The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Complete and utter BS.

 

....

 

Do you actually read this thread or just chime in from time to time to contribute misinformation? I've explained my views on this car after researching it and backing up the information I've learned with pictures in this thread. Please read it before making demands as above.

 

Complete and utter BS.

 

.........useless

hajduk statmenents have been noted in jim pdf file ........he read a book that made him have his conclusion on the car . Jim ran from it from his info

Jim should have done all his due diligence before making it public with such a historic car,,,,,,,,,,,,hence the amature hour we see day in and day out

 

Agree that Jim should have been more thorough. I believe that process is happening right now. But in all fairness, the guy was learning at the time as we are now.

What do you want Hadjuk to do? We all get past info from books and pictures and history. Including Miura SV, Ferrari, experts, lawyers etc. Should he build a time machine and go back to the actual crash?

 

Sure, lets just take your word for it before sussing out the bias.

Hopefully Wax will chime in and give another view from the source.

One must consider other peoples opinions before claiming theirs is factually correct.

 

You have to remember Sal Barones worked for world fine cars and now works for Jim and John Hadjuk was hired help they all have a reason to say yes to Jim.

They were the ones drawing conclusions regarding the car. Anyone that has bought , built or sold a replica remember a replica will always go into grave detail regarding the car in purchase. Knowing this to be a frankenstein car excuse my expression. More so than a production car

Do you really think Mauro Forghieri was visited without a predetermination to get the answer Jim wanted.

Question cheque book in back pocket or did he arrive with some $10.00 pastries?

 

All this is speculation. Did Miura lead MF? Did Jim Lead MF?

Who knows. I will wait for what is said after the car has been inspected.

And after that I will welcome either side to vette that decision out and I wll not claim anything as fact until both sides are allowed to debate and clear up any bias or loose ends.

I can't get behind a conclusion that is formulated by one side without the questioning of the other.

I don't know how much you know about Jim, but you should look into what he revealed about his Ford J6 before you imply that Sal and Hajduck are on the take. In that instance he figured out that the car was less valuable than what he thought he had and took that hit and made it public.

 

Yes, I have seen John's handwritten (not typed) statement.


via Tapatalk

 

RE: J6

That is a bit different than claiming to have found the missing P car in DP003 and then doing the full loop 10 years later and admitting the car actually was indeed what its been sold as in the beginning....replica with some period parts.

 

It seems that most of the theories presented in the PDF are automatically taken as gospel. I have a hard time accepting that the visible crash damage is located on the opposite side of the chassis to the actual impact.

If the design of the rear chassis is designed to incorporate the engine as a stressed member, there would be no way for the opposite side of the chassis to deform aft of the firewall, without comprising the entire structure. If the opposite side of the chassis actually flexed hard enough to bend the chassis tubes, certainly, the stressed engine mounts themselves, or the mounting lugs in the block castings would have cracked or broken to allow such movement of the structure.

Stating this theory as fact might question ones expertise on its own.

After all, the mass of an entire chassis structure (designed to be as stiff as possible) hitting an immovable object will present the structure immediately at the impact to absorb the energy first and foremost. This means that the wheel, suspension, suspension mounts, and finally, the chassis tubes supporting the suspension mounts would have deformed first. If the energy absorbed was sufficient enough to pass through these structures and actually cause visible damage to the opposite side of the stressed chassis and engine mounting structure, certainly the car would have been scrapped as a result of this accident.

Accepting this theory blindly is like accepting that a car gets in a light fender bender, and hits something with the right fender, however you see the left fender is damaged worse than the right fender.




Until Hadjuk's theory is vetted it is amateur hour to discount it. Unless you can prove it wrong? Can you?[/QUOTE]

 

So you feel that Hajduck is not qualified to asses that this is how it happened?

And that you are better qualified?

You feel with all his expertise that he did not take this all into account?

 

It is no different. It shows his character and how he would act in a situation of cliaiming what he has is what it is. he lost money on admitting that, same as he will here. But he came clean on what the car is. Seems like apples to apples to me.

