The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Based on what evidence do you base the claim in the first and second paragraphs, and are you Jims official mouthpiece now on fchat?

If you are why does he completely ignore the joint Italian/ English versions of MFs recent views?

 

Some time ago, Josh Lange (known as 121Designer here) gave details which were summarized in paragraphs 1 & 2.

Over the course of the last 15 years or so, James Glickenhaus and I have kept in touch. I understand fully why he does not post here & puts one particular troll on ignore wherever he goes, as it is a waste of valuable time in a life that is too short.

For each, there have been pertinent Q&A's for a variety of subjects. Push all the projects aside and the respect still remains.

I've had a few titles, but "official mouthpiece" is still not one of them. However, "Friend" is.


via Tapatalk

 

The "troll" as you call him raises very detailed and relevant points. Your "friend" has habitually provided disinformation and is guilty of saying words that do not match actions.

 

So on the basis of just one fchat member (Josh Lange) who's posts have been significantly moderated in recent times over his extreme views on this site and who appears to have a rather overly weird fascination with Tom Meade (whose family significantly distanced themselves from, since Toms passing) you have now turned probable fiction into fact. Have you ever met Josh Lange?

That member was clearly trying to garner favour with Jim (as well as a number of respected members on here, who have also now distanced themselves from Josh) hence the alleged deathbed confession that no one else heard, and was never in writing, and what is in quite poor taste as well.

The use of the term troll is very derogatory from a moderator, and one which Jim uses quite a lot on other sites about Steve, rather than him confront the factual information that has been presented.

Were you the moderator that banned Steve from Fchat? that caused the intervention of Rob Lay to re instate Steve.

 

Why not engage Steve and his investigation? Time.

Is the car based off of original P3 construction?

How did Piper do this?

One week it's the frames were built by Vaccari and Bossi, the next week it's two of the frames were built here and the other one was built by "some guy" (cause there were so many guys re-popping P4 frames in Modena back then, why use the guy that did the other two frames?)

He will continually contact Foghieri with question after question, he has a line to Piper, how is it he can't, after years, nail down some specifics of how this frame came to be in "some other" Modenese shop? If Piper can't remember the name of the shop, he definitely should have some specifics, as he does for the P4 frames, on how this oddball was built and why? My guess is he doesn't as he does not know how it came to be.

If Piper does not have details on how this frame was built, that was built different from the others, then it is highly unbelievable that he had it built that way.

Until that can be answered, why take a break from driving your recreation P4 through Italy? Mostly when you have a driver that loves recreations, and his name is Vacarella?

I sure wouldn't.

 

Vincent what are you on about, and why quote my text when what you are rambling on about has nothing to do with the context of it.

 

It is in response to why someone would not answer Steve's questions.

How was the frame built this way?

If Piper has no logical explanation, which he never has, then I feel that pretty much disqualifies him as the originator of this frame.

If that can't be answered, all of the other inquiries are rabbit holes that waste time.

Better time is spent behind the wheel of a recreation.

 

Why are you asking Steve, he did not build the thing, if it worries you so much then get in touch with Piper direct, Steve cannot force him to answer your questions.

 

If Ferrari sold it to Tom Meade, then an invoice for the transaction should be in Ferrari's records.

 

Tipo 218 and 242 are 312 F1, not P4. There is no P4 Tipo 237 stamping on JG's engine. It was 3 litres and no P4 ever ran or entered any event with a 3 litre engine. The P4 rib proved to be BS. A 312 F1 engine has the rib too. Look at the vertical distributors when the car had Webers and 2 valve F1 heads. Pic from 1987 auction description.

The gearbox does look like a P3 which doesn't mean it is. We haven't seen the P3 Tipo 593A N7 JG claims the gearbox has. Surely it would be easy for him to post this if it has this stamping. Or is he lying again? John Hajduk, who rebuilt JG's car, told me he made the 603 gearbox casting in the car as well as another one, copying them from 0854's gearbox.

Re the body clip: Is it really?

Why do many other components have to be genuine P4 just because they are from Piper's stock? Where is the proof they are genuine Ferrari? They can be made by others. There is no proof that Ferrari made the uprights for Jim's car specifically. JG has an invoice from Ferrari North America with no mention of 0846 or the name Glickenhaus on it. It actually proves nothing. JG also went on to claim Ferrari had helped him to restore the car just because he claims they made him some uprights. He made it sound like Ferrari were a big part of the project. What B........

Congratulations!!!

IMO Marcel posted the pic with the number 0846 just because JG claims he's legally entitled to call it 0846 but MM can clarify that himself. MM pictured sitting in a car proves he was sitting in a car.

Tell him to stop lying then. I agree it stinks.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I have dealt with Josh, he was left with the warehouse of parts, after Tom died........some 308 bits that I could use.

What's your point?

Some people's words are "more important" than others??

At least miurasv's tone is consistent, it's condescending, he distorts his "findings" at least as much as Mr. G's initial inquiry, and more, and it's "attack, attack, attack" from the get go.

Piper's lack of transparancy easily rivals Jim's public request for anyone to "bring forward what they know'....but that in my mind meant from actual principals in the history of the car.

Not some UK school boy, with a lack of respect.

 

Why don't you ring them up, and see how that goes???

 

Now please tell me and everyone else exactly what "findings" I have distorted. Re Jim's request for people to bring forward what they know is great just so long as it supports his claims. It doesn't get any more "principal" than MF.

