take his observations with due reserve, they do not prove anything.
Rgds

 

So if I buy this "chassis" and get bits from eBay, junkyards etc, can I call this #15885 and expect classiche certification?

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&alt=web&id=111979354027
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Ing. Forghieri has reminded me in his communications that he is 81 years old and his memory is not always the best. That would be normal for anyone's recollections of 50 years ago. That I had questions for him did not mean that I disputed the fact that he is the "ultimate witness" as the head of the team that designed the car. However, for you to diminish his observations as not proving anything is absolutely pathetic.

I notice that you did not say anything about his signed letter to Mr Glickenhaus not proving anything. Very telling that.

 

As said by others, if There is one person who was in an akward position after That letter, it was You and your silence was indeed telling. As for myself, I put all statements from Forghieri at the same level.
Rgds

 

You put all statements by MF at the same level but you only challenge/diminish the worth of his observations when I have something to say. Yes, OK.

 

That is not true; what I challenge is your absence of logic and elegance, or grace, when his first letter said the car was indeed 0846. And then, your obstination to have him reverse his statement because it was not suiting your purpose. I have said a long time ago That I consider your methodology flawed, and This has been amply demonstrated.
As for the car itself, I am of the opinion That the "smoking gun" Will never be found. All information from Forghieri, whatever he states, is no proof in one way or the other.
Rgds

 

You have your facts wrong. MF has never said the car was 0846. You are obviously not paying attention. The number 0846 has been deleted by "mother" Ferrari and nobody can use this number. Even if the car did contain a portion of the front of the chassis, which it doesn't, MF considered the car a replica due to it having no Ferrari number.

MF reversing his statement has nothing to do with my obstination but due to him actually seeing the pictures of the chassis, whereas previously he had not, which has allowed him to see details enabling him to come to conclusions and say what he has said.

We have statements from MF, the head designer of the car, that you dismiss as no proof. You are very disrespectful. Who may I ask would you consider a statement from that you would consider as proof?