 

I.m not implying that that are on the take. Where do you get that from ? Reason to say yes to someone in Jims position has a lot distortions regarding your opinions and reasoning to pursue something be it financial or not. Sometimes People in Jims position knowing this situation exist use this too there advantage .

think about that.............

 

This to me implies that they may say yes to Jim due to they owe him to do so.

I see that as someone being on the take. They are getting paid by Jim, and due to this, they answer yes.

I will wait to see what they have to say, if anything, before I will consider if their beliefs are compromised.

These are two Ferrari Experts. If they have a belief that the car is what Jim proclaims, my guess is they have good reason to do so. Much more of a reason than they are/were simply employed by Jim.

To me you are doing nothing but arguing with speculation about their character and why they would come to this conclusion without any factual reason to do so.

I will wait till the latest info comes out on the viewing of the chassis.

I hope John and Sal's opinions are in there with this, then, when you have their beliefs is the time to question their character based on the opinion they hopefully will present.

 

I have learned that DP0003 was built by Mario Allegretti and Silvano Cantelli, a chassis builder in Modena.

 

I am not emotionally involved in supporting a narrative, however, many of the key players in this exchange are. And yes, I believe that any assessment of the damage that supports this theory is clearly from "wanting it to be true", rather than actually analyzing the factual evidence.

I am an engineer and designer of structures that have included monocoque and semi stressed chassis. I am also a fanatic of Ferrari P cars that wants this glorious tale to be true. But, as I listed that I am an engineer first, I can no longer support my wish in light of the substantial amounts of factual evidence that is overshadowing the substantial and evolving amounts of conjecture.

When you smack the curb with the right side, then the right side gets banged up. If you smack it hard enought to bend the left side, then you throw away the chassis.

 

I have learned that DP0003 was built by Mario Allegretti and Silvano Cantelli, a chassis builder in Modena.

 

I also know for a fact that Mario also had complete drawings of the P4. When I was at his shop around 84-86, I saw a 3/4 scale P4 being built for a very lucky child of foreign royalty. As I was only 14, it was my dream car at the time. The body and chassis was built exactly to 3/4 scale, however, it was modified to fit what I believed to be a Dino engine.

Is anybody aware of the whereabouts of the 3/4 scale P4? I would love to find my old pictures of it.

 

Thanks for the info.

Do we know the dates it was built? Do we know where the other two were built and time frame?

If any one has any pics of the three Piper chassis it would be appreciated. I feel it is important to compare the threes construction versus each other and against the Ferrari Built P3 and P4's.

 

We heard you the first time! (and second, and third,... )

You will, of course, be providing written documentation, authenticated by third party, as proof? This seems to be the standard required to substantiate anything related to 0846/DP0003. Where were the other two unauthorized Piper replicas built?

 

I taked with Steve (Miurasv) last night.

My considered advice to him was that he has made his case, Jim Glickeknhaus claims he has some new stuff from Ferrari, but there is no point in continuing this useless tit for tat exchange with nothing more than ill informed conjecture until Jim comes up with whatever he has.

Steve has made his case and Jim says he will respond. Until then this thread is just vapour.

I hope Steve will take my advice and stop posting meanwhile, and if he does I hope you will all understand why. And if you don't agree then I suggest you are just here for the fight which is rather sad.

If Steve continues to rise to the bait - well, I tried!

Francis

 

There's a key point - the anti-0846 camp has long insisted that 0846 was destroyed by Ferrari, nothing was left. If instead the damaged 0846 chassis was thrown on a junk heap, retrieved by some third party, then sold on, perhaps through Piper's hands at some point as suggested by the carnet held by Piper in Switzerland in 1977 accompanying an unknown P car - wouldn't there be knowledge of it's existence? Would Piper never admit that he brokered a sale of some or all of 0846? Why would that be a secret, that could never be acknowledged?

Again, Piper has key knowledge and information that would help determine what happened to 0846 after Ferrari decommissioned it.

 

ALLEGRETTI Home page - Visitaci1