 

The Ferrari world owes you nothing, and that is what you will get here.

Maybe you should pick another marque for your passion..

Have you evern heard the term "Don't s**it where you eat?"
It usually applies to having relationships with female coworkers.

But in your case, i would say the more you attempt to tar and feather a legitimate collector of the marque, the farther you set yourself from your "dream job" in the market place.

It's your own tone, that "stinks" Steve.
It's the reason all your requests for "period drawings" and photos in this Section, fall on deaf ears. Should an enthusiast happen across some discarded flat file of drawings from the racing Department (I have found plenty, from NASA here) one would think they would go to the owner, rather than someone SEEMINGLY in search of the truth, but in reality pursuing some sort of vendetta, for whatever reason.

Did Jim run over your cat???

 

That's your opinion only, and I have broken bread with the man and have a much higher view of his integrity.

The final ruling on this car (legally 0846 in both New York, USA and Italy, as well as Sicily, EU) means far less then you and others apply.

It's a minor fraction of his collection, and of his net worth.

It's really almost a diversion, a small part of his current motorsports projects.
Which you would know, if you read the (right) book!

 

Answer the question, Tex. What "findings" are you saying have I distorted?

 

Your "findings" are hard cast facts, others "findings" are rumors and lies......

You don't see that, in your own presentation?

I actually enjoy your studies into the frame geometries, but you are looking at it from the modern perspective that they were "assembly line" production.

If you would carefully read some of the posts of those "there in the day" it would be easy for you to understand the way the prototypes were built, constantly evolving, some shelved as spares, disruption on the production lines with labor strife, and one could easily put forth that the welder starting one frame might or might not be the replacement technician finishing it, after the strike.

It as a different, far less funded factory of those days, we are discussing.

I have no problem with your searching for the answer, but I really feel you are plugging your findings into the wrong formula (of historical perspective) so you err in your final sums.

We have SEEN how the car was rebuilt and restored. Multiple gearboxes, and so forth.
You could add to the conversation, without the caustic characterizations of a well known Wall Street investor, as a "liar"......

Bernie Madoff, was a "liar".....Nixon tried very hard to find dirt on the Glickenhaus firm, and came up empty.

So, from your chair there in the UK you could dial it back a notch, IMO.

If your science is tight, bring it!

 

But I am only here as an interested participant.

I am not interested in carrying the water back and forth, in response for you shrill demands of "absolute proof"..

There is none.

Like Jim I have better things to do..

 

Seems MF did, and he signed the letter stating he thinks JG's car has elements of 0846 in it. Case closed, but apparently you have had conversations with MF to the contrary. Any signed notarized copies of that?

Perry

 

The question was directed to Wax, who was laying great claims on what Josh had stated, so why have you responded instead? is it a Jim camp tag team you guys have got going now....

The death bed confession claim by Josh is crass and about as valid as me stating I had lunch with the Pope recently, who informed me that many many years before in a confessional, Enzo had told him that every part of 0846 had been ground down to swarf and deposited in the Med!

 

I see......let me check Roberts Rules of Order.........brb.....

 

I know it's beat up on miurasv day, but the points he raises are very valid, like exactly how much of Jim's car is really from any P3/4? It seems actually very little. Of course if we took this same forensic approach to the majority of the old race Ferrari's out there I wonder how well they would stack up. Quite a few probably have after the fact bodies and chassises (and maybe quite a bit more). Jim has to be applauded for not being one of those guys who squirrels his collection away, at the same time he has spent so much time and effort to prove his car is what he wants it to be, perhaps the fact that there are still serious questions means more then some of us give credit for. That and the fact that experts, whose lives are all about issues like this, do not dane to clear up any confusions,.

 

I am not beating him up, only have a problem with the personal attacks and his general decorum.

Not what I would expect, in sales or discussion.

If he finds the "ah Ha moment" in his study of history (books) my hat will be off to him.

Phoning up the heros of the sixties, and demanding some sort of resolution to a largely rhetorical question, comes off to me as pretty obsessive. That leads me to question his motivation.

It seems to be far more than academic, in his case.
Where is his dog in the hunt??

 

I get this thread, ultimatley its all about $$$. In reality, fo thsoe of us who actualy drive witha capital D, wherever various bits come from is somewhat irrelevant, if a car is built to the spec of and utilises the same materials as a P3 or P4 it is one, regardless of when it was built, when those pieces were built, by who, and how many old pieces a car has in it
speaks to $$$ value.

Yes probably most historic race cars today car a percentage of newer build pices, some probably close on 100% others 20% or 505 or 75%. What percentage makes a car legitimate. I read all that needs to survive is one stamped chassis piece, thats what carries a cars provenance. Such a piece may make up .004% of a car, so this chassis member arguement may be legaly acceptable but is patently ridiculous by nay other measure.

Old cars have an $$ value based on the percnetage of origional bits and claim to a historic
serial number. To drive the car or use it, these facts are also irrelevant other than the more old bits a car has the less likely it is to be driven in anger.

I love Nick masons recent line that anybody racing a GTO is using a "sapre" engine and "spare running gear" Time for the car world to grow up and start appreciating cars for what they are, ie how built, and get away from stamped numbers as the only detirminator.

 

I don't know why I bother but ...

Can somebody actually and factually tell us the difference between a P3 and P4 chassis. Apparently the P4 was a minor mainly aero revision to the P3.

So yes we are all aware of the rear bulkhead and engine mounting differences, but what are the differences in the front, if any?
Pete